The Sun. — London, England, 1836-03-19 00:00:00

stat _ s10° • , ( Hear ,h) There was no question but that every wale, h owever comparatively powerless and limited in extent, pe u- n a ‘ entitled to h ave j ust i ce d one t o it, an d t o h av e the inde the a ence guaranteed to it by treaties maintained equally with de pen considerable states—( Hear, hear)—that the inde ts'uederice of the p e tty re p u bli c o f Cracow ought to be held as sac red as that of the great kingdom of Prussia. He felt sure olil t haf the th ree Powers would be w i se enough to re fl ect t h at Power' by acting on suc h a p r inciple as this could their own old and indepe n d en c e b e permanently secured. It was h ad Y_DY respecti ng th e engagemen t s an d t r eaties which they f : o ntracted with other, even the smallest States, that they ro ylift be entitled, if their own security were menaced, to call the co-operation and assistance of those other States with it in ad g they were parties in those engagements in which they such an interest. Sir H, VERNEY said that no circumstance had excited his haTfoiseration so much as the fall of that noble people, who made, he trusted, not their last struggle Tor their inde- Pende o ee He called on the Government to secure the friendshipcalled of those nations which surrounded Russia; he n ,:ed on them to secure the interests of Turkey, Persia, and ; he called on them to obtain permission of the o' 4lll l Government to send a fleet to the Black Sea. Russia i t acquired influence in all the nations surrounding - her, and of %I ," the duty of this country to seek to obtain the confidence t 'ePorrers threatened with Russian aggression. He hoped there wo uld be such an expression of feeling by the House ob taining tnight a s wou ld i n f orm Russia that she must despair of the sympathy of any party. las Lord SAN . DON truste d t h a t th a t occupation would not e t 1 "g, and that the other nations of Europe would not re einise t h e pr i nc i p l e on w hi c h t h e t h ree protect i ng p ower s bad acted: M t hey (2) 'CONNELL said that the three protecting powers as were called—the three plundering powers was their fttrper title--(Cheers)—had been guilty of the grossest vio ex!°ll, of an un di sgu i se d and unmitigated violation of the J u stified treaties. They did not pretend even that they were ;tified in th e course th e y had taken. Without any case to t er'r'itory such a step, they marched troops into this neutral and took possession of it. They had been guilty of ;violati on which, if committed on a small scale, would be a I ., '"Y or a l an d pi rac y. It had been suggested by the Noble er cl as a circumstance in mitigation, that Austrian troops d been marched into Cracow instead of Russian. This re "nfl be e d im of the story of a Spanish nobleman who, havi 8_ ea sent h enced to be hanged, complained that to carry such g a "fence into execution on his person would be a violation of the rights of nobility, whereupon it was decreed that he should be hung by a silk rope instead of a hempen one.—( A laugh.) It vio lated, not merely the letter of the treaty which had been vio- Ced, it had been violated in its spirit. H e s hould be g lad to 101 1 if any body would assert that the Queen of Spain had a ' ' ti ght t"i to make war upon Great Britain because there were on. Gentlemen in that House who were making earnest efforts in favour of Don Carlos ?—( Hear, hear.) The t hree Powers bad treated this country with contempt; we ere a party to the treaty of Vienna, and in violating it as they h ad done, they had treated both this country and France with Positive contempt. It was a great mistake to suppose that 18 country did not feel deeply with respect to Poland.— W ear, h ea r.) A feeling for the sufferings of Poland was orkin g i n th e m i n d o f th e p u bli c all over Europe, and the d espots with their armed power little knew what might be the co knaequences of te wrongs they were perpetrating. —( Cheers. tnoral effect wasin operation from city to city and town to tQt ro, and it would be found that this Power of Russia, which resembled a monster with its arms of steel, and its front of brass,,,. but its feet of clay, along with the other despotic powers were attached to it, would meet with a fate which would ,re as an example to the rest of the world. Their violation ; toe treaty of Vienna was the most glaring that ever yet oc erred- Poland had been the general spoil of Europe for l lAvards of fifty years; this was not a matter of to-day or Yesterday,P 1 but had been going on since 1 7 71 . And the rights and were founded not on the treaty of Vienna, but ex isted before ; the effect of that treaty was only to commit this cou ntry and France to the criminality of standing by and al -11r414g Poland to be treated as she had, been. It was the of this country to call on the King's Ministers to speak "to Russia on this occasion. He trusted that the time was ho t remote when he should be able, with the aid of France, to Insist not only on the re-establishment of Poland, but the re- Itforation of Finland to Sweden—when we should be able to L e ,eP the Russian barbarians within their proper limits. He Cgged to ask was the Russian Dutch loan unpaid ?—(Hcar, p e a,r hear.) He believed that 100,000/. of that loan was un 44 Yet, and it ought to be stopped. There was against Cr ofcow notoing out assertion—it was the wolf against the h•—the vulture against the chicken. He hoped the voice England would put a stop to all these outrages against ev erything human and divine.—( Cheers.) Lord PALMERSTON explained. Sir R. INGLIS said that the country was indebted to his Right Hon. Friend for having brought this subject forward. I Mr. HUME observed that England was undoubtedly bo und b y treaties'; but if anything could show the absurdity of such treaties, it certainly was the mode in which the treaty to which re ference had been made was violated. Let them, however, i is el tiember, that the treaty of Frankfort had bee n violated in th e same gross manner.—(blear.) But the Noble Lord "ould, it appeared, allow the treaty of Vienna to be violated i i the same manner that the treaty of Frankfort had been. „,;!le Noble Lord, however, was waiting for information. Of .._hat use were the Ministers at Berlin and Vienna, if the mo t Tent they had h ear d o f this transaction they had not apprised ~° Nobl e L or d ? Th e N o bl e Lord had to send from this Vantry for information. Why, he would ask, had they not a nisterial r es id e nt at Cracow ? It seemed to him that their hP l ornatic establishments were utterly useless, and certainly t le information was communicated by them. He hoped at the Commons of England would, when the documents W e re laid on the table, declare in the plainest manner what Wa s th e guilt of those who had violated treaties. But he NOW, told he could not do this without risking a war. -„?sv, he certainly did not wish to see the country plunged i t "„L° war ; he thought that the country had often been brought t " the verge of ruin by engaging in war, in which its real in rests were not concerned. They should, however, get rid ( I s tipulations, if by them they could not secure the indepen 114ee of the smaller states. Now , although Cracow was not h ger than the parish of Mary-la-bonne, still its independence bee n secured by treaty.—( Hear, hear.) Now, if they ; r e by treaty bound to pay Russia, they should, before they iti oeated any such sum of money, see whether it could not be I ,:re properly given to the unfortunate individuals whose pro- tOO was destroyed, and liberty interfered with—and that, this' by a gross violation of a solemn treaty. Unless they did (of they would have to submit to still further indignities.— Hear, hear. ) ° "d JOHN RUSSELL was much more disposed to coin cide in the opinion expressed by the Hon. Baronet the Mem ber for th e U n i vers i ty o f O x f or d, t han to agree in the senti- It ets of the Hon. Member for Middlesex. — ( Hear , hear.) titoWould, he considered, be very unwise in that House to come a stron g reso lution, unless it was prepared for worse. — 1 0 ie ar, hear.) They had seen, for example, in a neighbour °„, country, a public Chamber giving expression to a stro n g it 41 " upon the nationality of Poland; but not following as t lP by any f ur th e r proceedings. He must confess that the Pro t '' o f an o pi n i on , no t followed up by any distinct F re ') could neither increase the reputation of the Chamber 'v it t Which it emanated, nor add so the dignity of the country. Oerefore it was that he could not agree to the proposal made the Hon. Member for Middlesex. They could not with iepPriety come to a resolution strongly expressive of their in hiagdoation, unless they were prepared to take such a step as . been referred to by the Gallant Admiral the Member for lo t i / "Port, and have a very large force to support their reso- Vti l i ° , ll - -- -(Hear, hear.) With respect to the question itself, it had been put by the Right Hon. Gentleman, he thought b ef a s exceedingly right that such a question should be brought t h ° l;e the House. He thought it very proper that the House ev ° , ll „d not allow an occurrence of the kind adverted to that G en ": 1: gto pass without notice.