The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-27 00:00:00

TIM SON. LONDON, FRIDAY EVEMNG, NOVEMBER 27, 1833,

LAW INTELLIGENCE---This Day.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
(Before Mr. Baron Bramwell.)
WILKINS V. SMITH.

This was an action for libel brought by the plaintiff, the
proprietor of the refreshment rooms at the Peterborough
Railway station, against the Telegraph newspaper.
Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Koane were for the plaintiff, and
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine and Mr. F. H. Lewis for the de-
fendant.

Mr. Hawkins said the plaintiff claimed compensation and
damages for the injury he had sustained in consequence of
some comments of an unfair nature which had appeared in
defendant's newspaper. A special reporter from the
paper in question accompanied the Prince of Wales on
his journey to the north, and the, train stopping at
Peterborough station to take refreshment. On she pub-
lication of the report of the journey the following day the
special reporter said he trusted his royal highness had not
tasted the detestable pure sold at the Peterborough station,
had which was composed of a mixture of horsebeans, with
other such like delicacies. The plaintiff feeling naturally
indignant at such a reflection on the refreshments supplied,
wrote to the defendant complaining of the report,
and asking for an apology, when the following day an
announcement appeared .111 the Telegraph, stating that they
had been requested to state by Mr. Wilkins, that the soup
sold at the Peterborough station was not made of horse-
beans. Finding all attempts to obtain an apology vain, the
present action was brought. (The copies of the paper con-
taining the objectionable stricture and the announcement
mentioned, were lut in and read.) _ _

Mr. Sergeant Baliantine, for the defendant, argued that
although a misrepresentation respecting the ingredients of
the plaintiff's soup had been made by the gentleman en-
gaged to supply an account of the journey of his Royal
Highness the Prince of Wales to the north to one of the
newspapers, yet it was not of that damaging character
alleged by the plaintiff. The pUblic, he contended, were
under a debt of gratitude to the press for the manner in
which a reform had been brought about in the hotel system.
Before the subject was put in its true light before the public
bills of inordinate length were the invariable result of any
person staying the shortest space of time at an English
hotel. But, thanks to the press, hotel bills had been
shortened, accommodation had improved; in fact, a com-
plete revolution had been the result of the comments made
upon the objectionable system, and now an altered state
of things was in existence. It appeared to him that the
most had been made of a very rediculous mistake, and it
also seethed to him that some allowance ought to be made
for the disappointment that usually attends the first visit
of a traveller to a railway refreshment, room, He would
not detain them by describing the contents usually to be
found in those places—the antiquated and mathematically
cut sandwiches—(laughter)—the suspicious bits of
indestructible pork pia (laughter)— which might,
it was true, fill up a vacuum, but which certainly
would obstinately resist digestion--(laughter) —he would
rather ask the jury their opinion of the soup usually sold
to cold and hungry travellers. He had never been to Peter-
borough, so his remarks did not apply to that particular
place ; but, speaking generally, he was sure that the man
who had once taken soup at a railway station would be
greatly indisposed to undergo the miseries of-a second basin.
(Laughter.) Supposing a soup was made of horse beans,
he did not think it was the first article that
was manufactured, and of necessity, bad, because it was
made from somewhat coarse ingredients. To his mind it,
appeared that the flavouring was the principal thing—
(laughter) and although the plaintiff had called his cook
that important personage had not been asked of what the
identical soup prepared for royal travellers was composed.
(Laughter.) The whole matter he thought was perfectly
ridiculous, and he felt certain the jury would form a cor-
rect estimate of the damage the plaintiff had sustained for
the publication of the observations.
Baron Bramwell summed up the evidence.

The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff with £25 of
damages.

DIVORCE COURT.
(Before Sir J, P. Wilde.)
BAILEY V. BAILEY.

Dr. Deane, Q.C., and Mr. Pritchard for the petitioner.
This was an undefended suit by Clara Bailey for a disso-
lution of marriage with her husband, Loyd George Peachey
Bailey, on the ground of cruelty and adultery, and also for
the custody of the children.
The parties were married at Hailstone, in Sussex, on March
10, 1852, and there were three children issueof the marriage,
two of whom are living. After the marriage they resided
at Brighton for four months, and then emigrated to Aus-
tralia, where they lived for several years. The ill-treat-
ment was alleged to have taken place as early as June,
1855, and amongst the different acts detailed was striking
or kicking the petitioner violently a week before her con-
finement with her first child. The object for which the
respondeat, who was originally a wine merchant, went
to Australia having failed, the parties returned
to England at the end of the year 1832. The
respondent opened a confectioner's shop at 1, Duke-
street, Brighton, and in the beginning of 1863 he resumed
his violence. On ono occasion he followed her to her bed-
room and struck her a violent blew on the back of the neck
which knocked her down and rendered her insensible. She
was laid up for a considerable time afterwards from the blow
in question, On another occasion he tore her mantle to
pieces, and while she was washing a bottle in the kitchen
he came in and knocked it out of her hand, and flung the
piece at her. In the February following, while they were
at tea in the parlour, without any provocation, he took
the bottles and flung them at her one by one. Ile
was addicted lo intemperance, and had threatened
to shoot her with a gun. The petitioner left her
husband on the 23d March last, and had not since returned
to cohabitation with him. The adultery was. proved to
have taken place with different females at Brighton; and
on one occasion, during the absence of his wife, the re-
spondent brought home a woman named Lee, who re-
mained in the house for an hour.

