The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-05 00:00:00

Prince and Princess Louis of Hesse,

Their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess
Louis of Hesse, who lett London on Friday last,
arrived at Darmstadt on Saturday afternoon, after
making a short stay at Mayence.

Her Majesty yesterday afternoon honoured the
Duchess of Hamilton (nee Princess Marie of Baden)
with a visit at Hamilton House, Arlington-street, Picca-
dilly. The Queen remained an hour on her visit of condo-
lence to the Duchess.

HER MAJESTY, it is rumoured, will ba present
at Coburg on the 26th August, 1861, to witness the unveil-
ing of the statue of the Prince Consort.

The Duchess (Dowager) of Sutherland is daily
improving in health. Yesterday the Queen paid a
visit to the duchess at Stafford House The Marchioness of
Kildare and Lady Blantyre are staying with the duchess at
Stafford House.

The Duchess of Hamilton (née Princess Marie of
Baden) and Lady Mary Hamilton will leave town to-day
for Brighton, to pass the winter.
The Countess of Ellesmere and family are staying
with the Hon. Octavius and Lady Caroline Duncombe. The
countess is expected to leave early in the ensuing month for
Rome, there to pass the winter.

Viscount Palmerston arrived in town yesterday
from his seat, Broadlands, Hants.

Lord Chesham, who has been seriously ill for some
time, is now, we are informed, in a fair way of recovery.

The Right Hon. Sir Charles Wood and Lady
Mary Wood have left Howick Hall, Northumberland,
where they have been visiting the Earl and Countess Grey,
for Hickloton Hall, Yorkshire.

Sir Henry and Lady Sophia Des Vceux have left
town to visit Lord and Lady Londesborough at Scarborough,
Yorkshire.

The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer
and Mre. Gladstone are expected in town, to be present at
the Lord Mayor's banquet on Monday next.
THE COUNT AND COUNTESS DE CHAMBORD
have returned to Frobsdorf from Upper Austria,
where they have been visiting the estates bequeathed to the
Countess by her uncle, the Archduke Maximilian. The
Count and Countess will remain at Frobsdorf till about
the middle of December, when they will, as usual, go to
Venice.

I Tu VALUE OF THE VOLUNTEERS—as stated by
Lord Brougham, when proposing the health of the
"Army, Navy, and Volunteers," at the Presidential Din-
ner of the National Social Science Society, Edinburgh.—
Though there is every reason to count on a lasting peace,
there is no reason why the precaution of insurance ought
not to be taken. When a man insures his house he does not
expect a fire, nor even that such an event is probable. He
knows that a fire may happen from the negligence of the
people in his own house, or of his neighbours, or by acci-
dent of lightning, and he means to take security against
that happening. Now the volunteers, and whatever else
we do to improve our national defences, are an insurance,
but they are an insurance far superior to insurance against
fire, for when I insure ray house against fire. I do not in
the slightest degree lessen the chances against the fire hap-
pening; but improving our national defences not only
secures us against loss by invasion, but it makes it very
unlikely that that invasion should take place. It is therefore
an insurance of a double value, because it.not only prevents
loss when the mischief happens, but it tends to prevent the
mischief from happening.

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
THE ALEXANDRA CASE- THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V.

SELLIM AND OTHERS.

(Sittings in Banco, before the Lord Chief Baron, Barons
Bramwell, Channel], and Pigott.)

