The Sun. — London, England, 1863-09-16 00:00:00

T HE POLISH INSURRECTION. (From the Special Correspondent of the Times.) CRACOW, Sept. 10. The insurrection has received a severe blow in the Government of Lublin, where it was known to exist in greater force than in any other parts of Poland. I hear from a person who took part in an action fought by Lelewel on the 6th against an overpow ering force of Russians, that the detachment was beaten with great loss, and that the gallant chief, who for months past had made " Lubelski," or Lublin country, such terribly unsafe ground for the enemy, is now among the slain. Ido not think my informant belongs to that class of insurgents who mistake their own private fears for general danger, and fancy that when they run those of their eorq.. rades who are fighting, not from passing enthn iasm, but from a profound sense of duty, a re likely to fallow them. There were few, if any, ho seems suc h men in the detachment of Lelewel, to have known how to choose his followers and to have caused it to be generally understood that with him there would be no shirmishir.g on the frontier, but on the contrary, the hardeA possible fighting in the heart of the contested country. No chief, probably no two chiefs together, had met the Russians so often as Lelewel, and he generally con- trived to attack them with all the chances of success in his favour. The rapidity with which he moved and the certainty with which he took advantage of the slightest imprudence or mistake committed by the enemy, rendered him a more formidable oppe nent than other leaders who had forces thrice as numerous under their command. Be is said, more over, to have understood the art of conciliating the peasantry otherwise than by hanging them. Nevertheless, it was in all probability his great and lasting success that made the peasantry in the scene of his operations inclined to give him the assistance which as a rule they avoid giving until they are driven into fair dealing towards their fel luw-countrymen, either by threats or by actual com- pulsion. Since the defeat of Taczenowski, the principal commander in the west of the Kingdom, the great object of the Russians has of course been to surronnd and crush Lelewel, the principal commander in the east. The Russians, with all their weaknesses, have since the time of Langiewicz succeeded in encircling and destroying every Polish detachment which has once gained a particular reputation and become an object of interest and attention in Europe. Lele esel for some months fought without attracting much attention, and without risking any great battle. At times his men, or a portion of them, were engaged almost daily, but he never humiliated the Russians by inflicting upon them such a defeat in regular combat as 3,000 Russian troops sustained at Kobylanka from Jezioranski, Smiechowski, and Waligorski, with a force of only 700 insurgents — insurgents, however, of the best quality, known to one another, knowing their officers, and many of them known. at least by name, throughout the whole country. But, although Lelewel fought no great battles—at least not until his last action, of which the details are not yet known in Cracow--he found himself twice in such a position that he was obliged to break up and disperse his detachment, though not in such a position that he was unable to save his men, as one would imagine they ought always to be saved when an evidently irresistible force is being brought against them. It is highly probable that the military spirit of many of the Polish chiefs may have done more harm than good to the Polish insurrection. They sometimes refuse to retreat when retreat is necessary, and save their military honour at a cost which they cannot afford, the still greater expenditure of men to which the Russians may at the same time be put being as nothing compared to the inexhaustible numberkestill at their disposal. Lelewel, however, seems to have decided that it was his business to worry his enemy, make his life intolerable, and only strike a blow at him when ho saw that, if aimed with proper force and. skill, it would do him an injury, while leaving him unable to return it. After breaking up his band for the second time, Letowel re-formed it in Galicia, principally from old and well-tried materials, but partly also from new ones. He took back with him in all 800 men, fight ing his way into the Kingdom at their head. These entries from Galicia arc seldom successful. Indeed I do not now why I should say seldom, for out of the numerous detachments that have crossed from Galicia into the Kingdom during the last six months not one has established itself for more than a few days. Jezioranski, after gaining a most brilliant victory, remained in the Kingdom for about a week —that is to say, long enough for the Russian gene rals —urged and threatened by an indignant officer in the Imperial Guard and aide-de-camp of the Emperor, who had witnessed the battle from the Galician side—to bring overwhelming forces against him. But out of upwards of 20 detachments, great and small, which have left Galicia for the Kingdom since Easter, very few have been able to exist, even for a day, on the other side of the frontier. Gene rally they have retired without being pursued, after fighting a drawn battle. Sometimes they have beaten the Russians, but have found it impossible to advance into the interior. More than once, and always when they have entered in great force, they have suffered great losses, and their retreat has been most disastrous. It is true that the Polish papers in :dealing with these affairs have mentioned the entries without saying anything about the exits ; or ',they have simply chronicled the return of " a portion" of a detachment. Unfortunately the re turning" portions" have included all who were able to get back. Lelewel's successful entry the other day was looked upon, until the news was received this evening of his defeat and death, as a great triumph. I fancy now that Lelewel was caught in a trap, and that this time the Russians fell back at his approach— they who had so often fallen back before him for more direct reasons—that they might draw him into the country and surround him. The Poles in losing Lelewel have lost their best guerilla leader, the man who was always pointed alit as the model chief for carrying on the Polish war as it was long since determined it ought to be carried on' Bat no system has yet been dev ised b y which 1,000 ill -armed and undisciplined, or i m p erfectl y GlSCiplined, Poles, fighting as if in a foreign land, can be made to beat 10,000 well-armed, well-dis ciplined Russians, fighting as if on their own soil. It is very easy to say that the Poles ought to avoid formal encounters with the Russians ; but the views of the Russians on this subject must also be taken into accou n t. The Russians, of course, desire as many battle s as possible, knowing the fi g hting power of Pohlad to be limited, while theirs is, co mparatively spea k ing, unlimited. The Polish chie f s, whatever their own 4 themselves particular intentions m ay be, are sure to a lves compelled, som e day or ot her, to meet n crier numbers in reg ular battle, and hitherto chief has only had to a mount of cel e b e a gain a certai n Y for the Russians upon him at once i to bear down overwhelming numbers. Another and a PT-111", diflic lt keeping up the gue rilla mode of warfare in y Polandin contemptible, or at l east is found in the pitiable, character of tho peas ants. Degraded as have long ceased to t hey are by foreign rule, they feel that intruders... which ani mateshealthy , hatred for foreign civilised and lent' • the peasantry of other tea lised lands, and by their notorious attitude have caused the Poles to invent the perhaps consoling but certainly untrue saying that the peasant in all countries sides with the strong. " _Le paysan est toujours du cote dx poueoir," "Le 2U' paysan partout n'ob e it h la force," are sayings that every one who has been in Poland during the present insurrec tion must have heard over and over again. Thi s fallacy of these pretended truisms can bo proved without going out of Poland, for in Posen, where the peasant has long been his own master and has more over received a cert a i n measure of education, he has the feelings of a true Pole; and in the districts of the Kingdom bordering upon Posen the peasants have joined the insurrection in comparatively large num bers, whereas in the districts bordering upon Ga licia it has been necessary to treat them with great severity in order to deter them from rendering un due assistance to