The petitioner and other witnesses were examined, whose
evidence fully proved the case.
The learned judge made the decree nisi, with costs, and
directed the petitioner to have the custody of the children
until further orders.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings in Nisi Fritts, before Lord Chief Justice Cock-
burn and a special jury.)
STAIM V. ERAZER, AND ANOTHER.
The cross-examination of the plaintiff in this case (the
particulars of which will be found in another column of
The Sun), was proczeded with this morning. At its 'con-
clusion some friends of the lady were examined, who stated
that they had never known her to be guilty of anything
that could be considered the act of an insane person.
The case for the plaintiff was proceeding when we went
to press.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

A FEsr.--Dan Mahomed, a man of colour, who is well-
known to \Vest-end tradesmen as a beggar, and about the
greatest pest in that line in the metropolis, was charged
before Mr. Yardley with wilfully demolishing two panes of
glass in the window of Mr. Feodor Leihtwitz, tobacconist,
of No. 3, Old Compton-street.

Mr. Leihtwitz was standing at his door yesterday after-
noon when the prisoner passed, and after going a short
distance rushed back. Mr. Leihtwitz, fearing the prisoner
was about to attack him closed the door, and the prisoner
finding he could not get into the shop broke two panes of
glass.
Mr. Yardley asked how many times the prisoner had
been in custody ?
Barnes, the gaoler, said at least twenty times—for ruf-
fianly and unprovoked assaults, stealing meat, publicans•
measures, begging, in fact, for nearly every offence, and he
spent the best part of hie time in prison.
Mr. Yardley committed the prisoner for two months'
with hard labodr for the wilful damage.

THIEVES DISTUEEEDI. liA,:rleEe
lads named James Lowe
alias Law, Thomas P •
erkms, and Henry Upson, were
brought before Mr. Woolrych charged with being in a
stable in North-street, Lim •housc ' , for the purpose of com-
mitting a felony.
James Briden, a police sergeant, No. 4 K, stated that at
two o'clock this morning he found the
prisoners in astable
in North-street, Limehouse. They had btai ned
admission
to the stable by removing some of the tiles on the roof, and
displacing a board. All the prisoners had homes to
go to, and had no business in the stable which
contained two horses, harness, sacks, corn, and pro-
perty. Ho knew all the prisoners. They were notorious
thieves. The youngest, Upson, who was only 11 years
of age, had recently come cut of prison, after an imprison-
ment of 21 days for stealing a till in a shop. Perkins had
been imprisoned three months in Canterbury Gaol for a
robbery, and was recently discharged, after a week's remand,
from the Woolwich Police-court. Lowe had been sum.
madly convicted for stealing a till, and sentenced to one
month's imprisonment. He believed she intention of the
prisoners, after remaining in the stable a part of the night,
was to go out and plunder anything they could lay their
hands on. 'They belonged to a gang of juvenile thieves
who were the terror of small shopkeepers in Litnehouse,
The little fellow Upson was iu the practice of going round
counters and stealing money out of tills, and was the most
dangerous thief of the three.
Love, who is 18 years of age, on being called on for his
defence, slid
I went to the play last night, and it was not
over until one
o'clock,and I did not like to go home to my
parents, because they would " wop" me for being out so
late.
is Perkins, who l6 years of age, said I went to the play
and didn't like to go home, •
Upson—l say nothing.
Mr. Woolrych sentenced Love and Perkins to 21 days'
imprisonment each, and ordered that Upson should be de-
tained in the Feltham School of Industry for three years,
The father of the boy Upson would be compelled to contri-
bute to his support.

Mr. James Spence, of Liverpool, on
Southern Independence.
O
Last night the City Hall of Glasgow was crowded to
excess by a promiscuous audience, including all the chief
business men, to hear an address on Southern independence
by Mr. James Spence, of Liverpool. Mr. James Hannan
was in the chair.

