The Sun.
London, England, 1863-12-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 14, 1863,

TEE PROPOSED CONGRESS.

The following is the answer of the King of the
Greeks to the French proposal of a Congress,

Athens, Nov. 26,

hav e been highly
eheing hpllye gratifiedased to
send
nb
dy
MajestymtheeMiinonnvysiotiearriolnmetienhrieFefhr:yhroeeu'47thl inst. to take part in a Congress
of Sovereigns to be opened at Paris, with a view to placing
tho political edifice of Europe on new and more solid bases,
and thus to prevent commotions which might endanger the
general peace.
This appeal to conciliation which your Majesty has just
made in the interest of European order has been inspired by
views too generous .and too elevated not to find in me '‘ne
most sympathetic reception.

The noble thought which predomina
•
therein could not
be bettor,• enhanced than by the tank language and the ju-
, o.cious considerations with Which your Majesty has accom-
puled your proposition.
In accepting it without reserve, I fully share the hopes
which I find expressed in your Imperial Majesty's letter.
The meeting of the Congress will perhaps be the best solu-
tion of the grave questions which justly preoccupy all minds
in Europe, and will contribute to develope the general pro-
sperity by the maintenance of tranquillity. Every one feels
indeed, that it is necessary to take into account the spirit of
the age, the political aspirations of nations, the circum-
stances of the time, and to endeavour by all possible means
to secure the future by regulating the present so as to eli-
minate every element of trouble and discord.

The common work to which your Majesty invites the
chiefs of the European States would be, beyond doubt, one
of the greatest onward movements of our day. Its success
would realise wishes long since formed by the friends of
humanity and the noblest minds.

In congratulating your Majeety:on the glorious initiative
you have just taken, I sincerely wish that your proposition
may be as favourably received by the other Sovereigus,
and I flatter myself with the hope that the interests and
rights of the Christians in the East will find in your Ma-
jesty a generous defender in the future International
Council.

It is with these sentiments that I earnestly offer to your
Majesty the renewed assurances of the high esteem and the
inviolable friendship with which I am, Monsieur mon Frere,
your Imperial Majesty's good brother,

GEORGE.
(Countersigned) P. DELYANNI.
The following is the reply of the Germanic Con-
federation :

Sire,—The invitation to a Congress which your Majesty
addressed on the 4th of November last to the Sovereign
Princes and free cities of Germany is considered by the
Germanic Confederation as a proof of your Majesty's senti-
ments of friendship, and of your desire to assure to Europe
the benefits of peace.
Called upon by its fundamental treaties to be principally
directed by pacific views, the Germanic Confederation could
not refuse its consent to a project tending to assure the
peace and order of Europe.
Although frankly adhering to the pacific idea of your
Majesty, the Sovereign Prince and free cities of Germany
could not concur with a hope of success, in the realisation
of this project, unless the treaties which established the
Germanic Confederation as well as the political edifice of
Europe were considered as the basis of the negotiations.
Without ignoring that even the most solemnly concluded
treaties cannot remain unaltered in the midst of the irresis-
tible course of history, a pacific policy could not disavow
the principle that no modification or cancelling of a treaty
can be effected without the consent of the parties interested.
It is this principle which will point out the rule of duties,
the title of rights, and the curb of pretensions which, with
so just and penetrating (an eye, your Majesty has deemed
necessary to tranquillise Europe.
This basis for negotiation once adopted, it will be possi-
ble to designate beforehand, with the consent of the parties
interested, the international questions which the Congress
will undertake to regulate, and afford to Europe the assur-
ance that, far from being the source of fresh differences, it
will put an end to those which exist.

