The Express.
London, England, 1852-11-05 00:00:00

THE " ARISTOCRATIC HIGHWAYMAN."

TO THR EDITOR OT T9l DAILY NSW&
SIII,-Mr. Joseph Hall, solicitor, of Keserick, has
desired as to forward the enclosed letter from him for pub-
lication in your paper.
We are, sir, your obedient servants,
TATHAM AND PILOCTELL
Lineohis Inn, Nov. 4, 1852.

TO THI EDITOR OP THE DAILY NEWS.
1111,—in the Doug News last sleek I (observe an
article headed "An Aristocratic Highwayman." I have
beard the true statement of the facts from Mrs. Williams,
the lady who was robbed, on Thursday the 23rd instant, to
Damian Park, Cumberland. Her statement does not ex-
actly correspond with yours, but it is not materially dif-
ferent. The atteck upon Mrs. Williams was of a more vio-
lent nature than you make it appear to have been. Awl
the robber did not get much money. Ile took all that Mrs.
W. had, but it did not amount to 201. I beg leave to be
permitted space in your paper fur a few remarks upon this
very gross case.
In the first place, it seems to me somewhat strange that
the names of the unfortunate lady who was robbed (Mrs.
Williams) and other friends whom she had been
the Countess of Saliuski, of Mr. Breach, Mr. Breekbank,
and Mrs. Hodgson, who were deprived of their money sod
property, and of P. 11. Howard and James Stanger, Eager.,
who were probably intended to be victimised, should be
paraded before the public, and yet the names of the " aris-
tocratic highwayman" and his clerical and wealthy friends
should be concealed. One would have thought that the
ends of justice would require at all events the robber's 113111 C
to be made public. Initial letters are given (W. C.) pro.
(casing to be those of the father of the robber. They are
not correct, and therefore they are calculated to mislead
the public. The police have ascertained the name and re-
lationship of the robber. His name is James Cursors, and
ho is the son of the Hoe. John Hoary Roper Curzon, of
Cheltenham, and a grandson of a Lord llcynham. You
state that the robber " has broken loose from the military
school, and hr not been heard of since he left Penrith."
Ile ought to have been at Woolwich. Ile has been twice
in Keswick since be was in Penrith ; once at the time Mr.
Scott, the constable, was there in search of him on the Fri-
day after the robbery, and once since. But ho was clever
enough to evade the officers of police.
Now, I would ask, have our laws no power over aristo-
cratic highwaymen, or are there different codes for rich and
poor ? Arc the rich to have license to rob and murder, and
yet go unpunished because they are young, or have parents
or friends whose pride would suffer by exposure, or who
have wealth and influence enough to buy over the injured
ones to silence? If this robber had been the eon of a poor
person, whom hunger might have driven to steal, would
the Rev. Mr. Valpy have left his church and congregation '
on a Sunday afternoon, and ridden to Deere, to endeavour
to induce Mrs. Williams to be passive until the youth could
be got out of the country ? Or, when he failed, would Mrs.
Dixon, of Carlisle, have exerted her more powerful influence
for the game cause? No. And yet they did so in this
case. The " moths is feelings " in the case of the poor,
though perhaps Al tender as those of the rich, I fear would
not have been thought of. Are we to believe that because
the poor have not interest and influence they must he pun
lobed ? That "the law must take its course " in their
cases? Does not crime justly and rightly cry for punish.
meat ? Is not our land disgraced by deeds like those re-
corded by you, committed, encouraged, and winkedat by our
aristocracy, clergy, and heads of the pt ogle, who should he
the leaders, teachers, and examples of all that is just and
honourable, instead of the abettors and encouragers of
villany ? I subscribe myself,
AN ADVOCATE. FOR SQUARE JUSTICE.
29th Oct., 1842.

DIVORCE LAW IN At'sTßlA.—Tho Minister of Jut-
tice in Austria has adopted a series of regulations relative
to divorce between protestanta. The principle of !hem is,
that divorces shall be pronounced, of full right, by the
judicial authorities, when both parties shall consent thereto,
but only after they shall have been separately and joint'y
exhorted by a clergyman to remain united; thnt when only
one of the parties shall wish for a divorce, and when the
other shall refuse it, the tribunals shall (trier an investiga-
ti o and shall decide thereon ; that divorced parties shall
be allowed to re-marry; and that, in cases in which the
diswlution of a marriage is required for reasoaa of public
order, the tribunal may proceed to it without any com-
plaint being made ; but that in all other cases a demand
mat be mado by one of the parties.