The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-31 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, AUGUST 31, 1861

particularly when this was coupled with the fact that it
was proved that he admitted that on this night he was
" slued," and that he had only seen the backs of the persons.
Could they doubt for a moment what condition this man was
in when he was going home on the morning in question at
two o'clock or that even granting he did see two persons walk-
ing together, might he not have been very easily mistaken in
supposing they were Mr. Woolley and Crozier ? The jury
would not forget that the witness Temple, his wife, and his
son were in Cawpden House at the time, and if Mr. Woolley
and Crozier really had gone out after they were supposed to
have gone up to bed, would not they have been aware of the
fact ? but yet they did not venture to say that the fact had
occurred. Both Mr. Woolley and Crozier were also well
known, and if they had been walking about Campden House
at this early hour in the morning would not some one haw
recognised them ? It appeared to him, that after the con-
tradictions that were made by Ellis, and all the other cir-
cumstances, they ought not to place the slighest reliance
upon his testimony; and, while upon this part of the case,
he could not help thinking that it was rather a strange
thing that young Temple had not been called as a witness.
He played a rather prominent part in the proceedings that
took place after the fire was discovered. He was present
when his mother jumped out of the window; and the only
way in which he accounted for his absence was, by suppos-
ing that if ho had been examined his learned friend was
afraid that he might have contradicted his mother and
father upon some important matter. He believed he had
now answered, in a most satisfactory manner, every fact
upon which the defendants relied to support the charge of
arson; and he asked the jury whether, if upon such facts
they had been called upon to convict Mr. Woolley of that
offence in a criminal court, and the present proceeding w.as
exactly the same, for they could not return a verdict for the
defendants without virtually deciding that Mr. Woolley
was guilty of arson, they would not have laughed at the
idea. His learned friend had called a great number of
policemen as witnesses, but the contradictory statements
they made, and the confused character of their testimony,
appeared to him to render that testimony quite immaterial.
There was no doubt also that Mr. Woolley had complained
o veryt he police,
of their conduct, and without wishing to say a word in dis-
paragement
a f
useful geneeran, stillllys hepea ukienog, were
undoubtedly odoy, of men, could not
help remarking, with reference to this transaction. that it
was an admitted fact, that although a considerable portion
of the building was not on fire when they arrived, that with
the exception of a few chairs, not a single article of pro-
perty
Ni as rescued from tho flames, and all that they did to
save life was to send for the fire-escape ; and he contended
that under these circumstances Mr. Woolley was quite jus-
tified in coming to the conclusion that they had not been
so active as they should have been, and that the Commis-
sioners of Police would have done well to have made some
inquiry into the matter, in order to ascertain how far Mr.
Woolley was justified in coming to the conclusion he had
arrived at.

One of the jury here inquired whether it was necessary for
them to hear any more of Mr. Bovill's address.
Baron Bramwell caid, if they were satisfied already, it
was, of course, not necessary to proceed further. The topics
that were urged by Alr. Bovill, however, appeared to him to
bo perfectly legitimate ones, and to be well worthy their
consideration.

The foreman of the jury said that his lordship must un-
derstand that the juryman who had spoken was only ex-
pressing his individual opinion.
Baron Bramwell said if they were not all agreed, it would
he better that Mr. Bovill should proceed. He would, no
doubt, not occupy them very much longer.
Mr. Bovill said he would be brief, but the issue involved
was really such a fearful one to Mr. Woolley, that if he were
to run the least risk from his having neglected to urge any
topic that tended to show the utter groundlessness of the
charge, he assured them that he should blame himself for
the rest of his life.

