The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-24 00:00:00

The Alleged Murder in Gower-street.

Last night Dr. Lankester resumed at the Lord
Wellington tavern, University-street, the inqairy
into the circumstances of the death of Michael Quin,
aged 45, who was alleged to have been murdered on
the night of the 27th of June. On the night in
question, it will be recollected, deceased was seen to
pickedtall
off
Gower-street, and being
he was carried to the station-
house as being drunk. He was subsequently re-
moved to the University Hospital, where he died in
a few hours. It was then found that his skull was
fractured and several of his teeth knocked out, The
endeavour to find out who had inflicted the terrible
injuries on deceased brought to light some strange
facts. It appeared that deceased was a native of
the south of Ireland, where he had a wife and
family. Some time since they fell into great dis-
tress ; the eldest son enlisted in the 18th Royal Mali
and the wife came over to England. In her absence
the deceased formed an illicit connection with a
young woman named Margaret Ferguson. This
intrigue being discovered by the neighbours, he
came over to England, bringing his paramour with
him. He found lodgings for her in the house where
his wite lived. When that fact became known there
was, of course, a great disturbance, and the woman
was turned out. Quin followed her, taking with
him his furniture and leaving his wife in great dis.
tress. Meanwhile his son had deserted, and had
become almo't the sole support of his mother. The
deceased asked the son to leave his mother and go
to live with himself and Ferguason, who would
" make him more comfortable." The young man,
at first, it is said, refused indignantly, but after-
wards said he would go, and take " the - Fer-
gusson from his father." He went, and in a month
induced Fergusson to elope with him, and at the
same time carried off his father's furniture. The
father, furious at having been duped, gave informa-
tion to the authorities with a view to having his son
arrested as a deserter. The latter, however, got
clear off, and it is said he cast off Fergusson within
a month. The deceased then formed a connection
with a woman named Walshe, and it was said that
threats of various kinds had been made with regard
to him. Inspector Garforth now produced several
witnesses whose evidence merely went to show that
deceased was a very sober man, and was quite sober
when seen near the Marble Arch on the night in
question. The inspector said that all efforts to dis-
cover the deceased's son had been unavailing. The '
coroner, iu summing up, said that there appeared
to be every reason to believe that the case was one
of wilful murder, but there was no prospect now of
evidence of the fact. The jury returned a verdict
that deceased died from fracture of the skull from
a blow, but how or by whom the said blow was in-
flicted there was no evidence to show."

[ADVERTISEMENT J—Consumption, all nervous, bilious,
liver, and stomach complaints, is every stage, are only ag-
gravate I and accelerated by drugs of every description, but
erfec ly curable by Du Barry's health restoring Revalenta
Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases which had
been considered hopeless. We quote a few. —Cure No. 62,914.
Miss Lange, 1/.5 years of age, cured after the medical men had
abandoned all hope of her recovery from tyre last stage of
Pulmonary consumption, with f arful 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 de
Police. Cure, No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimley,
Surrey, of Thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting-of blood, liVt r
derangement, and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Mies
Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion,
gatherings, low spirits, and nervousfancies.—Cure, No.
54,816. Ibe Rev. James T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk,
of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which had resisted
all medical treatment. In tins, Ob, 2s 9d ; 2ib, 'ld Sib.
8; 121 b, 225; 241 b 105. Barry du Barry and C.., No. 7i,
itegent-street, London ; also Fornum and anon ; and all
urocers and chemists in every town of the Lrthed

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Times.—Taking occasion from a memorial re-
cently presented to the ForeigSecretary by some
esday brought be-
Liverpool firms, Mr. Cobden
fore the House the quelvsthiosnol.: bteruilding vessels for
foreign belligerents.
earnest, and generally so peaker so much in
conversant with the mat-
ters he discusses, can add so little to our knowledge,
it may be presumed that the subject is pretty well
exhausted, and this is indeed the case. Politicians
and lawyers, Federal partisans and Confederate sy sr,_
pathisere, the law officers of the c rown and the Chief
Baron of the Exchequer have given their opinions,
and both politically ~nd le ,tlit y the subject is per-
fectly well understood. Mr. Cobden,
by
a
the abstract propositions contained inthergulug u
Liverpool.n
memorial, and pointing oat the dangers of such an
interference of individuals in foreign quarrels as the
law is now said to permit, mightbu have given a use-
fulhe preferred to treat
turn to the discussion
the question as one of Briiishtinjusrice to the Fede-
ral States and possible Federal
Republic,
That
and
thaart ewe aidingcon.