In conformity with these views, the Germanic Confede •
ration will be disposed to respond to your Majesty's invita-
tion, and take part in the Congress, by causing himself to be
represented by a special Plenipotentiary, who will be there
with those members of the Germanic Confederation invited
by your Majesty. The Sovereign Prince and free cities of
Germany cherish the hope that your Majesty will be good
enough to see that these frank explanations are a proof of
their sentiments of friendship, of the care they have devoted
to the consideration of the step taken by your Majesty, and
of their desire that this step may be fruitful in happy re-
sults. Hereupon the Sovereign Princes and free cities of
Germany pray God to have you in his just and holy keeping.
The Germanic Confederation, and in its name,
The Austrian Minister, President of the Diet,

BARON VON KITBECK.
Frankfort.on-the-Maine, Dee, 7, 1863.
The following is the reply of the King of Den-
mark :

"Monsieur mon Frere,—During the few days that I have
occupied the throne of Denmark I have been enabled to take
two resolutions of high importance for the destinies of my
country. Providence has in a sad and unexpected manner
terminated the career of my august predecessor at the very
moment when the nation expected him to sanction by his
signature the new Constitution for the common affairs of his
non-German provinces, and to accept the invitation of your
Imperial Majesty to attend a Congress. It has fallen to my
lot to accomplish this double task. Happening at the same
critical moment for the welfare M my people, those two de.
visions tend to the same end, for it only settles the present,
the other will, I hope, assure the future of the Danish
Monarchy. Your Majesty has taken the glorious initiative
of substituting decrees of justice and of reason, instead of
an appeal to arms, to settle the questions actually pending
in Europe.

Denmark, which has always been the constant ally of
the Emperor, is resolved, frankly and without reserve, to
associate itself to the generous endeavours of your Majesty
to realise that great idea. I accept, therefore, with real
pleasure, your ,Majesty's invitation to attend a European
Congress. lam not yet sure whether circumstances will
allow me to attend in person, but I beg your Majesty to
believe that it would give me the greatest pleasure to enjoy
once more your cordial hospitality, and to express to you
Viva voce my warm and sincere congratulations, as I had
the honour to do on a former occasion.
I congratulate myself that the relations which I shall
have the honour of entertaining with your Majesty open
under auspices of that great inspiration, and I eagerly take
advantage of this opportunity to offer to you the assurance
of my high esteem and unchangeable friendship.
I am, Monsieur mon frere, of your Imperial Majesty le
bon frere, CHRISTIAN,
Copenhagen, Nov. 20.

common at the outbreak of hostilities. And the courage of
the people will not be diminished if they bring themselves
face to face with thereal character of the struggle. "Liberty
or death" is no mere phrase to us ; and it will do no harm
if we look steadfastly at the less agreeable alternative.—
Richmond Examiner.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

—DERBY, Dec. 12.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT
CROWN COURT.

(Before Mr. Baron Martin.)
Th:. trial of George Victor Townley for the murder of
Miss Goodwin was resumed this morning at 9 o'clock pre-
cisely.

As before, Mr. Boden, Q.C., and Mr. Bristowe appeared
for the prosecution; Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., Mr. Sergeant
O'Brien, and Mr. Fitzjames Stephen defended the prisoner.
Mr. Boden now replied on the part of the prosecution.
He contended that the evidence for the defence proved that
the prisoner knew the nature and quality of his act and that
it was prohibited ; and although, owing to a state of mind
differing from that of the majority of men, he conceived
that his act was right, yet it was clear that he well knew
that others thought it wrong. Miss Goodwin's letters,
which he had been unable to lay before them, had been
supplied by those who conducted the defence, and afforded
a clue to the prisoner's act. They showed that he went to
Wigwell-hall with a knowledge that Miss Goodwin was
desirous to break off her engagement with him, and in the
hope of inducing her to change her mind upon that subject.
It had been attempted to prove that he set out upon that
mission in an insane state of mind. The evidence used for
that defence consisted partly in the alleged existence of
hereditary insanity in the family, It had not, however, been
shown that any lineal ancestor of the prisoner had ever been
mad, and the evidence given with respect to some collateral
relations of the prisoner failed to establish hereditary insa-
nity. The other evidence pointed to the state of his mind
upon and after the receipt of Miss Goodwin's letters. That
evidence entirely failed to show anything resembling insa-
nity in the prisoner's conduct, while it showed a motive for
the murder. The stronger his attachment to Miss Goodwin,
the more likely it was that in resenting her rejection of
him he should in a state of distress have been hurried into
the commission of this act. The prisoner's letters were the
letters of a sane and rational person. The evidence given
by Grew of his behaviour at the Midland Hotel was almost
ludicrous. His conduct there was entirely natural under
the circumstances, and it was clear that neither the land-
lady of the Bull's Head nor Mr. Harris perceived anything
at all peculiar in his manner. Dr. F, Winslow's evidence
simply showed that the prisoner entertained certain specu-
lative notions inconsistent with the wellbeing of society;
but it would be most dangerous that any one who consi-
dered that stealing was not morally wrong should be enabled
to commit robbery with impunity. The law permitted the
holding of notions of this kind, but the very essence and ob-
jeot of law was to prevent those notions from being carried
into action. Dr. Forbes Winslow admitted that the pri-
soner knew his act was punishable, and that knowledge was
sufficient to make him responsible to the law. Dr. Forbes
Winslow had introduced a new species of insanity, which
he called general moral derangement, but such a doctrine
was fraught with danger to the wellbeing of society.
At the conclusion of Mr. Bolen's reply,