Baron Bramwell said that the learned counsel was per•
fectly justified in the course he had taken. _ _

Mr.-Bovill then proceeded to say that the Sun Fire Office
had undertaken to prove that Mr. Woolley had committed
the crime of arson, but he hoped he had satisfied them
that they had not only failed to do so, but that every one
of what they called facts tending to support the charge
was entirely fallacious. Mr. Woolley was acting not only
for the vindication of his own character, but for the protec-
tion of the public generally, for the jury would recollect
that the object the Sun and the other fire-offices had in view
by making the charge against him, was to escape from pay-
ing the £29,000, the amount for which they had granted
policies. Whatever result was arrived at, it would not
remedy the pain and misery that had been occasioned to
Mr. Woolley by having such a charge preferred against him;
and he believed that when the directors of the Sun Fire-
office heard the verdict they would pronounce, they would
themselves regret having made such a charge upon such
shallow and unsubstantial grounds. The learned counsel
then proceeded again to comment upon the circumstances
connected with the fire, and he urged that every fact in the
case tended to support the suggestion that it was acciden-
tal; and he particularly remarked upon the fact that the
defendants, who through their surveyor wire well acquain-
ted with the nature of the building, treated it as one that
was likely to be destroyed by fire, and insisted upon being
paid what was called the doubly hazardous premium. The
most that could be said, appeared to be that no one knew
how the fire occurred, and he would ask them whether this
afforded the least ground for saying that Mr. Woolley did
it, and still less Crozier, for the charge, no doubt, equally
applied to him, who had nothing whatever to gain by such
ct ha
saet
tthh
ee
yd
he faedn dsaent t su
ph da entirely
called
ielde d
uponin
an act. He concluded a very eloquent speech by stating
otuotptihvee
mattingt
he u r y
the plaintiff the whole amount of his policy and interest at
5 per cent.

B ought
uh defendantsgsehar
wishtrvoitonnggßtihrvhaaeraathaWiifmeftlahplieltehjduenirnyseUesgniltranlebeledidshlli pn ,g a
thenmd rhe.
he
Bacommencedgill
they athe
made against Mr. Woolley, he was entitled to, and they
every farthing they could. The question
that
most important
ptool htaendtispoonsee,d onfotbyontlhye
tjourtyhewas public, h u undoubtedlyt to
thea
plaintiff; and to the defendants it was probably of less im-
portance than to any one else., for to such eminently respect-
able and wealthy offices as the Sun, the Haad-in-Hand, and
Atlas the amount of money—which was the only question
involved, so far as they were concerned—was not the
slightest consideration. He thought it right to state, as the
result of his experience, that whenever an insurance office
defended an action of this description, they did not do so
unless they believed they really had a good case, and the
defence was, at all events, an honest one. The charge that
was made againet the plaintiff by the defendants was no
doubt a most grievous one; but the best proof that it was
not altogether so unfounded as had been represented was
that, after the jury had patiently sat for four days listening
to the evidence that had been adduced on both sides, they
still thought that they ought to go on to the end, and
this fact, as it appeared to him, acquitted the defendants
of having done anything improper in ,defending the action
and if they should in the result believe they were in the
wrong. The public also had a great interest in questions cf
this description, because if insurance companies were to pay
