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

The Alleged Murder in Gower-street.

Last night Dr. Lrnkester resumed at the Lord
Wellington tavern, University-street, the inciairy
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
tall off the steps of 87, Gower-street, and being
picked up insensible he was carried to the station-
house as being drunk. He was subsequently re-
moved to the University Hospital, where be 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 Irish
and the wife came over to England. In her absence
the deceased formed an illicit connection with a
young woman named Margaret Fergusson. 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 wife 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 almcot the sole support of his mother. The
deceased asked the son to leave his mother and go
to live with himself and Fergusson, who would
" make him more comfortable." Tne 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. Tao 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 Garfurth 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, in 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 She skull from
a blow, but how or by whom the said blow was in-
flicted there was no evidence to show."

[ADVERTISEMENT ]—Consumption, all nervous, bilious,
liver, and stomach complaints, in every stage, are only ag-
gravate i and accelerated by drugs of every description, but
perfectly 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, 18 years of age, cured after the medical men had
abandoned all hope; of her recovery from the last stage o
Pulmonary consumption, with fearful cough, expectoratiol,
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 die
/
Police. Cure, No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimle ,
Surrey, of Ihirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liv r
derangement, and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. 31i s
Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indig-estto ,
gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure, N .
54,816. the Rev. James T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfol ,
of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which had resist d
all medical treatment. In tins, Ilb, 2s 9d ; 21b, 4s 6d ; 51p,
118; 121 b, 225; 241 b, 40s. Barry du Barry and Co., No. 77,
Regent-street, London ; also Fortnum and ,Mason; and 411
grocers and chemists in every town of the United laingdot

