The Sun.
London, England, 1864-01-15 00:00:00

RIFLE CONFERENCE.

The third and concluding meeting of this conference was
held yesterday, and was well attended. Lieut.-Col. Halford
(Leicestershire Wolunteers) presided, in place of the Duke
of Wellington, who was prevented by an imperative engage-
ment from attending. Mr. Rigby, of the Dublin Rifle Club,
read a paper upon the pro'er conditions of rifle matches.
Mr. Melford, of Clifton, next read a paper upon the same
subject, in which he condemned the proposal to handicap
men as unjust and injurious. If all were brought down to
a dead level of mediocrity, the final result would be left en-
tirely to chance, and a deterioration in the general quality
of rifle shooting would follow the practical exclusion of the
best men from matches. The handicapping of weapons, as
'the Enfield against the small bore, was also objectionable,
if not impossible. Mr. Parsons (Hon. Artillery Company)
followed with a paper, in which he suggested an arrange-
ment of prizes into three classes for various degrees of skill
in the competitors. Capt. Tyrrell deprecated handicapping
of either men or weapons, but recommended that prizes
should be less in amount and greater in number. As to the
nature of the prizes
.he believed a majority of the competi-
tors would prefer hard cash, but the best plan would Le to
give either money or an object of equal value, as the win-
ner might elect. Mr. Thornby thought that handicapping
would be a mistake. Capt. M'Ciregor read a letter from
Lord Dude, in which an opinion was expressed that the
small-bore weapon now used in matches was useless as a
warlike weapon. Capt. M'Gregor proposed a scheme for
dividing competitors at rifle matches into three classes, the
National Rifle Association to give to certain prizes the cha-
racter of first or second class. In the course of the general
discussion an unanimous opinion was expressed against any
system of handicapping, although one gentleman suggested
h at upon the ground of expediency, and to maintain the
financial success of title meetings, some modification of the
present system must be adopted. An increase in the num-
ber of prizes, and a diminution in their value, was also ad-
mitted to be desirable, £3O being regarded as the highest
sum that should be given at any ordinary meeting as one
prize. The question of telescopic and aperture sights evoked
much remark, and considerable diversity appeared to pre-
vail as to their relative merits, and to the propriety of their
being used at all. Col. Rutley and Mr. Collette, of the Ist
Middlesex Artillery, urged the claims of carbines as a
match weapon, the latter gentleman stating that with his
own ammunition the carbine made as good practice at short
ranges as the Enfield. Captain Page announced that the
National Rifle, Association intended giving a prize for
carbine shooting at Wimbledon this year. The chairman
having briefly summed up the results of the discussion, and
congratulated those present upon the success of the confer-
ence, which he was sure would be of great benefit, the pro-
ceedings were then brought to a close by a vote of thanks
to the Council of King's College and the contributors of the
various papers,

The entire basis of treaty arrangements in Europe would
be overthrown, if such an'excuss for the breach of a clear
and simple treaty could be admitted. Any Sovoreign,when
called upon to fulfil his engagements, might say, "My
reason for withdrawal from filch a treaty was, that I had
made another agreement with one of the parties thereto.
This other agreement has bean violated ; my treaty with
you is, therefore, null and void."
Her Majesty's Government Is convinced that the Court
of Dresden will understand that, if such a lineof agreement
wore admitted as valid, every existing treaty would beoosne
waste paper. I refrain from quoting cases in point, in
which such a light and inconsiderate mode of interpreting
treaties would prove seriously prejudicial to the German
powers themselves.

For the present, it may suffice her Majesty's Govern-
ment to declare that they would consider any departure from
the succession Protocol of 1852, on the part of those Powers
who had signed, or become parties to the said treaty, as
wholly incompatible with good faith.-.-I have, &c.,

(Signed) RVSSELL.
You are requested to leave a copy of this despatch with
Baron von Beast.

BARON VON BEUST TO COUNT VITZIIVM, SAXON MI-

NISTER IN LuNAON.
Dresden, Dec. 29.
Count,—Mr. Murray has just communicated to me a
despatch relating to the affairs of the Duchies of Schleswig
Holstein, of which I herewith subjoin a copy.
It will be easy for you to point out that Earl Russell's
despatch undertakes to establish an opinion in reference to
the validity of the London Protocol of May 8, 1852, which
was never entertained by the Royal Government; and I
presume that her Britannic Majesty's Chief Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs will consider it abortive to enter
iato a discussion on such grounds. The Royal Government
finds itself is presence of a question which has arisen in
consequence of the demise of his Majesty King Frederick
VIT. of Denmark, and been brought forward in the Federal
Diet, the organ of the German Confederation. The Am-
bassador of his deceased Majesty at the Diet presented his
credentials to be recognised as the representative of King
Christian I. in his asserted capacity as Duke of Holstein
and Lauenburg. At the same time the agnate claims of the
Prince cf Augustenburg to the said duchies were submitted
to the Federal Diet by the authorised Bavarian ambas-
sador.