—( Hear.) The Right Hon. cr et - a e man was therefore quite right in calling upon the Se ill for Foreign Affairs to give some explanation respect ' s e s' ii ,"'• That explanation had been given, and up to the pre thiatlonsent the Noble Lord had, he considered, shown that acti on Ho ur of England had not been committel in this trans toof°ll. As the Right Hon. Gentleman had not proposed any t' l and as there was nothing before the House but a mo till; o f mere form, he wished that, as there was a very impor 42_' question to come before the House, the subject would be allowed to drop. to b ° "u DUDLEY STUART could not permit the subje ct de disposed disp osed of in this manner. He had heard with a great Fri e °f Pleasure a portion of what had fallen from his Noble Why the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. In a great part of IQ 'lad fallen from his Noble Friend, a portion of what his t a „, Friend had said did him honour • but he was bound to entirely there were other parts of the min ' e speech from which did disagreed—he could not but consider :those p arts 1, 0 tr a discredit. As to what had fallen from the Noble entid the Secretary of State for the Home Department, he di ree e ,'Y disagreed with it. He thought that speech was in tor,' c ontradiction to the sentiments expressed by the Noble 4 01 ; 4 sitting beside him, and which was likely to produce an fr oist e ,s,sion directly the reverse of what was likely to arise Ae,„‘ A ue language used by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. bah r uing to the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home rgrtra it a exit, the three Northern Courts had a right to commit teas gra nt , . violation of a treaty—of a treaty to which England Porei party, and in which the Noble Lord the Secretary for coo lnl gn Affairs t o ld th em that the honour of England was t hen Ate& Was it not, then, an affront upon them, that Vi e ; should be a violation of so important a treaty as that of arid 114-- -a treaty which had settled the affairs of all Europe, Ar e ,. e " which the possessions of every state in the world based tr eat ? Was it nothing, he would ask, that such a La erit Y li should be violated and infringed ? Was it not incum autripo them to resent such an insult ? Or should they ar i d Patiently to see that treaty trampled upon by arrogant cmuest,rbearing Northern Courts ?—( Hear, hear.) This was ee d b an which in vo l ve d th e l aws o f nations ; and what had ral g l ln c Te he considered involved the honour and interests of u s - --(Hear, hear.) How, he would ask, had it hap allianc?inen the three Northern Powers were bound up in co urt ; with them, they did not go even through the mere do? of informing this country what they were going to Plai nt how, he would ask, had it happened that no corn eleati "ad been made of this omission ? Even if it could be right Yt,,Proved, w hi c h h e d en ied, that these Powers had a `-ra,- ;0 ; make the demand which led to the occupation of hot , still the ou t rage an d insult offered to England could N eh ‘l e n that account be deemed the less.—( Hear, hear.) His ,give ett P riend had been obliged to tell them he would not he had not to his Right Honourable Friend, because % t i e , not official information upon the subject : that reply h ad ‘l.l, additional condeinnation on this Government. Why Qr ace ße Y not official information from the Resident at of WI Z? It w as hi s d uty to trans mit the intelligence B Peech h they were now in want. He trusted tln!t the of his Noble Friend was a prelude to an alteration in his policy—that it indicated a serious intention thenceforward to prevent a recurrence of events, such as those now referred to. He trusted that, with regard to Cracow, the Government would not remonstrate in the same feeble and unworthy man ner which it had done with respect to Poland.—( Hear, hear.) He could not help observing upon the feeble and vacillating: course pursued by the Government in its foreign policy. H e was not insensible to its merits in other respects. He ap plauded the members of the Government for what they had done for this country ; he supported, and should continue to support them, but that should not prevent his speaking out boldly, manfully, and plainly, nor from reprobating them upon those points where he considered they deserved reproba tion. He rejoiced that the Government were becoming stronger every day ; the strength which the Ministry derived from the country, and the favour with which they were re garded, would induce them, he hoped, to satisfy the people, not only in their domestic policy, but also as regarded their foreign policy.—(Hear, hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL then moved the adjournment of the House till Monday. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. GOU LB URN observed, that there were notices of the Noble Lord with respect to the Tithe Commutation Bill, and the Birth and Marriage Registration Bill ; and if the Irish Muni cipal Bill should not be disposed of that evening, it would also, he supposed, come on with those Bills on Monday evening. It would be a great convenience to know what course was intended to be pursued with respect to these dif ferent measures. _ _ . _ Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied it was his intention to proceed with the Tithe Commutation Bill on Monday. With respect to the Registration of Marriage Bill he was not so well prepared to fix a time ; but as regarded the Irish Corpora tions Bill, he hoped to proceed with it immediately, and that they might get it through in committee that evening. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL. The House went into committee on this Bill. Clauses 43 to 47 were agreed to without opposition. On clause 48 being proposed, Sir R. PEEL objected to the proposal for giving the com mission of the peace to the mayors, on account of their popu lar election, and their precarious tenure of office. Lord MORPETH defended the principle of the Bill, which he said was similar to that of the English Bill, only not carried to the same extent. Mr. ROEBUCK also supported the principle of popular elections. Mr. O'CONNELL would caution Hon. Gentlemen oppo site from throwing out insinuations against elected judges, for there happened just now to be sitting next to the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth an elected judge—elected not by the people at large, but by a small section of the community. The Hon. and Learned Member then contended that the principle of the election of justices Was in accordance with the ancient common law of this country. Mr. SHAW—Although he had been elected to his office by a particular corporate body, he believed his sentiments were in unison with those of the majority of the community of the place in question. The Hon. and Learned Member then com plained of the vast powers proposed to be given to the mayor and town-councils. If this Bill first framed by-laws at dis cretion, and afterwards enforced them by fines, recoverable by summary process before the mayors, and payable into the com mon funds of the respective corporations ; this he thought might lead to a system of oppression and tyranny throughout the corporate towns of the country. Lord JOHN RUSSELL supported the principle of the clause. Mr. ROEBUCK conteded that the majority or minority must govern in the management of local affairs, and he should certainly prefer that the majority should prevail, because they were the most likely to be identified with the community in moral and social interest. —( Hear.) Sir R. PEEL was willing to admit that in the management of municipal concerns generally popular election was the best mode of proceeding ; but with respect to the administration of justice, that was .a matter which stood upon distinct ground. By the 99th clause of the Bill, the Crown was invested with the power of appointing justices, and he considered that the right of nomination of the mayor to the magistracy should be also confined to the Crown, as much more likely to give sa tisfaction to the whole of the inhabitants of a country in which religious animosities were superadded to political dissension. Mr. LYNCH felt persuaded that the Roman Catholics would use the power which was bestowed upon them by this Bill, with the strictest impartiality and toleration. Sir R. PEEL did not allude to the Roman Catholics in particular, when he expressed a hope that the administration of justice would not be suffered to depend upon the opinion of ' the majority. He was equally opposed to stich a principle in the north of Ireland, where the Protestants preponderated. Mr. O'L OGHLEN could not help thinking that the powers to be conferred on the mayor as a justice, were supposed to be much more extensive than the clause directed. The mayor would be merely empowered to act with another jus tice, on a summons issued under the bye-laws ; but from their decision on such a matter there was an appeal in the larger towns to the recorder, who had jurisdiction over almost all questions of a civil or criminal nature. In the smaller towns the justices of the county had a concurrent jurisdiction with the mayor ; and from their decision there was an appeal to the assistant-barrister.