we, in our to the great
rebels in a piratical war againstg.t
we jet'have incurred its
sequently find to our cost thwabti
Mr. Cobden hop, s
anger, are the assertions by
to influence the British Parliaeathent, and obtain a
Liverpool
say that this
revision of the law. But we need
qu o o oes ofChief
is not the ground taken by the
memo-
rialists, who look solely to the consequences
England shall at
Baron Pollock's doctrine in
war, caseund
ask for a
any time be engaged in
the world
change in the law, as a means of inducingwho
in general to agree to a principle morefavourable
to belligerents possessing a large mercantile marine.
be. upheldor
Whether the Chief Baron's ruling
not, it is perfectly clear that the
Enlist-
ment Act is a purely domestic enactment, intended
England,
to bind Englishmen for the advantage onft,
and that no interpretation of it can give
grievance to a foreign country. All that Americaeauseof
or any other Power can demand of the British.Go
-
vernment is that it shall not do, or allow any British
subject to do, anything which is contrary to inter-
national law. Mr. Seward or Mr, Adams has
no-
thing at all to do with the 59th of George 111., u-
more than with the Act of Parliament which a
regu-
lates our street cabs. The Foreign EnlistmentAc
gives no belligerent any right which he does not
question,
derive from the doctrines which are accepted
by-
nations as binding on neutrals. The whole
then, iii whether international law forbids a neutral
to build for a belligerent a ship which may be used
for warlike purposes. Now, without presuming to
anticipate the decision of the, Court of Exchequer
next Michaelmas Term, we may say that the reason
of the case combines with high authorities in favour
of the affirmative. A ship is contraband of war,
but
so are rifles, cannon, powder, lead, cordage, and
all other goods capable of being used in war. Yet
that these may be supplied by tee neutral to either
party without any breach of neutrality has never
been contested, except in an irritable moment by Mr
Seward last year, and even Mr. Seward did not per-
sist in an opinion which would have been contrary
to everything that has been written and acted upon
on either side of the Atlantic since his own nation
has been in existence. Our traders have sup-
plied both parties with rigid impartiality during
'he present war, taking their chance of capture by
Federal or Confederate cruisers, which have an
equal right to seize a cargo destined for Charleston
and a cargo destined for New York. Do these
ships come under a prohibition which does no,
apply to rifles and gunpowder ? We cannot sea
it, and we believe that no case and no passage from
any legal writer has been cited to that cfDvt, thouen
all the ingenuity ot The Fe
dara w, trear h.. n
work. 0 ) the o'fier 41A, ! I :e-re-L,3t F
Eatietmant Aca as .kef .awyers :111,
pOlittetUnSt seem toir,dic:pi Airily that merely
nuilding a ship and setting it tll4 rated to one belle
gerent gives no ground of compiaint o the other.
l'he words of the Foreign Enlistment Act are
" eqnip, fit out, or arm a ship or vessel." As the.
Act was expressly intended ,o prevent anything
that might be " pr, judicial ;o and tend to endanger
tie peace and welfare of this kingdom,"- the absence
of any prohibition whatever as regards the buLdine
or selling a vessel shows that the framers of that law
had no idea that such to Act could be made a griev-
Elute by a foreign Power. Tne equipping and arm,
ing of a vessel makes the port of the neutral practi-
cally a bolligerent port, and if the vessel be thus
equipped and armed it sets out at once a
formi
to the
dable
enemy, and gives a just ground of complaint
belligerent whom jt attacks. But what identity is
there between suctfa case and that of a mere
ucun-
armed vessel which is sold to a belligerent. Sh
*vessel leaves the neutral port unarmed and defence-
iece
less; it is just as easily captureai as any other p
of contraband goods ; as soon as it ie three
ene miles
from the neutral coast it may be seized by
the
taken into port, and condemned, even though it be
in the charge of a clew put on board by the builder,
and though it may claim to be neutral propety.