the Russians and from betraying the insurgents into the ir hands. On th e w h ole, the Russians, if it suited them to do so from a military point of view, could carry on a guerilla war i n Poland more edvantageously than the Poles. As it is, their object, of course, is not to worry, but to destroy the Poles, in order to avoid being worried themselves, and the death of the brave L,,,lewel and the dispersion of his gallant band will undoubtedly be a great relief to the Russian troops acting in the palatinate of Lublin. Once more, now that they have struck down Tac zanowski on their right and Lelewel on the left, the Russians may be expected to announce that the insurrection is inppressed, and that they have at present nothing to do but to give out the constitu tion. Humanity would seem to demand that if the document in question is to be published at all it sb.ould be produced at once. But the fact is it would have no more effect in stopping th© insnr- rection—which, as the Russians know, still exists, and may soon have a fresh impetus given to it— than the amnesty had two months ago. Poles and Russians seem quite agreed on one point—that, as long as the insurrection lasts, no concessions need be offered to Poland. The Russian Government is, no doubt, influenced by a false and pedantic notion of quite modern origin, that it is impossible for a Sovereign to treat and make terms with revolted subjects. The Poles, on their side, aro not fighting for a constitution—they have not asked fora con- stitution—and they will attach no value to the one which it is proposed to give them as soon as the massacres and execution are quite finished. As to the course which the insurrection will now take, I may mention that a general levy i s expected to be proclaimed in the course of the month. It is easier, however, to call all the population to arms than to make them come, and it would be easier to make them come than to find arms for them after their arrival. It is said that the National Govern ment will issue no more permissions to leave the kingdom, and it is a faot that absentee proprietors are ordered back, and are commanded to bring their families back with them. Why the wives and children are to be exposed to danger is not very clear ; but the husbands, fathers, and brothers are wanted, if not for immediate service in the field, for the transmission of Government orders and news, for receiving insurgents, for guiding detachments through their particular districts, for hiding them in the woods, and arranging to supply them with giving confidence to the people in tfohoedn;eifignhabinlyu' for giving especially those in their employ. The National Government still enjoins all Poles payme nt of taxes to the Russians, and th e to R refuseussin s are beginning to levy for the two q uar t ers Russians now due. The insurrectionary or revolutionary edict on this subject seems to have been framed for the express purpose of ruining the proprietors. It would have been condemned throughout Europe bad it been the work of Berg or Mouravieff, coming as it does from th e mysterious whereas power which the Poles recognise, and willingly or unwillingly obey, it is generally looked upon as a model of cleverness. The National Government, it may be remembered, ordered some four months ago that no if one should pay taxes, an d th a t the property of defaulters were se i ze d an d o ff ere d for sale no one, under the severest penalties, should bid for it. I suggested at the time that it would be difficult to i prevent the Cossacks from making bids, and that as there would be no other competitors the lots would be knocked down to them very cheap. I hear now of cows being sold at a few Polish florins (sixpences) a head, and there is no reason why cavalry regi ments should not be mounted at the rate of a penny a horse if the auctioneer and the purchasers so arrange it between them. It may be inconvenient o the Russians to have to take cattle and agricul ural produce in lieu of money, but this inconve- nience is compensated for by the privilege which the National Government virtually allows them, of taking as much of everything as they please. I heard a " mixed subject"—a Pole who has the ad vantage of living under two foreign Governments, instead of only one—complain bitterly the other day that he was not permitted to pay his taxes in the kingdom of Poland. " I pay more than a third of my income in Galicia in taxes to the Austrian Government." he said : " I pay 30 per cent, on the Austrian tax to the National Government of Poland. I have subscribed the sum appor tioned to one as my contribution towards the forced loan, and all I want now is to be suffered to pay the taxes due for the last two quarters to the Government of Russia." This unpatriotic and wicked wish proceeded from a conviction that if the Russians proceeded to execu tion they would sell property to the extent of fifty times the amount claimed. In some instances the Russians, when the taxes demanded by them have not been forthcoming, have quartered soldiers on the defaulter without proceeding at once to a sale. But on the great majority of estates the proprietors are ruined, and cannot possibly pay, however much time may be allowed to them. Before seizing property it appears that the " sequestrator," who travels about accompanied by a guard of soldiers, inquires what rent is duo from the peasants. The peasants are then ordered to pay up within a certain time, and thus the Government gets its taxes in money, while the peasants receive a practical proof that, whatever the intentions of the proprietors may be, they cannot even give away their own property without the permission and sanction of the Government. When the insurrec tion is at an end, the farm land will doubtless be given back to the peasant. But the Government wishes him to understand that he can only receive it as a gift from the Russian Emperor, and some day we shall perhaps be told (as the peasant most assuredly will) that the Polish nobility wished to maintain serfdom in Poland, and that it was only through the unexampled generosity of the Czar that they were set free and endowed with land. Sanguine persons think that the demands now made upon the peasant by the Russian Government may cause him to turn towards his fellow-country men and join the insurrection in earnest. Despon dent persons, on the other hand, are of opinion that the Russian Government understands very well what it is about; that its attitude towards the peasantry is a proof that it does not fear them in the least, and that this attitude is indeed calculated to inspire them with respect, though not of course with love, which, however, is a sentiment not particularly valued by the Government in question. If the Polish peasant can only be persuaded that the Polish pro prietor is his enemy, and has always wished to keep him a slave, it matters very little whether he likes the Government or hates it. The one great object is to divide the country against itself. According to the Czas, Warsaw is about to be shut up for ten days, no one under any pretext being allowed to enter, and no one under any pretext allowed to go out. If this unhappy city could be closed, like the caves of Dahra, and the inhabitants stifled, one great step towards the pacification of Poland would have been taken. There is nothing which forbids such a measure in the Treaty of Vienna, and the destruction of Warsaw—but by fire, not by smoke—was one of the Emperor Nicholas's favourite threats. The present object in shutting up the capital of Poland is probably, how ever, to discover whether the Secret Government resides there or not, and what the effect on the in surrection will be of cutting off all communication between it and the country outside. The paragraph in the Constitutionnel stating that for some months past Prince Czartoryski has not been received by the Emperor has caused much sur prise here. The Poles have been under the impres sion that Napoleon 111. was constantly giving as surances to some member or members of the Polish e migration in Paris that—first, when Puebla was taken, then wh en M ex i co was t a k en , th en w h e n the Mex ican oo,v. question was settl e d, then in the autumn, ti the spring —France, supported or unsup ported, would positively intervene on behalf of Poland. Prob ably th t e he ch P oo ol c e e s s of Poland been a P n o i l n a t n e d rv h e a n v t e ion, as misinformed asto th e Poles of Lon don and Paris have certainly been m isinformed as to th e magnitude and general cha racter of the insurrectionary War. Ointment and Pills.