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. W. ROCHE thought that the proposed change of af fixing the dignity of a justice to the office of mayor would give great satisfaction in Ireland. After a few words from Mr. FINCH and Mr. YOUNG, The clause was agreed to. Clauses 48 and 49 were then agreed to. On the 50th clause, which provided for the appointment of town clerks beinc , proposed, Mr. SHAW observed, that this clause was a very material one, as it changed the tenure of the office of town clerk. Hitherto it had been held for life ; but by this clause the town clerk was removable annually, on the representation of the council. Lord JOHN RUSSELL remarked, that the principle of this clause had been already so fully discussed, that it was un necessary for him to detain the House by saying anything in favour of it. The clause was then agreed to. Clause 51 was struck out, on Mr. O'Loghlen's suggestion. Clause 52 was agreed to with some verbal amendments. On clause 53 (relating to the elections of sheriffs) being read, Mr. O'LOGHLEN proposed an amendment to the clause, with the view of carrying into effect the alteration announced on a former evening, on the part of the Government, by the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland—namely, that the nomi nation of sheriffs of cities should vest in the Crown, instead of, as originally contemplated, in the town-council. Mr. O'CONNELL would have preferred the clause as it originally stood ; but as it appeared to be the opinion of the Government that the alteration was advisable, he would not offer it any opposition. Mr. SH EI L also expressed himself favourable to the clause as originally framed, and regretted that it should have been altered. Sir R. PEEL expressed his satisfaction at perceiving that the Government had yielded to the force of reasoning in re gard to this clause. The amendment he looked upon, not merely as an alteration, but a vast improvement.—( Hear.) The clause, as amended, was then agreed to. Clause 54 was struck out, being rendered unnecessary by the preceding clause, as amended. Clauses from 55 to 70 inclusive, were agreed to without discussion. Clauses 71 to 11 were agreed to. On clause 82 being proposed, Lord COLE (several ineffectual attempts having been made to adjourn the House) moved that the Chairman report progress ; and, notwithstanding the entreaties of several Mem bers, persisted in having the gallery cleared for a division. The gallery was cleared, but no division took place. The House resumed : the Chairman reported progress, and ob tained leave to sit again. The Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'Clock. award, and as to the offences to which it may be applied ; whether those offences may not be more clearly defined than they now are, and, also, whether the power of inflicting that punishment may not be limited to cases where the culprit has, for some previous misconduct, been in some way publicly degraded. 5. Whether some system of rewards to the good and well behaved soldier, either by promotion to commissions, or by the prospect of sonic civil advantages combined with pension, might not have the effect of inducing the parents and friends of young men, of a better and more educated class of life than that of which the army is now composed, to encourage their enlistment, and of thus improving the moral character of the army so as to render the use of corporal punishment un necessary. The first great distinction between the British and the other European armies is, in the manner in which its ranks are filled. The British army is entirely composed of persons who enter voluntarily into the service, for life or until discharged under certain regulations. On the other hand, the Continental armies are filled by conscription, not indeed excluding voluntary enlistment, but admitting it under certain regulations as one mode of perform ing a duty required of all the subjects of the state. The law in France is stated to be " That every Frenchman shall be called to serve his country at the age of 20 ; nevertheless, any one who wishes to enter the service may enlist at the age of 18, and, having satisfied what the law requires, he is exempt from future conscription." The service thus required by the law lasts for seven years, whether under conscription or enlistment, but it may be volun tarily prolonged for a certain time, and under certain condi tions : the conscript may, if he thinks fit, find a substitute, but he remains responsible for that substitute in case of deser tion during a year. This manner of filling up the ranks of the army brings into it a considerable number of persons of good education ; and it is stated that that circumstance enables so many commissions to be given to the non-commissioned officers. _ In Prussia " all the subjects are called into the service of the state at the age of twenty years, and serve for three years in what is called the disposable force." They are then sent home until they have attained the age of twenty-five years, and constitute the army of reserve. At the age of 25 they are exempted from active employment, and become incorporated into the landwehr of the first ban till they are 32, and in that of the second ban till they are 35, the landwehr being a sort of militia ; the first ban being brought together for a short time every year for exercise, and the second only liable to service within the interior, in the event, during war, of an invasion of the country by an enemy. Under different regulations, the same principle of the right of the state to the service of every one of its subjects is en forced in every country in Europe. The adoption of this prin ciple must have the effect of creating a strong feeling in favour of the military service. It becomes the favourite profession in those countries where every man has either been, or actually is, a soldier. If a young man is called from his home to serve his prescribed time, his father has been so before him, and it is not considered a hardship. None of the great powers of Europe, excepting France, have colonies, and she does not employ her regular army in the few colonies which she possesses. Excepting, therefore, in the case of some active service, the foreign soldier is never called upon to quit his native country, while the British sol dier, besides being subject to the hardships, privations, and dangers of actual service when necessary, cannot avoid tte long separation from his family and friends, consequent upon the order to embark for the colonies, nor the wear and tear of life and constitution which await him when arrived there. The natural consequence of these disadvantages on the part of the British army is, that those persons of a better class who are to be found in the ranks of the other armies, are rarely found in ours, except in instances where a young man has been induced by misfortunes, brought on most commonly by his own folly or intemperance, to escape from them by enlistment. The great body of our recruits consists of the inhabitants of the large towns and manufacturing districts, and of agricultu ral labourers, which last appear generally to enter the army in consequence of some family difficulty, or some scrape in which they are involved, and become the best and most trustworthy soldiers, when they have undergone the necessary preparation of the drill. Those who come from the manufacturing districts and large towns are too frequently the most idle and dissolute, and require all the means in the power of their officers to cor rect the intemperate and vicious habits in which they have in dulged. A standing army always has been an object of jealousy in this country, and nothing can reconcile the feelings of an Englishman, who prizes his own personal liberty so highly, to its existence, but the fact of its being in such a state of discip line and restraint, as shall secure the absence of that tone of superiority which the armies of foreign powers arc apt to as sume in their own countries. In considering the subject of the punishments by which the discipline of the British army has been created and maintained up to this time, it is well to see how far they have answered their purpose. To the superior discipline of the British army, when on service in foreign countries, and even in an enemy's country, strong testimony will be found in the evidence, and more especially that of the Duke of Wellington, Sir Henry False, and Sir Henry Hardinge. It cannot be denied, then, that whatever other objections may be made to the present system of discipline in the British army, it has had the effect of rendering that army eminently fit for, and capable of, any service to which it may be called. In the year 1819 a general order was issued by his Royal Highness the Duke of York, requiring the transmission of re turns of regimental courts-martial, the extent of corporal pu nishment to be awarded by a regimental court-martial, having been previously, in the year 1812, limited to 300 lashes. This limitation was in force until the passing of the Mutiny Act in 1822, when the award was farther limited to 200 lashes, and it so continues. In 1829 the award of a district or garrison court-martial was confined to 300 lashes, and it so remains. In the year 1830 a circular letter was issued by Sir Herbert Taylor, then Adjutant-General, by Lord Hill's orders, which will be found in Lord Hill's evidence, and contains a full de tail of the system under which the army is now conducted. Its application is by a circular from the Horse Guards, dated 24th of August, 1833, limited to certain offences, viz :- 1. For mutiny, insubordination and violence, or using, or offering to use violence, to superior officers. 