The Express.
London, England, 1867-03-28 00:00:00

~..
THE PROSECUTION OF Fa-GOVERNOR

MARIMT DRAYTON, WEDNL‘DIT.

Shortly after 10 o'clock this morning the pro-
ceedings against Hr. Eyre, sui-govemor ci Jamaica.insti-
tuted by the Jamaica Committee, were resumed at this
place. The magistrates on the bench were Sir Baldwin
tl7:htrlamilles.EgerteuSiuterp.hepHardingno,b.width,
Leighton, Bart- (chairman), (,!olonel Hill, Major Bough-
'afwndaL:lfas'orjo3:l2°THdae:lire;:eifl33trilthierl:
again appeared for the prosecution. Hr. (Allard, with
on
Sheen (of the firm of Sheen and Resew, soh..
prosecution) and Mr. Rose (solicitor for the ilefe..'"' ....
also present.
tv

Immediately following the entry of the chairman ra.
court Mr. Eyre entered the room, accompanied by MY.`
Giffard. Him appearance was the signal for a clapping of
bands on the part of one of the gentlemen present ; but
this attempt at applause was immediately suppressed by
the chairman, who said that any one interrupting the
court in a similar way should be immediately expelled.
The Chairman rid that Mr. Corbet, one of the magi-
strates who sat on the bench on Monday, was not then
present. Mr. Corbet was a son of th..l landlord of the
accused, Mr. Eyre, and he had therefore thought it proper
to decline sitting any longer in the case. This he (the
chairman) thought was a very proper proceeding on the
part of Mr. °orbs.; see beeseerif Ilhelp• *an
his views of the ease would in any way be influenced by
the circumstance mentioned, but because in a case such as
that which they were assembled to hear it wee necessary
not only that justice should be properly administered, but
that there should not be the slightest grounds for an im-
putation upon their manner of administering it.
Mr. Warren, the clerk to the magistrates, then read the
charge upon which Mr. Eyre was in custody.