It is precisely in the position of a cargo of gun-
powder or other material of war. The ship, the
guns, the powder may all be consumed with equal
legality by the neutral ; and it is the business
such
of
the other ,belligerent to look sharplyent them
afr
specimens of contraband, and to
or prev the high
coming together in some foreign port, on
seas, and by their combination constituting that
" equipped, armed, and fitted out" ship of war which
the Foreign Enlistment Act, as well as the princi-
ples of international law, forbids us to send out of
our ports. If this view of the subject be correct, it
is evident that, according to the doctrines of inter-
national law, as they are accepted at present, the
Federal Government has not the smallest ground of
complaint against this country. If our shipbuilders
sell vessels to the Confederates, the Northern officers
must try to get hold of them as they come out of the
Mersey, and before they take their armaments on
board. In defe'tlit of such vigilance they must be
content to hear of .4 Confederate man-of-war cruis-
ing about in the At:tantic. As to Mr. Cobden's
course of argument, it 1.5 not likely to have much
effect on the people of this country.
t With
most the usual
infelicity of his school, he appzsals o the
worthy motives. He would fright
ing our law by threatening us with Ole future ven-
geance of his American friends. If cerlaain vesse's
are allowed to sail, it " will probably lead id a rup-
ture between this country and the United States."
We are to consider the effect of such a state of things
on the minds of the shipowners of New York and
Boston. The American Government has taken
depositions as to the value of each captured ship
and cargo, and claims for the amount
shave been
made on the English Govetnment. r Ma-
jesty's Government hadrefused to acknowledge these
claims, but some dav, when the demand could be
)nilde most incoevertiertly for the Government, the
u
esuit would probably be either humiliationsirier et or wari ."
We need herdly say that sch onnoes
will be treated very lightly by the British nation.
We take our stand on right and international law,
and if we have these on our side we carve not for tai
resentment of any people whatever. r. C
of the
obden's
speech "called attention" to the mernoriai
Liverpool merchants, but had nothing whatever
any
r to
do with it. These gentlemen do not assert, that
h
breach of international law as been committed by
the selling of ships, but they are alarmed at fieldtht
ing
now weak international law is, and they desire
international England shall call a Congress to change it. They
advise that the Foreign Enlistment Act shall be
made more stringent, and that then the Foreign-
office should endeavour to "secure the assent f
o she
Government Government of the United States of
other foreign countries, to the adoption of similar
regulations in those countries also"—thus admitting
that even by the law of the United States thele acts
which Mr. Cobden incriminates are perfectly gal.
We have no wish to dispute the prop osition of the
Liverpool merchants, that the present state of the
law gives advantages to a weak nav
bal Stat
pre e against
a strong one, and may consequently e j
to England in some future war. But that is nothing
to the point. The question is what is the law, and it
is evident that the document on which Mr. Cobden
founded his speech expressly assumes the principle
against which he inveighs.
.—On of the prorogation of Parlia-
POSTment the relations the eve
between Denmark and the
German Confederation certainly demanded a pass-
ing word. Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald only ex-
pressed the sentiments entertained by the majority
of Englishmen wh Powersdeprecated any attempt
by the German to coerce Denmark
through the medium of a Federal execution. It is
as a large proportion of
scarcely probable so long
the Duchy of Schleswig are Germans, and so long
as that province remains an integral portion of the
Danish Kingdom, that perfect concord wLI exist
between the latter and the great Federation of Cen-
tral Europe. Whilst Germans inhabit the Duchy
and supply a pretext for interference, and whilst
that Duchy, with its port of Kiel, remains an object
of envy to the German powers, Europe may expect
to hear from time to time those demands made of
Denmark by the German Federation
tug,
w when h are spe-
cially characteristic of mighty Staaddress-
ing those which are comparatively weak. Tho sub-
ject matter of the dispute which has so frequently
jeopardised the peace of the North of Europe may
have been, as Lord Palmerston yesterday observed
one of the most complicated which has ever en-
gaged the attention of statesmen, and its origin may
possibly be concealed in the obscurity of ea
times; but, at all events, recent transactions haver
tended so much to clear away complications and t
dispel obscurity, that it is by no means necessary too
be either a profound statesman or a learned anti
query to understand fully
the merits of theih existing
eue between the Danish innnercey n
Diet. It ,s cieraiy tt.-. et,b Gitcs, Bl‘ithe Gertz. ,r,
maintain unimpaired eiende nee etrid:i'nt:'
,_
.2' PI, of the p., adorn, .1, ,
"Pmight 1,4

justified in treating with indifference threats which,
if carried into execution, would have the effect of
lighting up-awar-in which-England- would assuredly-
be found on the side of Denmark. But, unfortu-
nately, the tone in which certain British statesmen
haVe treated the question at issue between Denmark
and the Confederation has given rise abroad to some
pardonable misconception. On risingwnhieh Ear
froml
Ruapsesrellu
sal of the celebrated despatch
addressed to the Danish oveek thernmencit
uineetthieenauwtuhmrbi
which
of last year one might well ask
was put in the House of
would EnglandCommonsyestedre idaeytbh3,
Mr. S. Fitzgerald—What
event of the threat of a Federa
l questionexecu ivetigonbe bein
carried out ? The reply to this
Lord Paimerston is of so reassuring a character the,
henceforth the German Powers will have no excte.