The Royal Goveinment on its part wilt pursue no other
course than that dictated by justice. Having at the Federal
Diet voted in favour of measures which they considered es-
sential to ensure the complete carrying out of its resolutions
it entered upon the study of the succession question, and
will give its vote in accordance with the result of this exa-
minati ,n.

As Earl Russell has been pleased to call our attention to
the protocol of May 8,1852, it may not be useless to make a
few observations on that subject.

The act in question, which was intended to establish a
new line of succession in Denmark, has been approved and
confirmed by the Danish Reichstag, but in order to make it
valid, and applicable to the German Duchies, it was neces-
sary to obtain the consent of the representative of the agnate
line of succession, then that of the States, and finally that
of the German Federal Diet.

Not one of these conditions has been fulfilled. It is conse •
quently unnecessary for the Diet, in order to dispute the
validity of the treaty of May 8, 1852, relative to the► duchies,
to take into consideration its complaints against Deniaark
for the violation during many years by that Power of the
obligations she had undertaken towards Germany.
When invited by the Powers signing the London proto •
col to become a party thereto, the Royal Government did
not withhold theirconsent—notparticipation—to a combi-
nation which, if Denmark had faithfully fulfilled her en-
gagements towards Germany, might have succeeded; for at
that time there was a prospect of obtaining the consent of
all parties concerned, which was indispensable to render the
treaty effectual. An attempt was not even made to secure
this participation, because it was clear that in face of the
violation by the Danish Government of its obligations, it
was impossible to arrive at such a result. In this manner
the treaty was left incomplete, and inapplicable in an essen-
tial part. The Powers signing the treaty cannot surely,
therefore, reproach the Federal Diet or its members.
The Royal Government, as the British Cabinet will
doubtless recollect, has already on a former occasion dis-
tinctly declared that it was not their intention to anticipate
the resolutions which the Confederation, through the organ
of the Federal Diet, might find it advisable to arrive at. The
case which was foreseen at that time has presented itself
to-day, and the Royal Government make use of the liberty
which they wisely reserved.
I venture to hope that this explanation of the true state
of affairs will give Earl Russell a just appreciation of our
conduct, as his well-known sense of right and justice leads
us to expect. • It is in fact enough to possess honourable in-
tentions to acknowledge that the Royal Government never
thought of departing therefrom.
you will have the goodness, Count, to read this despatch
to the Chief Seoretary for Foreign Affairs, and leave with
him a oopy of the same.
(Signed) BEUST.
The foregoing was sent to Earl Russell by Count
Vitzthum, accompanied by the following memo-
randum _

COUNT VITZTEUX TO EARL RUSSELL.
Hobart-place, Jan. 4.
I wrote to your lordship this morning to request the
honour of an interview, bat as you will scarcely be able to
see me to-morrow before the Cabinet Council, at which I
hear
liberty of g
Holsteinnd you questiont4 the subjoined copy of a despatch which
reached me this morning. It is the reply
of Baron von
sen
Beust to your lordship's despatch of the 17th December.
As you will doubtless remember, we have never used the
arguments combated by you in the document referred to,
and have at all. times. .maintained that the rights of the
German Duchies are established on a strong and sere foun-
dation. One principal reasen..for not voting with the ma -
jorily at the sitting of the Diet on the 7th December was
owing, perhaps, to ear having been unable to discover any
formal connection bet seen the Danish obligations of 1851
and the treaties of 1852, although he did not wish to deny
the existence of a moral connection. We have not said, and
do not say, "The Treaty of 1862 is null and void so long as
Denmark has not fulfilled her engagements of 1851." We
say rather, merely— A treaty has been concluded in which
certain arrangements for the future have been prepared.
But the event for which the said treaty made arrangements
has not occurred. King Frederick -VII. is certainly deceased
without issue ; he is also deceased without being able to
introduce legally and rightfully into the German portion of
h
ry succession which the
ie
would have been bound to maintain had the above-mentioned
arrangements really thoroughly been carried out. As this
leBresd
latter is not the case, the treaty of itself has not attained per-
siigan Patasoresssio to possessions
the the
treaty new
of h
2 i
hadta in view, and which they
fection on account of the non .accomplishment of three ma-
terial preliminary conditions.
1. The consent of the collective agnates.
2. The consent of the estates of Schleswig and Holstein.
3. The consent of the German Confederation.