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

-- ♦---

Temas.—Taking occasion from
See y by some
aretar memorial re-
cently presented to the Foreign
Liverpool firms, Mr. Cobden
fore the House the question yesterdayf
building vessels for
brought be-
foreign belligerents. When a speaker
earnest, and generally so conye leanit'o much in
mat-
ters he discusses, can add so little to out with
the
it may be presumed that the s r knowledge,
subject is pretty well
exhausted, and this is indeed the
arguing on
case. Politicians
e and
and lawyers, Federal partisan
sym-
pathisers, the law officers of the Con federate
Baron of the Exchequer have Crown and the Chief
and both politically end le given their opinions,
fectly well understood. 11;teel by ly the subject is per-
the abstract propositions no. Cnt
contained in the Liverpool
dbden,
memorial, and pointing out the
interference of individuals in foreign dangers of such an
law is now said to permit, might
quarrels as the
use-
ful turn to the discussion , h have given a
the question as one of British in he
preferred to treat
ral States and possible Federallnjuetice to the Fede-
we, in our ill-will to the Republic,resentment. That
great
rebels in a piratical war against it, are aiding
con-
sequently find to our cost that we have
that we
anger, are the assertions by whichemave incurred its
to influence the British Parliament,r. Cobden hopes
revision of the law. But we need not and obtain a
is not the ground taken by the not say that this
Liverpool
memo-
rialists. who look solely to the consequences
Baron Pollock's doctrine in case England of Chief
any time be engaged in war, andwho shall at
ask for a
change in the law, as a means of inducing
the world
in general to agree to a principle more favourable
to belligerents possessing a large mercantile marine.
Whether the Chief Baron's ruling upheld or
not, it is perfectly clear that the Foreignbe
Enlist-
meat Act is a purely domestic enactment, intended
to bind Englishmen for the advantage of n d
England,
and that no interpretation of it can give
cause
grievance to a foreign country. All
that Aeleriea
of
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 o t inter-
national law. Mr. Seward or Mr. Adams
bas no-
thing at all to do with the 59:h of George 111., any
more than with the Act of Parliament which regu-
lates our street cabs. The Foreign Enlistment Act
gives no belligerent any right '
which he does
derive from the doctrines which not
. are accepted by
nations as binding on neutrals. The whole question,
then, ie whether international law forbids a neutral
to build for a bel.igereet 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
T
of ine 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 contestee., except in an ire it able 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 end 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
toe 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 hese
ships come under a prohibition weich does not
apply to rifles and gunpowder ? We cannot see
it, and we believe that no case and no passage from
any legal writer has been cited to that effect, though
all the ingenuity of the Federal lawvera has been
at work. On the other hand, the terms of the Foreign
Enlistment Act, as well as the dicta of tawyers ann
politicians, seem to indicate pleinly that merely
building a ship and selling it utiermed to one belli-
gerent gives no ground of complaint to the other.
The words of the Foreign Enlistment Act are
" equip, fit out, or arm a ship or vessel." As the
Act was expressly intended to prevent anything
that might be " prejudicial to and tend"
the changer
to endangeence
er
the peace and welfare of this kingdom,
of any prohibition whatever as regards the building
or selling a vessel shows that the framers of that law
had no idea that such ac Act could be made
sagriev-
ance by a foreign Power. The equi nppingd arm
ing of a vessel makes the port of the neutral
thuspracti-
cally.a belligerent port, and if the vessel be e
equipped and armed it sets out at once a
form
to the
idabl
enemy, and gives a just ground of complaint
belligerent whom it attacks. But what identity
unis
there between suen a case and that of a mere -
armed vessel which is sold to a belligerent ? Such
i.vessel leaves the neutral port unarmed and defence-
less ; it is just as easily captured as any other piece
of contraband goods ; as soon as it ie three miles
from the neutral coast it may be seized by the enemy
taken into port, and condemned, even though it be
in the charge of aciew put on board by the builder,
and though it may claim to be neutral property.
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
ess of
the other belligerent to look sharply after
them
specimens of contraband, and to prevent
coming together in some foreign port, or on the high
seas, arid by their combination constituting that
" e quipped, armed, and fitte lout" ship of war which
the Foreign Eolistment Act, as well ae the princi-
Jaw, forbids us to send out of
pies of international
our ports. If this view to
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 thanes ir armament
musts o
ben
board. In default of such vigi they
content to hear of a Confederate man-of-war cruis-
ing about in the Atlantic. As to Mr. Cobden's
course of argument, it is not likely to have much
effect on the people of this country. With the usual
infelicity of his school, he appeals to the moat un-
worthy motives. Re would frighten us into chang-
ing our law by threatening us with the future ven-
geance of his American friends. If certain vessels
are allowed to sail, it " will probably lead to 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 have been
made on the English Government. M-
ajesty's Government had refused to acknowledge these
claims, but some day, when the demand could be
made most inconveniertly for the Government, the
robably be either humiliation or war."
result would p
hardly
li
will be treated very say that such considerations
We need ghtly by the British nation.
We take our stand on right and international law,
and if we have theses n our side we care not for the
resentment of any pple whatever. Mr. Cobden's
speech " called attention" to the memorial of the
Liverpool•merchants, but bad nothing whatever to
do with it. These gentlemen do not assert that any
breach of international law has been committed by
the selling of ships, but they
.are alarmed at finding
how weak intern io nal law Ito change it. and they desThey
ire that
England shall call a Congress
advise that the Foreign Enlistment Act shall be
made more stringent, and that then the Foreign-
office should endeavour to
"secure the assent of the
Government of tbe United States of America, and
other foreign countries, to the adopticn of similar
regulations in those countries alnited States the so"—thus admitting
that even by the law of the Us
which Mr. Cobden incriminates are perfectly legal.
We have no wish to dispute the proposition of the
erchants, that the present state of the
Liverpool m
law advantages to a weak naval State against
a strong one, and may consequently be prejudicial
to England in some fuzure 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 be inveighs.
POST.—On the eve of the prorogation of Parlia-
ment the relations 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 when he deprecated any attempt
by. the Merman Powers to coerce Denmark
the medium of a Federal execution. It is
scarcely probable so long as a large proportion of
the Duchy of Schleswig are Germans, and eo long
as that province remains
onco an integral portion 1
exist
of the
Danish Kingdom, that perfect c
between the latter and the great Federation of Cen-
tral Europe. Whilst Germans inhabit the Duchy
tend 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,which are spe-
cially characteristic of mighty States when addres,
sub-
ing those which are comparatively weak. The
ject matter of the dispute which has so frequently
jeopardised the peace of the North of Europe map
have been, as Lord Palm y
erston eterda b
y o served
one of the most complicated whsich has ever e ;
gaged the attention of statesmen, and its origin man'
posoibly be concealed in the obscurity of earlj
times; but, at all events, recent transactions hay
tended so much to clear away complications and tp
dispel obscurity, that it is by no means necessary la
be either a profound statesman or a learned t'
query to understand fully the merits of the e ant}
xisting.
issue between the Danish monarchy and the
Germah
Diet. It is so clearly the policy of Great Britain io
maintain unimpaired the independence and int -
gray of the Banish Kingdom, that one might le

