The Sun.
London, England, 1855-11-30 00:00:00

Spirit of the Public Journals.

(From tke Times of this day.)
How a great monarch may visit a great country and
leave behind no deeper traces of his footsteps than if he
walked on water—how pomps and ceremonies may fade
and leave no more permanent impress on the mind than
they do on the eye—was well exemplified in the visit
which, eleven years ago, the Emperor Nicholas of Russia
paid to the Court of Victoria. There was no lack of
courtesy and hospitality, or of those compliments and
urbanities which befitted the high estate of the host and
the guest ; but the Emperor ;Ame, and the Emperor
went, and left nothing behind him except certain dona-
ticns to our haritable institutions, and a demonstration
that the English pecple could look upon the man whose
policy they most abhorred, and, remembering that he
was a, stranger in the land, forbear from any expression
of feeling which might compromise the national charac-
ter for hospitality. The result could not have been
otherwise. The Emperor of Russia came, the type of
despotism, of aggression, of barbarism, to visit the land
of freedom and commerce and of progress—the two
things looked each other in the face and naturally re-
coiled from each other's presence. It was a case of im-
perfect synniatby, or rather of no sympathy at all ;
we parted hollow friends, to meet again as mortal
enemies.

How different is the visit which the King of Sardinia
comes this day to pay to the Court of Queen Victoria !
In significance, in hope and promise, this interview as
far transcends the corning of the Emperor of Russia as
Russia in breadth of territory and multitude of people
exceeds what is, as yet, the little kingdom of Piedmont.
It is true that Victor Emmanuel does not approach our
shores like the great Emperor of Russia, decked with
the spoils of Poland, or crowned with the inglorious
laurels of his triumph over Turkey ; but the King
of Sardinia is what Nicholas, with all his armies and
all his conquests, never was a tried and valiant
soldier, who confronted death in every shape on the
bloody and disastrous day of Novara, and in the midst
of treason, defeat, and despair upheld and added lustre
to the ancient reputation of the valiant House of Savoy.
No sooner had the reins of Government passed into his
skilful and moderate hands than the destiny of Pied-
mont underwent a complete and most gratifying change.
A. peace far more favourable than could have been ex-
pected under the circumstances of the times was ob-
tained from Austria, and from that moment, as if rein-
vigorated by the gallant blood that had been shed, Sar-
dinian liberty grew and flourished. Treason was punished
with becoming severity, and those democratic influences
which had urged on the nation to the final catastrophe
were repressed and brought within the control of law
and policy. Schooled by the teaching of a salutary ad-
versity, the nation awoke from its dream, and turned
itself, under the able guidance of its King, to the con-
solidation of its institutions and the development of its
material resources. It is difficult to overstate the claims
to our respect and admiration of a young Prince who,
standing on the tottering and shattered throne of his
ancestors, disdained to support his power by the aid
which the Church of Rome so readily affords to every
would-be despot, or by the countenance which the de-
spotic Powers would willingly have afforded in exchange
for the degradation of his people. Casting aside these
idols of vulgar minds, the spiritual and temporal despo-
tisms that surrounded him, Victor Emmanuel sought in
the spirit of hie own people and the resources of his own
simple and manly character for strength in the hour of
trial, and he found it. With unlimited power within
his grasp, he had the wisdom to see that his own true in-
terests and these of his peop'erequired that he should forego
it, and with ever temptation to transgress the limits as-
signed to him, Victor Emmanuel has carefully bounded
himself within the duties and functions of a constitu-
tional monarch. Content with the moral influence which
his character, his talents, and his position secured him,
he has given the free and representative institutions of
his kingdom fair play, and in so doing has conferred
upon it a far more important and durable service than
the most brilliant personal administration could have
bestowed. A benevolent and able despot might, indeed,
hare developed her material resources, and maintained
her position in the face of foreign nations, but Victor
Emmanuel has been teaching Piedmont to do these
things for herself. Even tried by the material test, how-
ever, his administration has been eminently successful.
The enormous railway works of Piedmont are alike hon-
ourable to her enterprise and the skill of her engineers,
and the improvements of her capital—the results of free
trade, good government, and national spirit—may also
vie-with those of Paris itself. While Austria lies grovel-
ling in the dust before the superannuated pageant of a
worn-out and degraded Papacy, Piedmont, under the
guidance of her King, has known how to vindicate the
honour of her Government and the independence of the
national church. The insolent Archbishop of Turin,
who dared to set the authority of the Pope over that of
the Monarch, has been driven into exile, the land has
ov eals dis-
tinguished been cleared of thousands of lazy monks and friars, and
the King of Sardinia comes to the shores of heretic
the Britain
soldier ea bearing
the
eocnr
crown
of brow o not only the
thbeutlu ther e
the
Sovereign,
sucho solemn the carefuln a
censure, s tud student
even,
v
to of
His-
tory
must
regard honour—for
it—of
the
we believe, the excommunication, of the Church of
Rome.
With the same clear comprehension of his duties
and his interests, he alone of all the Princes of Europe
has not scrupled to cast in his lot with the Western
Powers against Russia,
in whom he recognises the
natural enemy of that liberty on which he has chosen to
rest his throne. Formidable as Russia may be to her
neighbours, we do not believe they regard her with a
dread equal to that with which the Princes of oppressed
Tuscany, Rome, and
rulers of Lombardy, Venice,
Italy regard the King of Sardinia. The people and the
Naples—the first with hope and admiration, the second
with terror and hatred—agree in seeing in him the man
whom they hope and fear—the personification of Italian
freedom and Italian unity. It would seem to be his mis-
sion, not by violence or intrigae, but by the force of hls
example, the admiration for his success, and the national
pride in his well-earned fame, to consolidate the Italian
nation, and to deliver it from the frantic exce-ses of
anarchists and Socialists on the one band, and the icy
repression of tyranny and theocracy on the other. Such
is the Prince who comes among us to-day, brave in
battle, wise in council, constant in adversi having
ordeal of domestio losses and public cares, and surely
been tried above the erdinary lot of man inty,fiery
the fie
worthy, if ever man was, of the heartiest sympathy and
the friendliest welcome of a free and enlightened people.

