Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-08-26 00:00:00

had many and very narrow escapes from being
Burked. It now only awaits the Royal Assent
to become the law of the land. Since its intro-
duction by the Lord CHANCELLOR, it has
undergone several alterations. Taken as a
whole, we believe it will confer many
salutary advantages upon the entire community.
We must here do the Government the credit
of saying that they deserve the best thanks of
the country for the spirit and determination they
displayed with regard to this particular Act.
Although the Savings' Bank question was a
matter which interested a large class or the
community, it has been placed among the
dropped measures. The Bank Charter, and the
Hudson's Bay Company's Charter were referred
to Select Committees, but without any profitable
result. The question of Education was left un-
touched, as well as several other matters of equal
interest to the people. The Opposition was
quite tame, and although Mr. DISRAELI made a
set motion on the affairs of India, he was
defeated in his object—indirect censure of the
Government for their conduct in regard to
the emeute. The Persian expedition was noticed,
but nothing tangible resulted from the debate.
These and other questions connected with the
foreign policy, although discussed, did not
induce any departure from the established policy
of the Government.

Although mooted on more than one of the
election hustings, the Church Rates are left over
until next session. Bills for Regulating the
sale of poison, and punishing the traffic in
obscene publications, are among the new enact-
ments which have become law. In the financial
department, we have to observe that the House
of Commons has been liberal to the Princess
Royal, in granting her a marriage dowry of
70,000/. The usual supplies were voted without
much debate, and taxation confirmed upon its
former basis. These are about the chief items
of legislation, if we except the Mersey Conser-
vancy Bill, which received the royal assent last
night. Of this measure and its results we have
already spoken frequently. A short time may
serve to convince its promoters that they have
gained but little by the changes which they
have been so instrumental in producing.
The experience of the past session, short though
it be, has convinced us that the present opposi-
tion are weak and disunited, and that until fresh
blood is infused into it, Ministers will take
matters easy, and legislate for the people as they
please. Everything considered, the electors of
the United Kingdom have as yet little cause to
feel proud of the present parliament, seeing the
measures of good and necessary reform have been
so few in number, and poor in quality.

THE vindication of the law should never par-
take of harshness and severity. By doing so,
the ends of justice are oftentimes defeated, and
the security and safety of society imperilled.
Again, the law, when it acquits a prisoner of any
felonious charge, virtually pronounces him inno-
cent, and admits him or her, de novo, to all the
rights and privileges of an unblemished citizen.
Under such circumstances, it is not only impo-
litic, but positively unfair, to hunt down an
accused delinquent after the jury returns a ver-
dict cf not guilty. We have been led to make
these remarks on hearing that JAMES SPOLLEN,
he of whom we wrote last week—the man
accused, but acquitted of the murder of Mr.
LITTLE, at Dublin—has been re-arrested and
committed to gaol, for the robbery of 5/. and
upwards, the moneys belonging to the Midland
and Great Western Railway Company.

What the nature of the fresh evidence is
whereon the new charge is to be sustained we
have not yet learned. New testimony there must
be else the case will fail; for if the former wit-
nesses are to be called, there must be a verdict
of acquittal. The great object of the former
prosecution was to connect SPOLLEN with the
money stolen from Mr. LITTLE'S office, and
thereby prove him guilty of the murder. This
the Crown failed to do, and hence the jury's
verdict of " Not guilty." It is acknowledged that
they who robbed Mr. LITTLE were cognisant of
and privy to the murder in question. If, then,
the robbery with which SPOLLEN is now charged
should lead to a conviction, what can we think
of the capabilities of the Irish law officers of the
Crown ? Simply that they have blundered from
first to last in this affair, and now seek
to wreak out a spirit of revenge upon the
unfortunate man.

Because his counsel has managed to clear him
of the capital offence, they now hunt him from
post to pillar, prefer a fresh charge—robbery--
against him, and once more incarcerate him in
one of the Dublin bridewells until the next
Commission, when he must go through the
ordeal of another trial, less serious in its results
should conviction follow, but of sufficient
magnitude to deprive him of liberty for life, and
keep him working as a galley slave, in chains,
during the remainder of his days. We are no
sympathisers of SPOLLEN ;. nor do we agree with
the verdict which the jury awarded in the
murder case. They erred on the side of mercy,
and thereby deprived the gallows of a full-fledged
culprit. We regret that this was so ; but once
the jury acquitted him of the larger offence, we
hold it to be pure spite, and illegal petty male-
volence to arrest him on the minor charge—
robbery. Moreover, if such a principle is
recognised, there is a serious sapping of the
foundations of the liberty of the subject, The

ingenuity of Crown prosecutors can torment
from clay to day, month to month, aye, and