Mr. SPENCE, on rising, was received with loud cheers.
He said he appeared in answer to a requisition signed by
200 of the citizens of Glasgow, inviting him to address them
on the subject of Southern independence. It afforded him
the utmost pleasure in responding to the request. Glasgow
had a right to speak on such a subject, and any opinion it
might express on a matter on which it had means of infor-
mation, not common to the whole country, would carry
weight in every other pert of the kingdom. Before enter-
ing on the subject, he proceeded to clear the way by re-
moving two misconceptions whch existed in some minds,
tie had no hostility to the Government of this country, and
while ho denounced this cruel 'and unjust war, whilst he
claimed for the Southerners that right, of self-government
which we accord to every other powerful community, he
was no advocate or defender of slavery. Ile deplored it
for its own sake, and for the sake of the soathern people.
He entertained the opinion held by many of the greatest men
the South had produced—viz, Washington, Jefferson,
Madison, and Clay—all of whom regarded slavery as an evil
to their country; and advocating the independence of the
South, amongst other benefits which he believed it would
confer, ho held it to be the only issue of this war that pro •
liaised a hope to the termination of the evil. He then
showed, from the early history of the Union, that its pre-
sent constitution not only originated in rebellion, but was
thefruit of a secession. He stated that the principle of the
present constitution was that each State was a sovereign
community, governing itself except in regard to those mat-
ters which, in common with the rest, it committed to the
general government of the country. There was not a word
in the constitution to forbid any of the States retiring from
it as they had dane from its predecessor. Hence the cur -
cion now attempted by the North had not only no warrant
in the constitution, but was the wrongful exercise of a power
which was deliberately excluded from it, He affirmed not
only that secession was a just right of every State, but that
the ingenuity of man. could not combine those rovereign
States into a Federal Republic without the right of seces-
sion.. He did not advocate this principle of secession, he
n was o believer harepublicWin any form, but right was right
and if the American people thought proper to adopt certain
principles or ferms of government, it was their duty now to'
accept the coneequences. The Southern States had not only
a right of secession inherent in the Federal compacts, but
they had the same right from a still higher source, the de-
claration of independence, the fountein head of American
political principles. He then quoted Abraham Lincoln's
justification of Western Virginia receding from the rest of
that state, and asserted that any one who sought would find
en authority for the very grossest form either of rebellion or
secession in Mr. Lincoln. Thus the Southern States had
right upon their side ; they simply do what the Northern
slaveowners did before them, and have taught them to ad-
mire ever since. But it might be asked whether, admitting
the right, there was sufficient ground to exercise it. H e
then recited the causes which had led to secession, laying
stress on the fact that the' people of the North and South
are distinct from and antagonistic to each other. The North
preached religious liberty, and practised it by persecuting
and slaying all who differed from themselves. In like man-
ner they were the first to threaten secession; they were the
first who took measures to secede; but now that others fol-
low their example, and they lose by it, they deem it the
deadliest of sins. This was not an attempt to cut one na •
tion into two, but to compel two nations to 'be one. The
fact that the Southerners ate another people, and the na-
tural desire which it created to have an existence and
government of their own, that was the cause of this convul-
sion; tut there was another, in the conviction which had
long pervaded the South that the Union was worked to
the profit of the 'North and their own loss. Some might be
surpriled that he did not mention slavery as one of the causes
of secession. The very smallest reflection ought to show
any ene who took the trouble to reflect that slavery, so far
from being a cause, was the strongest of all possiblereasons
against secession. He then went on to show that in all the
other cases of war or threatened war in America slavery had
no part, and asserted that if slavery was the first object of
Southern thought, they would have clung to the Union
with the most desperate tenacity, but some might ask, Was
not slavery declared to be the corner-stone of the Southern
Confederacy ? That was a popular and parrot cry of the
Northern advocates. It'was true that a Southern orator said
that the difference of race and the inferiority of one race to
another was the corner-stone of the system; but did they
ever before hear of such a thing as taking a metaphorical
expression of an orator and fixing it on 8,000,000 of people ?
Leaving metaphor for fact, every man knew where to find
the corner-stone of any confederacy. There was but one
thing to which that epithet would apply, and that was its
constitution. Now, in the constitution of the Southern
States there was not a single principle in support of slavery
which was not in the old ono. Strange to say the only new
principle was opposed to sfavery, and that was the absolute
prohibition of the slave trade. Theme was not one word in
it to prevent any State freeing its slaves, and remaining a'
member of the Confederacy as befe re. What did they think