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said this case was an infor-
mation arising out of the seizure of the Alexandra on the
sth of April, for a violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act,
and he now humbly moved their lordships to show cause
why a new trial should not be granted on the ground of
misdirection on the part of the learned judge, and also on
the ground that the verdict was against the evidence.
Baron BRAMWELL said that in order that there might be
no mistake about the matter, he wished to know whether
the Attorney-General simply moved for a new trial and
abandoned the bill of exceptions.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that was the case.
Baron BRAMWELL wished it to be understood that the
Court must take the Lcrd Chief Baron's own version of his
direction, and that no appeal would lie except upon a
matter of law. If it should be the opinion of the Court that
there was no misdirection, but that the jury might have
acted upon some wrong opinion, and granted a new trial,
it would not be competent for the defendant to appeal. But
if the Court refused the rule it would not be competent for
the plaintiff to appeal. It was very desirable that these
three things should be well understood :-Ist, that the
plaintiff abandoned the bill of exceptions; 2d, that the
Court would take the Lord Chief Baron's own version of his
direction; and 3d, that there would be no appeal from the
decision on either side except on a matter of law.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he would proceed to state
how the information arose. The information was filed on
the 28th of May, and there were 98 counts, a number which
was rendered necessary by the complicated structure of the
Act of Parliament on which it was founded. The infor-
mation charged various persons with a violation of the 7th
section of the Foreign Enlistment Act. Those persons were
Messrs. Miller and Co., the builders ; Messrs. Faucit and
Co., the manufacturers of the machinery, who came for-
ward as the claimants ; Messrs. Frazer, Trenholm, and Co.,
the general agents of the Confederate States; Captain Bul-
lock, who was the special agent of the Confederate Go-
vernment, a person named Teisser, who was employed in
that business, and several others unknown. Separate
counts were founded upon the 7th section of the Foreign
Enlistment Act, which stated that if any person in
the United Kingdom or in his Majesty's dominions beyond
the seas shall equip, furnish, fit out or arm, or attempt to
equip, furnish, fit out, or arm, &a. Now their lordships
would find that the plaintiff, while cherging, equipping, or
fitting out, did not charge arming.
The LORD CHIEF BARON—That was the great point on
which I was doubtful.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought the learned judge
in his summing up overlooked the provisions of attempting
and endeavouring, and addressed himself to the complete
equipment and fitting out in the sense which his lordship
considered those words ought to bear. He would now come
to the evidence which was given at the trial, and would
show how it would bear upon the Act of Parliament.
When the Court considered the evidence in connection with
the direction, he thought the jury would find that the jury
had no opportunity of giving a verdict upon those points;
the matter having been left to them on entirely different
grounds. First, he would direct their lordships' attention
to the evidenCe of Mr. Barnes, who was an engine-driver
in the employment of Messrs, Barnes, and he stated that he
had been concerned in the yard in building three gunboats,
the Atrato, the Penguin, and the Steady. He was asked
whether he recollected the screw steamer Alexandra being
there, and he said she was like the other gunboats, only
smaller. Then came Mr. Spears, who was an agent of
Messrs. Faucit, who claimed the vessel, and who received
orders to take the machinery to the gunboat. Then there
were Mr. Black, a ship carpenter, and Mr. Green, a ship-
builder. They stated that the bulwarks of the Alexandra
were .not those of a merchant vessel, on account of their
extraordinary strength and height. Those bulwarks would
be worse than useless except for a vessel of war, and
that to a merchant vessel they would be an absolute incum-
brance. They stated further that the Alexandra had pitch
pine decks, a wood which was only used for war vessels.
Then came Capt. Englefielcl, who was a very high authority
on these matters. He expressed his opinion that the Alexan-
dra was not fit for mercantile purposes, and that she was
easily adaptable for a vessel of war. She had accommodation
for the men and officers of a man-of-war, and only steerage-
room for a crew of 32 men. He stated that she was not
capable of being used for mercantile purposes because she
had not sufficient stowage. This was the evidence as to the
structure of the ship, and he would now proceed to that
part of the case which related to the furnishing, equipping,
and fitting out as distinct from the structure, lie held
that it was utterly unimportant whether they were war-
like equipments if he showed that the vessel was intended for
warlike purposes. Ile thought that a great fallacy had run
through the argument, and that if he proved the intent and
purpose of the vessel it mattered not what were the nature of
the equipments. The learned gentleman proceeded to ana-
lyse the evidence bearing on the question of equipments,
showing that they were essentially of a warlike character,
although he did not rely upon that point. These equip-
ments, he contended, were unequivocally connected beyond
the possibility of doubt with the Ship itself, and he should
now proceed to refer to those parts of the evidence which