— f erysipelas, inflammation, give relief. [ADVERTISEMENTI -- Hollowar s eous diseases, Hol y Best Friends. —In cases of o ulceration, and all the varieties loway's Ointment never fails to first application lessens tho inflammation, an d Its very ingithe blood on its route to or return both heat and pain. This soothing from zd a ipurat- Ointment, b diminishes part promotes healthy a ction. Old indolent ulcers, ffCchtecd have resisted every oth er treatment, s p eedil y 08,,,n0 a'.n improved appearance; he alth y g ranulations s p rin g u p , the sore contracts, and soon cl oses, on the j udicious use of Holloway's noted remedies. In s evere and chronic ca ses , the Pills should always be taken; as their purifying ,alte rative, aperitive,land restorative qualiiies place the whole mas 3 of solids and fluids in a wholesome condition. THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 16, 1861 Earl Russell's Dispatch to Russia. The London Gazette of last night contains the follow ing : FOREIGN-OFFICE, SEPT. 11. The following dispatch has been addressed by Earl Rus sell to Lord Napier, her Majesty's ambassador at St. Peter sburg : " Foreign-offioe, Aug. 11, 1863. My Lord,-- On the 18th of last month Baron Brunnow communicated to me a dispatch which he had received the evening before from Prince Gortechakoff. This dispatch, of which I enclose a copy,* is far from being a satisfactory answer to the representation which, in concert with France and Austria, her Majesty's Govern- ment addressed to the Cabinet of St. Petersburg. The dispatch begins, indeed, by stating that " the Im perial Cabinet admits the principle that every power sign ing a treaty has a right to interpret its sense from its own point of view, provided that the interpretation remains within the limits of the meaning that it is possible to put upon it according to the text itself." Prince Gortschakoff adds, " In virtue of this principle the Imperial Cabinet does not dispute this right on the part of any one of the eight powers which have concurred in the General Act of Vienna Of 1815." Prince Gortachakoff, however, departing widely from the question of the interpretation of the treaty of Vienna, pro ceeds to describe the continuance of the insurrection in Poland to the moral and material assistance which it re ceives from without admits vaguely the six points ; rejects the proposed suspension of hostilities ; refuses to accept a conference of the eight powers who signed the treaty; and, finally, declares that the re-establishment of order must precede the serious application of any measures destined for the pacification of Poland. Her Majesty's Government will now proceed to examine calmly the principal topics of Prince Gortschakoff's reply to the considerations brought before him in my dispatch. Prince Gortschakoff, while he admits that confidence on the part of the governed, and the ascendancy of law over arbitrary power, must bo the foundation of order and sta- Jility, adds that the indispensable corollary to these prin ciples is respect for authority. But the Russian Cabinet cannot be ignorant that clemency and conciliation are often more effective in establishing respect for authority than material force. It would be a lamentable error to seek to restore that respect by force of arms alone, without the addition of some adequate security for the political and re ligious rights of the subjects of the King of Poland. Such security the proposals of the three powers held out to Rus sia and to Poland alike. It has pleased the Cabinet of St. Petersburg not to avail itself of this mode of restoring respect for authority. 2. Prince Gortschakoff affirms—and this view is the theme of the beginning and end of his despatch—that the re-establishment of order in Poland is dependent upon a condition to which he had called the attention of the Go vernment of her Britannic Majesty, "and which is not only unfulfilled, but is not even alluded to in the despatch of Lord Russell ; we refer to the material assistance and moral encouragements obtained from abroad by the insur gents." Her Majesty's Government would have been glad to have avoided this topic, and, instead of commenting on the past, to refer only to healing measures for the future. But, thus compelled by Prince Gortschakoff's reference to allude to the subject, her Majesty's Government have no hesitation in declaring their conviction that the prin cipal obstacle to the re-establishment of order in Poland is not the assistance obtained by the insurgents from abroad, but the conduce of the Russian Government itself. The Empress Catherine in 1772 promised to the Poles the maintenance of their religion. The Emperor Alexander I. in 1815 promised to the Poles national representation and national administration. These promises have not been fulfilled. During many years the religion of the Poles was attacked, and to the pre sent hour they are not in possession of the political rights assured to them by the treaty of 1815, and the constitution of the same year. The violation of these solemn engagements on the part of the Russian Government produced disaffection, and the sudden invasion of the homes of Warsaw, in a night of January last, was the immediate cause of the present insur rection. Unless the general feeling in Poland had been estranged from Russia the moral and material assistance afforded from abroad would have availed the insurgents little. It is true, however, that lively sympathy has been excited in Europe in favour of the Poles, In every considerable state where there exists a national representation—in England, in France, in Austria, in Prussia, in Italy, in Spain, Portugal, in Sweden, in Denmark—that sympathy has been mani• fested. Wherever there is a national administration, the administration has shared, though with prudence and re serve in expression, the feelings of the legislature and the nation. Russia ought to take into account these sympathies, and profit by the lesson which they teach. 3. Prince Gortechakoff lays much stress on the fact, which cannot be denied, that " the insurgents demand neither an amnesty, nor an autonomy, nor a representation more or less complete." But it would be a mistake to suppose that in cases of this kind there are only two parties, viz., the Government occu pied in suppressing the insurrection, and the leaders of the insurgents busy in fomenting and extending it. Besides these parties there is always in such cases a large floating mass who would be quite contented to see persons and pro perty secure under a just and beneficent administration. The confidence of this great mass has not been obtained, and their continued inaction can hardly bo depended upon. Her Majesty's Government must again represent the ex treme urgency of attempting at once the work of concilia tion which is so necessary for the general interest. In profiting by the loyal and disinterested assistance which is offered her by Austria, France, and Great Britain, the Court of Russia secures to herself the most powerful means towards making ideas of moderation prevail in Poland, and thus laying the foundations of permanent peace. 4. In referring to the treaty of Vienna Prince Gortscha koff says—" We should not be so far from the truth if we affirmed that the let article of the treaty of Vienna was pre pared by and directly emanated from his Majesty the Em peror Alexander I. Her Majesty's Government readily admit the probability of this supposition. In 1815 Great Britain, Austria, France, and Prussia would have preferred to the arrangement finally made a restoration of the ancient kingdom of Poland es it existed prior to the first partition of 1772, or even the estab lishment of a new independent kingdom of Poland, with the same limits as the present kingdom. The great army which the Emperor Alexander then had in Poland, the important services which Russia had ren dered to the alliance, and, above all, a fear of the renewal of war in Europe, combined to make Great Britain, Austria, and Prussia accept the arrangement proposed by the Em peror Alexander, although it was, in their eyes, of the three arrangements in contemplation, the one least likely to pro duce permanent peace and security in Europe. But the more her Majesty's Government see in the deci sion adopted the prevailing influence of Russia, the more they are impressed with the conviction that the Emperor of Russia ought to be, of all Sovereigns, the moat desirous to observe the conditions of that arrangement. It would not be open to Russia to enjoy all the benefits of a large addition to her dominions, and to repudiate the terms of the instrument upon