Mr. Macaulay rose and, addressing his lordship, observed
—I understand, my lord, with reference to the questions you
will leave to the jury, that you will ask them—first, whether
the prisoner knew the effed upon life of his act ; and second,
whether ho was conscious that he was incurring legal
punishment.

Baron Martin—l shall tell the jury that, assuming that
the prisoner's mind was diseased on the 21st August, yet, if
he knew the act he did would probably cause death, and
that what he was doing was against the law of God and the
subject of legal punishment, he is responsible for his act.
Mr. Macaulay—l humbly submit—
Baron Martin—Mr. Macaulay,. is this right ? At the
close of your address yesterday, I read out to you the ques-
tion I proposed to leave to the jury, and gave you an oppor-
tunity, and, indeed, invited you to comment upon it. You
declined to take advantage of that opportunity, and it
would be most irregular to hear you now, after the reply of
the counsel for the prosecution is over.

Mr. Macaulay—ln the absence of the power of tendering
a bill of exceptions ?

Baron Martin—You have a much better remedy than
that.

His Lordship then, addressing the jury, said that by the
law of this country, if a man was convicted of murder the
judge must pronounce sentence of death, and the prisoner's
only hope then lay in the mercy of the Crown. The result
of that trial was, then, of the greatest importance to the
public with reference to the protection of life. The law of
England attached the highest value to human life. Even
in the case where life was taken by accident, the law re-
quired an investigation of the circumstance. While, there-
fore, the interest of the prisoner in the result of their deli-
berations was the greatest possible, the interest of the
public was equally great, and it was their duty to give their
verdict upon the point of law he should submit to them,
and to leave the responsibility of acting upon that verdict
to others. So far as the act was concerned, it was the
clearest case he had ever had the misfortune to try. It was
plain that the prisoner suffered as much as probably any
man ever suffered. That was clear from the evidence of his
friends and of the waiter at the Midland Hotel; but it
was equally clear that he did not appear to be insane in the
eyes of the landlady of the Bull's Head or in those of Mr.
Harris. The prisoner then went to the hall, and remained in
the company of the young lady from half Test 6 to nearly 9
o'clock, when the deed was committed. It was probable
that he implored her to renew the engagement, and perhaps
reproached her with her conduct towards him. She may
have been conscious that she had not behaved well to him,
and may have remained in hia company from a sense of his
distress and from an anxiety to do all in her power to relieve
his mind. At any rate, if that was not the true explana-
tion of what took place between them, it could not possibly
place the prisoner's case in a worse light than any explana-
tion that could reasonably be suggested. He then inflicted
upon the young lady the wounds which caused her death,
That was murder, subject only to the question of insanity.
No one could doubt that the prisoner knew what he was
doing and that it would cause death. Unless he was insane,
therefore, under those circumstances he was guilty of mur-
der. No word was more vague than insanity. Probably,
there was not one of the jury but was acquainted with some
man who was in the habit of doing extraordinary actions,
and of whom people said, " Why, that man must be in-
sake." Two years ago an investigation took place into the
condition of mind of a gentleman from the eastern parts of
the county. There was a long inquiry, which excited great
public interest, and there was a great divergence of opinion
among medical men. Great eccentricity of conduct on the
part of that person was shown, yet there was nothing to
relieve him from criminal responsibility. Probably he
was not the wisest of men, yet he was of sufficient in-