showed the contemporaneous preparation by the Messrs.
Faucit, who claimed the ship, of three guns and carriages just
of the character which Captain Englefield had said would be
necessary for the Alexandra. (The learned gentleman read
the evidence of Robinson, Carter, and others, who were en-
gaged in the construction of these guns and carriages.) it
was open to argument whether those guns and gun car-
riages were unequivocally connected with the vessel, but
as to the other points he held that there could not be any
possibility of doubt as to the connection. He now proceeded
to the evidence having reference to the intent and purpose
of the Alexandra. The evidence stood thus. It had been
proved in a manner which he should have thought clear be.
pond the possibility of doubt, and it was wholly uncontra-
dieted, that these things were done under the superinten-
dence and with the interference of the persons who were
proved to be agents of the Confederate States for the purpose
of their war service. They were Captain Bullock, who was
specially sent to this country to organise the means of
carrying on war on the seas as an officer of the Confederate
States. Then there was Mr. Hamilton, who was another
officer of the Confederate States, who was obviously em-
ployed for like purposes. Then there were Fraser, Tren-
holm, and Co., who were named in the information interven-
ing with the construction of the ship by one of their agents,
and at whose office was the seat of the agency of the Confe-
derate States, who conducted their pecuniary business, and
through whom the officers of the Alabama and other vessels
which used and abused the neutrality of this country were
engaged, and by whom those agents were paid. Then they
had the direct admission of Mr. Nutter, the builder, that the
vessel was being built under a contract for the Confederate
States, and to be employed in the belligerent service. The
learned gentleman proceeded to examine the evidence of
Mr. Clarence M. Young, acting assistant paymaster of the
Confederate States Navy, who deposed that he made pay-
ments in Liverpool to persons acting for the Confederate
States, having derived his authority from " J. D. Bullock,
Commander of the Confederate States Navy." He made
requisitions to Captain Bullock for the amount of money he
required for his payments, and then Captain Bullock gave
him orders upon Messrs. Fraser, Trenholm, and Co., frcm
whom he received cheques. This witness was very strictly
cross-examined by Mr. Kerslake, and it was shown that
his morality was not altogether unimpeachable. It ap-
peared that while he was at Liverpool he formed a connec-
tion with a black woman, who passed as his wife, and that
he deserted her under circumstances which he (the Attorney-
General) did not pretend to justify. This black woman had
a black boy, and the man Young, who, according to his own
statement, was "raised" in Georgia, suggested that a little
money might be made of the little block boy, and that he
might be sold. It was not the intention, as had been
alleged, of the Attorney-General to whitewash this witness
who spoke only of the (item scripts and the res gestce of
certain persons, and which were accredited by documents
which had been produced, and to which no objection of any
kind had at any time been made. He spoke as to simple
facts. In England we had liberty and did net sell either
white men or black, but the witness Young came from a
country where such things existed, and a man Nought up
in an atmosphere of slavery, and who was engaged in burn-
ing up merchant vessels on the high seas,would scarcely be
expected to have very tender feelings. In America this
person would have been a very good witness notwithstand-
ing hisblack boy, for in that country they did not allow either
black men or black boys to enter the witness-box whatevere
might be the extent of the evil complained of. Thereforeindhl the
eloquent vituperation in which Sir Hugh Cairnsindulged
Theyi n
w referenceant e
wanted
no
otthhiisn witness,g from
y
mark.owuacnslgeacibruulyitt°teosbtpearyboollnsedhtehtdheeaguTehngecny
of Bullock, and that he very
as
enrovtihe eerowf imt neessssrsnamed.rraz
eCrhaanpdmTarne
nwhaesi crea
pe dr
e.
t eHnned
nn t etrne dhatvhee
ferfavogur of the
a moment
NSouthern
n BSYtina tPeast, hai eCrate: we as
iheihs vie Ndvidwer not i e
jwuistthi fyß
u; lbi
ouet
kt he ibse
nwt i
wt nue
isesnatl
there
oe rpd r
ho va ed
db
eceenr t
no
inn
dispute.transactions
came now to the evidence which connected
ectedotChaeprsta, inwipthullotchke,
Mr. Hamilton, Captain T
building and equipping of the ves'sel, and which proved the
frequent com,resueirce. atiFon
enbeyitleatntdersco,a.ndan ndiestshaagtesofbmetewsesres.n
the firm/of
Fraser, Trenholm, and Co., in reference to the Alex-
andra. He contended that the evidence disclosed a large
number of single acts performed by these gentlemen.
which, taken by themselves, were not of great importance,
but which, when viewed in combination, showed a common
object with regard to the matter now under considera-
tion. A person named Da Costa was examined,
and stated tliat Mr. Miller, the builder of the Alex-
andra, had stated to him that she was a gunboat, and
that he, i n conjunction with Faucit and Co., was building
the Alexandra for Frazer, Trenholm and Co., the agents for
the Confederate States, for the service of those States. In
the cross-examination of this witness nothing was elicited,
either with regard to his testimony or his manner, which
shook his credit the least in the world. He submitted that
upon that uncentradicted evidence, unless explained by the
manner in which they were directed, the jury have found a
verdict for the Crown. OA the gumming up the jury had