After Arranging for the absence from court of the wit-
nesses, Mr. Stephen said that on the last occasion of his
appearing there the bench had expressed a desire to have
the prosecutor present. In the emergency, the prosecutors
being in London, Mr. Sheen had volunteered to take upon
himself the office of prosecutor. Mr. Taylor, M.P. for
Leicester, was, however, now present, and desired to appear
personally as the prosecutor. The learned counsel then
proceeded at great length to open the case for
the prosecution. He divided his speech into
three parts, treating first of the general facts con-
nected with the disturbances out of which the charge of
murder against Mr. Eyre arose ; secondly, of the law upon
which the pmeecoution relied fur a committal ; and thirdly,
of the part personally token by the :teemed in the alleged
murder of George NN illiam Gordon. With the intmdue-
tory statement of facts the public are already familiar ;
and the second portion of Mr. Stephen's speech was an
able elaboration of the legal arguments, which have been
touched upon in the prosecution against Mr. Eyre's subor-
dinates instituted in the London police-court Mr.
Stephen laid down the proposition that the bench were
bound to accept one of two alternatives—either they
must say that Mr. Eyre was, in the matter of Mr.
Gordon's death, guilty of murder, or of justifiable
homicide. If they said he was not guilty of wilful
murder then they must adjudge him guilty of justifiable
homicide, but there was no medium between the two. It
was an undoubted fact, and he should prove it by letters
and other indisputable evidence, that Mr. Eyre gave all the
orders, and took unon himself the whole respousibility of
what was done in Jamaica with a view to suppress the
disturbance in October, lotto. It was a pleasure to hint
to be able to uy that Mr. Eyre was a 111311 of undoubted
courage and gallantry. From first to last no man could
have taken upon himself more plainly the responsibility of
the acts done by his suladterns, no man could have stated
more unreservedly the motives by which he acted than did
Mr. Eyre, and whatever might be the difference of opinion
on other points there could be no doubt in any man's mind
that Mr. Eyre was a brave, a very brave man. Premising
that his duty was confined to satisfying the bench that the
legality of the act of Mr. Gordon's death was doubtful,
and did not extend to satisfying them it was absolutely
illegal, Mr. Stephen hall proceeded some length in the
course of his legal argument, when, on remarking that if
be proved a certain state of things it would be the duty of
the bench to commit Mr. Eyre,
The Chairman said—lt would be better, Mr. :Stephen.
if you would go on with the facts of the case instead of
telling us what is our duty.
Mr. Stephen protested that he was not saying a single
word that was unnecessary. They were there to consider
• most important case, rind he felt he was justified in
treating it with commensurate care. It is said, he conti-
nued, that this act (the execution of Gordon) was done under
martial law. Martial law is proclaimed to meet a state
of revolt, and it authorises a recourse to extreme measures
to suppress the revolt. Necessity, independent of martial
law, authorises any act that can be done which is neces-
sary for the preservation of the peace and the safety of
her Majesty's subjects. But martial law dos o not justify
the putting of a man to death who had no connection—no
open and undoubted connection—with a state of insurrec-
tion among her Majesty's subjects. It casuist justify that,
and that cannot be justified except upon legal proof that
the party charged was actually a party to the insurrec-
tion. This is the proposition which I submit to you,
sirs, and upon which I found the inference that thu
execution of George William Gerrlon was a murder.
He would not impute to Mr. Fyro that Iris action
with respect to Gordon was the result of mere
spite or personal antagonism. lie would ream to
say that a mere private grudge was the leading meth°
with Mr. Eyre in this case. But he did any that for yeses
Mr. Eyre hail entertainml upon private grounds—he did
not mean grounds personal to himself—but room what he
heard and knew of Gordon as an inhabitant of the island,
he had entertained the worst possible opieion of Gonlun
fur several years before this transaction occurred. Gordon
was politically opposed to him, and he (Mr. Eyre) stated
himself that Gordon's language torwanla him hed been
most intemperate. With this forego: a- prepossession in
his mind, believing Gordon to be a most urangerous end
wicked man, he took upon himself the awful responsibi-
lity of 'rutting lihn to death. Ile, as it clearly appeared
upon the best pear:lido evidenoe--the evidence of iris own
handwriting—reg:trded Gordon's death as being mo-
rally just and politically expedient, and he also
knew, or at least strongly helieved, that the
execntioc was illegal, although be didnot appear to be
aware of the full extent of its illegality. lie (Mr. Ste-
phen) admitted that there were circumstances in view of
which a man might be suddenly put to death if his re-
maining alive really imperilled the peace of the country,
but there was no law which empowered a governor to put
a man to death simply became he thou;; his prisoner a
dangerous unon, a bail man, a man whose death would be
a good example by way of acting as an intimidation to the
disaffected portion of the community. Mr. Stephen then
went at great length into the circutostancea comeectiug, or
alleged by the prosecution t-, connect, `,r. Eyre with
Gordon, reading and critic oiling upon es t. rev from the
evidence given before the Jamaica l'ourtui,-,a, and which
311111,1113 ill the Jamaica Llue-took.
4 r. n.—Mr. Stephen has just concluded, having spoken
five hours. Re submitted two .mestiaus as ireceserry for the
consideration of the court : first, tele titer it was legal to
take a civilian from a district not under martial law to one
in which such a law prevailed, and hang him ; and se-
condly, whether Mr. Eyre's conduct towards Mr. Gordon
Wll,l that of a man who only desired to punish treason.
Vie court then adjourned.

