The Express.
London, England, 1867-11-01 00:00:00

/ban ant( Military.

CHATHAM, Ocr. 31.
TROOPS FOR ABYSSINIA.—A largo supply of pho-
tographic, telegraphic, and other apparatus required for
use by the scientific portions of the Royal Engineering
party about proceeding to Abyssinia, was despatched
from head-quarters, Brompton barracks, this morning, for
shipment on board the screw-steamer Mendoza!), for
Blaasowah, an order having been received at head-quarters
for the 10th company of Royal Engineers to embark on
Monday next on board that vessel at Woolwich. The
boxes are so constructed that they may be safely packed
on the mules which will convey them up the country.
A party of non-commissioned offieers and sappers of the
Royal Engineers has also been selected for service as well-
borers, and they will be placed under the direction of
Captain F. A. Le Mesurier. For several days past the
men forming the party have been practised in well•boring
operations on the Royal Engineer field.works at head-
quarters. The whole of the non-commissioned officers
and sappers attached to the expedition have been ordered
to receive 50 days' pay in advance.

ADMIRALTY, OCT. 31.—APPOINTMENTS.—Mid-
shipmen, Henry D. Mackenzie' to the Niger ; George R.
Lindley, to the Doris ; George H. Cherry. to the Aurora ;
Samuel Ewing, Anthony Gwyn, Charles R. Arbuthnot,
Edward Chichester, and Arthur F. Wolrige, to the Con-
stance ; Alexander Cochran, George H. Bruce, and Alfred
G. Waller, to the Royal Alfred ; Augustus hi R. Hamil-
ton, George S. Deverell. and Gordon Glennie, to the
Topare ; Barrington H. Chevalier, to the Snout; Alex-
ander M. Cr‘ msie, to the Malacca. Naval Cadets.—Dacre
S. Lacy, and R. F. Berkeley, to the Zealous; Robert
Mundy, to the Royal Alfred. Asaistant-Surgeon.—Dr.
James Paterson, to the Pembroke.

THE ABYWHNIAN Exrrernorr.—At the request
of Sir Robert Napier, Colonel Milward, IR.A., pro-
ceeds at once from this country to join the expedition
in Abyssinia. Colonel Milward served in the Crimea, and
in the expedition to Pekin in 1860 commanded the field
artillery which was attached to General Napier's division.
It is not usual that officets appointed to foreign service
should retain a civil appointment • but we are told that
considering the special circumstances of this case, the
Secretary of State and the Commander-in-Chief have al-
lowed Colonel Milward to retain the appointment which
be now holds at the War-office as Assistant-Director of
Ordnance. _ _

fAdvertisement. I-- HOLLOWAY'S PILLS. Cone-
detitta Advise.—To all permits who suffer from bilious headaches,
disordered stomachs, biliousness. or flatulency, these pills are
most strongly recommended as the safest, best, and quickest
mode of obtaining ease. without weakening or irritating the
nervous system. Holloway's pills are especially useful in clear-
ing away excess of bile, which produces fever unless remedial
measures be adopted without delay. In asthma, bronchitis,
and congestion of the lungs they may be relied upon for remov-
ing all clanger, and by purifying and regulating the circulation
they effectually prevent relspeer, by rousing the liver toe fair
secretion of bile, and quickly carrying it off from the system.
These pills ward off low spirits, listlessness, and those distressing
feelings often called nervous.

THE FENIAN TRIALS AT MANCHESTER.

MANCHESTER, OCT. 31.

