The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-31 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, AUGUST 31, 1863.

particularly when this was coupled with the fact that it
was proved that he admitted that on this night he was
" shied," and that he had only seen the backs of the persons.
Could they doubt for a moment what condition this man was
in when he was going home on the morning in question at
two o'clock or that even granting he did see two persons walk-
ing together, might he not have been very easily mistaken in
supposing they were Mr. Woolley and Crozier ? The jury
would not forget that the witness Temple, his wife, and his
son were in Cautpden House at the time, and if Mr. Woolley
and Crozier really had gone out after they were supposed to
have gone up to bed, would not they have been aware of the
fact ? but yet they did not venture to say that the fact had
occurred. Both Mr. Woolley and Crozier were also well
known, and if they had been walking about Campden House
at this early hour in the morning would not some one have
recognised them ? It appeared to him, that after the con-
tradictions that were made by Ellis, and all the other cir-
cumstances, they ought not to place the slighest reliance
upon his testimony; and, while upon this part of the case,
he could not help thinking that it was rather a strange
thing that young Temple had not been called as a witness,
He played a rather prominent part in the proceedings that
took place after the fire was discovered. He was present
when his mother jumped out of the window; and the only
way in which he accounted for his absence was, by suppos-
ois nnfa
aett
etdr
eta
ordhr. iyicst
Her learnedudeanhb, friend was
fafnuaforgt
wha
father
nautt
wofa
upon
rhehsedo:hmiaraned
important
mrte noohrstataevxnesata examined
nieslei
rem, v
eeo
dvt he
hreyer
facthanadd
upon which the defendants relied to support the charge of
arson; and he asked the jury whether, if upon such facts
they had been called upon to convict Mr. -Woolley of that
offence in a criminal court, and the present proceeding was
exactly the same, for they could not return a verdict for the
defendants without virtually deciding that Mr. Woolley
was guilty of arson, they would not have laughed at the.
idea. His learned friend had called a great number of
policemen as witnesses, but the contradictory statements
they made, and the confused character of their testimony,
appeared to him to render that testimony quite immaterial.
There was no doubt also that Mr. Woolley had complained
of their conduct, and without wishing to say a word in dis-
paragement of the police, who, generally speaking, were
undoubtedly a very useful body of men, still he could not
help remarking, with reference to this transaction, that it
was an admitted fact, that although a considerable portion
of the building was not on fire when they arrived, that with
the exception of a few chairs, not a single article of pro-
perty %as rescued from the flames, and all that they did to
save life was to send for the fire-canape; and he contended
that under these circumstances Mr. Woolley was quite jus-
tified in coming to the conclusion that they had not been
so active as they should have been, and that the Commis-
sioners of Police would have done well to have made some
inquiry into the matter, in order to ascertain how far Mr.
Woolley was justified in coming to the conclusion he had
arrived at.
One of the jury here inquired whether it was necessary for
them to hear any more of Mr. Bovill's address.
Baron Bramwell raid, if they were satisfied already, it
was, of course, not necessary to proceed further. The topics
that were urged by Mr. Bovill, however, appeared to him to
bo perfectly legitimate ones, and to be well worthy their
consideration.
The foreman of the jury said that his lordship must un-
derstand that the juryman who had spoken was only ex-
pressing his individual opinion.
Baron Bramwell said if they were not all agreed, it would
be better that Mr. Bovill should proceed. He would, no
doubt, not occupy them very much longer.
Mr. Bovill said he would be brief, but the issue involved
was really such a fearful one to Mr. 'Woolley, that if he were
to run the least risk from his having neglected to urge any
topic that tended to show the utter groundlessness of the
charge, he assured them that he should blame himself for
the rest of his life.
Baron Bramwell said that the learned counsel was per-
fectly justified in the course he had taken.