every claim when a fire occurred, although they might be-
lieve it was a wilful one, because by defending the action
they might bring discredit upon themselves and the public,
no one would be sate, as a dishonest person might take a
house next door to them with impunity and burn it down,
thus risking the neighbours' lives and property, upon the
assumption that the insurance company would not resist the
claim. If, therefore, insurance companies were merely to
consider their own immediate interests and to pay every
claim that was made, it appeared to him that it would be a
v:rryy
fdangerousorthe state
Legislature of
to things
interfereindeed,
and and
takeit might
someig h tb e n
stepse c e
ts
0-
Bensure inquiry into all suspicious cases of this description.
It was hardly necessary for him to remind them that the
most innocent and useful institutions had by the ingenuity
of man been turned to instruments of serious mischief. He
might instance burial clubs, which in too many instances
had led to the commission of murder in order to obtain the
burial fees; and there was no doubt that insurance com-
panies were frequently called upon to pay claims where the
fires were wilful. To the plaintiff the issue on the present
occasion was no doubt all important. He was charged with
arson, perjury, and fraud, and also with an act which,
if it had terminated in the death of Temple or any of
his family, would have amounted to the crime of wilful
murder, and with an act which at all events was very
likely to have led to their death. The case for
the lefendantah,adstneo doubt, also was, that having
committed the act the plaintiff had stood coolly looking
ps
whoseon, ta
livesl n king h noe
mane
n o worse
owr
whom,
eo
raco,endangered.ulfrdowhatevermbTe
ah
This
theea
than
save
evidence
allegedt
been conduct
ad adduced,
ae
d,tnhoahot
that
when
hbp
eee
nohtphha the
was very young he was not quite so steady as many young
men who went into a merchant's office, and remained there
until he worked his way up. It was then said that after
his marriage he had squandered his money away. Supposing
he had done so, he no doubt thought he had a right to do as
ho pleased; and if he were asked the question he would no
doubt justify the course he had taken. U 9 had probably
squandered his money, and had possibly got into a station
not quite his own ; and if upon these grounds and the other
facts in the case they should think that he had committed
the crime imputed to him, all he could say was that the best
thing he could do would be to go to some place where neither
he nor Catupden House would ever be heard of again. Ile
must remind them that the burden of proof was upon the
defendants. It was they who had to make out that the
plaintiff had wilfully set fire to this house, and that Crozier
also was concerned in it; for it appeared to him that they
could not decide that one was guilty unless they were
at the same time of opinion that the other was also
concerned in the act. And the first thing in such a case
would be to inquire whether there was any motive) for
the commission of such a crime. They must not under-
stand him to say that the al.;,wucto of any motive, or at all
events an adequate one, was a convincing proof that any
particular act had not been committed. They could not dive
into the hearts of mankind in order to discover the particular
motive that induced thorn to do an act; but the absence of
any apparent reasonable motive for the commission of a
great crime was always a material ingredient for the consi-
deration of a jury, and they would require stronger evidence
dtoersshtcawt,haltitehebealcietvlvda: committed by the party accused.
The motive suggested in this case he could hardlyquite un-
however,
nd that one suggestion by