THE WESTMINSTER PLAY.—The play this year will
be the Phormio of Terence, and the days fixed for its
perforeiaace are the Mb, 13th, and nth of December.

LA W INTELLIGENCE.—Nov. 29.

QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Before Lord Campbell and a Special Jury.)

[A. portion of the following appeared in our firat
edition yesterday.]

DEPOSIT AND GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY V.
ATEE, JUN.

This was an action brought by the above company to
recover of the defendant, a solicitor, carrying on businees
at Bristol, the sum of 2001., and interest for desposit
call, and interest on 200 shares in the above company.
The defendant, amongst other pleas, pleaded fraud on
the part of the company.
Mr. Sergeant Ghee and Mr. Baddely were for the
plaintiff, and Mr. M. Smith, Q.C., and Mr. Phipson for
the defendant.

Mr. Sergeant Shee, in stating the case to the jury,
said this company was completely registered under the
provisions of the act, in 1852, and the action was
brought to recover 2001., with interest thereon, in re-
spect of shares in this company, applied for by the defen-
dant, and allotted to him by the company in April, 1854.
In consequence of that allotment the defendant became
liable for 10s. deposit on each share, but which had
never been paid. In July, 1854, he wrote to the secre-
tary of the company, stating it was inconvenient for him
then to take the shares, btuy he signed the deed of settle-
ment on the 9th of August. In November the direc-
tors made a call of 10s. per share on all shares issued,
but the defendant had refused to pay either the deposit
or call, and the present action was brought to recover
those amounts with interest thereon.

Evidence was then given of the registration of the
deed of settlement, and the defendant's name being re-
gistered on the 9th August, 1855.
Mr. Doyle, the secretary, and Mr. Knox, the ac-
countant, produced the documentary evidence relative
to the application and allotment of the shares, and the
resolution of the directors ordering a tail of 10s. per
share.