At the close of the evidence for the prosecution to-day,
Mr. Digby Seymour, before opening the defence, said he
wished to call the attention of their lordships to a matter
of law. What be wished to submit was a question as to
the legality of the imprisonment of the men called Kelly
and Deasy at the time of their rescue from the van. It
was in evidence that they had been apprehended on suspi-
cion of felony, and were remanded on that charge under the
Vagrancy Act. According to the officer who filled in the
warrant it was filled in with the word " felony," and not
suspicion of felony. He submitted on these grounds whe-
ther they were not Illegally detained, and pointed oat
cases mentioned among othereby "Russell on Crimea" in his
last edition, in which it had been held that if a man was
illegally detained he had a right to liberate himself if he
could, and if in doing so, not using more violence than the
circumstances demanded, death resulted, it would not be
murder, but manslaughter. It was further held that if
personsaiding him to escape should kill any one, they would
be clothed with the same excuse. Mr. Seymour referred
to " Hawkins' Pleas of the Crown," chap. 21, that being
one of the authorities cited in " BusselL" It was laid down
in the case referred to that whenever the imprisonment was
groundless or irregular, and the person escaping was saved
from the penalty of • capital offender the strangers who
rescued him were in like manner excused.
Mr. Justice Blackburn did not think the case an analo-
gous one. Re doubted if the stranger, not himself utder
provocation or restraint of liberty, was entitled to kill.
Mr. Seymour said the question for the court was the
degree of excess used in the rescue. He did not say that
excess might not be used in • rescue that would make the
persons guilty of murder although the original meddling
with the matter might be lawful—as, for instance, when
death was caused by malice; but what he con-
tended was that if death ensued in a rescue that
was excusable in • civil proceeding, it would not
amount to murder but manslaughter, and that the crime
would attach only to the person who was responsible for
it, and not to others who took part in the act. The objec-
tion he took at the very threshold was that the warrant
was filled up for felony without due authority ; there was
no charge of felony, and there was no evidence of felony.
Mr. Justice Blackburn said he did not quits understand
the objection, seeing that the prisoners were given in
charge on what was believed to be a sufficient warrant.

Mr. Seymour said the policeman was a mere accidental
mechanism for carrying out the jurisdiction of the magis-
trates, and the policeman in this case had no better title
to issue the warrant than the magistsates ; in short, he
submitted that the warrant was made out contrary to the
charge, and was unsupported by evidence.
Mr. Justice Mellor—The original warrants were for being
parties to a conspiracy to dethrone the Queen.
Mr. Seymour—Those warrants were not backed.
Mr. Justice Mellor—But those warrants were produced
before the magistrates.
Mr. Seymour—Neither of them.
Mr. Justice Mellor—lt was stated upon oath that there
was no such a warrant.

Mr. Justice Blackburn —That is the charge. They were
remanded upon that charge.
Mr. Seymour said the witnesses had stated distinctly
that the remand upon the 18th was a remand backed upon
the original charge.
Mr. Justice Blackburn replied that the application was
that there might be a remand of the prisoners to the con-
stable.

Mr. Justice Mellor reviewed the history of the warrants,
and admitted that the omission to back the warrants was
informal, but the magistrates acted upon the discretion
with which they were invested.
Mr. Seymour replied that irregularities were constantly
creeping into the prsctioe of the law, and could only be
cured signal examples of their mischief. Even sup-
posing that the warrants from London and Dublin were in
evidence before the magistrates, that was no justification
for the remand or commitment for felony. The warrant
from Irelandspoke of treason and treasonableintercourse in
Ireland for the purpose of overthrowing her Majesty's
crown. Did that justify an English magistrate in com-
mitting a man in an English court on a charge of felony ?
The law was very tender upon these points. It was so
tender that in a case of indictment for rescue where the
detention was for a felony, and not upon suspicion, the
indictment had been quashed. He had lately read a case
which, though not strictly to the point, was an illustration of
what he was saying ; it was a charge of shooting a police-
man in the execution of his duty, but the indictment was
quashed because the warrant was executed by an otiiwr
who had no proper jurisdiction. The case was that of " The
Queen v. Saunders," audit showed how careful the law was
in these matters."

In answer to Mr. Justice Blackburn,
Mr. Seymour stated that the case would be found in the
Law Journal, vol. 36, page 87.
Mr. Seymour would also call attention to a case in
`• Russell on Crimes," vol. 1, page 161. He urged that the
evidence showed no sign of any of the accused persons
being animated by towards Sergeant Brett or
ageinat any man. The essential element was wanting in
asking the jury to convict these men of the crime of wil-
ful murder, and that was the legality and the regularity of
the imprisonment of the two men who were the subject•
of the rescue.

The Attorney-General argued that it was solely
on the ground that where a person was himself ille-
gally in custody, it might be aasumed that he was acting
under provocation, just like the provocation of receiving a
blow or some other insult, that the crime might be reduced
from murder to manslaughter.
Mr. Serjeant O'Brien called attention to Bray's case,
reported in the first volume of " Russell on Crimes." It
touched the point which the Attorney-General was argu-
ing—how far strangers might interfere to rescue a pri-
soner. The judges in that case divided, five being for
murder, and seven for manslaughter, on the ground of pro-
vocation.

