The Press. — London, England, 1854-04-08 00:00:00

APRIL 8, 1854. he vented on those who questioned the Duke's word ! No one does question the Duke's word. Any man, even a Minister in his place in Parliament, may be readily believed when he solemnly declares, on his word of honour, that he has been guilty of gross carelessness in the performance of his duty, whereby the public service has suffered. Indeed, protesta tions are superfluous where proofs abound ; and, to establish his individual carelessness, the Duke need only appeal to his series of inaccurate statements in the case of the hay contract. If he wishes a high precedent, he can point to the Premier and " the clerk " in the Foreign-office. But on the theme of the veracity of the Colonial Minister the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER waxed eloquent. "He was the " Duke's intimate friend." Every one knew that—he has üblicly proved it. " The Duke " spoke truth. " No one doubted it. But did the Right Honourable Gentleman grapple with the facts of the case ? He never touched them, and we do not wonder at it ; for, when the case was mentioned in the House of Commons, Mr. FREDERICK PEEL admitted that neither the Duke nor himself had read Mr. STONOR'S testimonials, in which the conviction for bribery is confessed ; and, now that the un fortunate gentleman has abandoned his pro fession, the appointment is rescinded, and he perhaps is ruined Thus Mr. STONOR is to be made the scape goat of the carelessness of a great Duke and of one bearing the illustrious name of PEEL. The only person who, so far as this transac tion is concerned, is not blameable was to bear the penalty, whilst the Colonial Secretary and the Under-Secretary were to go scathless ! However, the committee is now granted; and, when it reports to the House, we think it will disclose a case of " poor Peter Peebles v. Plainstanes" which it will tax the powers of a more accomplished Scottish advocate than ALLAN FAIRFORD to make clear. THE ACTION OF CIUM CON. Ott Tuesday last Mr. BOWYER moved for leave to bring in a bill to " amend the law relating " to actions for criminal conversation, and for " the better protection of women in such " cases." At present, painful and degrading as such a process must necessarily be to every feeling of honour, to every sentiment of deli cacy, an injured husband is compelled to resort to a court of law and ask a jury to com pensate him in money for the disgrace he has sustained. For, except in rare cases, such as the impossibility of finding the defendant, the House of Lords insists on such a prelimi nary investigation before it will grant a divorce ; and the reason is, that otht.rwise the whole proceedings may be a collusive attempt to sever the marriage tie. The course which this proceeding thus forced on the husband takes is uniform. The plaintiff's counsel comments on the absurdity of asking for pecuniary compensation " for a wrong which " is not susceptible of compensation ;" dis claims, on the part of his client, all desire for money, but concludes by asking for " exemplary" damages to mark the sense en tertained by the jury of the plaintiffs loss and the defendant's crime. Then, except in those rare instances in which the plaintiff's dis honour is denied by the defendant, follows an attempt to mitigate damages, either by vilify ing the man already wronged, or, sadder still, by " breaking the bruised reed," and blacken ing the fame already blighted. And really, if the defendant is base enough to adopt the latter course, the counsel have no alternative, for the question at issue is, not what punish ment should be awarded, but what loss has the husband sustained? Just as if he had lost a horse by the wrongful act of the defen dant, and then, of course, the character it bore must be known before its value can be appreciated. But, if the victim of passion and of crime is thus to have her guilt proclaimed, ought we in the faithless wife to forget the helpless woman ? 'Tis true the purse of her seducer is protected by all the trained intellect and practised eloquence its treasure can THE PRESS. purchase ; but the woman is left—in her shame defenceless! Society closes the gate of mercy on her ; in the court of law, which should be sacred to justice, shame may be added to shame, dishonour to dishonour, to deepen in dye the guilt that was dark before ; that so being held up to the jury as worthless and vile, the man that perhaps made her so may have the less to pay, and no voice is raised in her defence. In the case of woman in this position alone does the law of England depart from the eternal principle of justice, that no one shall be condemned un heard. We have spoken of her as erring, but she may be innocent. Between two scoundrels it would be perfectly easy to make a faithful wife the victim of a conspiracy which would pass unsuspected by the jury, and undetected even •by the Bench. The present law undoubtedly promotes these scandalous actions. Many a man of base mind brings such an action, not to dissever himself from a degraded wife, but solely to put money in his pocket ; and a case has been known of a man bringing such an action where the character of the lady was spotless, to extort money from a defendant, whose great wealth was only exceeded by his determination to shield innocence and resist extortion. But it is idle to multiply proofs when the facts are patent, and all see the evils of the present system. The ques tion remains, what is the remedy pro posed ? First, Mr. BOWYER would change the action at law into a criminal prosecution, and punish the offender by fine. Next, he would make the wife a party to the proceed ings, so that she may be represented by counsel. By these means it seems to us the requirements of the case would be met. As the fine would go to the Crown, and not to the injured husband, an honourable man would not be deterred from ridding himself of the cause of his shame by dreading imputation of sordid motives, whilst, the base no longer deriving profit from dishonour, our newspapers would not be so often occupied by the dis gusting details of those melancholy cases. The investigation would not be less rigorous than now ; thus the jealousy of collusion justly entertained by the House of Lords would be satisfied ; and, better than all, the wife, who may be innocent, will not be left defenceless ; and, if guilty, her guilt will not be taken for granted in a proceeding to which she, the person most deeply interested, is no party. The bill, though brought in by Mr. BOWYER, and seconded by Mr. COBDEN, we in the main approve ; and if those