2. Drunkenness on duty. 3. Sale or making away with arms, ammunition accoutre ments, or necessaries; stealing from comrades, or other dis graceful conduct. Previously to the issuing of that circular, there was scarcely an offence committed by a soldier which did not subject him to corporal punishment at the discretion of- the court-martial be fore which he was tried. With regard to the inefficiency of corporal punishment for its object, there can indeed be no doubt that if the entire pre vention of all crime and offence has been expected from it, it may be predicated of this, as of every sort of punishment hitherto thought of, that it has not attained that object. But if the object is taken to be the repression of crime by the means of example, it appears from the evidence that, in many cases, where every other punishment has failed, it has had that effect, and even by those who speak of its infliction in spiring disgust in the bystanders who witness it, it is admitted to have great effect in deterrin g other soldiers, and especially the younger ones, from committing offences which will subject them to it. We observe that, throughout the evidence, great doubt is thrown upon the fact of flogging being considered by the sol diers, at all events, a degrading punishment, if applied in the case of a military offence only. Almost the universal answer to the question of whether a man who has been punished at the halberds is c onsidered by his comrades as degraded by that punishment, and consequently shunned by them, has been in the negative, and that the nature of the crime led to degradation and not he punishment. And with regard to its effect as har dening, and not reforming the individual, it will be found, upon looking at the evidence, that such is by no means the universal consequence. Many instances are given of men who have undergone this punishment having become good soldiers, and having reached the rank of non-commissioned officers, and even of officers in some instances. It must be remembered also, that it is frequently thought necessary to inflict this punishment in a military body, when the moral reformation of the individual is in no degree its object ; instances of insubordination which cannot be passed over may, and very often do occur, where the offender is any thing but an immoral or vicious person. The prompt infliction of cor poral punishment may be necessary in such a case, for the sake of example, and to prevent the spreading of a disorderly or mutinous spirit ; but it cannot be said that its object is the mo ral reform of the individual ; and we cannot help thinking that this constitutes a great difference between offenders against the military and the civil law. The next objection is, that it excites disgust and sympathy in the bystanders in favour of the sufferer. It will undoubtedly be found by the evidence, that the sight of corporal punishment has a great effect upon those present, and that with the young soldier that effect is sometimes so powerful, as to produce physical weakness and fainting. It is difficult to say whether this is disgust or terror, but we must observe that such circumstances cannot arise without a very strong impression having been made upon the mind, and that, from that impression, must be derived a confident hope of the efficacy of the example presented to the eyes. But with re gard to the sympathy of the bystanders, we can collect nothing from the evidence to show that such a feeling is aroused by this punishment in the minds of the comrades of the culprit ; on the contrary, the feeling seems to be almost universal among them that no man is punished in that manner, in these days, who has not deserved it. Another objection to this punishment is that made by Lieut.- Colonel Peyronnet Thompson, who says that it fails in the field and before the enemy, and in support of this opinion that officer gives two instances, one in the 95th Regiment, at Buenos Ayres, and the other in the 14th Light Dragoons, in the Pe ninsula. But, we find in the evidence of Lieutenant Blood an in stance in which the corporal punishment of a soldier for insolence and insubordination, inflicted, as it were, in sight of the ene my, and when his regiment might at any moment be engaged, had the immediate effect of restoring order. We cannot, therefore, attach much weight to this objection, which, if founded at all, would equally apply to every other punishment. The last objection to corporal punishment is undoubtedly one which calls for the most anxious inquiry into the grounds upon which it rests. Nothing can be more certain than that in this country, and with the ample means afforded to every man in it for the free discussion of any subject in Parlia ment, in the courts of law, in public meetings, and through the press, no practice can be long maintained which is really contrary to the well-considered judgment and settled feelings of the country. Upon the extent of this feeling, it is difficult to form any very correct judgment, and persons who are them selves impressed with any strong opinion upon any subject are apt to overrate what they consider symptoms of a general con currence with that opinion. versa It is said that it cannot be necessary to retain the power of punishing the soldiers of the British army by the lash, when we have before us the example of some of the armies of Europe, and more especially that of France, in which no cor poral punishment whatever is permitted. Whatever objections there may be to this punishment when inflicted upon persons of the description and habits of those who are likely voluntarily to enter on an indefinite term of military service in a free country, there can be no doubt that those objections have immeasurably greater force when per sons of all classes and habits are torn by an overruling power from their homes, their families, and from the profession of their choice, to perform a paramount duty to the State. A conscription, such as exists in France, would be intolerable in this country ; but if such were the law, it might perhaps be unnecessary, and, if so, would certainly be unjustifiable, to re tain this power of corporal punishment. Still confining ourselves to the French army (for in most of the other armies of Europe some sort of corporal punishment is in use), it is worth while to consider what the punishments are in their military code, a list of which will be found in the evidence of Sir Willoughby Gordon, the Quartermaster-Ge neral. It will be seen that no less than forty-five offences are, by that code, punishable by death. In our Mutiny Act and Articles of War, authority to pass sentence of death is always coupled with the word—" or such other punishment as a gene ral courtmartial may award." In fact, an execution of such a sentence in time of peace in the British army, may be said to be unknown in these islands. On actual service, although sometimes resorted to, it is by many degrees less common than in the French service, in which, under such circumstances, death by shooting is the hinge upon which the whole system of discipline turns. Twenty-six other military offences arc punishable with imprisonment for periods from five to twelve years, with or without what is called the boulet, which is a cannon ball attached to the leg or body. Nineteen are punish able by periods of imprisonment, or what are called travaux forces, or galleys, of from one to three years ; and there are among the offences enumerated in these categories many which in our service would subject the offender at the most to be tried by a district courtmartial, the limit of whose power of sentence, in respect to corporal punishment, is 300 lashes ; for instance, the sale of arms, dress, or equipment, would be so dealt with in our army, and is punished in the French army by the galleys, from two to five years ; threatening language, also, is punished in that army by five years' imprisonment. We can not help thinking that it is matter of