Mr.. Smith said the defence to this action was, that the
defendant, on agreeing to take these shares, was de-
ceived in the grossest manner respecting the actual state
of the company by the agents of the company and the
directors. The directors were desirous of obtaining an
office at Bristol, to establish an agency there, and the
defendant having chambers to let, situate in Bridge-
street, Mr. Thomas, the agent, applied to him for them,
and he became the landlord of the company at Bristol.
It would appear that the company was projected in
1851 by a person named Howden, who was thrown out
of the concern, and in 1852 the certificate of complete
registration was obtained. Before that it was repre-
sented there were 5,034 shares subscribed; but, on inves-
tigation, it was found a great number of the persons
named as shareholders were insolvent, and others in-
fants, children of theofficers of the company. The society
commenced business, and at the time when the defendant
was induced to take shares the company was in an in-
solvent state, the receipts of all kinds being insufficient
to meet the expenses. By the powers of the deed, the
original capital was to be 100,0001. in 20,000 shares of
51. each, with permission to increase the capital as re-
quired. Capital being required, the company, in order
to raise it, said it was necessary to create new capital,
in order to increase their loan business ; but so far from
that being the fact, the money was revered to clear the
company from its difficulties ; and Mr. Thomas, the
Bristol agent, applied to the defendant to become a
shareholder, representing to him that the company was
a first-rate one, that the directors were men of wealth
and responsibility, and that the shares were all paid up
in full, and wished him to take 400 shares. He (the
learned counsel) should produce before them in evidence
the former manager (Mr. Bevan), now undergoing sen-
tence fur embezzlement, who would prove that the
society, at this time, was in a bad state; notwithstand-
ing, he wrote to Mr. Thomas, desiring him to stick to
his friend and get him to take shares, because the com•
pany wanted money, and that if he got him to take
shares he would give him a check for 50/., instead of
paying him 201. commission, which would be a very
pretty Christmas-box for him. He begged him not to
fail, and to stick to him. Ultimately the defendant ap-
plied for 200 shares, and after that Bevan went down
to Bristol, saw the defendant, and reiterated to the de-
fendant what Thomas had previously stated ' with
reference to the flourishing state of the society. The
learned gentleman then referred to a printed report
issued by the company, stating the capital of 100,000/.
to be fully paid up, and that the shares were held by
most respectable persons. He also referred to a
report of a Committee of Directors, drawn up in
the handwriting of Lord Drumlanrig, appointed to
investigate into the affairs of the company, which
stated the existing difficulties of the company arose
from three causes :—First, that it was a mistake in the
first instance in limiting the subscribed deposit to
10,0001., which ought to have been 20,0001. ; secondly,
that it was unfortunate there was no person in the di-
rectory experienced in the insurance business, and that
consequently the expenditure had been larger in the
management of the concern than it ought to have been.
If 10,0001. were raised, with 2,3001. money out on loan,
it would clear the company, who owed their bankers
6,5001., and had other liabilities amounting to 12,0001.,
and that each director should increase his stake 1,000
shares. The report further alluded to the bankers re-
quiring a material guarantee for the debt owing to them
by the filling up of the share list. The position of the
directors was critical, but by proper management they
might be saved from gettting into a worse position.
After some further remarks on the financial state of the
company, he called

Mr. John Ayre, jean., who deposed that he took the
shares, and signed the deed, from the representations of
Mr. Bevan and Mr. Thomas of the flourishing state of
the society and the responsibility of the directors. When
he afterwards found from these persons the true nature
of the society, he repudiated his engagement. He never
had any scrip, nor received any profits. (Laughter.)
Mr. C. W. Bevan, the late manager, deponed that he
was at present undergoing a sentence of 18 months' im-
prisonment, for embezzlement, at the prosecution of the
company. The letter referred to, written to Mr.
Thomas, was in his handwriting. What he told Mr.
Ayre, relative to the stability of the directors and the
flourishing state of the society, was untrue. Many of
them were not first-rate men, nor had they paid up all
on their 500 shares. Many of the persons who
signed the deed were not respcnsible men. 5,000
shares had been signed for by " stags," on the payment
of 6d. per share. (Laughter.) One of these stags signed
his name twice, once in full, and the other abbreviated.
Some of the names inthe deed were those of persons under
age. There were only from 8,000 to 9,000 shares
paid on at the time to which he alluded. On one occa-
sion the directors paid back the money paid on 1,000
shares, in consequence of a quarrel between this person,
and Mr. Morgan, and the Board. Mr. Princeps was
stated to be an East India merchant, but he was known
as a "guinea man ;" that was a person who was on boards,
and was paid a guinea forsuch attendance. In April, 1854,
the company owed 15,0001., including money borrowed to
lend again ; the only money available at that time was
5001. cash at their bankers, and the money lent ; there
was no vested property, as stated in one of the financial
statements, and which had been produced. The balance
sheet was made up to meet the public eye. There was,
however, at the time, money in agents' hands. The
report of the committee of directors, in Lord Drumlan-
rig's handwriting, but not signed, witness found after
he left the company, amongst his papers. He did not
purloin it, as bad been represented.
Mr. Thomas, the Bristol agent, corrob&rated the
evidence relative to the representations made to Mr.
Ayre as to the flourishing 'state of the company. He
wrote in a letter to the company that Mr. Ayre bad a
notion he should become a director, and had alluded to
the expenses of the company being great. He supposed
his attention must have been called to the expenses.
The directory referred to a Bristol board to be estab-
lished.

By Lord Campbell—He believed Bevan was acting
under the authority of the board, notwithstanding the
strange manner in which he wrote him, using the terms
" stick to him," "no humbug," &c. Witness never re-
ceived his 501.
This was the defendant's case.
Mr. Sergeant Shee then called evidence to rebut Be-
van's statements relative to the state of the company.
The learned judge having gone through the evidence,
The jury retired, and, on returning into court, deli-
vered a verdict for the plaintiffs.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.—Nov. 29.