Mr. Bovill then proceeded to say that the Sun Fire Office
had undertaken to prove that Mr. Woolley had committed
the clime of arson, but he hoped he had satisfied them
that they had not only failed to do so, but that every one
of what they called facts tending to support the charge
was entirely fallacious. Mr. 'Woolley was acting not only
for the vindication of his own character, but for the protec-
tion of the public generally, for the jury would recollect
that the object the Sun and the other fire-offices had in view
by making the charge against him, was to escape from pay-
ing the £29,000, the amount for which they had granted
policies. Whatever result was arrived at, it would not
remedy the pain and misery that had been occasioned to
Mr. Woolley by having such a charge preferred against him;
and he believed that when the directors of the bun Fire-
office heard the verdict they would pronounce, they would
themselves regret having made such a charge upon such
shallow and unsubstantial grounds. The learned counsel
then proceeded again to comment upon the circumstances
connected with the fire, and he urged that every fact in the
case tended to support the suggestion that it was acciden-
tal; and he particularly remarked upon the fact that the
defendants, who through their surveyor ware well acquain-
ted with the nature of the building, treated it as one that
was likely to be destroyed by fire, and insisted upon being
paid what was called the doubly hazardous premium. The
most that could be said, appeared to be that no one knew
how the fire occurred, and he would ask them whether this
afforded the least ground for saying that Mr. 'Woolley did
it, and still less Crozier, for the charge, no doubt, equally
applied to him, who had nothing whatever to gain by such
an act. He concluded a very eloquent speech by stating
that the defendants had entirely failed in making out the
case they had set up, and he called upon the jury to give
the plaintiff the whole amount of his policy andinterest at
5 per cent.

Baron Bramwell then summed up, and he commenced by
observing that if the jury agreed with Mr. Bovill that the
defendants had failed in establishing the charge they had
made against Mr. Woolley, he was entitled to, and they
ought to give him, every farthing they could. The question
that had to be disposed of by the jury was undoubtedly a
most important one, not only to the public, but to the
plaintiff; and to the defendants it was probably of less im-
portance than to any one else, for to such eminently respect-
able and wealthy offices as the Sun, the Hand-in-Hand, and
Atlas the amount of money—which was the only question
involved, so far as they were concerned—was not the
slightest consideration. He thought it right to state, as the
result of his experience, that whenever an insurance office
defended an action of this description, they did not do so
unless they believed they really had a good case, and the
defence was, at all events, an honest one. The charge that
was suede against the plaintiff by the defendants was no
doubt a most grievous one; but the best proof that it was
not altogether so unfounded as had seen represented was
that, after the jury had patiently sat for four days listening
to the evidence that had been adduced on both sides, they
still thought that they ought to go on to the end, and
this fact, as it appeared to him, acquitted the defendants
of having done anything improper in ,defending the action
and if they should in the result believe they were in the
wrong. The public also had a great interest in questions of
this description, because if insurance companies were to pay
every claim when a fire occurred, although they might be-
lieve it was a wilful one, because by defending the actioa
they might bring discredit upon themselves and the public,
no one would be safe, as a dishonest person might take a
house next door to them with impunity and burn it down,
thus risking the neighbours' lives and property, upon the
assumption that the insurance company would not resist the
claim. If, therefore, insurance companies were merely to
consider their own immediate interests and to pay every
claim that was made, it appeared to him that it would be a
very dangerous state of things indeed, and it might be neces-
sary for the Legislature to interfere and take some steps to
ensure inquiry into all suspicious cases of this description.
It was hardly necessary for him to remind them that the
most innocent and useful institutions had by the ingenuity
of man been turned to instruments of serious mischief. He
might instance burial clubs, which in too many instances
had had to tho commission of nzurdcL in order to obtain the
burial fees; and there was no doubt that insurance com-
panies were frequently called upon to pay claims where the
fires were wilful. To the plaintiff the issue on the present
occasion was no doubt all important. He was charged with
arson, perjury, and fraud, and also with an act which,
if it had terminated in the death of Temple or any of
his family, would have amounted to the crime of wilful
d
mu
i kel-y to
e r,and with an act which at all events was very
have led to their death. The case for
the defendants, no doubt, also was, that having
committed the act the plaintiff had stood coolly looking
on, taking no steps whatever to save the people
whose lives he had endangered. This was alleged to be the
been conductacl adf
duced, c ae
no anof whom, from all the evidence that had
was very young he was
could be said than that when he
men who went into a not
merchant'squi te
office,s o s te anyandnydrse
inmaaine
dy
there
ge
until he worked his way up. It was then said that after
his marriage he had squandered his money away. Supposing
he had done so, he no doubt thought he had a right to do as
he pleased; and if he were asked the question he would no
doubtjustify the course he had taken. He had probably
squandered his money, and had possibly got into a station
not quite his own ; and if upon these grounds and the other
facts in the case they should think that he had committed
the crime imputed to him, all he could say was that the best
thing he could do would be to go to some place where neither
he nor Carupden House would ever be heard of again. He
must remind them that the burden of proof was upon the
defendants. It was they who had to make out that the
plaintiff had wilfully set fire to this house, and that Crozier
also was concerned in it; for it appeared to him that they
could not decide that one was guilty unless they were
at the same time of opinion that the other was also
concerned in the act. And the first thing in such a case
would be to inquire whether there was any motive for
the commission of such a crime. They must not under-
stand him to say that the absence of any. motive, or at all
events an adequate one, was a convincing proof that any
particular act had not been committed. They could not dive
into the hearts of mankind in order to discover the particular
motive that induced them to do an act; but the absence of
any apparent reasonable motive for the commission of a
great crime was always a material ingredient for the consi-
deration of a jury, and they would require stronger evidence
to show that the act was committed by the party ac.cused.