of the capacity of those who took up the sound of a phrase,
and had not the penetration to discern the sense of it, and
the limits of its application ? There was another question,
Was it true that this war was carried on by the North in
order to free the slaves ? Now, it was true there was a small
band in the North of fanatical men who had made this sub-
ject a passion, and who, to gratify that selfish passion, were
not only hounding on this bloodshed, but were ready to
exterminate men of their own race, and to level every re-
straint of law and humanity in order to carry out their ends.
But these men were a mere handful of the 21 millions
in the North. The infinite majority regarded the negro
with aversion, and maintained the war, some for the sake
of Southern trade, some because they feared that separation
now woula lead to other divisions in the future, but by far
the greatest number because, under the pernicious moral
effects of the Union, boastful ambition had become the
leading characteristic of the Federal mind; and as their
idea of greatness was the gross idea of greatness in size,
they shrink from this reduction of dominion. Could there
be my possible doubt on that point ? Mr. Lincoln never
wielded despotio power over what were called the Free
States. If his objects were to free the slaves, would he not
proceed with those who were within his reach ? He had all
the slaves in Delavvare,Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky, ab-
solutely in his power. Why did he not tree them ? They
were told the constitution stood in the way ; that was a
miserable excuse. The constitution might be laughed at
when Lincoln wanted to imprison men, but it must be re-
spected when he wished to free them. But though ne would
not free those within his reach he was quite ready to free all
who were beyond it. Those were the principles, this the
style of virtue they were to sympathise with and admire.
He characterised Lincoln's celebrated emancipation procla-
mation as a complete farce, and then asked the meeting to
consider the subject of slavery, not as ranting declaimers
but as thoughtful men, It was a great, terrible fact
4,000,000 of negroes—and the people of this country took
these negroes from Africa to slavery in America. How was
this evil to be removed ? Certainly not in the philanthropic
manner proposed by the North of setting at liberty men
who were powerless to make their way en the world; but in
his judgment, the first step to terminate this evil was the
independence of the South. Ilea problem, how to effect a
change in the condition of so vast a multitude without
anarchy or industrial paralysis, was the largest and most
difficult ever presented to the mind
of the statesman.
When he reflected on the wonders the people of the South
had accomplished, when he considered how they had raised
and equipped great armies, how they had created manu-
factures, or that self-devotion they had displayed, what
calmness in the senate, what heroism in the field,
h
ended slavery amongst ourselves ? Had the people of
France invaded us to force emancipation upon us, should
we have assented ? Nay, they knew better. In that case we
Whet he m'as
convinced they were equal to this further task.
should probably have been slaveowners to this day. It was
ended under a calm conviction of duty. Carry that convic-
tione to the Southern mind, 'and they would gather the same
fruit. Ho thought, in considering the question of inde-
pendence,
ieneceeu,e.theHe held
must
suc-
cess would be a war with this country, which would be most
disastrous to ourselves. The independence of the South
weigh
rat the
result consequences
fqNlleenrzrn
s of
the
appeared to him to be essential to the
continuance of the
the well-being of the whole
American people, and the prolonged thattheel (I
also
war would be fraught with great evil, both of which points
he illustrated at some length, and vividly portrayed the
terrible effect of its prolongation on the Americans of both
sections, and asking what could be done to end that mass of
evil. They could at least make the attempt to do some-
thing. Neutrality did not necessitate inaction. He did
not urge recognition, but whale° did urge was that Govern-
ment should enter into relations with the other Powers of
Western Europe, and in their united wisdom decide as to
the measures to be taken. Our inaction was, indeed, con-
venient at the moment, and saved responsibility and excused
irresolution. This country did not attain its place among
nations by a policy of inaction. It was not by doing
nothing that we were ourselves what we are, and our emi-
nence would hardly bo maintained if we were always to
leave it to another Power to regulate the destinies of the
world. It was the duty of this country not to follow, but
to lead, It was our duty as men to hold out a hand when
the voice of outraged humanity implored it. It was our
duty as politicians to consoler the balance of power in the
New World as well as the Old. It was our duty as citizens
to give some regard to the interests of this country, and
the danger threatening it in future. It was a duty we owed
to our traditions to respect the desire for self-government
expressed by a powerful people. and it was a duty which
this country, the parent of America, owed to its descend..
ants to make an effort to assuage the tempest by which
they were tern, and restore to them the blessings of peace
on the only basis on which it could ever endure, and that
was the independence of the South. tie concluded amid
loud applause.
wed received,and few
The lecture having been very , a
questions having been put and answered, the vast assem-
blage broke up.