Honourable Members turn their practical intellect to questions like this, which they view without prejudice, they may do the State some ser vice; for certainly Mr. BOWYER has been more successful in dealing with the married woman than with the nuns who " Live for aye in shady cloister mew'd, Chanting faint anthems to the cold fruitless moon." THE HAY CONTRACT. WE feel bound to notice the case of Messrs. STUR GEON and SON again, because we, in common with our contemporaries, joined somewhat too hastily, as it now appears, in expressing our abhorrence of their imputed crime. It will be remembered that when the Duke of NEWCASTLE was asked to name tale offender he said first that he could not, then that he could, and finally his Grace named a most respectable man, who, though a dealer in hay, had in reality nothing what ever to do with the case. At length the right name was mentioned, but coupled, as it now seems, with a wrong charge. For, without repeating minutely the particulars of a case which so recently arrested the excited attention of the nation, it is ~ utticient to state that the Messrs. STURGEON and SON were believed to have knowingly and fraudulently furnished the com missariat department with hay of so foul a descrip tion, that, it it had been supplied to the Eastern ex pedition, it would probably have destroyed the horses, imperilled the army, and perhaps have resulted in a terrible national calamity. A charge more serious it was impossible to make; but its gravamen consisted entirely in the fraudulent inten tion. No amount of mere carelessness, however blameable, would have elicited from universal England that burst of execration the sound of which is yet ringing in our ears. On Tuesday last, how ever, in answer to a question, Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE, on whom the duty of investigating the case devolved, stated that, after full inquiry, he acquitted the Messrs. STURGEON and SON of all fraud in the trans action. Soon afterwards Sir W. BOWYER SIIIUTR bore valuable testimony to their general character as honest men, whereupon the Secretary to the Admi ralty again rose and qualified his previous acquittal by adding that, though not fraudulent, their conduct was highly culpable. Highly culpable is an am biguous phrase, which may be applied to many offences, and with great propriety to those which con sist in recklessly making " scandalous " charges for which there is no foundation. How far the Messrs. STURGEON may be blameable we cannot tell, but cer tainly, after the carelessness displayed by the Govern • ment in this matter, we should be reluctant to con demn any man on their testimony. 315 LADY FRANKLIN AND THE ADMIRALTY. AMONG parliamentary papers recently delivered is one of painful interest. It will be remembered that in January last an Admiralty notice was issued removing the names of Sir JOHN FRANKLIN and his officers from the Navy List, and thus assuming, as proved, the fact of their deaths. That the conclusion so come to is that of the public generally, few per sons will deny ; but there are those who cannot be expected to assent to its justice, unless established by positive proof, which at present is wanting. Lady FRANKLIN, in an eloquent letter, dated Feb. 24, pleads the cause of the missing navigators with the earnest. ness of one who persists in hoping against hope. She argues that it is inconsistent to pass sentence of death on the crews of the Erebus and Terror while other expeditions are still searching for them among the ice—Sir E. BELCHER especially, who has been gone only two years, and has provisions for two more. The reasonings on which it is contended that FRANKLIN may yet be found are as follows : (1) The want of evidence of any catastrophe having befallen them. It was thought at one time that the expedition had gone down in crossing Baffin's Bay, during their first summer—a story set at rest by the discovery of their winter's quarters. Here is, at least., a warning against hasty impressions. Arctic captains assert the improbability of two large vessels having gone down in such a manner that no trace or fragment of the wreck should float ashore. (2) The Arctic. seas have never been searched in that direction which Sir JOHN FRANKLIN is most likely to have taken. In bis instructions from the Admiralty two routes were pointed out—one by Barrow Straits to the south-west, along the northern coast of America; the other in a much higher latitude, by a track hitherto quite unexplored, and which none of the searching vessels have subse quently taken. It is known, says Lady FRANKLIN, that this route was often spoken of by Sir Joffe, and was "extremely popular among his officers." Sir E. BELCHER, who followed it a little way, only saw an expanse of sea to the north west, " unencumbered " by ice and without visible limit." (3) There is no proof that life cannot be sustained iu Arctic regions during a period of several years. Captain M'Cr.van was nearly four years in the ice; Sir JOHN Ross somewhat longer, and enduring great hardships ; four Russian sailors, left without re sources of any kind on Spitsbergen, were rescued after an interval of seven years. The climate, therefore, is not fatal, nor even dangerous to life. It is possible, and has by many philosophers been believed, that the temperature near the Pole is less intensely severe than some degrees farther south. We know that wherever man has yet penetrated animals are found. The whale, the walrus, the seal, birds of many kinds, even ruminants, abound in the highest latitudes known to navigators. Captain NVCl.ree observed that the greatest cold was always attended by a south wind. It is the North American continent, not the Polar icebergs, which forms the great depository of frost. Esquimaux were seen on islands where their existence had never been even suspected, and surely an Englishman can live where' an Esquimaux can. (4) Want of provisions is not to be feared in the. Case of Sir JOHN FRANKLIN. He was supplied for a. period exceeding four years : this, on half-rations,. would almost suffice to the present time. His stock of ammunition was abundant; and we know that he lost no opportunity of seeking food on shore, even when carrying out so large a supply. He himself said to Captain MARTIN that " he bad provisions for "five years, and could spin them out to seven." We know also that some of those under him contem plated a possible detention, extending to the latter period. The above is, in few words, the substance of Lady FRANK.LIN'S argument. In justice to her we give it publicity ; not, at the same time, concealing our own lrl