which her tenure depends, In stating these terms Prince Gortschakoff says that the only stipulation which can have made it appear doubtful that the Emperor of Russia possessed the kingdom of Po land by the same title as that by which he holds his other possessions, the only one which could make his rights de pendent upon any condition whatever, is contained in two passages which ho proceeds to quote. But there is another passage which ho does not quote. It is found in the beginning of the First Article, and says " The duchy of Warsaw, with the exception of the pro vinces and districts which are otherwise disposed of by the following articles, is united to the Russian empire, to which it shall be irrevocably attached by its constitution, and be possessed by his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, his heirs and successors in perpetuity." Were not a national representation intended by this arti cle it would have been sufficient to say "to which it shall be irrevocably attached," without any mention of a consti tution. It is therefore evident that the constitution is the link by which Poland was connected with Russia. It is important to know what this constitution was which united Poland and Russia. It was not prescribed by the treaty, it was not promulgated by the European Powers, its construction was left entirely to the Emperor Alexander ; but nevertheless, when once promulgated, it must be taken to be the consti tution meant by the framers of the treaty of Vienna. It was for this reason that her Majesty's Government proposed as the second of the six points laid before the Go vernment of Russia, "national representation with powers similar to those which are fixed by the charter of tho 15-27th November, 1815." 5. Passing to the specific propositions of her Majesty's Government, Prince Gortschakoff says in regard to the six points, that the greater part of the measures which were pointed out by the three Powers "have already been either decreed or prepared on the initiative of our august master." Towards the end of the despatch an allusion is made to "the measures which his Majesty's adheres to, both in the germs already laid down, and in the development of them which he has allowed to be foreseen." control, or of national administratio n, g ives some ho p e that eitlh'ehrisopassage, ntthiloruegphrefsaer fromntati being onssi a efil de c fi ae n i i o t u e s " m s e ur an a s nc o e f the Emperor Alexander will ultimately listen to the inspi ration of his own benevolent disposition and to the counsels of Europe. e T t i h e e e proposalE mperor'sofa faithful hostilitieser army, yto th is rejected ee t cd peaceable"in ju majority of Poles, and to Russia, on whom these agitat ions impose painful sacrifices." The proposal of a conference of the powers who signed the treaty of Vienna is rejected, and with it the prospect of an immediate and friendly concert. In the place of this fair and equitaMo proposal, the - - - * See "Correspondence respecting the insurrection in Poland. 1863," part IV ,7 presented to Vorliament, July 20, 1863, sian cabinet suggests that the three powers who proposed the separate treaties between Austria and Russia, and Prussia and Russia, previously to the general treaty of Vienna, should meet together, and that France and Great Britain should be afterwards informed of the result of their deliberations. There are two reasons, either of which would be suffi cient to condemn this suggestion:- 1. The treaties in question, taken apart from the pro visions inserted in the general treaty of Vienna, have reference only to material objects--the use of the banks of rivers, the regulations for towing paths, the free passage of merchandise from one province to another, and such other matters of convenience and of commerce. No political developments or details are contained in them. 2. It is obvious that such a conference would place Austria in a false position, and be inconsistent with her relations to France and Great Britain. His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, therefore, with a proper sense of his own dignity, has at once rejected the Russian proposal. In communicating their views to Prince G-ortschakoff, it remains to her Majesty's Government to discharge an im perative duty. It is to call his excellency's most serious attention to the gravity of the situation, and the responsibility which it im• poses upon Russia. Great Britain, Austria, and Franco have pointed out the urgent necessity of putting an end to a deplorable state of things which is full of danger to Europe. They have at the same time indicated the means which, in their opinion, ought to be employed to arrive at this termination, and they have offered their co-operation in order to attain it with more certainty. If Russia does not perform all that depends upon her to further the moderate and conciliatory views of the three powers, if she does not enter upon the path which is opened to her by friendly counsels, she makes herself responsible for the serious consequences which the pro longation of the troubles of Poland may produce. I am, &e., (Signed) RUSSELL. plan involves a very grave departure from the true princi ples of relief administrat'on. " 6. Contracts for public or private works can only be safely entered into by boards or committees charged with the execution of such works, apart from the question of relief of indigence. Such boards or committees of public works reduce the sum of indigence in the same way as any private capitalists may do by such works as they undertake. But they assume no obligations to find employment, and they strengthen the relations between capital and labour by increasing the employment of capital and the demand for labour. These functions, though they indirectly relieve in digence, are not to be in any degree confounded with the functions of boards or committees, whose primary duty is to relieve indigence so as to sustain health. " Adopted and printed by order of the Central Executive Committee. " DERBY, Chairman: " JOHN Wu. M'CLURE, Hon. Sec." Grants were made from the General Relief Clothing Fund, including the following :—Ashton, £450 ; Staly bridge,L4so; liukinfield, £300; Tintwistle £100; Heywood, £300; Farrington, £lOO ; Blackburn, £4OO ; Bacup, £2OO ; Oldham, £BOO ; Whitworth and Facit, £l5O ; Royton, £2OO ; Broadbottcm and Cbarlesworth, £lOO ; Hyde, £B5O Crompton, £100; Stockport, £1,250. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—The public will certainly have learnt with some satisfaction that the two ironclad steamers now approaching completion in the Mersey will not be allowed to leave that river until something more is known of their ownership and destination. As Lord Russell acknowledged a short time ago the inability of Government; in default of evidence, to venture upon this step, we may presume that the grounds for interference have since acquired strength, and, indeed, although notoriety is no war rant for conviction, it was hardly possible to over look the universal impression, whether justifiable or otherwise, in the case before us. Whatever might be the complicity or the innocence of this party or that, it was every where accepted as beyond reasonable doubt that these two vessels were ultimately des tined for the service of lth.) Confederate States, and the precedents of the Alabama and the Florida enabled us to conjecture the future stages of their equipment and the uses to which they would be turned. The law of the case is certainly obscure, and its application is perhaps not likely to be facili tated by much clearness in the facts, but the rea son of the question can be readily apprehended. It is not denied that a neutral may sell munitions of war, ships included, to a belligerent. inter national law deals considerately with neutrals, and limits the extent to which their customary trade may be curtailed in aid of belligerents and their operations. It is not our fault that the Americans are fighting each other, and our share in the suffer ing produced by the war ought to be as light as possible. We, therefore, or any other neutrals, are entitled to pursue our ordinary business in all its branches, provided only that we do not violate the principles of neutrality by refusing to one bellige rent what we grant to the other. If the goods in which we deal are contraband of war they are liable to confiscation, but oven that trade, subject to the risk, is perfectly lawful. According to these doc trines, it is undoubtedly competent to any British shipbuilder to build a ship and sell it, as another merchant might sell a battery of fieldpieces