The Express.
London, England, 1853-08-18 00:00:00

worst follows. For the object of the bill is
most likely to sanction a branch, to legalise a lease,
to confirm a guarantee, or to do something else that
will augment the fixed charges which must be
crow., and discharged before dividend can be
thought of or hoped for. Therefore, in all human
probability, defeat in these Parliamentary contests's
much more profitable ultimately, or rather much
less costly, than success ; and the real question and
subject for congratulation for shareholders at August
meetings is, not how many bills have ben " got,"
but how many have been lost ?

In " Guy Mannering," Scorr, in his raciest man-
ner, describes how the last Ellangowan was not
ruined, like the squires around him, by hunting,
drinking, rioting, or even Jacobitism, but by "keep-
iny a man of business" to manage his affairs. And
so it is with Railways—they are despoiled of fair
dividends by "keeping lawyers" to direct their
policy. Lawyers are all very well, though des-
perately expensive, in their proper spheres—
when land is to be conveyed or actions
defended, or an agreement to be drawn ; but, to em-
ploy lawyers to scheme the policy of railways, to
bear-lead and direct directors, to plan annual Par-
liamentary campaigns with engineers, is simply
to render all real economy hopeless, to prolong
a system which has no cure at all if they
are to be so employed, and in spite of increasing
traffic still further to depreciate the va'ue of
English Railway Stock. It was by rooting Mr.
Glussin out of Ellangowan that Colonel 3lannering,
restored Vanbeest Brown to his name and fortune;
and it is only by rooting out our Railway Glassine,
that we shall most readily revive Railway prosperity.
If allowed to remain, they will intercept augmenting
traffic, and. by deep-laid schemes of policy, effectually
keep dividends dawn.

Tut police have lately taken their share in the
general movement of the working population for an
increase in the wages of labour. They urged their
case with great moderation, although with very little
knowledge of political economy. Mr. DANIEL
WHITTLE HARVEY took occasion to set them right
upon the latter point, and the petitioners, convicted
of arguing upon false data, retreated, leaving their
case in the hands of the Commissioner, and medi-
tating probably upon the futility of strikes which
stood upon insufficient logical grounds.
It is strange that the analogy of the word
"suit." did not lead them to the reflection that
there was really an argument which they had neg-
lected, which, and although it might not be perfectly
unassailable, was yet better than the one they bad
put forth. The police of the present day are the
great victims of " striking." Not thst metaphorical
striking which perplexes capitalists, and beggars
workmen, but that plain, literal, matter-of-fact
" striking " which staves in the skull, shatters the
arm, fractures the leg, dislocates the joints, and makes
the body a mass of internal bruises. If the Police-
men indulge in a strike, in the politico-economic

sense of the term, it must be remembered
that they have suffered from being struck, or the
liability to be struck, ever since they put on their
uniform. The pay of most of them has been, to use
a vulgar expression, "more kicks than halfpence."
They might have very reasonably urged that this was
not in their bond ; that if they were hired to protect
the law they ought to have a guarantee that in the
exercise of their powers they should not be sub-
ject to more than ordinary risk. They agreed to
undertake a service of much hardship for a

email modicum of pay; but it was never

contemplated that the; were to be put up
in battues, to be kicked and cuffed, and
disabled for life, at the pleasure of CANNON, the
sweep, and EDWARD LAUD, who figures in a report
simply as "a ruffianly fellow"—being, indeed, " a
lamb who bass like a bear."

This amateur police-hunter has, it appears, been
frequently punished for outrages upon policemen.
He has lately undergone six months' imprisonment
for injuring one of the objects of his excit-
ing sport, it is feared, for life. This adven-
turous person, "taking his walks abroad" on
Hampstead-heath, being at the same time
slightly elevated with drink, commenced ope-
rations on the day on which the assault for which
he was last brought up was committed by upsetting a
basket of fruit belonging to a man who was going over
the heath. To the remonstrances addressed to him

he answered by gross abuse and menaces. The
disturbance, as usual, attracted a crowd, in the
midst of which appeared, after a time, policeman
120 8, named WILBQM. Lao, who, it may be pre-
sumed, looked upon the mw of surrounding spec. I
tators as a knight of old upon enemiesl
who had not earned their spare ; or as a modern
spsle■sa upon sparrows and crows while he is on
the basest for " birds," felt his martial ardour ex-
cited at the sight of a policeman. Upon being civilly
asked by Wasox to retire, he refused, and, on being
taken into custody, threw the unfortunate man down
with great force, and kicked him repeatedly upon
the Ina mad other parts of the body. Another
}albumen same to the rescue in the shape of Ser-
geant Moons, 98 8., who was also kicked and hit
severely. The prisoner then promised to p quietly
with the °Steers, if permitted to he released
from their hold, but, upon his request being granted,
saidsnly made off. He was ultimately captured,
aid after much resistance handcuffed, strapped down
upon a stretcher, and conveyed to the station-house.
The defence was that the policemen had exercised
improper and unnecessary violence. This, bowmen
was disproved by the evidence of respectable wit-
nesses, who declared that no more violence
was used than what, under the circumstances,
was actually necessary. The principal wit-
less, who hoped that the cue might be summarily
disposed of, as it would be inconvenient for him to
attend upon a future occasion, professed himself
ready, mention of personal trouble, to owns for-
ward in the event of the man being committed for
big
Mr.

decision on this case appears to I
be less intelligible than any decision of
the kind which we have read for some
time. He stated in the first place that he
should take into account that the prisoner
had been injured by being struck with the truncheon.
Why, in the name of common sense—not to talk of
law—was the policeman the executioner of a legal
sentence P Were the blows he inflicted a portion of
any penalty which the law has instituted? Was
Lane under his hands receiving legal chastisement?
If not, what had the blows of the truncheon adminie-
tend in self-defence to do with the punishment for
the offence for which he was about to take the pri-
soner into custody ? Is not resistant* to legal authority
generally considered an aggravation of a crime? The
capture of a murderer has often been effected only by
using a considerable portion of violence ;--hasthepain
he suffered ever been considered as forming a claim
for exemption from punishment ? It this principle of
Mr. BacovonTote's were universally recognised, we
should have our future TnuirreLto appealing to the
good feelings of their judges in such terms as these :
" There is no denying that I murdered Mr. WZAill
in cold blood, but you can never be so hard-hearted
as to record a sentence of death against me. Look
what I have suffered at the bands of your police-
Looh at the black-eye I received in the scuffle with
A 1 before I managed to fling him down and
'sample won him. Look at this eta a all that is