the defendants for the commission of the act by the plain-
tiff was that he might get back the money he had ex-
pended ; and another was, that not being able any longer to
keep the station he had up to that time moved in, he had re-
solved to burn down his house and quietly retire from the
stage, and thus relieve himself from being in a position to
invite his friends to the house and to give the expensive en•
tertainments he formerly had done : of course taking with
him the money he would receive from the insurance cfficts.
It was for the jury to consider how far either of these pro-
positions was reasonable or probable. They must first con•
eider the value of the property that was destroyed; and
with reference to the furniture only, there could be very
little doubt from the evidence that, even if they believed
every word that Temple had said with regard to the articles
that were alleged to have been removed, the value of the
property that still remained in the house would have still
been considerably greater than the amount he would have
received from the insurance office for it. If he did set
fire to the house and destroy this property, be
also did a most cruely ungrateful thing to Miss Cope,
who had behaved so kindly to him, for it was her only
security for £13,000 which she had advanced to him.
While at the bar, he (the learned judge) had had a good deal
of experience in fire cases, and he did not remember an in-
stance in which a man who played at the game of arson did
not do so with very long odds in his favour. A man would
readily, no doubt, burn £5O worth of furniture in the ex-
pectation of getting £l,OOO for it from the five-office ; but
he never yet knew a man who had acted in a way the plain-
tiff was supposed to have done. :He must have jeopardised
£20,000 or £25,000 worth of property at the very least by
his act, and there was nothing to show that he could not
have obtained the same sum, and probably more, by selling
the property in an honest and open manner. They started
then with these considerations ; and what was the case that
was sought to be established on the part of the defendants to
show that the plaintiff had committed the act imputed to
him ? The learned judge then briefly recapitulated the prin-
cipal points in the evidence they had brought forward. It
was certainly rather remarkable that the plaintiff should
have gone down with Crozier on this night to see him put
out the gas, and that he should have gone out of a warm
room and sat down on the stairs while he was so engaged.
The suggestion no doubt was, that having pretended to go to
bed, and being met by the Temples while he and Crozier
were going down stairs upon their horrible errand, it was
necessary for them to give some explanation; and this was
a point for the consideration of the jury. Tho act in it-
self, however, appeared of a trivial character, and possibly
might have been explained in the most satisfactory
manner. He must observe also, that if the plaintiff
had wilfully caused the destruction of the building, if the
account of his conduct afterwards was correct, he must at
the same time also have contemplated the needless murder
of three people. He himself, however, could not believe
this evidence; he could not believe that any man could be
such a fiend as to stand coolly looking on and not take any
steps to save the lives of the persons that were jeopardised
by his own act. Such a thing could not be. Ho now came
to the evidence of the man Ellis. It was impossible to sup-
pose for a moment that he was subpoenaed to tell an untruth,
and there did not appear to be any motive for his coming
forward to state what he had done. According to his evi-
dence he saw Mr. Woolley and Crozier walking together
on the morning of the fire; and he also declared that he
saw their faces, and spoke positively to their being the per-
sons he saw. Upon this fact, however, he was contradicted
by two people, and it appeared to him there were no grounds
for coming to the conclusion that he was wilfully saying what
he knew to be untrue, but that if the persons he saw were
not Mr. Woolley and Crozier, he was probably mistaken. If
the jury should, however, bs of opinion that this witness
did see Mr. Woolley and Crozier at the time he mentioned,
it was a matter well worthy of their most serious considera •
tion ; because it showed, at all events, that those persons
were not speaking the truth when they stated that they
never left the house ; and the jury would consider how far
this fact tallied with the other circumstances in the case in
support of the suggestion of guilt on their part. The next
evidence of importance was that given by Woolhouse, and
if they believed his story with regard to the finding of the
clothes in the passage was correct, it certainly involved a
very serious subject for inquiry. He must remark with re-
gard to this witness that he could not be mistaken with re-
gard to the fact that he deposed to, and he could not dis-
cover any grounds for imagining why he should have come
forward to tell a wilful untruth, or what motive he could
have had for doing so. If he really did find the clothes there,
it was, as he before said, a most important fact. They could
not have come there by any rightful means, and the sugges-
tion no doubt was that the clothes were thrown down in
this passage after the act of setting fire to the house had
been committed, and that they were taken off there before
going out to the back of the house ; and the material ques-
tion appeared to him to be, whether they could place ITU-
once upon the evidence of this witness. The learned judge
then said that the question was purely one of fact for their
consideration. The burden of proof was on the defendants,
and if they had not satisfied them by the evidence they had
brought forward that the plaintiff had wilfully set this place
on fire, they were not entitled to a verdict. He repeated
that before they could come to this conclusion, they must
at the same time be of opinion that the plaintiff had been
guilty, net only or arson, but or perjury, uu,l eimoet
bliss point involved was
to murder,his
be thesenoefft
ae
entcoers, accocpoemp. aTnhi eed by dire ingratitude
ono of very great importance to the public generally, and
all important to the plaintiff. They would consider all the
facts, and say what conclusion ought to be arrived at.
The Jury immediately returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Mt. Bovill said the amount of interest would be £277
16s. sd.