German history affords an instance of striking similitude.
I mean the so-called "Pragmatic Sanction." Karl VI.,
failing male issue, desired to alter the existing order of
succession in favour of his daughter. He concluded treaties
with all the principal Powers. Did these treaties satisfy
him ? No. He held it for right and wise to lay the Prag-
matic Sanction before the Estates and Provincial Assemblies
of his different territories, and they accepted it. The conse-
quence of this was, that when at a later period foreign
Powers sought to rob Maria Theresa of ccrtain portions of
her inheriianee the people rose to defend the rights of the
Empress.
,c Had Frederick VII. acted in the present case with the
same wialcm as Karl VI., and had the peopl.3 of Schliswig
declared themselves in favour of
and Christian Holstein
I x ~ openlya
s di
d d
t hee cAustrians and Hungarians at that
time for the Empress, are you of opinion that Gei'many
would have stepped in and questioned the legality of the
succession which the Treaty of London sought to arrange ?
I confidently hope your lordship will pardon these few

" That the visiting justices of each prison be requested
to inquire and report to the Court on the next county day
the number of Roman Catholic prisoners that have passed
through each prison during the last 12 months, the number
of Roman Catholic prisoners then in each prison, and the
number of Roman Catholic prisoners in each prison who have
been visited by a priest during the preceding three months."
He said that, in making this motion, it was necessary that
he should explain why he brought it forward after the de-
cision which had been come to by the last Court. At that
court a motion was submitted to them which rather took
them by surprise. For want of authentic information they
were not prepared to pronounce an opinion on the question
laid before them. He thought it desirable that they should
approach the subject of the Prison Ministers Aot with the
facts necessary to a right judgment in their possession, and
therefore he had given notice of a motion for obtaining from
the visiting justices the statistical information referred to in
his resolution. The Prison Ministers Act contained two
important provisions, the first of which evidently contem-
plated that where there was a large number of prisoners
differing from the Established Church, a minister of their
own faith should be appointed and paid to attend them ;
and the second contemplated the admission of such
a minister to visit them, whether the requested it or not,
in cases where the number of such prisoners was few, and
where the expense of engaging a chaplain for them might
not be justified. The real question to be considered in their
county, as he took it, would arise under the first of those
two provisions. The main question—viz., whether it was
desirable to appoint a paid minister of any persuasion other
than that of the Established Church—ought, however, to be
deferred until they knew officially what was the precise
number of Roman Catholic prisoners who passed through
the gaols of Middlesex. When the proper time arrived, if the
statistics for which he asked were such as he anticipated
they would be, he would be prepared to state the reasons
why he thought the Court should carry out the provisions
of the Act. Another notice of motion on this subject had
been given by Mr. Turner, the first part of which closely
resembled his own, but it went on to suggest that the visit-
ing justices should also be asked to report their opinion as to
the expediency of appointing a Roman Catholic chaplain in
accordance with the new Act. Now, he objected entirely to
anything like an invitation of an expression of opinion from
any section of the Court. Mr. Cox being here called to
order for anticipating the discussion of a motion not yet re-
gularly before them, concluded by moving his resolution for
returns.