tellect to take care of himself and avoid doing injury to
others. There was a somewhat similar case at the last
Glocester Assizes, in which a young lady was under
the impression that a number of ladies had formed an
unfounded dislike to her. In all probability she was
labouring under a delusion with respect to there persons,
yet she was as subject to the criminal law as any person
in that court. W hat the law meant by an insane man
was a man who acted under delusions and supposed a
state of things to exist which did net exist, and acted there-
upon. A man who did so was under a delusion, and a person
so labouring;was insane. In one species of insanity the
patient lust his mind altogether and had nothing but instinct
left. Such a person would destroy his fellow creatures as a
tiger would his prey, by instinct only. A man in that state
had no mind at all, and, therefore, was not criminally re-
sponsible. The law, however, went further than that. If
a man labouring under a delusion did something of which
he did not know the real character, something of the effect
and consequences of vt hich he was ignorant, he was not re-
sponsible. An ordinary instance of such a delusion was
where a man fancied himself a king and treated all around
him as his subjects. If such a man were to kill another un-
der the supposition that he was exercising his prerogative
as a king and that he was called upon to execute the other
as a criminal, he would not be responsible. The result was
that, if the jury believed that at the time the act was com-
mitted the prisoner was labouring under a delusion, and be-
lieved that he was doing an act which was not wrong, or of
which he did not know the consequences, he would be ex-
cused. If, on the other hand, he well knew that his act
would take away life, that that act was contrary to the law
of God and punishable by the law of the land, he was guilty
of murder. That was the real question they had to try. In
the able address of the counsel for the prosecution no allu-
sion had been made to the state of mind which constituted
insanity. He had called the learned counsel's attention
to that point, because he was desirous of hearing his views
on the subject. He had already stated that in his opinion
the law upon the subject was best laid down by Justice Le
Blanc, as able a judge as ever sat on the bench. Justice Le
Blanc, in ithe case alluded to, observed to the jury that it
was for them to determine whether the prisoner when he
committed the offence with which he stood charged was in-
capable of distinguishing right from wrong, or under the
influence of any illusion which rendered his mind at the
moment insensible of the nature of the act he was about
to commit; since in that case he would not be legally
responsible for his conduct. On the other hand, provided
hey should be of opinion that when he committed the
offence he was capable of distinguishing right from wrong,
and not under the influence of such an illusion as disabled
him from discerning that ho was doing a wrong act, he
would be amenable to the justice of his country and guilty
bit the eye of the law. That in his (Baron Martin's) opinion
was a correct statement of the law, He should not allude
to Bellingham's case because many wore of opinion that that
was an unsatisfactory trial. In Offord's case the late Lord
Lyndhurst told the jury that they must be satisfied, before
they could acquit the prisoner on tho ground of insanity,
that he did not know when ho committed the act what the
effect of it if fatal would be. With reference to the crime
of murder, the question was, did he know that he was com-
mitting an offence against the lass of God and nature ? In
Oxford's cave Lord Denman said, " Something has been
said about the power to contract and to make a will; but I
think that those things do not supply any test, The ques-
tion is, whether the prisoner was labouring under that
species of insanity which satisfies you that he was quite un-