The jury said they gave a verdict for the plaintiff for that
amount also, making a total of 4,277 16s. 6id.
It was understood that this verdict would decide the other
insurances, and that the amount of the whole of them, with
interest, would be paid to the plaintiff.
Mr. Bovill, addressing his lordship, said it had been a
very long and arduous inquiry, and he asked his permission
for the jury to be paid a guinea a day instead of the usual
fee of one guinea each for the trial.
Baron Bramwell doubted whether he had the power to do
what was requested of him unless both sides concurred. He
remembered in ono instance where it had been done a new
trial was applied for upon that ground.
Mr. Lush said he was quite willing on the part of the de-
fendants to consent to the proposition of his learned friend.

The jury were consequently paid a guinea a.day for their
attendance, making a total of 60 guineas.

THE FATAL BALLOON ACCIDENT:

Mr. Henry Cornwell, in a letter to a contemporary, says :
" Sir.—The evidence Which was adduced at the late inquest
was generally considered to be so clear and conclusive, each
link in the chain apparently exonerating me from blame,
that I had no idea that it would become my duty to offer a
separate explanation besides that which was given to the
coroner and jury at Arnold. A leading article or two in the
Nottingham papers, as also some strictures in the London
press, compel me to do so. Permit me briefly to refer to
one or two features of the sad affair. The balloon I found,
upon trying its ascending power three times, would not lift
me; this is indisputable, therefore, by reason, and the laws
of mechanics, I could not ascend. xi
—y weight is 11 stone 6
pounds. At this moment poor Chambers stepped forward,
he having observed my difficulty, aLd when I again ,
demon-
strated it by fair test, he nobly offered to take my place,
arguing
atdhvaatnasghe. In o
he
was
only9stthe 2st 61b. would give
him that the simplest mind may
sully understood my position, I will illustrate it by stating
a simple balance before
eight taken out, more or
t
g power. Upon doing so
the
ehhtsaeasr:ut
starting,
balloonifgvo,ers:
it
unndat
tthhei
eseonOrceictqaeuunfpioarwbenratopanoosfguchtnehntdeds tienwoa r
was raised with about
151 b. of sand, and not with 2 stone weight, which would
have been nearly equivalent with the excess of my own
weight.
Now, as a balloon in its ascent may be said to be a rever-
sal, cr apparently so, of the laws of gravity, it may be com-
pared to the action of a pair of scales,supposing that an up-
ward motion of the scales were the test of sufficiency in-
stead of a downward, as on a grocer's counter. If the weight
of a pound of a tea were thus estimated, and it was found
that half an ounce less caused it go up, then it can more
be understood why 9st would rise, and list 61b
when I allowed this poor fellow to ascend, I might be
wouldreadi remain stationary.
l
cempared to the owner of a conveyance who was prevented
from running it home himself, but who permitted it to be
y
coached by one who was not a novice, feeling sure that by
enjoining him to drive slow and sure he would reaoh the
destination.

now that the aeronaut is no more,
unskilfulness ; but I may be permitted, not-
cw4hrgscteaanh:idinoint 71:,iotthgosidbolyjistice to myself. Again, then, I re-
peat that it was not because I would not go myself, but be-
cause I could not, Since the balloon three times refused to
lift me. I might here fall back upon past exploits which
are now historical, and, by comparison, show the absurdity
of charging me with being reluctant to go a mere thousand
feet high or so, if the balloon would take me. It is not
however, in my nature to fall back upon my successes, but
rather to explain my shortcomings. I am quite willing, and
indeed, anxious to admit that I had better have sent off my
balloon alone, and borne the scoff of the dissatisfied, than
risk any other life than my own. I have more than once
faced the world's dread laugh, which scarce the firm philo-
sopher can scorn ; and time, the great revealer of truth, has
proved that I have not been wrong. If I deserve censure let
me have it; it is with me that the outcry should be
raised. The committee and the visitors I absolve from all
blame. There were no roughs in Basford-park, but
25,000 o) derly persons; and,
in conclusion, I feel bound to
say that if those who feel called upon to censure felt as
shocked at the occurrence as I do they would think of sym-
pathy with the fatherless and widow, as well as of reproach,
and would, after having dipped their pens in gall, dip them
for the second time in their pockets, and thus join in mak-
ing amends for that which cannot now be prevented.

Full benefit of reduced duty obtained by pur-
llerniman's pure Tea; very choice at 3s. 4d. and
"High Standard" at 4s. 4d. (formerly 4s. Bd.), is the
strongest and repst delicious imported. Agents in every
town Papply it in p.1(..1i00,