Mr. T. TURNER said it might be convenient if he now
moved his resolution by way of amendment, instead of
troubling the court with two discussions on the mule sub-
jeer. He was quite ready to adopt Mr. Cox's motion as far
as it went, but he thought they ought to go further. Mr.
Cox was opposed to inviting any expression of opinion from
the visiting justices of their prisons; but it certainly had
been usual, when any measure was suggested affecting the
administration of any particular institution, to invite from
those magistrates, who had special charge of that institu-
tion, not only a statement of those facts which were impor-
tant for the information of the Court, but also an expression
of opinion resulting from their own experience and intimate
knowledge of all the details of the case, Moreover, even
when the Court had before them the opinion of the commit-
tee, they could throw it aside if they did not approve it;
and certainly it could do no possible harm. His present
motion was in substance the same as he had moved by way
of amendment when that question was last before the Court.
Some members might not be aware of the different alter-
natives which the Act presented for their consideration.
They were not limited to the simple course of appointing a
minister of the Roman Catholic persuasion to attend the
prisoners of that Church in their houses of correction and
paying him a salary. It was also competent for them to
leave the visiting justices of each prison to exercise the per-
missive power vested in them by the Act of inviting, or not
refusing, the voluntary services of any Roman Catholic
priest who might offer them, reserving the matter of his
remuneration for future consideration. 110°, the Court
refused, on the last county day, specially to a;noint a
Roman Catholic chaplain, but they still might eelopt the
second alternative be bad just mentioned. He was him-
self rather is favour of that course, much as bit by bit re-
form had been derided. Without, therefore, interfering
with their previews decision the Court might accede to his
motion, unless, indeed, they were perfectly satisfied with
the working of the present system, and thought nothing at
all should be done under the new Act. rho Court would,
he believed, be slovi entirely to disregard on that subject a
decision of the Leislature concurred in by the leading men
of all parties. But, not to rest his case on the deference
due to the Legislature, reasonable as he thought that
deference, let him remind them of one or two facts as
to the state of Coldbath-fields Prison, with which, as
chairman of the visiting justices, he was personally
acquainted. There were upwards of 1,800 prisoners there
at their last Friday's meeting, and of that number 380
were Roman Catholics. How many of those 380 would the
Court suppose had been visited by a minister of their own
persuasion during the preceding weak ? Why, only eight I
and small as that number was, he believed it was twice the
ordinary weekly average. There were not more, he believed,
than four Roman Catholic prisoners per week who made a
special request to see a minister of their own Church. Was
that a satisfactory state of things P What became of the
remaining 372? Did they, through the magical effect of
their incarceration, immediately become good members of
the Church of England, and, by attending the prison
chapel, renounce their connexion with their own creed ?
Nobody could conclude anything of the kind. The great
mass cf them passed through their prison life without any
religious exercises whatever. Roman Catholic prisoners
were now allowed to be visited by their priests, provided
they specially requested it, but not etherwise. On what
grounds was that permitted ? Not on the ground of fa-
vour duo to good conduct, because, be the prisoner's con-
duct bad or good, his request was equally granted or
equally retused, The ground was either that they would
not deny him a right—the right of having religious
ministration in conformity with his own faith—or else
that they allowed it for purposes of reformation. If they
granted it because nobody confined in a prison ahould be
subjected to a religious disability from which he was exempt
outside its walls, it surely ought to be extended to those
who did not make a special request equally with those who
did. Moreover, if it was granted for purposes of reforma-
tion
to those who made a special request, clearly those
who made no such request required that reformatory in-
fluence most of all. (Hear.) On principle, then, the pre-
sent system could not be defended, and nobody acquainted
with the state of crime in the country could regard its
practical working as any more satisfactory. He trusted,
therefore, that the Court would adopt his amendment, viz. :
" That it be referred to the Committee of the Visiting
Justices of the three county prisons to inquire and report
to the Court what numbers of Roman Catholic prisoners
have been committed to each prison (stating separately the
numbers of adults and juveniles of each sex), during each
of the three years ending respectively, Michaelmas, 1861,
Michaelmas, 1862, and Michaelmas, 1863, and also what are
the present numbers of such prisoners within the same pri-
sons respectively. And that such committee do report
further whether, having regard to the numbers of the Roman
Catholic prisoners within the aforesaid prisons respectively,
and to the circumstances of each prison, it is in their opinion
advisable that a minister of the Roman Catholic Church
should be appointed by the Court, under the provisions of
the 'Prison Ministers Act, 1863,' to attend on the prisoners
belonging to that Church, at each or either of the prisons ;
or whether it appears to them preferable for the Court to
leave it to the visiting justices of each prison to act, if they
think fit, upon the authority vested in them by the said act
(in the event of no such nomination as aforesaid being made)
to permit the visits of a Roman Catholic minister to pri-
soners belonging to that Church, without any special re-
quest for such visits on the part of the prisoners themselves;
or whether, lastly, they are of opinion that it will be fit and
proper to leave the ministrations to Roman Catholic pH-
toners, in each or either of such prisons, on their present
footing. And that such committee be requested, in the
event of their recommending the nomination by the Court
of ministers of the Roman Catholic Church to each or either
of the said prisons, to state whether any and what annual
or other sums ought, in their opinion, to be awarded to
such ministers respectively in remuneration for their ser-
vices. And that the committee be requested to state to the
Court the grounds upon which their recommendations or
opinions upon the abavo points respectively shall have beeu
fouuded."