aware of the nature, character, and consequences of the act
which he was committing; or, in other words, whether he
was under the influence of a diseased mind, and was really
unconscious at the time he was committing the act it was
a crime." His lordship continued that the jury must judge
ofthe act by the prisoner's statements, and by what he did
at the time. Unless they were satisfied—and it was for the
prisoner to make it out— that he did not know the conse-
quences of his act,or that it was against the law of God and
man and would subject him to punishment, he was guilty
of murder. His lordship then went most carefully through
the evidence. The prisoner's letters appeared to be the
most sensible letters he had ever read. Again, the reason
the prisoner gave for his act was " She should not have
proved false to me." Now, if his real motive was that he
conceived himself to have been illused, and either from
jealousy of the man who was preferred to him, or from a
desire of revenge on her,he committed the act, that would be
murder. Those were the very passions which the law re-
quired men to control, and if the deed was done under the
influence of those passions there was no doubt that it was
murder. The prisoner's expression that he should be hanged
for it indicated that he knew the consequences of this act.
Another reason he gave for what he had done was, " The
woman who deceives me must die." If a young lady pro-
mised to marry a man and then changed her mind, it might
be truly said she deceived him ; but what would be the con-
sequences to society if men were to say every woman who
treated them in that way she,uld die, and were to carry out
these views by cutting her throat ? The prisoner claimed
to exercise the same power over a wife as he could lawfully
exercise over a chattel, but that was not a delusion, nor like
a delusion. It was the conlusion of a man who had arrived
at results different from those generally arrived at and con-
trary to the laws of God and man, but it was not a delu-
sion. Evidence, indeed, had been given of an actual delu-
sion in the prisoner's mind in supposing that there was a
conspiracy against him. That was an apt and common in-
stance of delusion. There was also evidence of insanity in
the maternal line, and it was true that insanity was here-
ditary and did descend in families. The object of that was
to show that it was possible and not unlikely that the here-
ditary taint might exist in the prisoner. All the evidence,
however, failed to show the existence of any delusion in the
prisoner's mind which could explain this act. None of his
family conceived him to be mad. It was clear that such an
idea had not entered into their mind, er they would not have
recommended him to go and see Miss Goodwin. They
treated him as sane from beginning to end, as a proper
person to contract matrimony and re-engage the affections
of this young woman. The account of his state of mind
upon receiving her letters was most probably correct.
Most men would probably suffer in the same way under
similar circumstances. It had been said by one of the
witnesses that the prisoner did not know the difference
between good and evil. If that was a test of insanity many
men were tried who did not know that difference. In
truth it was no test at all. The idea of a conspiracy was a
delusion ; but the mere setting himself up against the law of
God and man was not a delusion at all. The question for
the jury was, was the prisoner insane, and did he do the act
11 under a delusion, believing it to be other than it was. If he
knew what he was doing, and that it was likely to cause
death and was contrary to the law of God and man, and that
the law directed that persons who did such acts should be
punished, he was guilty of murder.
The jury then retired, and after an absence of five
minutes returned into court with a verdict of guilty of
wilful murder.

The prisoner was then called upon in the usual form to
say why sentence of death should not be passed upon him.
Baron Martin, having put on the black cap, said—Pri-
soner at the bar, after every possibility in your favour has
been urged with an ability never excelled you have been
found guilty of wilful murder, and in that verdict I entirely
concur. It the defence which has been set up in your behalf
had prevailed, it would in my opinion have been attended
with consequences dangerous to society. If it entered into
the minds of men that they might take the life of any
woman who was fickle, the results would be fearful. I have
now only one duty to perform. With regard to that I have
no discretion, but am under an absolute necessity of fulfil-
ling it. I beg of you to take advantage of your opportunity
to make your peace with God. I have no desire by any
comment of mine to distress you or any other Lessons, but
will, without saying more, pronounce the sentence imposed
by the law. His Lordship then, with much emotion, passed
sentence of death upon the prisoner.
After finishing this case, and trying three or four other
cases which do not require a report, Baron Martin left for
Nottingham, where he opened the commissions for the
county and town.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