for ignoring
consequences of any .t
an armed force. "A:
byythe Government in r,
'erupt) t
p ech e
t policyutot hees these: coerce
'n u
disputes, espi nessr.assrtaekhr oeybi Goveril tnent are desire e
teat the rights or Denmark shout(' bermatintatint,-,,0
and if any attempts were made to ( Ivethw rhf
rights they would be resisted." Thisis .cea o
spoken policy, of which there can be
i °lmisappre-
hension, and which will recommend tse to ever
one. Denmark is not a large State, but it is as,
sovereign and independent as ktussia ; whilst, as
the Premier observed, its geographical position ten
dere it a matter of great importance to this country
that its rights se ould be secured, Since the promul-
gation of the ordinance of the 30th March, giving
to the Duchy of Holstein a separate constitution, all
pretexts for interference by the German Confedera-
tion in the affairs of the Danish monarchy has been
completely removed. England, said Lord Palmer-
ston, recognises the right of the Diet to exercise the
same control over the affairs of Holstein which they
are empowered to exercise over those of the other
States which constitute the Confederation ; but in
respect to Schleswig they were considered to have
no more right to interfere than in regard to any
independent State not a member of the Confedera-
tion. This is so indubitably true, that it is to be
regretted that Lord Palmerston entertained for a
moment the frivolous pretext under which the Diet
justify their interposition in respect to Schleawig.
" There are many Germans in Schleswig," said Lord
Palmerston, " and the Government held that the
German Confederation had a right to represent, if
such a case existed, that the German inhabitants
were not placed on an equal footing with the sub-
jects of Denmark." But is there not a fallacy
lurking under the expression, " Germans ?" If by
that term was meant German subjects, then the
ground for interference by the German Power whose
subjects they were would be intelligible. But if by
the term is simply meant persons speaking the Ger-
man language, and possibly cherishing German
likings and German traditions, then the ground for
interference becomes so shadowy that if entertained,
and generally acted upon, there would be no end to
the complications to which it wuuld give rise. The
population of Schleswig, it is needless to say, are
Schleswigers and Danish subjects; since that Duch)
forms as intimate a part of Denmark as Ireland does
of the United Kingdom, and they can no more be
called Germans because they speak the German lan•
guege than Belgians can be called French because
they speak French. Without for one moment at-
tempting to justify any distinctions which the Danish
sovereign may draw between different classes of
his subjects, if any such distinctions exist, it is evi •
dently not open to a foreign Government to dictate to
niro in the management of the affairs of his kingdom.
The Diet, indeed, confess that in regard to Schles
wig they are not. entitled to interfere, and it it
enly in the Duchy of Holstein that they threaten a
F deed execution. But ny the royal ordinance of
it)
I.Vi !.;ell (14-Sire, 1,11,1 heit
,tetors, the Ge.rui-,t, Pow, ts, no; bine, to &wand.
HF nce the dtssatislaction cl the latter at the pros-
or•c, of their sole geoued for interference in ter
.ffora of Denmark being removed. In the coursr
ot the spring m-vertil of the German owers " pro-
;eared' against the course taken by tee Dinisti So-
vereign in giving to his subjects in Holstein
liberal constitution, and F decal r.xi-curion was as
usual threatened. The German Powers are, how-
ever, far from precipitate, and in the present cot,di-
lion of European affairs there is little probability of
the execution taking place. Lord Palmerston has
pledged the Government to make every effort to
retain this much vexed question within the field
it
has so long occupied—that of diplomacy. He is
more sanguine about the results of friendly nego-
tiations than we are. As for the Danish Go
vernment, the course they have to follow is simple
enough. They cannot admit the principle of foreigt
interposition in the conduct of their internal affairs.
On the other hand, we hope—though we doubt it
—that the German Powers will at length admit that
a common tongue and a common lineage do not give
them a right to prescribe the political privileges
which the subjects of a foreign State should receive
at the hands of their Sovereign.