Mr. BAKER Seconded the amendment.
Lord EBURY thought that, instead of• extending to the
wide question opened by the amendment, the discussion
ought, if possible, to be confined to Mr. Cox's simple pro
position—viz., that they should be furnished with fuller in-
formation. Very recently the Court came to a decision ad-
verse to the appointment of a Roman Catholic minister in
accordance with the act of. Parliament; and the avowed
object of Mr. Turner's amendment was to induce them to
reverse that decision. He sincerely hoped that that deci-
eion would be reversed; but the mode of attaining that end
most congenial to the Court would be by now limiting their
action to a request for further information. The wain
question at issue was clearly one of proportion and degree,

depending upon the character and religious denominations
of tha inmates of their prisons; and if an interval were
allowed for members to obtain accurate returns on the
subject, ho thought the convenience as well as the de-
corum of the Couit would be much promoted.
Mr. LAWRIE said that although the question was disposed
of at their last meeting, it was disposed of avowedly on the
ground that they had not before them the statistics requi-
site to guide them to a right decision upon. it. They knew,
indeed, practically what the effect of those statistics would
be; but ttey had not yet that information in en official and
authentic shape. That deficiency Mr. Cox's resolution
would supply, end it would hereafter be 01/01 to him to found
a further motion upon the returns. Mr. Turner's proposal
to refer the main question to any section of the Court was
very objectionable. Matters of detail might very well be so
referred; but that was a question, not of detail, but of
principle, and as such it should be dealt wi-h by the Court
on their own responsibility. Would they or would they
not recognise the principle of the Prison Ministers Bill ?
He believed they ultimately would. It was their bounden
duty to do so. and if they did not they would virtually
abrogate the act of Parliament as far as that county was
concerned. (No.) That was his own individual opinion. The
adoption or rejection of the act should be discussed, after fair
notice, by the whole body of the magistrates, who ought not
to shrink from pronouncing a decision upon it ; and, if they
agreed to adopt it, then would be the time for referring to the
visiting justices points of detail as to salary, or the mode
of giving effect to that decision. Under the second section
of the act, the visiting justices had power to admit a Roman
Catholic minister to the prisons if they thought fit. If, in
a prison containing 1,800 prisons: s, they found 330 Protes-
tants, did anybody doubt that they would have a Protestant
chaplain ! Then, on the principle of doing as they would
be done by, it was their duty to have a Roman Catholic
chaplain for the 380 prisoners of that faith at Coldbath-
fields. They were required to do it by the Act. ("No.")
Practically, the Act was obligatory upon them. (" No ; it
is discretionary.") No doubt it was an injunction left to
their candour and honourable feeling by the Legislature.
because the circumstances of particular districts were so
various that one fixed uniform rule could not be made uni-
versally binding.. But the preamble of the Act expressly,
declared that the present system was defective and req4ed
amending and extending. They had no right, &At-to—rot '
up their own opinion that the present practice was sufficient
in opposition to the declared will of parliament. He did
not deal with that as a religious question, but as a question
of the respect due to an Act of Parliament. At the proper
time he should vote for the appointment of a stated minister
for the Roman Catholic prisoners. It was said that what
they did for prisoners of that persuasion they must do for
prisoners of all their denominations. No doubt, a single
soul was infinitely precious, but the Legislature had made
numbers the test in this matter ; cud, moreover, there were
no such broad distinctions between Dissenters and the
Church of England as made submission to the ministrations
of the latter a sin on the part of the former, as was the case
with Doman Catholics, Apprehensions of proselytism had
been expressed, but it did not lie in their mouths to talk
about proselytism when every one of the 380 Roman Catholic
prisoners referred to was liable every day to be called upon
by a Protestant chaplain, and might be compelled to receive
his ministrations (" No I")—not, indeed, in the chapel, but
in his cell.

Mr. Cox withdrew his motion in favour of the first para-
graph of the amendment, which then became the subsi antive
motion, Mr. Turner consenting to limit his proposal for
the present to a mere request for returns.
Mr. HALSWELL thought there was a practical difficulty
in the way of their agreeing to the resolution for returns.
At the Westminster House of Correction, for example, he
believed the particulars now asked for were not kapt on re-'
cord, and therefore could not be furnished.
Mr. Sergeant PAYNE hoped it would bo distinctly under-
stood that if the motion now proposed was agreed to the
hands of the Court would not thereby be in any way tied
when they came to discuss the question of principle here-
after.