or a cargo of gunpowder. Even if theship be manifestly and exclusively designed for purposes of war the traneaction is not necessarily unlawful, for the con struction of ships of war for foreign States is noto riously a branch of our customary trade. We can thus, without much difficulty, see our way to both the construction and sale of such vessels ; but then comes another point of the greatest importance — their delivery. If a ship of war thus built and dis posed of were delivered at the belligerent port, as other munitions of war might be delivered, we do not see that the transaction could be impeached. Sup posing, for the sake of argument, that these steam rams in the Mersey were avowedly destined for deli very at Charleston, there to be equipped and received into the service of the Confederate Government, the obligation of stopping them would then lie with the Federals, who would be entitled to capture them on their way, just as the Confederates, if they were strong enough, might capture a siege train on its way to New York. Under such condi tions, there would certainly be no difference between the sale of a steam-frigate and the sale of a park of artillery ; bat such are not the conditions to be as sumed. The Alabama was not delivered at a Southern port, nor are we sure, indeed, that she has ever en tered one. The Florida has run in and out of Charleston, but she only entered those waters as a ship already in coin mission, fully manned, and fully equipped. Where and how was this equipment effeeted ? If it was not effected—as it certainly was not —in a Confederate port, it must apparently have been effected in or from some neutral port, and that deprives the adventure of its lawfulness. A shipbuilder may not sell a ship ready armed, for that is not a cus tomary trade, and no such sales are effected. But if the purchaser, after receiving the empty hull, goes elsewhere to purchase guns and elsewhere to obtain men and stores, then the transaction in the aggregate amounts to the equipment and despatch of a hostile expedition from a neutral territory. To put the case clearly, let it be supposed that we were ourselves at war with the Federals, and that our Government, being pressed for ships, ordered the construction of vessels in private yards, as was actually done during the was with Russia. Suppose, also, that in the urgency of our need guns were purchased from pri vate manufacturers, and stores of all descriptions obtained in like manner. All this would be per fectly natural, but all this, and nothing less, is what probably happened in the case of the Confederate cruisers, thougn we are notat war but at peace with the Federal States.. The Confederate Government or its representatives did not simply buy ships in this country for transport to a Confederate port. These agents bought ships and guns and stores, and having thus got all the elements of a man-of-war together, sent the vessel to sea on her business fully equipped. But we ourselves could have done no more than this if we had been the belligerents, and consequently our ports or o ur territory would have been used by a belligerent for purposes of war. When the Alabama commenced her attacks on the enemy's shipping from what port had she sailed ? That is the important question. It had been answered by the assertion that she never sailed, as a fully-equipped man-of-war, from any port at all; that when she left the Mersey she was unequipped, and therefare innocent ; that i she borrowed her guns and her men from a Confederate consort at sea, and. supplied herself afterwards with stores in a justifi able manner. Bat would an adventure so planned be lawful in its inception ? Would it, for instance, be allowable for a British merchant to build a ship of war for delivery, with all but her guns and stores, to the Alabama or the Florida, lying conveniently off to receive her, and ready to put men and guns on board directly ? We have more than once remarked that the transactions in question have been conducted in such a manner as to indicate a consciousness of trespass in some direction or other. The law is loose enough, and there is great latitude reserved for genuine commercial adventure, but this recognized license has never been pleaded. No shipbuilder has openly avowed that he was building a ship for a belligerent Power, but that he intended to confine himself throughout the transaction to the limits imposed by the law. The vessels have been hula without any admission of their real destination, and despatched covertly or under pretext. When, therefore, we find two more vessels of a descrip tion apparently similar preparing to leave one of our ports, there can be nothing unreasonable in re quiring some certificate of character or destination before we allow them to depart. Of two things one —either the despatch of the Alabama was perfectly lawful and need not have been disguised, or the despatch of a vessel reasonably suspected of being another Alabama may be justly prevented. Which of these assumptions may be the sound one we can not take upon ourselves to say. The law admits of so many evasions, and the facts of the case have been so imperfectly ascertained, that we could not pretend to forecast the issue of a trial. In favour of the step on which Ministers have at length decided there are many considerations, It is not affirmed on any side that the despatch of the two iron-clads which have acquired so equivocal a re putation wouid be really allowable if their character is such as is imputed, while no suffi cient evidence has been tendered to rebut this imputation. They are war vessels, and war vessels of exactly the kind which would probably be be spoken by the Canfederates for the purposes alleged. They must have a purpose of some kind, and no other purpose appears to have been conclusively shown. These being the grounds of suspicion, it is argued by some, and felt by almost all, that the departure of the vessels should not be permitted without some effort either to fix their alleged cha racter or to clear them of suspicion altogether. Thew may be obscurity about the law, but there is none about the reason of the case. We should not submit, if we were belligerents, to the despatch of cruiser after cruiser from a neutral port to make war upon our vessels. We believe that, except for some evasion. EMI proceedings could really be proved unlawful. We cannot but suspect that such service is the service for which these steamers are destined, and we therefore ask that these suspicio ns may be dis pelled before we lot the vessels go. HERALD.—The passionate anxiety of the Federal Government and its agents in this country, English and American, td prevent, by all means and at all hazards, the building of ships in British ports, which may eventually find their way into the hands of the Confederates, is a little surprising. We can quite understand that the North 511011 1 4 be very Lancashire Central Relief Committee. The weekly meeting of this committee was hold on Mon day—the Earl of Derby in the chair. _ _ The Hon. Secretary reported that £149 3s 3d had been received during the week, and that the balance in the bank was £299,853 lis sd. Three packages of clothing had been received during the week, and two had been sent off. Mr. FARNALL read the following report :—" I beg to in• form you that on the sth inst. there was a decrease in the number of persons receiving parochial relief in 27 unions in the cotton manufacturing districts, as compared with the number so relieved in the previous week, of 1,669. This decrease of 1,669 is explained as follows :—Thero is a de crease at Ashton-under-Lyne of 592; Barton-upon-Irwell , 28 ; Blackburn, 48 ; Burnley, 48 ; Bury, 119 ; Chorley, 21 ; Chorlton, 354; the Fylde, 25; Garstang, 46; Haslingden, 11; Leigh, 23; Manchester, 3 9 8 ; Preston, 309 ; Saddle worth, 143 ; Salford, 167 ; Stockport, 82 ; Wigan, 59 ; total, 2,396. But there is an increase at Bolton of 3; Glossop, 23 ; Lancashire, 3 ; Macclesfield, 8 ; Oldham, 405 ; Prest wich, 10; Rochdale, 196; Todmorden, 30; and Warring ton, 49; making a total increase of 727,—50 that there is a net decrease of 1,669, and since the 6th of December last a to an tal in d er e e c a r s e e as o e f o: 6s 129,203 ,05 has taken place. There were on the sth inst., 142,780 persons receiving parochial relief i n the 27 unions adverted to ; in the corresponding we ek of 1861, 46,725 persons were so relieved; there is, theref ore, persons in the receipt of parochial re lief, or 205.6 per cent. In the corresponding week of 1862, 144,007 persons received parochial relief. It will be a source of satisfaction to your committee to observe that the pauper ism of this week is less by 1,227 in number than that of the corresponding week of 1862. Tho total weekly cost of out door relief on the sth inst. was £8,749 4s ; in the correspond ing week of 1861 it was £2,236 9s ; there is, therefore, an in crease of £6,512 14s 2d or 2951 per cent. In the correspond ing week of 1862 it was £8,193 Os 10d. The average per centage of pauperism on the population of these unions o n the sth inst. was 7'2 ; in the corresponding week of 1562 it was 2 . 