The Express.
London, England, 1849-07-09 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY EVENING, JULY 9, 1849.

any such usage, and urged that the cargo should be sold
afint, and Leslie, Alexander, and Cn ,in reply to 4-his re-
quisition, stated that if the defendant declined to make the
usual de;sosit, they would consider the corn as th. is own, and
11 it for their own profl', not holding the defendant liable
for any loss. The defendant, however, denied the right of
Messrs. Leslie, Alexander, and Ce. ts adopt such a course,
end repeatedly called upon them to sell tho corn and furnish
bin with an account of the sales. The corn arrived at
Linrpool on the 27th May, in very bad condition. It was
not sold however until the first week in September, when it
was found wholly unfit for human food, and only good for
feeding piga. The 1,200 querten produced about L3OO.
The question under these circumstances wes, whether the
less upon the speculation ought to fall upon the b.nkrupts
or the defendant. On the part of the latter it was contended,
that the bankrupts disobeyed his orden by not dieposing of the
corn before the arrival of the ship when the price was high,
and that a profit would have been realised; and that upon
his refusal to make the deposit they asked for, they expressly
discharged him from any liability If the speculation thZraid
turn out a losing one. In reply it was alleged that New
Orleans Indian Corn could not tw sold afloat at any time
before the arrival of the Free Trader, and that the defend-
ant declined to permit the bankrup's to treat the speculation
as 'heir own, by calling on them to sell on his account.
The Chief Baron was of opinion that when tte bankruipte
wrote to say they would treat the corn as their own, be-
cause the defendant did not make the usual deposit with
thi m, they proposed to do whrot the law did not authorise
I them to do. Such a proposal came to nothing unless as-
tented to by the defendant, and it was quite clear, front the
subsequent correspondence, that he repudiated such an
arrangement.
The jury, without any hesitation, returned a verdict foe
the plaintiffs for 1,6321., giving the defendant credit for the
actual proceeds of the corn, lees the freight, Ike.

PREROGATIVE COURT.-JuLT 6.
Hama SIR arum lINNEII.

BARLOW V. RAHFOITAWiIiti/lIRRDITART

INSANITY IN A FAMILY.

This was an opposition to the will of the late Mr. Edwin
Ashford, of the Harrow-road, ironmonger, on aceourt of in-
sanity. The testator died ea the 25th of November. 1846 :
the whole of the personal estate was valued at near 5.0001.,
which consisted of leasehold houses. He made a will, dated
3rd of April, 1816, and a codicil, dated 16th of October
iu which he appointed two executors, and gave to
each 1001., and other small legacies • the residue was not
disposed of under this will ; the codicil disposed of the bulk
of the property to the exclusion of his wile and family, who
now opposed the will. It was set forth in the allegations
that the whole of his family were insane, his father and tour
brothers and sisters fell by their own hands, and another
sister died insane. There were numerous acts of profligacy,
eccentricity, and extrangan-e, set forth to prove the testa •
for to be insane. On one occasion, when his wife was in her
confinement, he made his servant maid undress and go to
b d with him, in the same room, in spite of the remon-
strances of his wife. Oa another occasion be attempted to
murder ber. At last she applied to the Conmstory
Court for a divorce, but did not proceed in its
suit, as he conser.ted to a searation, and by
deed settled 1201. a year upon her, and after their death
1,500!. was to be divided between the three children, but the
trustees became defaulters.
Dr. Harding, in the able: ce of Dr. Addams, asked the
court to grant probate to the will and codicil to Mr. Barlow,
and condemn the parties in the cost..
The Queen's Advocate, with whom was Dr. Cattle*, op•
peered onthe part of Mr. Abraham Byrom Ashford, the son
of the testator in opposition to the will, the teetstor being of
unsound mint at the period of its execution, and prayed the
court to condemn the two principel legatees, Messrs. Dirbw
and Crouch in the costs.—The court adj turned the bearing.
The letters which were read to the court, appeared to be
the production of an acute intellect, if not of a vigorous
mind; but the acts of the writer were anything but recon-
cilable to them.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.—SATURDAY.
BIPOIII DLL JVATICE COLTMAN.
THE SICILIAN ARMAMEN F—VERDICT.
The proceedings in this cue were again resumed this
morning at ten o'clock.