Mr. Turner's motion for returns was then agreed to nenz.
con., with the addition of words suggested by Mr. Stanford,
to embrace the statistics of other denominations besides
Roman Catholics as far as they can be obtained.

Mr. LAAVILIE then gave notice that on next county day,
if the returns now ordered were produced, he intended to
move tbat, having regard to the number of Roman Caiholic
prisoners within the three prisons in that county, it is expe-
dient to appoint for each of such prisons a minister of that
church, at a reasonable remuneration, under the provisions
of the Prison Ministers Act.
Ad j

THE CITY REMEITERANCER,

---

Yesterday, at 2 o'clock, a special Court of Common Coun-
cil wat..held at Gaildhall, the Lord Mayor presiding, to
elect a mbrancer for the City of London, in the place
of Mr. Edwara
who resigned the office, which is
one of great antiquity
in the summer of last year, in consi-
,
h and advanced age, after a ser •
deration of declining heat,:.
vice in the corporation extena;:ig over half a century. Great
by the members of the
iderable emolument,
interest was taken in the ceremony'
corporation, the office being one of con,.
and there being as many as 11 candidates. By a recent vote
of the Common Council the salary, which until now has
fluctuated in amount, and which of late years hen averaged
£2,003, was fixed at £1,500 a year, with an annual allow-
ance of £4OO besides for office expenses.
The candidates, stating their names in alphabetical order,
were Mr. Brandon Woodthorpe, of Mill-hill, Barnes-com-
mon, barrister, and Registrar of the Lord Mayor's Court—
Mr. Henry Edwards Brown, of 8, Parliament-street,West-
minster, Parliamentary agent and solicitor—ldr. William
Corrie, 20, Leicester-square, barrister, and magistrate at
Bow-street police-court—Mr. James Crosby, 3, Church-
court, Old Jewry, solicitor—Mr. George Colwell Oke,
Queen's-road, Peckham, ass.stant-clerk to the Lord XillYur
—Mr. James Pearse Peachey, 3, New-square, Lincoln
inn, barrister—Mr. Henry Thomas Riley, M.A., 31, St.
Peter's-square, Hammersmith, barrister—Mr. Samuel
Spofforth, 12, Great George-street, Westminster, Parlia-
mentary agent and solicitor—Mr. Ed ward Walmisley, 26,
Abingdon-street, Westminster, Parliamentary agent and
solicitor—Mr. John R. L. Walmisley, 5, Victoria-street,
Westminster, Parliamentary agent and solicitor—and Mr.
John Samuel Wilde, 10, Sergeant's inn, Fieet-strect, bar-
rister and Parliamentary draughtsman and conveyancer.
On the motion of Mr. H, L. TAYLOR, seconded by Mr.
KEARNS, the Court first reduced the 11 candidates to four
by poll, then from four to two, and afterwards decided the
election by a third poll, which, in pursuance of a standing
order, was kept open one hour. By the first poll seven
of the candidates were eliminated--namely, Mr. Brown,
Mr, Oke, Mr. Peachey, Mr. Riley, Mr. Spofforth, Mr.
Edward Walmisley, and Mr. John Walmisley, and the
field of choice was narrowed to Mr. Corrie, who had 127
votes—Mr. Brandon, 111—Mr. Crosby, 84—and Mr. Wilde,
60. The second operation resulted in Mr. Crosby and Mr.
Wilde being struck off. The contest finally lay between
Mr. Corrie and Mr. Brandon, who by the second poll had
respectively 103 and 64 votes.
At the close of the poll the Lord Mayor stated that 100
votes had been recorded for Mr. Corrie, and 57 for Mr.
Brandon. He therefore declared the election to have fallen
upon Mr. Corrie.
The successful candidate did not enter into the competi-
tion until the eleventh hour. The Aldermen almost to a
man voted for him, as did the great majority of the Common
Council, ana the result of the election appeared to give
general satisfaction to the members of the Court. It may
be mentioned as a coincidence that Mr. Corrie polled pre-
cisely the same number of votes (100) when a few years ago
he was a candidate for the office of Judge of the Sheriffs'
Court of the Corporation, and was defeated by a majority of
one. Mr. Corrie was originally educated as a solicitor, but
afterwards studied for the Bar, to which he was called by
the Inner Temple in June, 1836. He practised for some
years before committees of the Houses of Lords and Com-
mons, in the Common Law Courts, and in patent cases in
the Court of Chancery. He was at one time Judge of the
now defunct Palace Court, in respect of which office, on the
abolition of the court, he was allowed a pension until he
became a police magistrate, when he was obliged t, re-
linquish it in consequence of holding an office under the
Crown. Of late years he has been chiefly known as one of
the stipendiary magistrates at the Bow-street Police-court.