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

SATURDAY RERIEW.—M, von Bismark has satis-
factorily explained that absence of Prussia from
the Frankfort meeting which required no explana-
tion. He has, however, managed to draw the at-
tention of Europe to what might otherwise have
escaped observation, and has revealed the extreme
indifference with which the Emperor of Austria
regarded the opposition of a King of Prussia who
has fallen so low as William I. The Emperor, to
the delight of all Continental gossips, went spe-
cially and in person to Gastein. There he saw the .
King of Prussia .an d:proposed a meetingofSovereigns
for discussing Reform. The King, prompted by M.
Bismark, pointed out, in the most convincing way,
that it would never do—that there must be all sorts
of diplomatic conferences first, and that, at the very
least, it would be necessary to wait till October.
The Emperor seemed to acquiesce, and went away;
but a few days afterwards up rode an aide-de-camp,
and brought an official invitation to the King to
attend a meeting of Sovereigns in a fortnight. Di-
rectly the Emperor of Austria found out that there
was to be no competition on the part of Prussia, and
that he was to have a monopoly of reform, he was
quite easy. The iron was so hot that he could not
think of waiting till October to strike it. He kuew
that Prussia would be absent, but he thought that
it was quite worth while to try to lead Germany in
the absence of Prussia, Of course the King of Prus-
sia was not to be induced to attend, however
' ardently the lesser Sovereigns might regret his
absence; and unquestionably Prussia had excel-
lent reasons for keeping aloof from the
movement if she chose to do so. She can al-
ways urge, and M. von Bismark does urge on
her behalf, the unanswerable argument that no
manoeuvres and shiftings of the Federation can bind
a member thatis strong enough to act independently,
and chooses to exercise her power. Prussia an-
nounces that the Sovereigns may make any arrange-
ments, and pass any resolutions, and set up any
sort of sham authority they please, but that she will
go on just the same, and think only of her own in-
terests. Is is also easy for Prussian statesmen to
pick holes in the Austrian scheme. The proposal
of Vienna is not half liberal enough for such zealous
Liberals as M. von Bismark and his master. They
cannot stand a House of Delegates from Diets—
they must have a real popular Assembly freely
elected by the people, and the number of represen-
tatives must be in proportion to the population. If
such an Assembly were constituted, Prussia, as M.
von Bismark hints, might be inc'ined to respect its
decisions. The population of Prussia is rather more
than double the German population of Austria, and
M. von Bismark, therefore, means that Prussia
might act in harmony with an Assembly in which
her representatives were rather more than double
the number of the representatives of Austria. This
is quite in the established line of Prussian policy.
The King and his Ministers have inherited a policy
which they did not invent, but which they cannot
abandon. It is very intelligible that Prussia should
say that all Federal Reform is moonshine until it is
settled who is to rule in the Federation : and that
Prussia, having double the German population of
Austria, and being in sympathy with the German
people, intends to rule. This is the line which all
Prussian statesmen have taken in recent years ;
and M. von Bismark talks as his predecessors have
done. He maintains the pretensions of Prussia,
but then he has done all in his power to make
the pretensions of Prussia absurd. If Prussia
were really able to lead Germany in arms, and
were the fountain of domestic liberty, the Prussian
notions of Federal Reform would be very plausible.
And, in theory, Prussia is strong and liberal. M. von
Bismark always speaks, when he is not addressing
the Prussian Chamber, as if Prussia were very
strong and very liberal. But facts are stubborn,
and facts are wholly against M. Von Bismark.
Prussia is weak, timid, and contemptible in its foreign
policy, shuddering at France, and catching con-
vulsively at the skirts of Russia ; while at home it is
reactionary and absolutist. M. Von Bistaark and
the King, or the clique they both obey, have, for
the present, made the standing policy of Prussia in
Germany absurd and impossible. In words, they
are as brave as ever, and stick to the claims of their
country. But practically they have managed to
make Prussia and its opposition a nullity. The
statesmen of Vienna have seen this, and have taken
the opportunity of giving an accidental preponde-
rance to the influence of Austria. Everything
confirms the opinion that the project of Austria
cannot possibly be carried out, but that Austria has
set a real reform on foot which its promoters have
a fair chance of controlling. The sovereigns have
hitherto occupied their time in settling the constitu-
tion of an imaginary Directorate, and very subtle
provisions have been devised for the election of the
'members of a board which has no chance of possess-
ing real power, and which, if it had any practical
control, would seriously endanger the independence
of the smaller States. Nor is it to be wondered at
that German reformers laugh at the notion of a
Parliament which is only to meet once in three
years, and is to be composed in a great measure of
the nominees of the reactionary nobility. A still
more fruitful source of discord is the proposal of
Austria that the Federal Council shall determine
by a bare majority when the Confederation shall
defend the non-German possessions of any of
its members. It would be strange if Austria
could not command a bare majority, and
then she would at any time be able to bring the
whole force of Germany to guarantee her tenure of
Venice or Hungary. If there were any reality in
the details of the proposed reform, it would have
been a serious blunder in Austria to have made a
proposal which seems as if her object in taking up
her new position in Germany were a selfish one, and
exposes her to the imputation that all this appara-
tus of reform is nothing more than a manoeuvre to
strengthen herself in the provinces where she is
conscious of weakness. It is inconceivable that
Prussia _should ever acquiesce in a change which
would make her the slave of Austria and oblige her
to renounce all independent action in Europe. One
of the most sensible acts of the late Prussian parlia-
ment was its declaration that it was no concern of
Prussia to keep Austria sate in Venetia; and the
Prussian parliament, patient and long-suffering as
it is, would scarcely endure to have its decisions re-
versed by a body of which a very large proportion
would be simply nominated by Austria. Nor could
neighbouring European States regard with indiffer-
ence an alteration in the constitution of Germany
which would have an important bearing on the
balance of power. So long as the movement now set
on foot can be regarded as solely intended for the
defence of Germany, no one can complain; and if it
can be said to be directed against France at all, even
Frenchmen would allow that Germany is quite right
to take care of itself.