no option but to find as they did, whereas the evidence
clearly entitled the Crown to a verdict. The learned counsel
pointed out at some lengththe nature and objectof the Foreign
Enlistment Act under which these proceedings were taken.
The LORD CHIEF BARON said one of the great objects of
the Act was to prevent any hostile vessel being fitted out
as to make a pert of this country the point of discharge.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said that did not appear to be
the view of the Lord Chief Baron, as shown on the short-
hand writer's notes. His lordship seemed to imply that a
vessel might be constructed :in Messrs. Faucit's yard, for
instance, for the Federals, and one in Mr. Laird's yard for the
Confederates, and that as soon as they got out they might
engage and endanger the public peace.
The LORD CHIEF BARON said that might be one of the
mischiefs that would arise.
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL thought that such a mischief
never entered the mind of any human being.
The LORD CHIEF BARON—Not only is it not impossible.
It is a fact—it is true.

The Court adjourned shortly after for refreshment.
On the learned Judges taking their seats, the LORI)
CHIEF BARON addressed the Attorney-General and said
they had considered the matter while out of court, and they
were agreed that from what had been stated there was mat-
ter fit to be discussed. You may, therefore, take the rule
on the terms announced. If it was desirable to put it
shortly on the ground of misdirection or of incompetent
direction, you could do so.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that would not be war.
ranted on the ground of misdirection by himself, or on the
ground that although .there might have been no positive
misdirection, yet there was a want of information as would
enable the jury to form a proper opinion. He might take
a rule.

THE LORD CHIEF BARON—Perhaps you had better take
it on the terms I mentioned.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that was exactly what
he had been asking for. lie had no more to say.
Rule nisi granted.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

A SCENE AT A CAFE.—ASSAULT RY GENTLEMEN ON
A REFRESHMENT HOUSEKEEPER.—Mr. John Cellars, of
10, Sussex-terrace, Camden-town, gentleman, and Mr.
Richard Dixon, of 3, Bayswater-terrace, Bayswater, gentle-
man, were charged before Mr. Knox, with behaving in a
disorderly manner at the Cafe Riche, 226, Piccadilly, and
assaulting Mr. John Nicholls, the manager, and William
Smith, the waiter. _ .

Mr. Nicholls said that half-past two that morning his
attention was called to the door of the cafe by hearing the
waiter say " You can't come in ; we are just closing." On
going to the door he saw the two defendants struggling to
force their way in, the defendant Cellars thrusting bi 4
umbrella at the waiter, and saying that for two or three
years they had wanted to serve him (Mr. Nicholls) out.
Cellars then said that he was Captain Gordon, of the 16th
Lancers, that he would kill a dozen such men as the waiter,
and that he was -if he would not be served. Cellars
then caught hold of his (Mr Nicholl's) collar, and bumped
his head against the door-post, the defendant, Dixon, at
the time pushing the other defendant in.

In answer to Mr. Knox, the complainant said the de-
fendants were both drunk.

Win. Smith, waiter at the Cafe Riche, said that on telling
the defendants he could not admit them, they pulled bite
about, tore his coat, and nearly drove him through a pane
of glass. The defendant Cellars acted like a madman,
said he was Captain Gordon, of the Lancers, and that he
would fight witness, or anybody else.
Cellars asked the waiter whether he did not hear hi'
abused, and the waiter said he did not.

Harn, 344 A, having given evidence,
Cellars admitted taking a glass, but said the account of
the assault was exaggerated, but there was no doubt be
had taken a glass too much. _

Dixon said he might have been a little more elevated
than usual.

Mr. Knox said he did not sympathise much with night'
house keepers in the Haymarket, bat at the same time
there must not be breaches of the peace. "Why did the
defendants not go away when they were refused admission?
Dixon said he wanted to reason with the landlord.
Mr. Knox—What I a drunken man reason.
Cellars was then fined 205., or 14 days, and Dixon 1054
or seven days.

THAMES.
A VlRAGO.—Elizaboth Reed, a very disorderly and
drunken woman, 30 years of age, was brought before DU'
Partridge charged with assaulting and wounding Elizabeth
Williams, who came into court with a surgical bandago
round her head. Her clothes were stiffened with blood.

The complainant said that she had a quarrel with the
prisoner some time ago, and had forgotten all about it.
This morning at 1 o'clock she was standing at her door,
and the prisoner came up to her and said, "I'll have satle
faction," and struck her a tremendous blow on the forehead
with a tea-cup and knocked her down. She was seriously
wounded, and her head was dressed by a surgeon.
Timothy Cox, a police sergeant, No. 45 K, found the
complainant bleeding profusely from a wound on her fore-
head. On taking the pris3nn into custody she offered hint
a bribe to let her go. Both women lived next door to each
other in Palmer's-folly, Ratcliff-highway.
Mr. Partridge sentenced the prisoner to be imprisoned for
one month and kept to hard labour.