4 ; and the corresponding week of 1861 it was 7.3. The amount of money in the hands of the treasurers of the above unions on the sth inst. was £98, 5 7 6 95 . Mr. FARNALL remarked upon the fact that whilst at this time last year the number s elieved by guardians was increas ing at the rate of 5,000 per week, it was now decreasing after the rato of something like 1,500 weekly. He then, in con formity with notice given last week, introduced the question whether it was expedient or desirable for distinct relief com mittees to undertake contracts for the execution of public works by the men on their relief lists. For his own part he was prepared to answer the question distinctly in the ne, , ative. Committees, by entering into such contracts, and employing the operatives on them simply as a labour test, would cause unfair competition with corporations and other contracting bodies, who, under the Public Works Act, would be able to occupy the men upon work for a fair rate of wages, and thereby tend to the demoralisation of the ope ratives by maintaining them as paupers instead of allowing them to become independent labourers, in accordance with the intention of Parliament in passing the act referred to, Mr. R. H. HuTcurssoN proposed :—" That, with a view to extend the operations of the Public Works Act as m uc h and as quickly as possible, it be recommended that the various relief committees, during the winter months, assist in procuring contracts SO as to p rovide for the able-bodied unemployed operatives , takin g care to ensure them bein g placed on this employm ent ver y extensively on measured work, and conducting the o p erations so that those em ployed may be trained to continuo contracts for themselves b under the respective bo ards or p ublic bodies carryina. out the act after the termin ation of this winter." Oue of th e main reasons which in duced him to make this proposal wa s that, in the event of local committees taking any other course than that he ha d indicated, there would be no pos sibility of discriminati n g as to the kind of labour whi ch should bo employed on these works,—that was to say, when there was not sufficient work for all, th e em . into fam the e hands wher e a o ef rhoth Committeee single men p an lo d ym th e o n s t e wwotuth small ld of which he was a member felt that the married men witb large families ought to have the preference till all could bo employed. Ile was of opinion that corporations alone would not be enabled to undertake many desirable contracts which, u nder the arrangement he proposed, could be carried out. According to the opinion of counsel which had been obtained corporations could not recover losses which might arise under them from the rates. At least that would be the case at Blackburn. The municipal rate, as it was called, was probably the only one upon which such a charge could be made, and that would not suffice. In course of some months the committee would be able to resign the work of entering into contracts entirely into the hands of corporations end other properly-constituted bodies. What he desired was, that during the winter season the commit tees should have power to afford temporary relief to those engaged on these public works, but who, from inclement weather, would occasionally be unable to earn a sufficient maintenance. no trusted this committee would, by their adoption of his m otion, allow local committees the oppor tunity of using the labour at their command upon public works as a fit and Proper test of eligibility for the relief to afforded. be conclud e d that the Public Works Act Mr. GOODAIIt seconded th e motion, urging various cient to p rov i de employmen t f or th e s cs : u eted operati ves, w i t h out t h e a id o f th e wwhouolled grounds topi r o to n hve w e d h ii i n district committee. He thought there was no choice except as between the carrying out of lir. Hutchinson's sugges tions and allowing the ;operatives to walk idly about the streets. into the who t ° w e a n s The CHAIRMAN said thi s would pro b a bl y b e th e fitti ng this a s b u l e bj e t c o t a f r t. o t e m n d S . r a h m e e m s K in a u y t question at issue and the main time w S he went t t t t v l o e e w r r eyoardct closely m inute principles which it involved. His lordship then read the commun i ca tion adverted to, which was as follows: it minute as to contracts by relief committees, and em ployment of indigent cotton workmen in such contracts. 46 The relief of indigence in the cotton districts has hitherto proceeded mainly from two sources, viz., the legal c h ar ge on property, and the voluntary contributions of c harity to Publish funds. These two sources of relief are subject to a law of economy. When the poor rates and the relief funds have provided to the indigent the means of sustaining health, they have discharged their function. ss I. The laws for the relief of the poor never were in tended to provide employment with wages. Such an obli gation would convert the poor-laws into an organised system of labour conducted by the state, which would destroy the relations between capital and labour—employers and em ployed—and establish a form of socialism destructive to private capital and demoralising labour. Every step, there fore, from that legitimate use of the poor-rates, or of public charitable funds, which restricts them to the maintenance of health, to another which proceeds to assume obligations to provide w ages from such sources i s f u ll of danger. "2. W ages are given to the able-bodied without respect to the wants of their families. A single able-bodied man receives as much, at piece work, as a man with a wife and four children. To find employment with wages, therefore, if general, necessarily creates a heavier charge than the simple maintenance of health. " 3. A relief committee has no corporate power to enter into any contract to secure employment for those whom it relieves. Such a contract could only be legally entered into by individual members of the relief committee in their private capacity. If such private persons enter into such a contract, the from the mana tee. " 4. Supp os i ng y can receive no legal security for its fulfilment these technical difficulties to be over come, and th a t t h e ma j or it y an d most influential mem bers of such a committee sign such a contract—if they de termine to provide from their relief funds ordinary wages, either for piece work or day work, they have no warrant to expect any aid from the Central Executive Committee to carry out a scheme inconsistent with the economy of funds intended simply to support health. " 5. It is possible to adjust a scheme of labour to a scale of relief adapted simply to sustain health, by paying for work done by the hour at the usual rate, and not requiring more hours' work than will enable the workman to make his labour and that of his family equal at that rate per hour to the scale of relief intended to sustain health. Any othcr • angry ; we should not be utterly astonished if its natural resentment and its ignorance of interna tional law were to lead to acts of unjustifiable re taliation ; but we do not quite understand the desperate energy with which the Federalists labour to prevent these ships from getting to sea. They have the right to seize them as contraband of war as soon as they are beyond British jurisdiction ; and a ship seized on suspicion of being built as a con sort of the dreaded Alabama would meet with little justice from a Northern prize-court and little pro tection from the British Government. These prizes, moreover, would be of immense value to the Yan kees, for they are about the only ships that would have at once the speed to catch the Alabama and the strength to fight her. But this is the only moans of security which the Yankees have not tried. They have bullied the British Government, and tried to mislead the British people ; they have appealed by desperate menaces to the fears of Lord Russell, and by falsifications of history to the gra titude of the country ; they have even brought before a