Sir F. Kelly at once proceeded to address the jury on
behalf of the Prince °mutelli and Signor Scalia. The
learned counsel said he had the honour to appear on behalf of
a nobleman hi'hero of high and honourahle character, who
appealed to them to protect him, and to say by their verdict
that be was not guilty of that which he looked upon as a
great aggression, namely, a requital of the hospitality which
in these days of trial and danger he had received is this
country, by committing a breach of its laws. lie was in-
straoted to state on his behalf, that in all the political strug-
gles to which he had taken a part, he had always endeavour( el
to obey the laws of the country in whic'i he was placed, and
he felt confident that when he bad called their attention,
and that of his lordship, to the act of parliament under which
this indictment was framed, and which this nobleman was
alleged to have violated, they would be satisfied that
upon the case as it had been Pod before them, no offence
whatever had been committed, and that in everything Prince
Orenatelli had done he had strictly conformed to the lAN.
He felt confident that nothing whatever had been proved
against either of the defendants, except by the testimony of
one or two witnesses, respecting wnom character he should
in the course of the else make • few observations. lie begged
the jury to recollect that what was prohibited by this
act of parliament was not in itself either unlaw.
ful or criminal, and when they considered tbat
notwithstanding this, the penalty involved fur its in-
fringement was of a very serious character, he was sure they
would agree with hint that such au act of parliament should
be construed most strictly, and that no person ought to bo
convicted under it unless the evidence was of the most clear
and conclusive character. Upon this view of the matter he
asked them whether it would hot be mat unjust to make
any of the defendants amenable for what might have been
said by other parties in their absence, and over whom they
could have had no control; and yet the principal portion of
the evidence in support of the pro:undo& consisted of testi-
mony of that description. The question here was not whether
the defendants might not be liable upon some civil
coatracts, but the point the jury had to decier
was, whether they or any of them had been
guilt of any of the offences charred aeainst them in
this uni'ctment, and he submitted to them, and to his lord-
ship, that the y could not be convicted unless it was clearly
showa that they had done some distinct ac', or had clearly
and distinctly authorised the doing it. Thanks to Hod and
to their law, no one could commit a crime in this country by
delegation or agency ; and if ever there was a case in which
that rule should he strictly carried out, he submitted it was
the one now before them. He therefore called upon them to
look at the evidence, and what any of the defendants had
done, or what any one of them had authorised to be done,
which amounted so a violation of the law, and mode them
seminally responsible. What were the circumstances of the
ease ? Herr was a nation struggling for independence, and
striving to achieve it, and for that purpose the provi ional
government had entered into c emmunications with
a number of persons and had delegated different tasks to
them, some hang wholly unconnected with each other.
Some of these parties wars to enter into communication w.th
the foreign minister in this country ; others were to enlist
soldiers sad seaman ; and others were to par urn (la rent
duties, it being of course quite clear that the persoas who
despatched them were totally ignorant of the laws of this
country, and their only de.ice was to perform their duty in
the honourable and noble struggle fur the independence of
their native land. It was very probable that, on arriving in
this country, while some of these age nts would take counsel
and determine to conform strictly with the law, that others,
either rockiest or unprincipled, might embark in proceed-
ings calculated mxe soeeaily to effect the object they had in
view, but which were contrary to the municipal laws of the
c .untry. The jury, therefore, should beware how they con-
founded the ac's of one with the acts of another, and they
should take care not to punish those who had no intention
to offend against the law, for the acts of others over whom
they had no control, and if they did this be said with great
confidence that there was no evidence to prove that either of
the defendants bad violated the law. The act of parliament
under which this indictment had been preferred was fraud
in the year 1819, at the time of the struggle of the Spanish
colonies in South America for independence of the mother
country. Attempts had been made by the insurgents to
raise forces in different parts of Europe, to fit out vetoes of
war, and to despatch them for hostile purposes aseinst the
kingdom of Spain. The policy of the legislature to passing
this act was to prevent our ports from being used as dock-
yards foe fitting out vessels of war against Spain,
hut i[there was no intention to interfere with
the c ,mmerce of the country, and this act of par-
liament did not apply to thy mere purchase of •
vessel, but to i's being actuagy fired up and armed for the
purposes of warfare, end that, notwithstanding this act, any
persons, whether foreigners or others, had as much right to
purchase a ship and fit it up as they pleased, short of actual
armament, as they bad to go into a shop and purchase any
other article. There was also, he so-tended, nothing in the
ant to prevent the purchase. of arms and ammunition. The
legislature had no intention to intertere wt h the commerce
of the count y; but what tt deeared to he illegal, and what
he admired was so, was the using the ports of this country as
dockyards to fit nut armed vessels, and he could cite legal
opinions of the highest authority in confirmation of this view
of the law.