lIIRMINGRAM SocIETY OP ARTlsTs.—This society
opened its doors yesterday for the " private view" of the
spring exhibition of water-colour runtious. The collec-
tion is a fine one, and includes the work. of W. Dyce,
MA., E. H. Corbould, the late David Cox (many 1.:••,1-
mens), P. F. Poole, MA., G. Cattennol, R.A.,J. M. W.
' Turner, It.A., Fred. Goodall, 8.A., Sydney t ooper. A. 8.A.,
and from the principal local artists—F. 11. Henshaw,
/t. S. Chattock, A. Hall, C. W. Radclytfe, J. Steeple,
A. E. Everitt, IL Johnson, C. T. Bret, s.e. Mr. Byte.
Betts has lent two or three of David ('ox's most
famous productions ; an them " Bolton Abbey" and
a landscape, "Stormy Weather," another highly
characteristic picture by the same artist, and
" Gleaner Returning." Amongst other of the more
notable contributions is " Saul in the Cave of the Witch
at Ender," K If. Corliould ; " Boy unit I'. F.
Poole, H.A. ; "Arrest of Charles, at liolniby," G. Cstter-
mole ; " Hayfield," Birket Foster ; "The ()Id Gondolier,"
F. Goodall, I.A. ; Kilvator Rosa in the Altirussi,'•
George ratterniole ; " Brittany Peasant Frederic
Goodall, H.A. ; "An old 0..1i, Forest of Arden," F. U.
Henshaw ; and two exceedingly rimer pictures, one a
Norwegian scene, the other " Fishart Boats leaving
IMuglcs," by a rising young artist, I'. M. Feeney. This
" private view " was a crowded one, and considering that
this is only the second year in which a water colour ex-
hibition has been attempted in Biri.iingliam, it is highly
successful.

CROCODILE.% IN CALIFORNTA.—At the meeting
of the Academy of Nctural Sciences on the 19th Nevem..
her, Professor Blak4exhibited about twenty fossil vertebra
of what be believes to have been a great marine saurian,
or crooodile. These bones are each about four inches long
and three in diameter, and. together with teeth of sharks
and other remains, were found in Tulare Valley, iOOO
feet above the ocean.—Alta Californian.
OIYrnL PALAos. Own SHILLING DAT.—.
WILDRIBDILY, MARCH 27.—Adminiona on payment, 979;
ditto by moon tickets, I,Bil. Total visitors, 2.650.

BROWNand POLSON'S CORN FLOUR
for CHILDREN'S DIET.
To obtafn extra pr ftt by the Ws other kinds on Somoitstro
offered instead ,•1 lIROWN and polan:srs.
"John Prosru,- "John Potion.* Is signed by She nab= at
each packet.

eitt erarregiO.

TftRUIPONDWTS.

Advertise:heats httewled for .Tho Express," London Ironing
lam must, be at the Oeo, 10, bouveriwettwat, by Two
dank ou the day of pulaicatloa.

DRKILY LANE.

TIM ETinsind, ROB ROY. Mews. Phelps, T. Sitinhourne,W,
Harrison, Wintyre. Barrett, and Harcourt . Mesdames E. eras,
It. G. Le Thiene. iludsp,th, and E. Brougham.—To conclude
with WANTED litrsE.iNDll FOR SIX. Miss Hudspeth.

MATMAILIL

Thu Evßernto, D \VII) (lAititlCK. Mews. Sothern, Bork-
stone, I'hipven.l3le. Kocers, Clark, Re. ; Mc.lames Nacre, Chip-
pendale. &,:,--'111k: SEICIOIN FAMILY. Mews. Buckstone,
Howe, Farren. Re.—And PISILFECTION. Miss Burke.

!sn!TAlts•

Tim nygNIN4, NO. i, RlO'irTfilt CORNER. Mama.
Shorn and F.lrrnat3. —And IT 13 NEVER TOO LATE TO
MEND. Mews. Vil.,nz V. VIIIi<33, Veriscr, Shure, Calhaem,
and Manna; Minas Page and Rodgers.

LYrM.