A NEW ThEATRE at Aleiandria, with accommol
modation for 1,500 people, and with two tiers of brace, is
to be opened in December with Italian opera.

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, HALF-PAST 4 o'CLocK.

DENMARK.

GOTHA, Nov. 26.
Prince Frederick of Augustenburg has proposed
to the Germanic Diet to adopt measures for the
protection of the functionaries in the Duchies who
refute to take the oath of allegiance to the King
of Denmark. Colonel Duplant has just arrived
from Hamburg to assume the direction of military
ti rs.

THIRD E : ITION

SUN OFFICE, SEVEN O'CLOCK.

THE CRAWLEY COURT MARTIAL,

FROM OUR SPECIAL REPORTER,
TENTH DAY.
ALDERSHOT, Friday Morning.

This morning the court reassembleil at 10 minutes after
10 o'clock, Colonel Ladder being still absent from indis-
position.
Gavix Ainslie Turnbull, surgeon of the Gth (Inniskil•
ling) Dragoons was recalled for cross-examination. He
said, in reply to Colonel Crawley, that his after report
modified to a certain extent the ()pinion he expressed in
the detailed case, but to what extent he could
not previously state, but his opinion with regard
to the other causts remained substantially floe same.
On the information suppli,cl to him by Colonel Crawley
and A-sistant Surgeon Barnet that a quantity of brandy
had been consumed, he was led to the belief that the prisoner
might have consumed that quantity of spirit, and that it
was calculated to increase the predisposition to an apoplec-
tic seizure, but to what extent, of his own personal know-
ledge, he was unable to state, as there was no indication in
the post mortem appearances which would lead him to sup-
pose that the man had died from using drink to excess.
Nor has he ever noticed any indication of drink about the
prisoner during his lifetime.
Colonel Crawley—ln your opinion is it part of the duty
of a regimental surgeon to ascertain, whether a soldier of
plethoric habit of body under close arrest in India, does not
consume a considerable quantity of brandy daily ?

Witness—lf he has any reason to suppose that the pH-
senor is addicted to the use of ardent spirits, I think it is
the duty of the medical officer who attends upon hire to find
out whether he does consume a considerable amount of
spirits daily, or not.