justified in treating with indifference threats
thethre effect oi atswhicli
if carried into execution, would have
lighting up a war in which Eenglanrk. But, d wou ldt,asusnturoerdthiy.
be found on the side of Dnula
nately, the tone
in which .
a tissuecertain B
have treated the question .
rtbetweenjsh BDt aetne Denmark
dp
and the Confederation has
given rise abroad to some
pardonable misconc On rising from a peru-
sal of the ceiebrat eedespatchwhich in
nEtahre autumn
Earl Russ
Russell
addressed to the Danish
Government
was put in the House
of last year one might wello Commonsaskthequyeessttieorndwayhibcyh
Mr. S. Fitzgerald—What' would England negx!eaerandtiodno in the
event of the threat of a Federal
carried out? The reply to this
quescthioangoitveernthb43l
Lord Palmerston is of so reassuring
by co
henceforth the German Powersnswilulehaevs of anyenoexcuse
for ignoring the necessary
consequences
force. "As
at-
tempt to coerce Denmark
t
to the policy and of
Government an
the
Government
are de desirous
ore
spect to these disputes,s
This is a clear out
that thee rights oi Denmark
dshotuc:,dovheermtharionwtatihnoetsd:
and if any attempts were ma
rights they would be resisted."
spoken policy, of which there can benom
to
misappre-
hension, re-
hension, and which will recommend itself
it
is
as
one. Denmark is not a large State, buts
the Premier observed, its geographical position a
ren-
ders and independent as Russia ;
whilst,
it a matter of great importancethisto country
that its rights would be secured. Since the rromul
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 Schleswipe
" There are many Germans in Schleswig," said Lord
Palmerston, " and the Government held that the
German Confederation had a right to represent, it
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 falLley
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 would give rise. The
population of Schleswig, it is needless to say, are
Schleswigers and Danish subjects; sieee that Duch!
forms as intimate a part of Denmark as Ireland does
of the United Kingdom, and they can no more b
called Germans because they speak the German lan.
7,uage than Belgians can be called French because
they speak French. Without for one moment ate
tempting to justify any distinctions which the D h
Sovereign may draw between different classes of
his subjects, if any such distinctions exist, it is evi •
.:lently not open to a foreign Government to dictate to
him in the management of the effairs of his kingdom.
The Diet, indeed, confess that in regard to &hies
wig they are not entitled to interfere, and it it
only in the Duchy of Holstein that they threaten a
F,deral execution. But by the royal ordinaece of
March last the Holsteiners are placed in a position
which leaves them nothing to desire, and their pro
tectors, the German Powers, nothing to demand.
Hence the dissatisfaction cf the latter at the pros-
pect of their sole ground for interference in the
affairs of Denmark being removed. In the course
of the spring several of the German powers" pro-
tested" against the course taken by the Danish So-
vereign in giving to his subjects in Holstein a
liberal constitution, and a Federal execution was as
usual threatened. The German Powers are, how-
ever, far from precipitate, and in the present condi-
tion of European affairs there is little probability of
the execution taking place. Lord Palmerston has
pledged the Government to make every effort to
remit, 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 foreigi
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
the hands of their Sovereign.