The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-10 00:00:00

'WESTMINSTER.

A SINGULAR SPECIMEN or A RESPECTABLE MARRIED
WOMAN.—A well-dressed and good-looking middle-aged
woman, who gave the name of Sarah Bailey, was charged
with the following gross misconduct :
Mr. Dyer, the proprietor of a refreshment house at 64,
King's-road, Chelsea, said that last night defendant had
goods of him to the value of 7i., which she refused to pay.
He then again asked her civilly for the money, when she
used the most disgusting language to him, struck him
several times, and took up a knife to stab him.
Mr. Paynter—What, is she a prostitute ?
Defendant—No, I am not, you old swine—l'm a respec-
table married woman.

A youth in complainant's employ confirmed his state-
ment, adding that he (witness) took the knife from her
hand.

efendant—You took the knife from my hand, you —1
Do you know that you are speaking of a respectable married
woman ? What did you do, eh ?
Witness—l helped to turn you out of the shop.
Defendant—" You helped to turn me out of the shop—
I'll limb you !" saying which she rushed towards him to
put her threat into execution, but was restrained by the
officers of the court, when she laughed derisively, and
repeating "You helped to turn me out, did you ?" ex-
claimed, " Why, I would eat two better men than you and
your master !"

Charles Stretton, 139 B—l was called to take defendant
into custody.

Defendant—Yes, and then I walked into you, didn't I.
Of course you're very much hurt, you (Here a
volley of the most Elthy epithets followed, which created
laughter amongst the low and debased persons assembled.)
Mr. Paynter—lf the laughter is repeated I shall certainly
have the court cleared. I cannot see anything to laugh
at in a human being degraded below the level of the beast.
Defendant's previous conviction for disorderly conduct
having been returned, it was determined to commit her for
three months.

The Juridical Society.—The Alabama.

A meeting of the members of this society was held

last evening at the society's rooms, 4, St. Martin's-
plao., Trafalgar-square. The meeting was presided
over by the Right Hon. Lord Stanley, Al P.

The minutes of the previous meeting having been
read and confirmed,

Mr. W. W. KERR read a paper on " The Foreign
Enlistment Act and the Alabama," or "The Prin-
ciples and Rules of Neutrality," which latter title
he stated would more accord with the subject and
scope of his paper. Having explained the principles
of international and municipal law, the learned
gentleman pointed out how the former was infringed
by a neutral nation supplying a belligerent Power
with the munitions of war, or by permitting vessels
to be fitted out in its ports for the use of such Power,
and alluded to the case of the Alabama, which he
considered to have been a violation of the Foreign
Enlistment Act, and which ought to have been pre-
vented by Government from putting to sea. He
thought it matter of regret the order for the deten-
tion of the vessel did not reach Liverpool before she
put to sea, as when. on the high seas he did not think
the Govermnentcould attack or capture her without
producing a cause of quarrel with the Confederate
States, unless she happened to come into any of the
ports of this country, which she had little chance of
doing. As regarded the subjects of this country
who were on board of her, there could be no ques-
tion that it was a case of privateering of the very
worst description, and that they had brought them-
selves under the penal clauses of the Foreign En-
listment Act. It was now well known that Mr.
Adams, the American Minister at this Court, had
at the instigation of his Government made a de-
mand on Earl Russell for compensation for the
damage inflicted on Am v rican merchant vessels
by the Alabama, but in that respect he considered
the Federal Government had no claim upon this
country, unless in cases where the property
she had captured had been brought within its juris-
diction, and there was, he believed, no such case.
He considered it, however, a case where the Govern-
ment ought to take measures to prevent any such
fraud being again perpetrated by putting in force
the penal clauses of the Foreign Enlistment Act, as
if those who had been instrumental in fitting out
that vessel were allowed to pass with impunity other
cases of a similar character might occur.
On Mr. Kerr concluding his paper some conver
ation ensued.
Lord STANLEY said he had not come there for the
purpose of speaking on the subject, but rather to
gain information respecting it. As regarded the legal
point of the case, as to the fitting out of the Ala-
bama in this country being a breach of international
law, who would take the interpretation which Mr.
Kerr had put upon the law in that reapect a cor-
rect ? But at the same time he considered the ques-
tim to be one of fact rather than of law. A great
deal would turn on the question as to whether a
merchant vessel having to trade in parts of the
world where pirates abounded might not be built
somewhat in the form of a man-of-war, in order to
proteot her against their attacks. That therefore
awsotuoldprboesaecsuitminpgletqhuocssetiwoho
nofhsandipfibtuteidldoinugt.theThen
ves-
sel, they ought not to do so unless they could be
proved to have had a guilty knowledge of the ser-
vice for which the vessel was intended, and a guilty
knowledge of any criminal act was well known to
be of all things the most difficult to prove. Strong
suspicions did not constitute guilty knowledge, nei-
ther did carelessness or credulity ; and while the
parties in this case may have been deceived--7while
they may have neglected to make the necessary in-
quiries—while they may have acted foolishly, yet
that would not constitute a guilty knowledge of the
purposes for which the vessel was intended, and no
jury would convict them on such evidence.

A vote of thanks was then passed to Mr. Kerr for
his able paper, and the proceedings terminated with
a cordial vote of thanks to Lord Stanley for his
kindness in presiding.