In continuation, witness said he never visited Sergeant
Major Lilley for the purpose of prescribing for him. He
saw him frequently during the period of his arrest. It was
the duty of Aesistant •Surgeon Barnet to see the prisoner
daily. He could not state how often he visited the Ser-
geant Major, nor did he visit him for the purpose of
minutely enquiring into the stare of his health. He never
made a medical inspection of Sergeant Major Lilley during
:,is arrest. The sergeant previous to being confined was
not sent to the hospital for medical examination. He was
not aware what the nature of his imprisonment was going
to be when he was first placed in confinement, nor did he
anticipate it was to be so long. The sergeant major did not
suffer from any specific complaint during his arrest until he
died, He dil not anticipate Sergeant Major Lilley's death as
a consequence of the arrest under which he was placed. He
did nut recommend before the 30th of April that Sergeant
Major Lilley should have exercise, because he did not know
the nature of the confinement which he was undergoing.
The circumstances connected with his arrest were of so
unusual, and, as he considered at the time, of so mysterious
a nature, that he did not know exactly how to act in the
matter. It was unusual and mysterious so far that
he understood the prisoners were not examined
in the orderly-room of the regiment, nor were they
examined before the adjutant or any field officer of the
regiment. Between the 26th and the 30th of April, to the
best of ley recollection, he believed he did inquire what was
the nature of Sergt. Major Lilley's arrest, and, so far as he
remembered, he did not find out the exact nature of his
offence. He understood that the three sergeant majors
were under close arrest, and that it was Colonel Crawley's
wish that they should be so. He never anticipated that
Sergeant Major Lilley's imprisonment would have been
prolonged, and that was the reason why he did not
make earlier application on his behalf fur exercise.
A detailed medical history of Sergeant Major Lilley's case
was, he believed, sent to Colonel Crawley on the Bth of
June, or it ma) have been the 7th. It was on one of those
days that the report was sent on. After the report was
sent in Colonel Crawley asked him in reference to the
quantities of spirituous liquors Sergeant Major Lilley was
supposed to have drunk, and inquired of him whether he
wished to make any alteration in his report. At the inter-
view which he had with Colonel Crawley he said he did not
consider that any additional report from him was necessary,
as he was convinced that the man had died from
heat apoplexy, and that be -had no proof that excess in
spirits was the cause of death. Assistant Surgeon Barnet
was Sergeant Major Lilley's medical attendant, 'and it was
he who gave witness the • information relative to the con-
sumption of spirits by the sergeant major, which induced
him to modify his report. He never heard that Lilley
drank largo quantities of brandy from any one but Assistant
Surgeon Barnet and Colonel Crawley. If he had ever
made such a statement he did not mean to convey that
meaning.
Colonel Crawley—Have you said that in none of
your medical reports was there anything that could be con-
strued to attach any blame to me?
Witness—There is a letter 1 addressed to Sir Hugh
Rose is October which conveys that meaning I think.
The witness was next examined in detail with regard to
his medical reports, and to certain portions of them which
had been expunged, but ho did not know by whom that had
been done.
Captain the Hon. Edward Bourke, of the 6th Dragoons,
was called, and a letter being shown to him, he was asked
whether he wrote it, and whether ho had any objection to
its being read to the court. He said he did write the letter,
and had no of to its being read. 'rho letter, which was
read, stated that the writer had known Sergeant Major Lilley
as a sober, worthy non-commissioned officer, for whom he
had the greatest respect. He had known him from the period
of his joining the regiment, in the beginning of 1858, till ho
left the regiment in India, in March, 1862.
Surgeon Turnbull was re•called. and his cross-examina-
tion was continued. He had stated in one of his reports
that Sere eant Major Wakefield was admitted into hospital.
A man might be said to be admitted, and yet not detained
in hospital. He remembered seeing the letter produced
(the letter was read). It was from the Commander in
Chief, and it was remarked that Sergeant Major Wake-
field was admitted to hospital on the 25th of May,
1862, labouring under feverish and nervous excite-
ment. Other entries were shown to the witness on this
subject, but he could not verify them without reference
to his private notes. On the 28th of June he for-
warded to_ Colonel Crawley a letter purporting to
contain an abstract of Mr. Wakefield's case. (The letter
stated that Sergeant Major Wakefield was ordered into
hospital on the 25th of May, the day on which Sergeant
Major Lilley died). He recovered, and was readmitted on
the 25th of June, and was discharged convalescent on the
expiration of eleven days. There was an abstract of Wake.
field's case entered in one of the books the day after
he had had a communication with Col. Crawley, to whom
he mentioned the circumstance. It was 13 months after
the date of the case that the particulars were entered from
witness's private notes. He officially informed Colonel
Crawley of the facts, and he had all th, correspondence. He
did not recollect whether at the time Colonel Crawley wired
him for his private memoranda, or whether he produced
any. Colonel Crawley expressed his surprise that witness
should have given for the use of the Commander-in-Chief s
certain copy of a case vt hich was not at that time in
the books. On the 29th of Juno he took the
orderly-book to Colonel Crawley and told him that
he had found Wakefield's case in another registry
of which he had no knowledge. In that register it ap-
peared that there had been an erasure, and a different date
substituted, for which he could not account. The original
entry was dated May 25, but that had been erased
and June 5 substituted. To the best of his belief
he altered the date, because the man was detained on
the 25th of May and admitted on the 6th of June. He
ad-
mitted that there had been an erasure,but the circumstances
ho could not explain without reference to his private notes..
To the best of his recollection he made the erasure hininnotef.
Several other questions were put to the witness connected
with this subject, to which he gave most elaboraten
cases to
In consequence of this the questions had in
be repeated, Colonel Pipon having protested thatwu i
possible for him to record the answers. many
was im-
possible
witness was still under examination when the Court
rose at 4 o'clock.
The President announced that the next meeting of the
Court would take place at 10 o'cloc on Monday next.

...;-----„..-----,----
Liverpool Cotton Narket—This Day.

Sales of the week, 74,960 bales, including 21,260
on spec. and 15,680 for export. Actual export,
5,363 bales. Quotations: Middling Orleans, 28;
Upland, 271; Fair Egyptian, 29. E,timated
stock, 256,100 bales. Imports 01. the Week,
43,999 bales,. Surats,

Tim CELEBRATE)) 'VIOLINIST HERR joAciiim
AND I.IS YOUNG WIFE 7i117.1t iS,U.IIdOrBLOOd, V6it LOlidCn
in tl).3' spring.
.He is at present giving a series of qtiartet
concerts at Hanover.
.
tric HITHERTO ANONYMOUS AUTHOR OF
" GRANDMOTHER'S MONEY," " Wildflower," and other
novels published by Messrs. Hurst and Blackett, and
which have attained some popularity, announces his namo
as Mr. F. W. Robinson, in connexion with n new novel
Ikon'. his pen, in the press, entitled " 4 Woman's liansow."

THE PROPOSED EUROPEAN CONGRESS,

(From the Gazette of this evening,)

The following is the dispatch of Earl Russell to
the French Governmentrdvcitning to take part in
the proposed European Congress :
Foreign-office, Nov. 25.
My Lord,—Her Majesty's Government have received
from the Marquis of Cadore, the copy of a despatch ad-
dressed to hint by Monsieur Drouyn de L'iluys, in answer
to my despatch to year -Excellency of the 12th Est. Her
1I jes~y'e Government having obtained an answer to the
inquiries they made, will not any longer delay giving a
deti,litive reply to the iuvilation addressed by the Emperor
of the French to her Majesty the Queen, to take part in a
Congress of the European Puwers to be assembled in Paris.
In enclose a copy of the Emperor's letter of invitation to
the Queen which is similar to one which has already ap-
peared in the dlloaiteur, addressed to the German Confede-
ration.