SPECTATOR.—WiaiIst the Ultramontane faction
and its favourite organs, the Artnonsa in Italy, and
Le Monde in France, endeavour to stir Catholic
faith by working on the superstitious feelings of the
fanatical and weak-minded, the liberal section
of northern Catholics resortto proceedings
more in harmony with the spirit of the age.
The Belgian archiepiscopal metropolis, Mechlin,
better known under its French denomination
Malines, has been the scene of a remarkable
gathering of renowned Catholics. The assembly
might well be denominated a council of the Church,
were it not for three reasons; it was not convoked
by the Pope, it had no dogmatic object, and, above
all, the majority was composed of laymen. Monta-
lembert, Albert de Broglie, and'Prince Czartoryski
sat there, in company with Monseigneur Sterckx,
Archbishop of Marines, with the Papal Nuncio and
Cardinal Wiseman. The famous M. Veuillot was
absent, and Le .211-onde scarcely deigns to mention
the important meeting; two circumstances which
alone would suffice to stamp the assembly with a
liberal character. Theology has nothing to do with
th'e Congress; and, in fact, if we accept the dogma
of the temporal power, scarcely any point of faith
was raised. The dignitaries, priests, and laymen
of the Church assembled together for merely poli-
tical purposes, and fall therefore legitimately under
newspaper criticism. Reserving and qualifying our
approval, we must sympathize with many ad-
mirable words that fellafrom the lips of the speakers.
It is a good si▪
gn of the times that even Roman
Catholic cardinals feel compelled to associate with
the laity in a public Congress, to listen compla-
cently to almost revolutionary appeals, and to
applaud with several hundred conscientious Church-
men, Montalembert's bold thesis—" a free Church
in a tree State." The Congress:of Malines lasted
five days, and there were several public sittings
held in the teemi▪
nary of that ancient city. After
high mass was celebrated, the members went in
procession through the streets, headed by Cardinals
Sterckx and Wiseman in their red gowns. The
masters of ceremonies wore ribbons of the papal
colours, white and gold, and the hail was orna-
mented with an ivory crucifix under a red canopy,
and a portrait of Pius IX, over it. The Archbishop
of Malines opened the proceedings by a short
speech, in which he maintained that "men must
associate if they wish that their labours may nit
prove barren." It was certainly a startling though
gratifying fact to hear a cardinal of the Church of
Rome, the primate of a Catholic kingdom, conclude
with the generous words, "All honest opinions may
be put, forward, all measures bent on propagating
good may be proposed, both may be supported, dis-
cussed,i and refuted with the greatest liberty." 'Tie
Archbishop gave his blessing to the kneeling
.con-
gregation, in the sacramental words :
.B..enedscho
Deg ontnipotentis, et Fail, et 'Spiritus Sancti descendat
super yes, et nianeat, and the real business of the
Congress was opened with a speech by the working
president, Baron de Gerlache, the learned and re-
spected first president of the Belgian Cour de Cas.