Mr. Justice Blackburn said Bray's ease, or what he
should call Salley's case, which were one and the same,
had probably no application to the present case; but it
was the case that went the farthest for that position.
Mr. Justice Mellor said that in Sulley's case the judges
held that it was manslaughter because it was a sudden
action, without malice or design of doing hurt, but only to
prevent the imprisonment of the woman and rescue her
from any unlawful restraint of her liberty.
Mr. Bannon contended that in the present case the
evidence showed not a sudden action, but a predetermined
concert.

Alr. Seymour protested against the case being pot as
one of civil action between Brett and his prisoners.
Serjeant O'Brien contended that in a case of a man
rescuing himself from illegal custody the law recognised
not merely provocation but justification. The question
then arose how far provocation might be recognised in
others who believed the man was illegally detained.
Mr. Cottingham and Mr. O'Brien supported the argu-
ment, which was replied to by the Attorney-General, Mr.
Pickering, and Mr. Hannon,
. .

Mr. Juutice Blackburn and Mr. Justice Mellor ultimately
retired to lunch, promising to consider the points raised
and give an answer on their return.
Mr. Justice Blackburn (on the reassembling of the court
after lunch) said, on consideration he and his brother
Mellor had decided, when the case was concluded, to put
it to the jury to consider whether the prisoners had a com-
mon design to rescue Kelly and Deasy from the priso
theand
jury were satisfied they did it using dangerous violence,
they were of opinion it would constitute the crime of
murder. They were of opinion that even supposing the
prisoners had been told that Kelly and Deasy were detained
under a warrant which was not regular or legal, that
would not excuse them for using dangerous violence
in rescuing them. lie would not say anything as to what
might be their opinion if the case had arisen from sudden
impulse under provocation. They thought the prisoners
in the van were under legal detention.
Mr. Seymour submitted there would be another question
for the jury—as to whether there was a common intent to
rescue, and one of them used an excess of violence, all the
rent would be equally guilty.
Mr. Justice Blackburn— If there was a common design to
use dangerous violence to procure the rescue by one,
the others aiding would be fully as guilty. In answer to a
question from Mr. Seymour, his lordship said, after their
return to London, they should he glad to be furnished
with any further information as to points which had been
argued.
Mr. Seymour said he proposed to call witnesses for all
the prisoners except Allen before he addressed the jury.
The witnesses under examination when our report left
were those previously examined to prove alibis before the
magistrates.
Mr. Seymour will address the jury for the defence early
to-morrow.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN TUE SOUTH OF LONDON.
—Last night a public meeting was held in the lecture-hall,
Carter-street, Wa!worth, for the purpose of considering
the objects of en association which has been recently
formed in the district by a number of ratepayers, who are
dissatisfied with the administration of the local governing
bodies. Mr. W. Malthouse occupied the chair, and
opened the proceedings with a speech denunciatory of the
vestry and board of guardians, who he said neglected to
discharge their duty to the ratepayers, and glossed over
the defalcations of one of the collectors. Mr. J. ti. W.
Bishop proposed a resolution approving of " The St. Mary,
Newington, Ratepayers' Association," the principal aims
of which are " to obtain an equitable assessment of the
houses and property in the pan-a 6 ;to watch vigilantly the
parochial expenditure ; to promote the election of those
ratepayers to parochial offices who are known to be men of
strict integrity and economic principles ; to obtain an
equalisation of poor rates throughout the metropolis ; and
to take steps to relieve the ratepayers of the heavy expen-
diture required in maintaining the public roads, caused by
the abolition of the turnpike trusts, believing it to be
nothing but simple justice that the duty received by the
government on public vehicles, &c., should be applied to
the repair of roads." The resolution was adopted, and in
the course of the discussion which followed there seemed
to be a general belief in favour of municipal institutions as
a means of reducing the rates.

The Irish Railway Commissioners met yesterday
at 2, Victoria-street, Westminster. Present—Sir Alex-
ander Y. Spearman, Dart., Mr. John Fowler, and Mr.
C. E. Seymour Clarke. The secretary (Mr. W. Neilson
Hancock, LL.D.) was also present.