Mr. Justice Coltman intim-Vet that :his was not a leititie
mate line of argamaat If the learned eon- set wished to
argue the point he aught cite authorities, but the opinions of
learned gentlemen who were perhaps consulted is the case
ought not to he introduced.
air F. Kelly said he should ebeeney bow to the ruling
of the court, but it was at all events fair to infer that
such was the cpinion of the government, for, awing under
Um advi e of Ps law officers, it appeared that this prosecution
bad been discountenoneed by those whose duty it was to
have instituted it, if there had been any grouuds for doing
so. He repeated that the art did not make it illegal to pur-
. chase a shop of war, and that when purchased the owners
had an equal right to send it to Pslermu or anywhere else
they pleased. He admitted that is was illegal to enlist sol-
diers and ',adore in this cautery f r the purpose of fighting
with a furei4u nation at peace with us, but where was the
evidence of this having been none, except the tes-
timony of two puma, Centel Aubrey and Mould° ?
The former had certainly made out a very strong
ere against himself, but be was sure the jury
would be of opinion that it made out nothing against either
done defendants. It appeared to hint that this act of parlia
Rent lad baea resorted to solely for the puma* of enabling
a foreign prince to wreak his vengeance upon some of his
writ people, and be urged upon the jury that au act of par-
liament which was evidently paned for the proteeti en and
benefit of this kingdoms, and in order to prevent Pa subjects
froa entering clandestinely into warfare with a friendly
mate, mkt not to be p to be so made nee of. If

there had been any ground for prosecuting is the present
case, did they doubt that the British government would have
performed its duty and have instituted a prostcution it the
circumstances had warranted it ? With regard to the charge
of having enlisted sail re and soldiers, the /vide Intl show. d
that although spies and informers had urged the
defendants to take that step, they all along refused to
do so, and the evidence showed that fact most
distinctly. The learned counsel then repeated his
opinion that there was no illegality in purchasing
a ship for war purposes, and he arid that, although the ex-
portation of arms and ammunition might be prohibited by
an order in council, yet no such order had been issued in
this case, and there was every reason to believe that the
British itovernment was not tadisposed to aid the Sicilian
people in their nob'e endeavours to obtain independence.
Sir F. Kelly then proceeded !!:ion the enner-
'ions " flt out" and " equip," as used in th . act of parlia-
men., and contended that a vessel of war cmld not be eon-
, sidercd as equipped until she was fully provided with men
and areas, and he said ke believed that his lordship would
concur with him in this interpretation of the law,
Mr. Justice Coltman said, as he had been appealed to, he
must say that he did net go along with the learned counsel,
in his view of the law. The act of parliament expressly

made the distinction between fitting out arming.
Sir F. Kelly asked if his lordship would reserve the point if
it should become necessary?
Mr. Justice Coltman said he had no objection to do so;
but he himself had no doubt upon the subject.
Sir F. Kelly proceeded.--It certainly did appear to him
that this was the correct interpretation of the law, and that
it was impossible to say that a vessel was fitted up unless it
had every thing on board, the whole equipage de name on
beard, so as to be ready for immediate action. These gen-
tlemen had come to this country for a perfectly laudable eur-
pise—the y were guilders of any unlawful acts, and if ouch
had been done by other persons it would be most unjust to
hold them responsible. They had refused to be cancer, ed in
these unlawful proceedings, and he blushed to think
of the opinion they must form of the law of this
country, when they found that under these sir
cumatances they were dragged into a criminal court
to answer an indictment which contained eighty Ceuta-.
Whit must a foreign nobleman and gentleman think of such
a law ? They had come to this country at a period of
danger and difficulty ; they had been received in a most
friondly manner by the minister of the crown, and although
the time had not arrived for formally recognising the govern-
ment which they represented, they had reason to believe thi-
would be done ; and he submitted they were clearly autho-
rised in adopting all lawful and honourable means for the
interest of that government. They were advised that there
was nothing illegal in purchasing ships of war for the defence
of their country if attacked , and with wham (lid they enter
into a contract for that purpose ? Why, with one
of the most wealthy and respectable companlea in the
country, the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Company !