doubt whether, if the option were given to the British soldier between the two codes, he would not infinitely prefer that of our service, even taking into consideration the degree of degradation which is said to follow from the punishment at the halberts. But, after all, it would appear from the evidence, that the French code does not produce even in time of peace a discipline in any de gree equal to that which is enforced in the British army. Of late years, recourse has been had by the military autho rities to several punishments, by way of substitutes, and in the hope of rendering the use of the lash, to a great degree, un necessary. In the sentences of general courts-martial trans portation as a felon for life, or years, has taken place of those severe awards of corporal punishment so usual in former times. We confAs it appears to us to have been a wise course to en deavour to get rid of those extreme corporal punishments, which, after all, were generally inflicted, in time of peace, upon men not worth keeping in the service. The other punishments which have been resorted to as sub stitutes are imprisonment, with or without hard labour, and solitary confinement ; and we regret to say that the greatly predominant result of our inquiry is to satisfy us that, as hitherto inflicted, they have not so operated as to be depended upon as efficient substitutes. One great reason for their failure in this respect is the uncertainty with regard to - the degree of severity with which they are enforced. In one prison imprisonment may be a real punishment ; in the prison of a 6 adjoining county, it may be anything but a real punish ment. To make these punishments such as they ought to be for the military, efficient and proper means of carrying them into execution in the several barracks should be provided, and military prisons, of sufficient capacity for the probable num bers, should be built. The complaints of the practice of confining soldiers, for military offences, with felons and con victs, will be found, on reference to the appendix, almost uni- A soldier, although under punishment, should not lose sight of the profession against the rules of which he has offended; nor should he be placed where he is in contact with men whose notions of crime are not very strict, and who have none whatever of the nature of a military offence. But even if the means we have alluded to be provided, we are not satisfied that these punishments can be depended upon as perfect substitutes for corporal punishment, although we are far from undervaluing them. However improved, they will still be deficient in one important requisite in military punishments upon certain occasions—a striking and prompt example. A man sentenced to a corporal punishment is brought out before the whole regiment; the preparations for his punishment are made ; the sentence is read, he is stripped, and receives his punishment. All this passes before the eyes of his comrades. In the other case, the offender is equally brought out before the assembled regiment, but there are no preparations for punishment to be seen ; his sentence is read, he returns to his confinement, and is entirely lost sight of by his comrades until the period of that confinement has expired. There will be found in Lord William Bentinck's evidence the mention of a minute laid by him before the Council of India, proposing the establishment of penal companies in each presidency, to whose ranks that punishment should be limited, and that all hardened offenders in the Company's European regi ments, and those of your Majesty in India, for whose correction all other punishments have proved insufficient, should be sent by sentence of a general court-martial to those companies. That minute, which contains the whole detail of the proposed esta blishment, is also annexed to the evidence. His Lordship says, that however anxious lie may be for the abolition of cor poral ?Punishment, he is of opinion that such a step would not be safe unless some efficient substitute should previously have been discovered. This expedient of penal companies, or con demned corps, is also suggested by several others of the wit nesses, and it is therefore desirable that we should consider it. As a military corps, and for the purposes of military ser vice, we doubt whether a corps consisting of the most har dened and unmanageable description of men, collected from different regiments, can be useful, or to be depended upon under any circumstances. Such a corps would require the most careful selection, both of commissioned and non-com missioned officers, to serve in it, and the real efficient part of the army would thus be deprived of their services. It would be dangerous to leave those corps without the presence of some other troops to watch and restrain them, if necessary ; and, after all, these inconveniences would be encountered, and all the consequent expense incurred, for the purpose of retain ing in the service men who have been previously found not to be trustworthy, and to be incapable of being made useful sol diers. There have been more than one experiment of this sort made already in our army, and they have failed. The history of that corps, which was established at Sierra Leone some years ago, is a fatal one. If it be thou g ht necessary to keep such men at all , we cannot hel p thinking that it should not be in any respect as soldiers, but in penal or convict gangs, such as those on board the hulks, and in Australia, for the mere purposes of labour at the public works, for such periods as may be thought fit. Such a plan might possibly be tried with advantage, as the means of disposing of such men as shall have been found utterly incorrigible, and who arc a burden and disgrace to their regiments. After a careful examination into the result of the several substitutes for corporal punishment now in use, we regret to say that none of them, as at present enforced, appear to have answered, or to be likely to answer, the purpose of rendering that punishment entirely unnecessary, nor have any others been suggested to us which appear to promise to effect that purpose. Hitherto, our remarks have been applied to the entire and immediate abolition of corporal punishment; we now pro ceed to consider it with a view to its restriction within nar rower limits than at present, both as respects its severity and frequency. With regard to the offences for which the soldier should be liable to corporal punishment, we beg to suggest whether they might not be more clearly defined than at present. Insubor dination, for instance, has many shapes in which it appears, and it probably would not be impossible to describe more ex actly which should be so punishable. We have stated the prevalence of an opinion among all ranks of officers and non-commissioned officers that the powers of commanding officers are too limited, and we recommend a re consideration of the regulations upon that point. We have already stated, that the disposition to drunken ness is the mos t fruitful source of crimes and breaches of discipline in our army, and, unfortunately, it is difficult to impress, even upon the good soldier, that drunkenness off duty is, in itself, reprehensible. In order, however, to check this practice, the soldier is punishable under the articles of war, by the sentence of a court-martial, for habitual drunken ness, to constitute which offence certain particulars are re quired, and for drunkenness on duty by forfeiture of his beer money and a p ort i on o f hi s p a y, to a certain amount and for a limited peri o d. Th e consequence is, that it too often hap pens that th e h a bi tual d run k ar d , i n or d er t o av oid these for feitures, does not return, or is prevented, for a time, from returning to hi s b ar racks by those in whose society he is , although h e i s, for the absence without leave, equ all y sub j ect to punishm ents o f anot h er d escr i pt i on . During this absence his comrad es h ave to per f orm hi s d u ty. We are aware that any interf erence w i t h t h e pay o f a so ldier should be well con sidered, but we thi n k that the principle of no work , no pay , might safely b e - app li e d t o suc h a case ; and that, without the sentence of it which wou l d ot h erw i se h ave b ee n paid to himself, should of a court-martial, the pay of the sol dier, or that p art be stopped by his commanding officer as a matter of course, for every day upon which he has been absent, unless upon in quiry his absence is satisfactorily accounted for. We are now arrived at the last point to which our attention has been directed—namely, whether the effect of increased rewards and advantages to the soldier might not be such as to bring into the ranks a better description of persons, and by so doing render the retention of the power of corporal punish ment unnecessary. There will be found in the evidence suggestions with re gard to increased attention and encouragement to regimental schools for the men, and to the providing libraries and a reading-room in every barrack, to (enable