Tins Everlrn, Bt tKI Wl7.Lt Y,77Mr. Pricy and Mks Rate
1t1.dt0p.—.%14.1 THE DUI: MirTrtl. Mr. Vrchter, M rams.
Jordan. Entrry. Widdleotah. Iltrpatrirk. Rc. ; Mires
llamado, ltlaworthy. Gruttua, and Carlotta Leclercq.

TwT Ev MAREIV.77OAt MITERS AND YOTTNG ars-
BA N %I 10111.1)A : OR. THE SENSATION Of/AT. Messrs.
Th,rne, Lame.. IGrlw,n. ant 'Dunce Me,lantes Swanhorongh,
Hughes, Newton, Wenthersly,ae.—And A SUIT Or rwszara.

lIOLSORN..

Tun Benirnall, YY TF&S NERT. Mr. &bum: Misses
late and Lena:.—Not vLiallo !CUD. Messrs. Neville. &1-
more. Make, Vahan. ll...dames V. Josephs, C. Saunders,
Bessie too4e. Addis, Lam; lltsvinced, Bs.

BIZTANNU

TAU EVENING, I,ll'BT ; M AROVERITE' mANGLE.
3lra. Lane, dr. —NI r. W. Randall. Mr. N ogden, and Nice Llama
Xerridge.—With THE TICKET tor LEA VY..

Molt WALTZ AT LONDON DE/DOS
Till DAT —morning. 616 "461 Atiersuoa. TL j
TO-Mooooll—Morning, 71. Atkinoon, 60. 24m.

LONDON, THUR.SDAT, MARCH 28.

THE removal of the dual vote from the field of
controversy enables us to concentrate our atten-
tion on the remaining substantial provisions of the
Government Before' Bill. Two of these now
stand in the foreground—the distinction that is to
be made between persons qualifying on occupa-
tions above 101. and below 101., and the applica-
tion of the compound-householding principle to
diminish thenumber whom household suffrage would
enfranchise. The invidious distinctions directed
solely against the proposed new class of voters
below 101. rental will, it may be expected, not
survive a fair discussion. It will be found im-
possible and unreasonable to try to maintain a
two-years period of residence in the case of the
one class, when six months is considered adequate
for the other. The occupancy, again, may
properly consist, for the new as for the
old voters, of premises other than a d
house, since the use of such premises in addition
to a dwelling-house argues in general a higher
position than occupancy of a dwelling-house only.
Discrepancies of privilege between the voters
above and the voters below 101. will be at once
useless and irritating, and Conservatives as well
as Liberals must be ready on reflection to abandon
distinctions which are absolutely indefensible.
The great conflict, then, will probably be
on the compound householding restriction. But
whatever might be said for this limitation if it
were uniformly applied, the fact that it is not at
present capable of uniform application ought to
satisfy Government that it cannot be accepted as
it stands. The restriction must be understood to
aim at some practical effect. If nobody were
to be kept off the register by its means, it
could not be worth the support of any party.
But if a certain number of persons are to be ex-
cluded from the franchise by itsoperation, then Par-
liament cannot delegate to Bumbledom the selection
of these individuals. The Legislature cannot ab-
dicate in favour of the vestries. It cannot in
decency profess itself unable to draw a line at
which free enfranchisement should end, and hand
the duty over to the pot-house politicians of the
parishes. Whatever it does it must do in its own
name, and on its own responsibility. And having
contemptuously laughed the idea of dual voting
out of the Bill, it cannot for very shame leave
plural voting in vestries to determine the limits of
the suffrage in each locality. Plural voting may
be very proper when nothing else is affected by it
than the fixing of rates, the election of collectors
and surveyors, and the regulations for paving and
lighting the parish ways. But if it should be
invoked to settle the line at which Englishmen
shall be admitted to or excluded from the
full privileges of citizenship, its operation would
be a most offensive anomaly. The anomaly
would bo ludicrous u well as hateful in those
cases in which it was not even co-extensive with
the limits of the individual borough, but in which
different parishes in one town were left free, as in
fact they are at present, to establish different
rules. The nature and degree of variety in the
franchise which such a scheme contemplates ex-
ceed in extravagance the most fantastic dream of
a political visionary.