A NEW COMEDIETTA, by Mr. Troughton, is
underlined at the Strand ; also A NEW FARCE by Mr.
Hancock.
No HOME complete without a WILCOX AND GIBBS'
SEWING-MACHINE. Simple, compact, efficient, durable, and
noiseless. Warranted to fulfil all the requirements of a
perfect family machine. Prospectus free on application at
No. 135, Regent-street, W.—[AnvT.]
[ADVERTISEMENT.)—Consumption, all nervous, bilious
liver, and stomach complaints, la every stage, are only ag-
gray sited and accelerated by drugs of every description, but
perfectly curable by Du Barry's health restoring Revalenta
Arabic.% Food, as proved by thousands of cases which had
been considered hopeless. We quote a few.—Cure No. 62,911.
Mlis Lange, 18 years of age, cured after the medical men had
abandoned all hopes of her recovery from the last stage of
pulmonary consumption, with fearful cough, expectoration„
exhaustion, spitting of blood, perspirations, hollow cheeks,
emaciated to a skeleton. She is now, thank God, a perfectly
healthy, blooming, fleshy girl.—N. Lange. Commissaire dc
Police. Cure, No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimley
Surrey, of thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver
derangement, and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Miss
Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion,
gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure, No.
64,816. The Rev. James I'. Campbell, Pakeuham, Norfolk,
of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which bad resisted
all medical reatment. In tins, Ilb, 2s 9d ; 21b, is 6d ; sth.
Its; 121 b, 225; 241 b, 40s. Barry du Barry and Cr., No. 77,
Regent-street, London ; also Fortnum and Mason; and all
grocers and chemists in every town of the United Kingdom.

His continuance in tho 6th Dragoons" can therlore no
logger be permitted, and he will be removed from the regi-
ment accordingly.
Surgeon Turnbull, in like manner, has laid himself open
to the gravest censure. His conduct with reference to thc
entries in ►,he hospital records will become the subject of
further inquiry, and should his explanations not prove
satisfactory, most serious notice must necessarily be taken
of his prt,,...,-olugs ; but, at all events, his continuance is the
inniskilling Dragoons has become impossible.
Lieutenant and Adjutant Fitzsimon has by Ids replies ard •
evasive eswers proved himself uttiilty nuft‘iii the post of
adjutant, the duties of which ha carried out in so uns title-
factory a manner, as proved by his own evidence.
It is further most undesirable that he should contin'ie in
the 6th Dragoons. He therefore will likewise be removed
from the regiment.

The general tone and temper evinced by a portion of
the officers of the Inniskilling Dragoons is most deplorable.
When the Field Marshal Commanding-in-Chief issued his
Memcrandum on the Mhow court-martial he was not, as he
is now, aware of the extent of ill-feeling which actually
prevailed.

Discipline cannot be maintained when such views are
entertained by any portion of the officers of the regiment,
and it greatly redounds to the credit of the corps generally
that its efficiency did not suffer more by the insubordintto
and defiant tone manifested by some of its leading mem-
bers.

The sad and painful lesson which has been experienced
by all will, it is hoped, not be forgotten by those who have
escaped censure.

`Without discipline an army is worse than useless, and,
under all circumstances, it must, therefore, ba maintained.
His Royal Highness, having had a personal and inti-
mate knowledge of what the Inniskilling Dragoons were in
former days, is most painfully impressed with the a tercd
tone of the regiment in respect of too many of its offiers
which is now brought to his notice. Bad elements -must
have been introduced, which have tended to this lament-
able change in a corps second to none in former days, both
as regards discipline and eIM iency.
The Field Marshal Commanding-in-Chief trusts that the
decisive steps now taken may at once and for ever put a
stop to similar practices, alike destructive to the interests of
the corps and to those of the individuals concerned.
His Royal Highness cannot conclads these remarks
without observing that he considers it due to the Comman-
der. in-Chief in India to state that, while he is still of opi-
nion that the character for sobriety of Sergeant-Major
Lilley up to the period of his arrest was supported by the
evidence before the Court, statements were subsequently
made to Sir H. Rose, borne out by the opinions of the me-
dical officers of the regiment, which explain to th. Field
Marshal Commanding-in-Chief the grounds upon which
that distinguished General officer made the observatiots on
that portion of the case included in his remarks on the
Mbow court martial.