them u sefully to occupy thei r idl e hours, which in this country, and more espe cially in the warm climates of some of our foreign stations, hang heavily upon them. It appears from the regulation!, which are published in the Appendix, that the East India Company have created establishments of this sort at the prin cipal Eur o p ean stat i ons o f t h e i r a rmy, and we cannot help recommending this subject for c onsideration. enjoy given in bar rack-yards f or t h e me nt of manly games by the soldiers, We thi n k, too, t h at every f ac ility should be such as fives' -courts and rackets, and by providing additional spaces of ground, where necessary , for cricket and foot-ball, and that those games should be en coura g ed as much as pos sible by th e o fficers. The public exercise of these and similar amusements might also give additional attraction to the service, The evidence of almost all the witnesses we have examined tends to encourage a hope that the establishment of an order of merit, with a medal or some distinction of dress, bestowed in front of the assembled regiment, would have a considerable effect upon the discipline of the army, and that the taking from the soldier that distinction with the same ceremony, under the sentence of a court-martial, would operate as a heavy punish ment. Without entering into any details upon this subject, we cannot help earnestly recommending its adoption with suf ficient securities against its being bestowed too indiscrimi nately, or too frequently, and with different decorations for gallant conduct in the field, and upon other occasions, from that which is given for mere good behaviour. The real and substantial reward to which every soldier looks with the utmost anxiety is a pension after his service. That pension, however, should not be too easily attained, and as a powerful assistant in enforcing discipline, good conduct should be made necessary to establish :the claim, and bad conduct should render it liable to forfeiture, even up to the last moment of service. In the grant of a pension for disability, also, the greatest care should be taken that it is not converted into a provision for men, who, by their own vices and irregularities, have brought that disability upon themselves. These appear to us to be the main principles upon which a system of pensions ought to be founded, and if the system be a good one, no con sideration of economy should stand in the way of making that pension such a one in amount as would be a real object to the soldier to attain, and the loss of it a real misfortune. We come now to the alterations of the most vital nature, which have been, in part, at least, alluded to by other witnesses, but more fully stated by Mr. Hume, in his evidence, "as the means of inducing the educated sons of individuals in com fortable situations of life to enter the army, provided corporal punishment was also abolished." The first of these-alterations is, "that a portion of either one-third, one-half, or two-thirds of the first commissions, as may be determined upon, should be granted to men, who have gone through with credit the gradations of private, corporal, and non-commissioned officer." With reference to this point, we have examined most of the officers of experience, whom we have had before us, and we have also bad the opportunity of examining two gentlemen who have themselves served in the ranks, and obtained com missions. Mr. Blood, one of those gentlemen, now a lieute nant upon retired full pay, obtained his commission in the Peninsula, as a reward for gallant conduct ; and the other, Mr. Winterbottom, the commissions of lieutenant and of pay master, for excellent conduct in every respect, and he is still in active service. From the evidence, more especially of the Duke of Wel lington and Lord Hill, we collect, that the giving commissions to deserving non-commissioned officers is by no means unfre quent, and that, in some instances, those officers have risen to considerable rank in the army. The other suggestion made by Mr. Hume is, that a large proportion of the officers of Customs and Excise, of police, and messengers in public departments, should be taken from the ranks of the army, and he refers to Prussia as an example of the good effects of such a system. There can be no doubt, that if here, as in Prussia, the army were as the high road to all offices, such an effect as he supposes might be produced ; but we are far from believing that the feeling of this country is military enough to admit of its being so. There now only remains for us to submit to your Majesty the conclusions which, in our judgment, are the results of the whole evidence : 1. That the opinion of almost every witness whom we have examined is, that the substitution of other punishments for corporal punishment in the British army, upon actual service, and in the field, is impracticable; and if practicable, would be insufficient for the maintenance of proper discipline in your Majesty's army; 2. That the abolition of the power of awarding corporal punishment, by sentence of court martin in the British islands and the colonies, and during peace, and the retention of the power of inflicting that punishment when the army is on ser vice and in the field, appears to us, for the reasons we have stated, manifestly unjust. 3. That it does not appear to us, that the punishments which have been resorted to as substitutes have hitherto had such an effect as to render it safe to abolish altogether that power in Great Britain or the colonies, nor have any other punishments been suggested to us that appear to promise more favourable result. 4. That it appears to us, that even supposing that some effectual substitute might be devised, or that those now in use might be made more effectual, so as to render corporal punish ment ultinuitely unnecessary, it would be unsafe to proceed at once to abolish it entirely, and that even in that case its aboli tion should be gradual. 5. That in order to give full effect to the punishments now in use as substitutes for corporal punishment, considerable alte rations must be made in the means of rendering solitary con finement in the several barracks more effective, and that a cer tain number of prisons, exclusively for military offenders, should be provided as soon as possible. 6. That, although we have been unwillingly convinced of the necessity of still retaining the power of corporal punish ment, and in proportion to our conviction of that necessity, we earnestly recommend that no pains may be spared to endeavour to make its infliction less frequent. 7. That, with the view of diminishing the frequency of this punishment, the offences to which it is limited, and the occa sions upon which it should be resorted to, should be more clearly defined. _ 8. That, with the same view, more discretion should be vested in commanding officers as to the power of making use of minor punishments, and in determining on the offences which shall, under their orders, be tried by a regimental court martial. 9. That it appears to us that the extent of the sentences in the power of the several descriptions of courts-martial to award may, without danger, be more limited than at present. 10. That encouragement should be given in the way of honorary reward and distinction, both to the gallant and to the well-conducted soldier. 11. That no consideration of expense within reasonable bounds should be allowed to stand in the way of attending to the comforts of the soldier while in the service, and of a suffi cient pension for the good and deserving man after that ser vice has been performed. We cannot close our report without assuring your Majesty that we find ample evidence of the earnest desire, and the most strenuous efforts upon the part, not only of the superior offi cers, but of officers of all ranks, so as to conduct the disci pline of, the army as to render corporal punishment as rare as possible.; and more especially we observe that the command ing officers are fully aware of your Majesty's gracious wishes in that respect, and we are satisfied that they will pdrsevere in giving the fullest effect, by the strictest attention to the moral discipline of their regiments, to those wishes. Finally, we feel it to be eur duty to your Majesty to state our conviction, that if it were possible to introduce such a sys tem of discipline as that of France into your Majesty's 'army (a system which in its effects we believe to be far from being as successful as that of Great Britain), it could only be by the establishment of such a rigorous conscription of all ranks as we believe would not be endured, and by a change in the whole tone of this country, as to the military service, such as we have no expectation of seeing effected. We humbly submit this our unanimous Report to your Ma jesty's Royal co nsideration. WHARNCLIFFE. JAMES KEMPT. SANDON. E. HYDE EAST. R. C. FERGUSSON. E. BARNES, Lieutenant-General. T. REYNELL. India Board, March 15, 1836. MILITARY PUNISHMENTS. REPORT FROM HIS MAJESTYS COMMISSIONERS FOR IN QUIRING