Mr. DISRAELI, indeed, approached near enough
to such a dream when he gravely defended the
idea of a diversified franchise in different boroughs
on the ground that it would break the " oppres-
" sive monotony " of the House. It would be
interesting to know what the CHANCELLOR of the
ExcEsquza exactly means by that observation.
To persons less gifted with imagination, it seems
as if the House was yearly tending to comprise
elements more various, and less amenable to party
discipline. Where formerly we had two parties
we now have twenty. If we have not the heights
of a Mountain, we have the hollow abysses of at
least two Caves. We have eccentricity that
is rollicking and eccentricity that is funereal.
We have more distinct crotchets than
Mr. DISRAELI has fingers to count them
on, and we have cases that almost verge on inter-
esting studies of monomaniacal tendency. Mr.
DISRAELI is unreasonable in calling for more vs- I
riety in the performances or more diversified ca-
pacities in the actors. It may be all very well to
have one Bill in a session presented once a week
in an entirely altered and never-before-witnessed
shape, but if every member were to put
whatever Bill he brings in through similar trans-
formations, the whole business of the House
would resemble those ingenious figures of blue upon
a red ground which dazzle the eye as they dance
before it, till everything seems mixed up with every-
thing else, and nothing remains but a same of

Oriental gorgeousness, and a desire to have the
brilliant effect removed. More variety in the
House ! Why the one thing we are all praying
for just now is to have less variety in the Ministry,
and, if it were only possible, a little more cohe-
rence in their ideas.

But whatever may be the normal House of the
future for which Mr. DISRAELI'S fancy may se-
cretly sigh, we must seriously protest against ar-
riving at it through manipulation of the parish
rate book. Why is the parish to be made
the basis of Imperial arrangements? Why are
parish deductions and parish compromises to be
reflected in the composition of the House of Com-
mons ? There are a thousand objections of de-
tail to the scheme, but for the present we confine
ourselves to this broad inquiry. If we merely re-
sorted to the local valuations as convenient moans
for ascertaining rental, there would be some reason
for the course proposed. Even for such a purpose,
however, it is hard to see why we should not re-
quire the parishes to put the real rental on their
books, instead of that fluctuating proportion which
is called the rating value, and which, as it is got
at by a propel Uonate deduction from every one, is
no relief to any one, and is purely fictitious and
useless. But at whatever proportion we choose to
fix it we may surely insist that the rating shall be
uniform. And this is, indeed, confessed by Mr.
DISRARLI'S own Rating Bill now in Parliament.
But when the doctrine of uniformity of rating is
admitted for the purpose of securing uniformity of
franchise, it is to the last degree inconsistent to
allow diversity of compounding for the purpose
of creating a variety of franchise.

It is clear that Parliament cannot abdicate
its functions in favour of the vestries. It must
make up its mind whether Household Stiffra‘e
is right or not, and if it thinks the time for
its adoption not yet come it must dare to
say so in its own person, and not throw the responsi-
bility on the chance operation of a parish bye-law.
By its own wisdom, and not by the parish wisdom,
it must deal with the selection of the classes who
are fit for admission to the franchise. Loss of all
sense, not only of dignity, but of self-respoct,
would follow from so weak and absurd a delega-
tion of its proper powers to the bodies which of
all in the country are the least regarded. If this
notable scheme were really carried out, agitation
would not be appeased, but embittered. The
voters in one parish or town would see themselves
deprived of a right which the Legislature had con-
ferred on them, by the irresponsible action of a
few rich gentlemen or ladies with a plurality of
pariah votes. There would be perpetual quarrel-
ling, angry recriminations, and all the fury of local
disputes. The unenfranchised may consent to
wait for the action of Parliament, but they would
certainly not endure limitation of a parliamentary
gift at the option of local magnates.

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.
(THIS DAY.)