They left to that company the entire ex cutioo of the con-
tract, and had nothing whatever to do swim it. When they
found their ship was Nixed, they remonstrated to the govern-
ment, and no doubt a full and proper inquiry was instituted
and the result was that the tranuesion was frond to be a
perfectly honourable one, and the ves-cl was restored, end
the defendants then found that the set of parliament which
was clearly intended fir the ben, IL of this country only,
ban been bronght to bear upon them for the pummel' of
the King of the Two Skillet. Now he would ask the jury
whether these gentlemen were insurrente or revolutiontate ?
It was nut necessary for him to refer to ail those events which
had convulsed Europe fir the last e ighteen months, but he
w oold state one broad historical fact, viz., that those gen
tlemen were natives of a country which, by means of
the arms of Great Britain and its mediation, was gua-
ranteed a free institution, consistirg of King, Lords, and
Commons, and, almost the greatest blc-sins of all, the
independence of the judger. Time tele iniasies were
guaranteed to them in 1812, by Lord \V. B oi-
tinek, and the only fault these gentlemen had committee
was endeavouring to regain that constitution which had
been violated by all the kings of Naples in succession. In
1848 the Sicilian people were unable to bear any longer the
intolerable yoke that pressed upon them, and they rose almost
en masse, mil, with the single exception of the eitad. I of
Messina, which was garrisoned by the troops of the King of
Naples, the whole country rose as one man and asserted
their right to the constitution of which they had been de-
prived, and appealed to Great Britain to ail them is regain-
ing it. Prince Onutatelli and Siinor Scalia CaOl.! to Engl ind
in 1818 with that object. At that time there were no warlike
operetiona goirg on with the King of Napo,' nor did soy
appear to be in con,emplation. All Sici'y had risen as one
man, end every!, sly was determined to support the coned-
tution. A parliament of lords and commons was esta-
blished, and they sought a king who would keep faith with
them. The defeadants came to this country, therefore, no'
for the purpose of gr.ting up hostilities, but to obtain the
recognition of their Ind. pendence, and they knew if they did
that there would be no necessity for warfare, but that the
King of Naples would lie compelled to sehrnit, and ni ither
he, nor one of kis soldiers, would ever airoin se' their toot in
Sicily. They were reoeived by Lord l'elmersten and by his
lady at her private parties with favour atid distinction, and
they had theretore good grounds fur heii,ing that their con-
stitution would be rec senised, and by the powerful media
tion of England and France all disputes would he put an
erd to. Me reminded the jury that during all this peri el
there were no hostilities going on. It was true that the
King of Naples did invale the city of Mewine, but the
British and French admirals tnterteril, and hostilities were
prtheuted. There was, therefore, ro ereutid fir si.pposiost
that the defendants, when they purchased these vessels.
were actuated by any hoatilo iutentioes towards the
King of Naples, and their object rather appeared to
be to wells, war vessels far their own protect on, and the
other purposes for which such se est Is were required
by every kingdom when at perfect peace. In app rein°, to
these undoubted facts is. the case, would they place reliance
upon the evidence of such men as Colonel Aubrey and Be-
neath) ? As to the fernier, ho blushed ro mention his name
as belonging to the British army or the British nat.on—a
man who, having connected himself with tha secret
councils of a gallant notion struggling for independence, aud,
havieg obtained their confidence, for the wretched bribe of
j three hundred pounds sacrificed his lair tame es a man and a
British officer by bet tying them, according to his own ac
count, into the hands of their enemies—and what was the
excuse he had alleged for such conduct ? Why, that a go-
vernment, in the cummencemeut of a great struggle, end
! surrounded by difficulties, had not ;mid him as bee:petted.
Wax that an excuse for a British e &H.,. acting no
basely ? lie was sure they would think not; and that such
a mast was disentitled to credit. Us therefore calm)
upon them to dismiss every word of his evi term, from their
consideration which had not received confirmation by some
credible witness. The other person he submitted was I qu,114
unworthy of belief. Ile had received relief when in a state
of destitution from the defendant., and he hap repaid th, it
kindne.s by selling himself to the Neapolitan government,
sad be called the asts.ntion of the jury to the fact of his
basing sworn positively to repeated cenviesadoes with
Prince Ciritectelli, when it turned out that he bad never
seen him in his life. Such persons be contended were un-
worthy of belief, and therefore he entreat, d the jury, for the
honour of the British character, to give n, effect to the eel
daces of those witnesses. The learnt-I counsel then wint un
to remark upon the feet that the fitting up of the
Bombay had been left by the defendants entirely in the
hands of the respectable c impany from wham she was
purchased, and they had nu reason to suppose
that anything ill, gal would have been done, and he
said that although certainly he could not blame th- se who
conducted the prosecution for not pro mine the contract, a.
the witness in *host possession it was bed declined to do so
for fear he should criminate himself,yet he must remark that
it was quite as inconvenient to the defendants that is should
rot innYt been produced as it was for the prosecution, as it
would have shown the jury the exact position of the per, is s.