INTO THE SYSTEM OF MILITARY PUNISHMENTS IN THE ARMY. TO THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY. We, your Majesty's Commissioners, appointed by your Ma jesty's Commission, bearing date the 4th day of March, in the fifth year of your Majesty's reign, whose hands and seals are hereunto set, do humbly certify to your Majesty —That, In prosecuting the inquiry entrusted to us by your Majesty's commission, we have called before us and examined a great number of witnesses, including persons of all ranks in the army, from the recruit and private soldier to the most expe rienced general officers in th e service, and to the general com manding-in-chief. A further object of our inquiry has been the practice in the other armies of Europe, with regard to their discipline, and the means adopted for its maintenance. Upon an application made at our request by your Majesty's principal Secretary of State for the Foreign Department to the French Government four most intelligent offic ers were sent over for our examina tion, and from their evidence, which was given with the ut most frankness, and with the sincerest wish to assist us in our inquiries, we have dnrived a great deal of most valuable in formation. The object for which we have humbly conceived your Ma jesty had pleased to direct . this commission to issue, appears to us to have bee n a mite inquiry into the means at present used to mainta in the discipline of the army, with a 'view to ascertain how far the resort to corporal p un i s h men t might be di spen sed with either immediately and entirely, or prospectively and gradually. We h ave , therefore, directed our attention to the follow ing points :- 1. The regulations which have been adopted of late years in order to render the infliction of that punishment more rare than at former perio ds, and to diminish the extent to which it may be carried by the sentences of courts-martial. 2. Whether some alteration in regard to the minor punish ments now inflicted by the authority of the commanding offi cers of regiments, might not tend to diminish the supposed ne cessity of recurring to corporal punishment, without endanger ing the maintenance of proper discipline. 3. Whether the punishments that are now resorted to as substitutes for corporal punishment apear to have been effec tual, and whether their substitution is likely to render an im mediate and entire abolition of that punishment . practicable and safe, or to hold out a hope that by a m . ore stringent appli cation of them, the necessity of its continuance may be gra dually removed. 4. Whether the infliction of corporal punishment may not be confined within still narrower limits than at present, both as to the number of lashes in the power of courts-martial to THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, MARC:I 19, .1836 ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—DERnr, MARCH 17. EXTRAORDINARY SCENE IN COURT.—SUTTON V. SUTTON. This action was brought on a warranty to recover tho value of a horse, warranted. This cause possessed no particular features of interest in itself, except to the parties concerned, the complaint on the part of the plaintiff being that the defen dent had sold him a horse, for which he paid the sum of 751., the animal proving within a fortnight after the purchase had taken place to be a rank roarer. The evidence had been heard both for the plaintiff and the defendant, and Mr. Bal guy was proceeding in his address to the jury, in reply, when a noise was heard as of something very heavy falling, upon which one or two of the more timid of the fair sex screamed out, the rest soon joined in the cry, and a sudden panic having seized the minds of most of the persons assembled in the body of the Court, a simultaneous rush was made for the doors, the rumbling noise above continuing seemed rather to increase than to allay the excitement, almost every one believing the roof of the building or the walls supporting the same were giv ing way, and now the terror which had been raised at first only in the minds of the mobility seemed to infect special jurymen, barristers, and all, while even the Learned Judge seemed to have a tincture of fear in his countenance. Be that as it may, all were struggling (save one gentleman of the long robe whom we observed kept his place during the whole time the confusion reigned, and was trying to still the same by calling on the people to keep their seats) to escape. Some secreted themselves under the table, one gentleman lost his gown, another his wig, and in less than two mi nutes' time not one remained (save the individual to whom we alluded) to mark what had been. A more effectual clearance could not have been effected had a magician's wand been called in aid, and thou who so lately were ga thered together to debate upon and decide whether the horse " Ironsides" was a " roarer" at a certain time or not, now thought no more of the subject-matter in dispute than of their grandmothers' graves. However, as the walls still re tained their respective positions and the roof remained in statu quo, the alarm gradually subsided, people by ones and twos began to crawl back into Court, and had leisurelo ascer tain their respective losses. Innumerable were the shawls, b onne t s , boas, hats, gloves, gowns,and wigs, that had either been lostor suffered damage ; but, beyond several ladies fainting, no serious injury occurred. The panic created was so great that individuals dropped from the balcony or outside galleries, a co nsiderable distance in height, into which the galleries in the interior of the court led. The cause of the alarm was found to be this :—A vane fixed on the outside of the hall above the roof of the building had fallen upon the glass form ing the outside covering to the top of th e Ni s i Pir us Court, which is lighted from above. This created the panic in the first instance, and the noise occasioned by the vane and broken glass in their descent on the outside, increased it to the pitch we have stated. Quiet, in about half an hour, being resto red, the business proceeded, and a verdict was found for the HOME CIRCUIT.—MdIDSTONE, MACH 18. GRIM. CON.-BASS V. MARSH. The plaintiff in this action sought to recover damages from the defendant, for criminal conversation with his wife. Mr. TuEssmEtt stated the case. The plaintiff was a young 28 years of age, and practised as a solicitor at Dover, and m irried the unhappy subject of this inquiry in April, 1833. She was a young lady of great accomplishments and conside rable personal attractions, and on the plaintiff first becoming acquainted with her she was only nineteen years of age. She was an orphan, haling lost her father, Capt. Prescott, at the battle of Salamanca, and her mother some years afterwards. When Mr. Bass was introduced to her, Miss Prescott was a parlour boarder in a ladies' school at Dover ; and, very shortly after they were introduced to each other, a mutual affection was conceived, and the plaintiff ma d e proposals of marriage, which were accepted. The young lady, however, had no property, and the father of the plaintiff was unwilling that his son, who was just commencing business, should be burdened with the expenses of a domestic establishment so early in life. The conduct of the plaintiff, however, was such, and he evinced so much affection for the object of his choice, that his father was induced to waive his objection, and they were married. In March, 1834, Mrs. Bass was delivered of a son, and it would be supposed that such a circumstance would tend to strengthen the affection they entertained for each other. But, unfortunately, it was but the prelude to the withering of the father's hopes and the ruin of his happiness. The plaintiff had been intimate with a brother of the defendant, who was the son of a farmer, be tween 23 and 24 years of age, and possessed of a handsome person. He introduced him (plaintiff) to defendant. He was afterwards received at his house as a guest and friend. In June, 1834, Mrs. Bass visited a Mrs. Nokes, at Deal, and remained there a few days. The defendant was acquainted with Mrs. Nokes, and on the 21st of July met Mrs. Bass and some of the party, and accompanied them home to tea, and after wards to the theatre. The plaintiff, havinii i a complaint of the spine, went up to London about this time with his father, to consult Sir Astley Cooper, and, during his absence, a Miss Ford was invited to keep Mrs. Bass company. The defend ant, on the 22d of July, took tea with Miss Ford and Mrs. Bass. At about ten o'clock Mrs. Bass went into the kitchen, and desired the servants to go to bed. They did not go inr mediately, and she was very angry, though the usual hour of going to bed was much later ; the servants shortly after went up stairs but not to bed, for they placed themselves on the stairs, for the purpose of observing what passed. They heard Mrs. Bass let the defendant out, and wish him " Good night," and slam the hall-door. They also heard the office-door in the passage slightly creak, and saw Mrs. Bass come up