EXAMINER.—The Great Fight! Which is the
Great Fight of the week, the Great Fight between
the American and the Englishman. or the Great
Fight bet weep Mr Cobden and the Times? We give
the preference to the latter, but heartily wish
neither had taken place. For the encounter, it is
enough to say that Mr. Cobden was angry and the
times cool, And when any man sits down to write
in an angry mood he ought to know that he will be
answered with all the advantage of coolness, his
adversary avoiding his fault and profiting by it.
Then as to the merits of the quarrel, it was one by
adoption. Now, a man who is childless may not
unnaturally adopt another's child; but Mr. Cobden,
pacific as he may be in purpose, is not so quarrelless
as to be driven to adopt another's quarrel, and espe-
cially the quarrel of the most pugnacious character
of the time. Indeed, when a man feels moved to
take up the cudgels for another (who is apt enough
to resort to them on his own bJaalf), he ought to
ask himself the question whether his real object is
to vindicate his friend, or to assail a third party ;
and he may be sure that the latter is his true mo-
tive if he finds in himself a disposition to employ
terms of abuse which prove nothing but ill will. In
matters of this kind, as Sancho Panza says, "every
tub should stand on its own bottom, every hearing
hang by its own head." Gay, too, advises well
against interposing in quarrels, and Mr. Bright can
hardly be pleased to flail his friend more touchy
about him than he is about himself. To take a
quarrel out of his own hands, his staff of life, is in-
deed like taking the bread out of his mouth, and
certain we are that he thinks he could have done
the thing much better himself, and probably
he could. The matter of complaint was
a construction, that an argument went to
a division of land amongst the poor; but
why was the question of the fairness of a con-
struction to be extended to the question of anony-
mous writing, and to personalties not boldly out-
spoken but insinuated, betraying the willingness to
wound together with the fear to strike. The cha-
racter of the 2imes is of by far too mixed a nature
to be disposed of by unmixed vilification. Many
faults may be found with a journal wielding so great
a power, but if it deserved the character given to it
by Mr. Cobden its existence would most gravely
impeach the intelligence and morality of the British
public. Mr. Cobden more measured would be mere
forcible and effective; and if we might presume to
offer a word of counsel to one we sincerely respectand
esteem, it would be to mistrust impulses of intense
indignation, which in some temperaments proceed
not from the judgment, but long-nourished preju-
dice and exaggerated imagination. Johnson ad-
vised a young writer to read over carefully what he
had written, and when he came to anything he
thought very fine, to strike it out. We would ad-
vise Mr. Cobden to do the same when he comes to
anything very angry. Had he been schooled in
anonymous writing, instead of trusting to the au-
thority of his name, he would have learnt to rely
for effect only upon facts and reasoning, not upon
words of sound and fury signifying nothing but the
vituperative.

SATURDAY REVIEW.—In these days of indiffer-
ence and apathy, it must be some satisfaction to a
writer in the limes to have made a veteran public
man like Mr. Cobden, who ought to be thick-
skinned, so particularly angry. The readers of
the Radical journals are accustomed to be lashed
into a fury, and no doubt feel a pleasing ex-
citement in the process; but even they
must have been startled at the list of forcible
epithets which caught their eyes as they
glanced down Mr. Cobden's letter. " Gross
literary outrage," " groundless and gratuitous false-
hood," " foul libel," " calumny," " pre-eminent un-
scrupulousness," "slander," "servility," " corm pt
advantages," " traducer," "calumniator"—here is a
catalogue of gems. Surely Mr. Cobden must be
composing a philological work upon the vocabulary
of the New York Herald, and was incautious enough
to write to the limes before he had got the results
of:his studies sufficiently out of his head. Other-
wise we shall be obliged to assume that he was very
deeply wounded by that passing sentence of the
limes; and no doubt he has been quite long enough
in France to know whether it is truth or falsehood
that wounds the most. If it be only the truth that
wounds, the remarks of the Times must haa e been
very true indeed. Mr. Cobden must have been
goaded into a state of ungovernable fury to have
been able to blind himself to the abeurdity of the
exhibition ho has been making. A skilled con-
troversialist, who can only answer a grave state-
ment of opinion by calling his adversary names,
must be in very evil case. Mr. Cobden ought to
have been above the vulgar claptrap of railing at
the anonymous character of the public press. Its
assertions are made openly ; if they are false, they
can be refuted with ease; if they are true, their
truth would be neither lessened nor increased by
the affix of a name. The moral character of a state-
went depends on its own intrinsic truth or falsars
hood, not upon its authorship. Mr. Cobdenaspp
teo be
to be of a different opinion. His
that any license of calumny is pervmi
mlistlong
who
as the author of it gives his name.
Aeisw moralist
sibsele, as
undertakes to reform the tone by abstaining
of uublic writing
might usefully begin the
great workations of corruption,
can
himself from vague
which he not only innositn:rove, but does not even
venture to describe. "lie art of round, uneompro-