court of law a case utterly devoid of legal foundation, and supported it before an English jury by the evidence of a set of scoundrels such as are seldom seen in the dock, and rarely indeed in the witness-box; and now they have busied themselves in trying, by threats, coaxing, teasing, expostulation, downright bullying, to force the Foreign Secretary to do for them, in violation of law, what the law refuses. We are more scan dalised than surprised to learn that they have suc ceeded. We never believed in the much-vaunted spirit of Lord Russell. It is quite in keeping with the character of Mr. Christie's patron that he should obey the bidding of Mr. Adams ; and the hero of the Vienna Conference is just the man to sacrifice the honour and interests of his country to his awe of Mr. Seward. The aspect of his conduct as a matter of foreign policy we have discussed already. It deserves a little consideration in another aspect, as a scandalous violation of the law of England, a gross misuse of power, a usurpation of illegal autho rity on the part of the Executive Government. If Lord Russell had good cause to believe that there was an intention to break the law, and that he had evidence of that intention, he would of course be quite justified in detaining the vessels in Mr. Laird's yard until their guilt or innocence had been estab lished before the proper tribunal. But he has con fessed publicly that he has no evidence whatever: he is well aware that, the real bearing of the law having been shown by the case of the Alexandra, every care will have been taken to comply with its requirements; he has not the faintest hope of ob tam ing the condemnation of these ships; and he has detained them only that he may, by their illegal detention, este Well a claim on the gratitude of the Yankees, and give them the advantage of some months' time wherein to do their worst, before these vessels can take part in the war, This is an act of vexation and tyranny, committed under shelter of that principle of our constitution which allows an extraordinary discretion to the Executive, subject to the ordinary penalties of the law if that discre tion be unwisely or unjustly exercised. The law is clear. The Executive, under the Foreign Enlist ment Act, is entrusted with the power of a police man to arrest suspected criminals. In this case it arrests without a decent pretence of suspicion, not because the law is likely to be violated, bat because something is likely to be cone which will be very disagreeable to its friends. It is as if, in a close contest, a Yellow constable were to arrest half a dozen Blue voters on the pretence that they medi tated an assault on the poll-clerk, and keep them in custody till the election was over. They would have their action for false imprisonment, and would recover swinging damages; but the election would be lost. So Mr. Laird, or the party who has ordered the ships, may recover damages; but the object of Lord Russell has been gained, and the service he proposes to render to the Northerners has taken effect. There is a law to forbid the sailing of belligerent expeditions from British ports. But there is no law, and there ought not to be, and the Legislature never meant that there should be, any law to prevent British shipbuilders from dealing in ships of war. The discussion, independently of the decision, in the case of the Alexandra, made it quite clear what British subjects might do; and this of course is what Mr. Laird has done. He will not arm or fit out or equip a ship of war, and sell her to the Confederates to make war in the United States. Either his ships will not go faith "equipped" within the meaning of the act; or they wilt go not directly to the Confederate service, but to some neutral port as the property of the subject of some other neutral power. In neither case will there have been either violation or evasion of our law ; for that law was not meant to fetter trade, or to assist a belligerent who wants arms and ammu nition at the expense of a belligerent who wants men of war. If such bad been its meaning we should have been bound as neutrals to repeal it when war broke out; just as when France made war on Spain, we altered our orders in Council as to the export of arms, in order to put both parties on an equal footing. It is beyond doubt that all concerned in the building of the vessels now in question have kept within the law ; Lord Russell has broken the law in order to use his position as a Minister of Queen Victoria for the advantage and benefit of a foreign Government, and in doing so tie has been guilty of something not falling very far short of an overt act of treason. He will escape with impunity, but certainly not without infamy. " But," say some timid and shortsighted peace mongers, "it is very hard that we should via the risk of war merely that Mr. Laird may have his profit as a shipbuilder." So it is very hard that we should have to run the risk of war to protect Bri tish subjects in China or Chili, Mexico or Japan, from illegal violence; why do they not come home and abandon the profits of their trade to citizens of more courageous or less peaceable countries? While Mr. Laird,acts within the law we are bound by our own honour to defend him, and refrain from inter fering with him; and if we once allow the argu ment to avail, that we should rather force our subjects to abandon their rights than fight to main tain them, we shall never enjoy any trade which is disagreeable to any of our rivals. This argument would bid us cease to sell arms and munitions of war to one belligerent for fear of war with the other, for if it were thought that such a threat would avail the Federal Government would threaten us with war if we supplied rifles to the Confederates, and France would follow the example if we ventured to sell contraband goods to the Mexicans, or Russia if she found the Poles making purchases of arms in Birmingham. We cannot allow the slightest weight to fear of an unjustifiable declaration of war ; to do so would be to forfeit for ever our claim to respect from foreign nations, and to place ourselves at the mercy of any power that might think fit to play the bully. If we have to fight it will not be for ship builders' profits, but for national honour ; not be cause Mr. Laird has sold an Alabama, but because Lord Russell has allowed the Yankees to imagine that the sale of Alabamas is to be prevented by bluster and menace. EXTRACTING A RAT'S TEETH. Yesterday John Hicks, a cooper, appeared before Mr, Woolrych at the Thames Police-court, on a summons, charged with threatening to take the life of one Anthony Praviski. The parties were employed at a steam cooperage in Hun gerford-street, Commercial-road East, and from the state ment of the complainant, delivered in broken English, the defendant undertook to extract the teeth of a large rat with his own teeth, and succeeded in doing so, but at the expense of his tongue, which was severely bitten by the rat. Mr. Woolrych—The biter was bitten. The complainant said that was so*. The defendant's tongue was in a very bad state, and so frightfully swollen that his mouth could hardly contain it. Mr. Woolrych—His mouth could not hold his tongue ? Did he extract the rat's teeth ? The complainant replied—All of them, and that the de fendant, whose life was in jeopardy from the bite of the rat, was laid up for some time, and a collection was made for him in the factory. Mr. Woolrych (ironically)—For his undeserved suffer ings ? (A laugh.) The complainant—Yes, sir ; yes, sir. His tongue, your worship, was larger than his mouth. (Laughter.) Mr. Woolrych—And no sympathy was exhibited for the rat P The Complainant replied—None whatever; and pro ceeded to state that when the proprietor of the factory heard of the collection he stopped it at once, and said the act of the defendant in extracting the rat's teeth was a piece of gross cruelty. Mr. Woolrych—l quite agree with him. The complainant, in continuation, said that the defendant accused him of stopping the collection, and abused him in a very gross manner. Hicks also said he would take his life away. Mr. Woolrych—How did he propose to do it; by draw ing your teeth ? Are you afraid of him ? The complainant said he was not afraid of the defendant, but he might do him a secret injury by throwing butts, casks, and staves upon him. Charles Praviski, a boy, the son of th e complainant, con firmed the statement of his father. The defendant, a man about 30 years of age, said he did extract the rat's teeth with his own, and his tongue was bitten while doing so. He had paid £5 to Dr. Godfrey, a physician, in