stairs and go into the drawing-room, and wish Miss Ford good night, and tell her she would go down stairs and see that all was right. Miss Ford offered to accompany her, but she said she was not afraid, and went down stairs. Miss Ford then went to bed. Shortly afterwards they saw Mrs. Bass creep slowly up stairs, and the defendant without his shoes behind her. They went into Mrs. Bass's bedroom, and they heard the night-bolt fall. The servants then retired to bed. On the following evening the defendant came to tea, and the same transactions took place as on the preceding night. On the Thursday following he again came, and went at night into Mrs. Bass's room. The nurse having sat up all night heard a noise about five o'cloak in the morning, and on going down stairs observed the defendant and her mistress on the staircase. On seeing her they endeavoured to avoid her. Mrs. Bass on the following day asked her if she had been ill, and if she had seen anybody on the previous night. She replied, " Yes, I saw him, and I can swear to him." M rs. Bass said he was taken ill, ' and she gave him some tea. The manner of the nurse, however, was such that Mrs. Bass must have known that her guilt was discovered. The plaintiff returned home on the 20th of July. On the 9th of June, 1835, the plaintiff's suspicions were first excited. The plaintiff had been out on business during the day, having told Mrs. Bass that he should not return at night; circumstances, however, arose that ren- • dered his return necessary, and he reached home about eleven o'clock. He asked for Mrs. Bass, and the servant told him that she was sleeping with Mrs. Ellerton, his sister, who was on a visit at the house. Mrs. Ellerton, however, came down stairs, and said that she was not sleeping with her. The servant then suggested that she might be gone to Sir Edward Miles's house, a friend of the family, about two miles off. The plaintiff immediately repaired there; but did not find her. Not succeeding in finding her, he became apprehensive that she had dro'wned herself, and had a brook at the back of the house dragged, and he proceeded to his father's house at Buckland, two miles from Dover, and exclaimed in great mental agony, " I have lost her." His father endeavoured to console him, and accompanied him back to his house, when they found that Mrs. Bass had returned about three o'clock. She was sitting in the drawing room in her dressing-gown. The plaintiff was naturally very indignant, his alarm having subsided, and he refused to see her until she had explained her conduct. She appeared very much excited and de ranged, rolled her eyes very much, and went off into hysterics. Mr. Chalk, a medical friend, was sent for, and he ordered leeches to be applied immediately, being apprc hensice of a rush of blood to the head. Mr. Chalk thinking reconciliation necessary to remove her out of danger, and shu expressing a great wish to see her husbrnd, he was induced to go into the room. On seeing him she shed tears, and said " She did not know how she came to do it." Mr. Bass, sup posing that she alluded to an attempt to destroy herself, ba nished suspicion from his mind, and eventually they were re • conciled. They resided under the same roof afterwards for a fortnight ; but she, although her husband treated. her with kindness, was excessively sullen, and appeared ill. The father afterwards obtained information which induced the plaintiff to make inquiries of the servants, who then related what they had seen, leaving no doubt in the plaintiff's mind of the infamy of his wife. He immediately sent her from his house, and re fused to see her again. Evidence was called, which went to prove the facts stated in the Learned Counsel's speech. Mr. PLATT addressed the Jury for the defendant. The Learned JUDGE having summed up, the Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages, 4001. POLICE INTELLIGENCE: MANSION-HO USE. A young man named White was brought up in the castody of J. Forrester, charged with having forged a cheque to the amount of 212/., on the banking-house of Currie and Co. The prisoner was committed for trial. GUILDHALL. Yesterday three men, named George Whitlamb, William Graham, and James Brown, were brought before Mr. Alder man WINCHESTER, charged with carrying unstamped news papers. Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER discharged them with an ad monition. MARLBOROUGH -STREET. Robert Smith and William Davis, a couple of boys, in the full professional costume of the order " chummy," were brought before Mr. CONANT, charged with the high crime and misde meanour of having attempted to carry off a portion of the con tents of Lord Derby's dusthole, the property of the dust con tractor in that district. " Please your Lordship's Grace," said the dust contractor's deputy, " ve've lately lost a hunaccountable lot o' dust off of our beat, and as ve natrally know'd as it couldn't have wanished if nobody hadn't prigged it, vy conseqventlye I keeps a look out for them ere covies, what goes out a dusting on the cross. Vhile I vos out in Grosvenor-skvare, I saw'd both these here young criminals slip down his Lordship's airy, and begin a shovelling his Lordship's stuff into von of their sacks. I drops on 'em in the werry hact, and collars 'em both vith the pro perty in their possession. Mr. CONANT—You: hear the charge, my lads; what have you to say in defence ? Smith—Ye vorks for the house, my Lord. Mr. CONANT—Is it your business to take away the dust ? Smith—No, my Lord, vere the reglar chimbly sveeps vot sveeps his Lordsip's chimbleys. Both on us called to ask if his Lordship's chimbleys vonted sveeping, and they told us they didn't. So, my Lord, as ye happened to see a lady sift ing cinders in the airy, ye arks'd her if she could be so werry obleeging as to let us have a shovel full. She gran ted us our demand, and jest as ye vere about to c ut our sticks this here good gentleman comes up and lugs us avay to this here office. Mr. CONANT—You must be fined 10/. Have you got 10(.. apiece to pay? Smith (grinning from car to ear)—Me got ten pounds ! All as ever I got in my pockets is three-hapestee farden, and a bag of marbles. (To the other.) You got any capital, Bill ? Bill—Ain't got nuffin. I spent my last brown on Vensday for a baked tater. The fine of 101. each was imposed, or ten days' imprison , ment. ==------ The meeting of Bank Proprietors held on Thursday passed over much more harmoniously than many former occa sions of the same kind. The blunder of Mr. Spring Rice in allowing 4 per cent. discount on the anticipated payments on the late loan, at the time when the Bank were lend ing money on the same security at 3} per cent. has worked admirably well for the proprietors, as every one foresaw who had paid the least attention to the subject must necessarily be the case. The profits of the establishment have been so con siderable, that instead of the " rest" of the Bank being dis turbed, as was done at the last dividend, to make up the 4 per cent. shared among the proprietors, there has occurred in the interval an addition to it of 25,0001., after providing for the present dividend, and carrying to account another sum of 15,0001., as the final loss sustained by the Bank through the forgeries of Fauntlei oy. The only facts elicited by the dis cussion of any interest out of the circle of Bank proprietors related to the recent transfer of a certain por ti o n of the publ ic b u siness to the London and Westminster Bank. An impres sion prevailed, it seems, among the proprietors, that this busi ness, which arose under the management of the Excise out of the hop duties in Surrey and Kent, had previously been ma- Ds themselves, ma naged by the Bank of England, and that the change had led to a diminution of the balances there. It appeared, however, that the business was wholly ander private control, and had * t o Thet hem been conducted by Mr. Ward, lately a member of the Court, Governor admitted, on the change that were desirous, as the . but who did not keep any accotuentthaits the Bank. that took place, to appropr i ate of and addressed a'letter to the Chancellorncl ce the Exchequer on the subject, pointing o e ut fie a ct s ed an ; butluthment, the large saving that might thereby be the, ey were informed that this was a m atter over which Government had no control, and that it rested solely with the Board of Excise. Some feeble attempts were made, as usual, for the production of a balance -sheet, as a corollary to the declaration of a dividend, but no motion was made on the subject, and the great bulk of the m eeting were evidently averse to any such disclosure. The meeting did not occupy much more than half an hour. — Times. On Friday, a sermon was preached agreeably to the will of Hercules Clay, and in the afternoon the Town-hall was crowded with men and women, with a numerous host of chil dren, to receive the dole of bread agreeably to the will of the donor, when every applicant, amounting to 3,774, received a penny loaf, as has been the custom for 186 years !—Lincoln Gazette.