By command of his Royal Highness the Field Marshal
Commanc.ing- in-Chief.

W. F, FORSTER, Military Secretary.

TRIAL OF ARMOUR PLATES,

Denmark is following in the wake of the great
Continental Powers, who, before commencing their
armour clads, have instituted competitive trials
between the resistance shied by various plates of
the same thickness manufactured in England and in
France. The announcement made acme time back
that French plates were about to compete with ours
in the markets of Europe created a feeling among
our manufacturers which was at first one of astonish-
ment, and which became almost one of consternation
when at a trial of some French plates at Portsmouth
they gave some really remarkable results as re-
garded their powers of resistance. How the French
managed to produce such good plates as were then
experimented upon is a mystery to this day ; for,
although since the unlocked for success of these few
specimens they have regularly competed side by
side with ours in various parts of Europe, their
failure has been so rapid and so total as to drive
tn,ern out of the market &most as quickly as they bad
enter ,ed it. Nowhere were they more signally de-
feated an before the French effieers at Vincennes,
have been officially and since t.'lat time they
con-
demned in Rub sia, Holland, Sweden, England, and
now, again, in D,nmark. This last experiment NT as
begun in the arsenal near Copenhagen on the 27ile
of last month. The tra,.-1 lasted over several deys
and the results have just leeen made public. Five
plates were experimented upell—namelY, one from
om the Lancefisld
Gaudet and Co., Lyons ; one fa:
Company, Glasgow ; one from the Thalles Ironworks,
London ; one from Messrs. Rigby's es" orks, Glas-
gow; and one from the Atlas works of Br own and
Co., Sheffield. All the plates were of about the same
size-151t by 3-1-ft ; each was 42i0 thick, and backed
to resemble the Warrior target, which is everywhere
taken as the standard of resistance, upon 18in. of
teak beams. The guns used were the usual 9ocwt.
63-pounder naval ordnance, loaded with the full
service charge of 16ib. After three shots at eecti
plate those of Gaudet and Co., the Lancefield works,
and Tnames Ironworks were so injured as to be de-
elared by the Commission to be unfit for further
competition. Messrs. Rigby's plate received four
shots as close together as they could be aimed, and
Messrs. Brown and Co.'s five shots, similarly
directed, in a small space, without either showing
signs of crack and very little of yielding. The firing
was resumed on the 4 of this month, when another
41-inch plate of Messrs. Cammell and Co., of Shef-
field, was added to the list of competitors, and it
was then determined by the Commission to continue
the firing as nearly as possible upon the same spot
on each plate till it was fairly destroyed. Messrs.
Catnmell's plate was the first of the three which
yielded. Eight shots destroyed it, but both the
seventh and the eighth carried away large pieces of
the iron which had previously cracked. Messrs.
Rigby's plate took seven shots is addition to what
it had received on the first day before it was broken
through, and the eighth shot carried a large piece
of the plate through the backing. The firing at
as it happened, been mire
this plate, however, had,
concentrated than that against Camrnell's. Messrs.
Brown and Co.'s plate received nine shots, in a spice
of 60 inches by 30 inches. The " last straw" was
the ninth shot, which cracked the plate severely,
bat no part of it was broken, nor, comparatively
speaking, was the backing injured. The Danish
Commission, therefore, declared the order of merit
to be—Messrs. John Be o evn and C,., Sheffield,
first ; Messrs. Rigby and Ce., Glasgow, second ;
mud Messrs. Cammell and Co., Sheffield, tl.ird.

THE GREAT CLOCK.—" It is a triumph of ingennity." - -
Daily Telegraph, March 31, 1862. Clocks by the first artists
of the day for the drawing room, dining room. bed room,
library,
hall, staircase, bracket, carriage, church, turret, rail-
ways, warehouse, counting house, musical, and astronomical.
Church and turret ciccks specially estimated for. Benson's
illustrated pamphlet on clocks (free by post for two stamps),
with descriptions and prices, enables those who live in any
part of the world to select a clock
eeAlso a
ne short p.imrrplilzelet
on cathedral and public clocks,
medal aged honourable mention in classes St and IS. J. W.
Benson, 33 and 34, Lu.igate-hill, London. liLtAblished 1741
Wat.h and clock maker by special warrant of appointment to
the Prince of Wales.