Her Ma;esty's Government fully recognise in this step
the desire of the Emperor of the French to put an end to the
disquietude which affects several parts of Europe, and to
establish the general peace on foundations more solid than
those on which, in his opinion. it now rests,
The Emperor declares that Francois disinterested in this
question; that he, iM his part, seeks no aggrandisement,
and that the interests to be secured are those, not of France,
but of Europe.

Her Mdesty's Government may also declare that Great
Britain is diaiuterested in tnis matter, and she seeks no
aggrandisement, and that she has only to counsel modera-
tion and peace.

But France and great Dritain being thus disinterested
eboentshZrrL le conduct of Powers
themselves,wh atn aarean g
Congress,
bound to
otfheteprroistiotiroyn,oranodf
who may be called upon to make sacrifiteeiss
It r;ose to sao on this occasion
p rwo(i)nnei
gin cLanldi
ttrel
eortaal strength;
the
iu
admitsand the bind-
a n
ry trhaigcnticaml
loyr,o of
thatEhe Tmpieerantri esof 18
of
th
e 1 5.
French
me portions of
ji ne
sgt
sf, o,
sr coe
oov%mrnaran many portions
tp oaratiroenasdoi
readily
ha
lot eaewt rtehaat
ti e ss
0; her Ma-
them have been modified or disregarded, and that other
portions are tow menaced or called in question,
per Majesty's Government understand from the expla-
nations given by Monsieur Drouyn de L'Huye, that, in the
opinion of the Government of the Emperor, it is obvious to
every one that there are several questions, not hitherto
solved, which may disturb Europe. Of this nature are the
following :
Must the conflict in Poland be still further prolonged ?
Is Denmark to be at war with Germany, and have the
Powers which formerly took a part in the discussion of this
question become indifferent to it?
Must anarchy continue in the Danubian Principalities,
end thus at any moment tend to reopen the question of the
East ?
Must Italy and Austria always remain in presence of
each other in a hostile attitude;?
Must the occupation of Renee by French troops be pro-
longed for an indefinite time?
The Emperor's Government put a further question :
Must we, without having made now attempts at conci-
liation, renounce the hope of lightening the burthens im-
posed upon the nations of Europe by excessive armaments,
kept up by the feeling of mutual distrust ?
These, no doubt, are the principal questions which either
disturb or threaten tha peace of Europe but there is a
further question which her Majesty's Government con-
sider to lie at the bottom of the whole matter, and that is
the following :
Is a General Congress of European States likely to fur-
nish a peaceful solution of the various matters in dispute ?
This, indeed, is the question which it behoves the Go-
vernments of the different States to consider seriously and
attentively.
There appears to her Majesty's Government to be one
main consideration which must lead them to their conclusion.
After the war which desolated Germany from 1619 to
1649, and atter the successive wars which afflicted the Con-
tinent of Europe from 1793 to 1815, it was possible to dis-
tribute territories and to define rights by a Congress, be-
cause the nations of Europe were tired of the slaughter, and
exhausted by the brthens of war, and because the Powers
who met in Congress had by the circumstances of the time
the means of carrying their decisions and arrangements
info effect.
But at the present moment, after a continuance of long
peace, no Power is willing to give up any territory to which
a title by treaty, or a claim by possession.
For example, of the questions mentioned as disturbing
or threatening Europe, two of the most disquieting are
those regarding Poland and Italy.
Let us examine the present state of these questions, and
see whether it is probable that a Congress would tend to a
peaceful settlement of them.
Iu the first place, with regard to Poland, the question is
not new to France, to Austria, or to Great Britain.
For t everal months these Powers, while carefully ab-
staining from any threat, have attempted to obtain from
Russia by friendly representaticzis the adoption of mea-
sures of a healing nature, but have only succeeded in pro-
curing promises, often repeated, that when the insurrection
shall have been put down, recourse will be had to clemency
and conciliation. Would there be any advantage in re-
peating in the name of a Congress representations already
made with so little effect ?
Is it probable that a Congress would be able to secure
better terms for Poland unless by a combined employment
of force ?
Considerable progress has been made by the military pre-
ponderance, and by the unsparing severity of Russia, in
subduing the insurgents.
Is it likely that Russia will grant in the pride of her
strength what eh° refused in the early days of her dis-
couragement ?
Would she create an independent Poland at the mere re-
quest of a Congress ?
But if she would not, the prospect becomes one of humi-
liation for Europe, or of war against Russia; and those
Powers who are not ready to incur the cost and hazard of
war, may well desire to avoid the other alternative.
It may be truly said, moreover, that the present periodlis
one of transition. If the insurrection shall be subdued, it
will then be seen whether the promises of the Emperor of
Russia are to be fulfilled. If the insurrection shall not be
subdued, or if, in order to subdue it, the Polish population
is treated with fresh, and if that be possible, with aggravated
rigour, other questions will arise which may require further
consideration, but which would hardly receive a solution from
a large assemblyof representatives of all thepowers of Europe.
Indeed, it is to be apprehended that questions arising from
day to day, coloured by the varying events of the hour,
would give occasion rather for useless debate than for prat •
Heal and usefgl deliberation in a Congress of 20 or 30 repre-
sentatives, not acknowledging any su,reme authority, and
not guided by any fixed rules of proceeding.
Passing to the question of Italy, fresh difficulties occur.
In the first place, it is intended to sauctibn by a new treaty,
the present state of possession in Italy ? The Pope, and the
Sovereigns related to the dispossesed Princes. might, on
the one side, object to give a title they have hitherto re
fused, to the King of Italy; and the King of Italy, on theid
other, would probably object to a settlement which
the
appear to exclude him, by inference, at least, from the ac
-
appear
of Rome and Venetia.
But is ;it intended to ask Austria, In Congr,esos,
flounce the possession of Venetia ? Mejests
epre.
ment have good grounds to believe that no Austrian R
otvoerrnel
svvsinouolfdthbee
tion was to be discussed. They are informed
sentati ve would at tend a Congress
beforehand,
Atuhswerh therefore,
re,eAuuttc
hthsht
sucheeraaltd.pirf‘ovvpooolisilild-d
an intention were announced
decline to attend the Congress, andttrliaaarti if h question
Minister
introduced without notice, the
quit the Assembly.
would °gia oaou2n: beco
Congress
sgsh t
and to
sight
delibera-
tions of the Congress
alternative of nullity or war.
sucho a
ant
But is it possible to assemble
a al i
of
n Venetiarepresentative
T h e
aEnt
don sit it
oairtdomwf thehtho without
tt
Frenchd isetl g the
it
er
nules e
vheas
aSntaltet
And course
arcely
twhaelnvfilidrtshntapit.cebrgseaorpndoattaooibGfieeee.rl,many
and
Denmarkit
several of tho Powers of Europe have interested stedistlet
in that question, but the addition of Spain,
improve the
and Turkey to the deliberation wouldsc ortugal, Italy,
prospect of a satisfactory solution.
Poland and Italy, no beneficial result if, with regard to
is it expedient to call together a is likely to be attained,
States of Europe to find a remedygeneral Congress of all the
Wallachia ? for the anarchy of Moldo-
Were all these questions, th
and the Danubian ose of Poland, Italy, Den-
mark,ten Provinces,
mere utterance of opinions, to be decided by the
vernment upon most of theta the views of her Majesty's Go-
materially to differ em might, perhaps, be fouud not
French. from those of the Emperor of the