OLD COURT.
(Before the Lord Chief Baron.)
[A. portion of the following appeared in onr first
edition yesterday.]
CHARGE OF MURDER.—DanieI Lorders, 38, labourer,
was indicted for the wilful murder of his wife, Catherine
Lorden.

The prisoner was also charged with the like offence
upon the coroner's inquisiticn.
Mr. Bodkin. and Mr. Clarke conducted the prosecu-
tion. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Parry.
It appeared from the opening statement of the learned
counsel for the prosecution that the prisoner bad for-
merly been a weaver, but had been unable to sup-
port himself by that occupation since Christmas last,
and from that time he had maintained himself
and his family by working as a labourer at the
docks. The prisoner, his wife, a daughter 18 years old,
and two sons, aged respectively 12 and 14 years, occu-
pied a single room in a house in Parliament-court,
near the Artillery-ground, and it appeared they were
in very distressed circumstances, and that on the even-
ing of the 17th September a raffle was to take place
at a public-house in the neighbourhood, out of which
the prisoner and hie family were to receive some
benefit. The prisoner, his wife, his daughter, some
other of his relations, and a man named Kingston,
were at this raffle, and it appeared that the prisoner
*as very much intoxicated, and during the evening
a quarrel took place between him and same of his
wife's relations, and the prisoner was turned out
of the room with considerable violence. The party left
the public-house soon after 12 o'clock at night, and it
appeared that Kingston accompanied the deceased
and her daughter to their house, and they bad a pot
of beer at the door. At this time the prisoner came
home, and h. e appeared to be very angry at finding King-
ston with his wife, and he went into his own room and
threw a piece of wood out of the window, which struck
Kingston, who challenged the deceased to fight, and he
came down stairs and they had a scuffle together, and
both fell to the ground, The prisoner, afterthis,went
again into his own house, and it appeared that his con-
duct was so violent that the deceased and his daughter
were afraid to go into their own room, and remained on
the staircase until the morning, when the two eons went
out to their work. The daughter subsequently went
away, and it appeared that the unhappy deceased
shdrtly afterwards went into the room where the
priar was, and almost immocliately, afterwards

there were the sounds of a scuffls, and the
deceased was heard several times to striek out mar
(11.. r. After this had occurred soinu lodgers in the bowie
heard the deceased leave her room and go down stairs,
and she was followed by the prisoner, and in a short time
the cries of murder were repeated, and the prisoner waa
then heard to leave the house. Very soon after this the
deceased woman was seen in a sitting posture upon the
landing of the staircase, and at first it would seem that
she was thought to be asleep, but it was eventually dis-
covered that she bad received a stab or wound in
the throat, and that she was quite dead. It appeared that
immediately after the fatal occurrence bad taken place
the prisoner proceeded to the police stati,n and said that
he had come to surrender himself for killing his wife,
and a constable was sent with him to his residence, and
the prisoner then handed to the constable the knife with
which the fatal wound had been inflicted. The prisoner
subsequently made another statement in which he ad-
mitted that he bad stabbed his wife.

The above facts were established by the evidence of
numerous witnesses, but in the course of the cross-exami-
nation by Mr. Parry it was elicited that the accused
was a woman of most drunken habits, and that she was
in the habit of constantly getting drunk and coming
home late at night, and on these occasions it was her
custom to behave with great violence to the prisoner,
and he had on several occasions left the house to escape
from her. It also appeared that there was a suspicion
that the deceased was on too intimate terms with
Kingston, and that she had admitted that she had
stayed out all night with him at a coffee shop. It
also appeared that the prisoner was not addicted to
habits of intoxication, but that he was a very hard-
working, industrious man, and that during the time he
was engaged as a weaver he was frequently employed
from 10 in the morning till 12 at night to endeavour to
support his family. It also appeared that upon one oc-
casion during a paroxysm of fury the deceased had bitten
the prisoner on the leg, and he was still suffering from
the injury be received upon the occasion.
Mr. Parry made an eloquent address to the jury on
behalf of the prisoner, and he urged that although there
was no doubt that the prisoner had caused the death of
his wife, yet that, under the circumstances of the case
they would be justified in acquitting him of the crime of
wilful murder, and in finding him guilty only of the
lesser offense of manslaughter.

The Chief Baron having summed up the jury returned
a verdict of guilty, recommending the prisoner to
mercy, upon account of his previous quiet character.
The Lord Chief Baron then passed sentence of death,
telling the prisoner not to entertain any hopes of his
life being spared.