the Whitechapel-road, for putting his tongue to rights, and the complainant taunted him with it. H e told the complainant he ha d nothing to do with the matter, and that if he was an Englishman he would fight him, but as ho was a poor Polo he would have nothing to do with him. Mr. Woolrych was afraid the defendant was of the same disposition as his antagonist, the rat. He was not sur prised that the complainant expected harm from a man who had encountered au animal \vitt ouch an insatiable appetite as a rat, whose bite was keen and difficult to heal, whic h the defendant had found out to his cost.' ?He ordered the defendant to enter into his own , recognisarit3e in the sum of £2O to keep the peace, and bo of good behaviour for the next six months, and to pay the cost of tire summons. Extraordinary Charge of Assault. At the Marlborough-street police .court, yester day, Mrs. Turner, of No. 2, Swollow-street, Regent-street, was summoned by Captklia Charles Ackerley, R.N., for an assault. Mr. Edward Lewis appeared for the defence. Captain Ackerley stated that on the morn ing of the Bth of September he went upstairs to his . pan try to get ajug of water, having on his usual shav ing costume, a short petticoat fastened round .his waist. The defendant being in I%he room upstai rs he waited until she came out, but iilstead of comic g out she called him bad names and threw a basin of tepid water over him, right over his face and shoulders. He merely said " That's quite enough,." and went downstairs to dry himself. Mr. Lewis cross-examined the complainant. Mr. Lewis—You occupy the parlours, dly you not ?' Captai❑ Ackerley—The coal-hole you mean.. They have turned my things out of the parlours, and I occupy the coalhole, which is my property. Mr. Lewis—What was the state of your drag; when the alleged assault took place Captain Ackerley—l had on my shaving petti coat. I was recommended to wear such a dress► by the house-surgeon. The fact is they want to• get me out. I am the Government trustee, and. the house is made a perfect nuisance to me, but I'll hold it all my life. Mr. Lewis—Was not your shaving pett:Lcoat only a towel or a duster hanging from your mon.th? Captain Ackerley—lt was not. Mr. Lewis said he was prepared to show that no assault had been committed, and to prove the kind of shaving dress which the complains nt went about the house in. Fred. Billing heard screams, and on going up stairs saw Captain Ackerley pulling the defendant downstairs. Capt. Ackerley had got a towel hang ing from his mouth. He had often Been Captain Ackerley with no more clothes on than he had when he was born going upstairs. Captain Ackerley—That is extraneot Is. Witness—You have come downstate into the workshop in the same state. Captain Ackerley —Quite extraneous. Mr. Edmonds, decorator, Jermyn-stre et, said he saw Captain Ackerley with only his towel hanging from his mouth close to the street. He should have taken the advice of one of his men and r an him over in that condition to the station-houtv had there been anything else to lay hold of exce l ? t the towel. Mr. Tyrwhitt thought it was discreditable for a person in Captain Ackerley's station not to a dopt a less questionable style of costume. He was sur prised Captain Ackerley did not go down to his house in Dorsetshire and live there like a g entle.. man. Captain Ackerley—l have no house there. I've been turned out, and as I'm Government trustee I'll stay where I am; for if I stay Government must truckle to me—but if I go Government say theY will not have to truckle to me. Mr. Tyrwhitt—The assault is net proved, and the summons is dismissed. Mr. Lewis—l hope you will allow my client her expenses ? Mr. Tyrwhitt could not allow expenses. The complainant was a poor fellow whose eccentricities no doubt exposed him to a good deal of annoyance. Captain Ackerley—Me a poor fellow I I beg to deny that I am a poor fellow. I've had water thrown over me, and this is all I'm to get. Good day. The Captain then left the court in a state of ex" citement. COUNTRY MARKETS. ►"- LEEDS—TUESDAY. Now wheat was in good show to-day, and can only be cleared off at is to 2s decline on the currencies of last Fri day, LIVERPOOL-TUESDAY. At our market to-day there was a fair atten dance of the trade, but the demand waslimited for wheat, and prices generally 3d per cental lower on the week. Flour dull, and 6d per barrel easier. Indian corn quiet, and easier —mixed 27s per 4801 b. MARKET HARBOROUGH—TUESDAY. All accounts agree that the wheat crop never was: better. —White wheat, 43s to 49s ; red, 40s to:46s per 3 6 stone• Malting barley at 33s . to ; 36s:per qr.; grinding, 29,4 to 300 per 30 et. Oats, old, 26s to 30s; new, 20s to 235. per 21 et. ; beans, 39s to 43s per qr. • SHEFFIELD—TUESDAY. We had a tolerable supply of wheat, and the demand rather more active. Red wheat, per load of 3 imperial bushele 158 Od to 17s Od White ff , lBB Od to ;19s 6 0 New red , , 178 Od to 18s Od New white ~ )9 , 18s Od to 20s Od Beane If 3, lss 6d to _l7s 6 a Peas, per qr 458 Od to 5 6 s Od Grinding barley, per qr Malting ditto, ~ 34s Od to ass Oc l ,, ii Oats 22s Od to 27s ( I" Flour, is 7d to 2s Id per stone. MELTON MOWBRAY—TUESDAY. The following were the currencies :—New white wheat, 44s Od to 485,0 d ; new red, 42s Od to 46s per 36 stone; beans, 39s to 43s for old; new sorts, 37s to 38s per 38 st• ; barley, 34s to 38s for malting, and 28s to 30s per qr. for grinding; new oats, 23s to 25s Od per 24 stone. DUBLIN-TUESDAY. A fair supply of grain to-day at Friday's prices, but the condition gen erally was uosatisfactory. Oats were a shad e lower. Inian corn ueglec ted. s. d. s. d. a. d. e• d ‘ ; Wheat, white.. 23 0t026 6, Beans.. - u,, Do., red .. 20 0t023 6 Bore . ll o to 13 L,; Do., new .... —oto 0 Rapeseed .... 24 0 t026 0u Barley Oats Do., black —oto 0 Indian corn .. 27 oto2B 0 Foreign Mail Pacitet List. MAILS DUE. Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton. Sept. 18 ' via Marseilles Oct. 13. Brazil and Cape Verde, by British packer`. Oct. 6 , ,, Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena Sept. 2T China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southanipton Sept. i''' via Marseilles Sept. 21. Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton ... Sept. 18 Q . India (Calcutta), and Coylon, via Southampton ..Sept. 0 111 . r via Marseilles... • Sept. 4 " ' India (Bombay), via Southampton S e pt. 25. via Marseilles 1-,ept. 20. Portuga 1.... • Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Sept. ...-- via Marseilles .. Oct. 1. Newfoundland Oporto and Vigo ........... U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet.. Sept. 24, by U.S. packetc 11 ._. e • • t. 18. a .. . S O e c P t . 10. by C an adian P W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe ........ ... . Sept. 24. .. . Bahamas, via. New York .................. Sept.... o 28. Mexico. ........................... L' .... Peru, 1 All parts of West Indies, including ' Sept. 28. California. and British Columbia. . Births. CURWEN.—On the 11th inst., at Lower Clapton, Mrs. T. Curwen, of a daughter. MILLER. —Oa the 12th inst., at Manderaton, Berwickshir e, the wife of Wi lliam Miller, Esq., M.P., of a son. SEYmovit.—On the 14th inst., at Havant Rectory, the wife of the Rev. F. P. Seymour, of a daughter. WITIUNGTON.—On the 14th bag., at Westbere, Kent, the wife of Major Within; ton, of a .daughter. Marriageg. MORRIS — STIELDON.—On the 12th inst., at St. Pancr as Church, James M orr i s , E sq., o f 14, G res h a m-shee t, city, to Mary, widow of the late Thos, Sheldon, Aolicitor, Cheltenham. PATTISON — BROCK.—On the 15th inst., at Bl o omsbury Chapel, R ow l es Pattison, Esq , 44, B e dford-row, and : Park Cottag•es Park Village E. to Hannah, the el der' daughter of the Rev. Wm. Brock, D.D. Deaths. AITCRISON.—On the 12th inst., •at Alderston, nodding' tonshire, James Aitchison, Esq. CRALLEN.—On the 10th inst., at Hardham, Sussex, itch ci Challen, Esq., aged 70. CHErPiNs.—On the 13th inst., at Chester, Geo. Alexandecti Cheffins, Esq., of 5, St. Peter's-terrace, Notting-hill, 8, Billiter-square, E.C., aged 27. DOUGLAS.—On the 13th inst., at Bruntwood, Cheadle' Cheshire, John Douglas, Esq., aged 53. HOWARD.—On the 14th inst., at Harwich, Mr.E. Howard' of Old-street-road, aged 41. Pnimars.—On the 14th inst., at Chelsea, Rich& Esq. YOUNG.—On the 12th inst., at Brighton, Lieut. Chas. O. Young, R.N., aged 4a London : Printed and Pub:imbed by WILLIAM ANDRIO of No. 112, Stran d, Printer, at TUE SUN Office IC0.112; Strand, in the Pr ecinct of the Sa v o y , In the CotuitY 0` bittidloex,7lVeclu eoa b t9ePteMber 10, 1b63,