But if the mere expression of opinions and wishes would
accomplish no
positive results, it
8 cars certain that the
deliberations of a Congress would consist of demands and
pretensions put forward by some and resisted
tiy others
and, there Leing no supreme authority in such .n 383,b
:aid
to enforce the decisions of the majority, the C'DTe,6,B worse
probably sep irate, leaving many of its Ineuss'er; I,' ~n they
terms with each other than they
bi'4.beeressult, it fol-
-13;,
met. But if this would be the Prf'bt i; likely to beal4H
lows that no decrease of arnounen
N. Drouyn de
Lord Clarendon in
effected by the progress Congresbew
L'Huys refers to api ()piss' nuulceougress of Paris. But
one of the last sittings
%tot:wen two Powers to he re-.
her Msjesty's Governm
have reference to a dispute
. a friendly Power, but in no
°f
thenderstand that proposal to
('erred to the good officE%-fGeneral Congress.
way to the assembling' of
fore,
to discern the likelihood of
Not being able,.thtrueen,,s which the EMperor of the
those beneficial ti
" • Be.lif when proposing a Congress, her
French promised
,e hicanii, following their own strong convic-
Majestrs G°- -1n: deliberation, feel themsslves unable to
tions, after it
'''
instructed to give a copy of this despatch to 11,
You are Ipaetruial I\lok:sty's invitation.
Drolrl do '
accept
his
II tfuys,—l am,-&c.,
(Signed) RussELL,