The learned counsel then. ceec uilid a serf el -quest address
by emphatieady ceiling upon the jury to acquit the whole of
the defendants.
Mr. Chambers then addressed the jury for the defendant
Moody, who, he fetid, although the prosecution had chosen
to designate him Captain Moody, in cr ler probably to induce
the jury to suppose that he bad commanded some ship of
war, wog not at all entitled to such an appellation except by
courtesy from having commanded a merchant yes, I.
" Ile was a highly-respectable man, without a blem-
lab on his character, and who had been repeat-
edly entrusted by the Oriental Steam Cempany to
take out vessels for them, and he had done so to their en-
I tire satisfaction, and during the whole course of his life, he
' had never lost one easel that bed been under his charge.
All that he had had to do with this transaction was to un-
dertake to convey the vent' to its ea etiaation, and he had
I no more to do with any alleged hostile or warlike intentions
I of any parties than any one of the jury, and he could not
I help thinking that it was a most unjust proceeding to include
him in this indictment, and the only object it appeared to
him for doing so was, that the other defendants might not
: have the Dena". of his testimony in their behalf. The
learned counsel then proceeded to comment upon the fame
of the case, and went over at considerable length meny of
' the points urged by Sir F. Kelly with regard to the inter-
pretation to be put upon the set of parliament, and he con-
eluded by expressing his opinion that if. under the Mecum-
sta..ces of this case, Captain Moody could be brought under
its provisions, the sooner such an act of parliament was
burned by the band of the csnimoe hangmen the better.
Me. Justice Coltman then summed up the case. He said
this was a prosecution instituted by the Neapolitan govern-
' meet, and there was no doubt that they had as much right
to adopt such a proceeding as any other person under her
Majesty's protection. The government:of this country might
1 if it tad been so minded have put an end to the proceeding
by entering a none prosequi, through its law officers, but it
' had not done so, and it appeared t, have been perfeely
neutral, except, for some reason which did not
appear, having ordered the discharge of the vessel
after she had been seised by the custom-house
' officers. The indictment divided itself into three separate
charges: first, the enlisting of sailors; second, enising
soldiers ; and the third, which was the mist material matter,
was that of fitting out a ship or vessel wilt, intent to emelt- y
it for warlike purposes against the King of Naples. A good
deal had been said with regard to the intention of the act of
" parliament, but at present he should tell them that, if mey
were satisfied that the vessel was fitted out for the purpose
of cmimitting hostilities against the N, apolitens, and that
the object was so far carried out as that, by putting the
armament on board, she would have been ready to go into
action, that this would be quite sufficient. The offence cer-
tainly was 113 further immoral and improper than as being a
violation of as act of parliament ; and *great dial of the case
for the prosecution consisted of alleged cenversetions, which
was a description of evidence that was always looked upon
with a good deal of caution, because it was obviously a meet
easy matter entirely to alter the effect of a conversation by
a slignt misrepresentation of what actually occurred. The
learned judge then proceeded to read over the whole of the
evidence, commenting upon it as he proceeded.
The jury expressed a wish to retire; bat, before they left
' the court, they intimated their opinion that the perusal of

the ship's articles entered into at Liverpool would assist
them in their &liberations. They were cot, however
given to them
They retired at twenty minutes pact four, and in half an
hour they returned into mat, and gave a verdict of Not
Guilty as regarded ell the defendants.
There was a bur t of apple se when the verdict was re-
' turned, which was with difficulty repressed by the offizers.
Mr. Ballantine said there was another indictment against
the defendants, and he wished to know what course the
counsel for the prosecution intended to take respecting it ?
Mr. Bodkin said it was for tke Lame offence, and of course
he should offer no evidence upon it.
A verdict of Not Guilty well accordingly recorded upon
this indictment, and the defendants left the court.