The motive suggested in this case he could hardlyqi, un-
derstand, lie believed, however, that one ouggeetzon by

the defendants for the.commigaion of the act by the plain-
tiff was that he
.night get beck the money he had ex-
pended ; and another was, that not being able any longer to
keep the station he had up to that time moved in, he had
ite his e
money friendswas
reasonable
he to
would the
orreceive
and to
They h
re-
solved to burn down his house and quietly retire from the
stage, and thus relieve himself from being in a position to
n
givet e thn expensiveesmuurastn insurance
s offices.
tcon :e •
tertainments he formerly had done : of course taking with
himv t h
It was for the jury to consider how far either of these pro•
positions
from
probable.
eider the value of the property that was destroyed ; and
with reference to the furniture only, there could be very
little doubt from the evidence that, even if they believed
every word that Temple had slid with regard to the articles
that were alleged to have been removed, the value of the
property that still remained it the house would have still
been considerably greater than the amount he would have
received from the insurance office for it. If he did set
fire to the house and destroy this property, be
also did a most cruelly ungmeful • thing to Miss Cope,
who had behaved so kindly b him, for it was her only
security for £13,000 which she had advanced to him.
While at the bar, he (the learned judge) had had a good deal
of experience in fire cases, and he did not remember an in-
stance in which a man who played at the game of arson did
not do so with very long odds it his favour. A man would
readily, no doubt, burn £5O worth of furniture in the ex-
pectation of getting £l,OOO for t from the fire-office ; but
he never yet knew a man who hat acted in a way the plain-
tiff was supposed to have done. :He must have jeopardised
£20,000 or £15,000 worth of property at the very least by
his act, and there was nothing to show that he could not
have obtained the same sum, alai probably more, by selling
the property in an honest and o?en manner. They started
then with these considerations ; and what was the case that
was sought to be established on the part of the defendants to
show that the plaintiff had committed the act imputed to
him ? The learned judge then briefly recapitulated the prin-
cipal points in the evidence thee had brought forward. It
was certainly rather remarkable that the plaintiff should
have gone down with Crozier oa this night to see him put
out the gas, and that he should have gone out of a warm
room and sat down on the stairs while he was so engaged.
The suggestion no doubt was, thit having pretended to go to
bed, and being met by the Temples while he and Crozier
were going down stairs upon their horrible errand, it was
necessary for them to give some explanation; and this was
a point for the consideration of the jury. The act in it-
°cif, I"'"'`.) appeared of a trivial oharaotcr, and possi▪ bly
might have been explained in the most y
manner. lie must observe also, that if the plaintiff
had wilfully caused the destruction of the building, if the
account of his conduct afterwards was correct, he must at
the same time also have contemplated the needless murder
of three people. Ile himself, however, could not beli▪
eve
this evidence; he could not believe that any man could be
such a fiend as to stand coolly looking on and not take any
steps to save the lives of the persons that were jeopardis•
ed
by his own act. Such a thing could not be. He now came
to the evidence of the man Ellis. It was impossible to sup-
pose for a moment that he was subpoenaed to tell an untruth,
and there did not appear to be any motive for his coming
forward to state what he had done. According to his evi-
dence he saw Mr, Woolley and Crozier walking together
on the morning of the fire ; and he also declared that he
saw their faces, and spoke positively to their being the per-
sons he saw. Upon this fact, however, he was contradicted
by two people, audit appeared to him there were no grounds
for coming to the conclusion that he was wilfully saying what
he knew to be untrue, but that if the persons he saw were
not Mr. Woolley and Crozier, he was probably mistaken. If
the jury should, however, be of opinion that this witness
did see Mr. Woolley and Crozier at the time he mentioned,
it was a matter well worthy of their most serious oonsidera •
tion ; because it showed, at all events, that those persons
were not speaking the truth when they stated that they
never left the house; and the jury would consider how far
this fact tallied with the other circumstances in the case in
support of the suggestion of guilt on their part. The next
evidence of importance was that given by Woolhouse, and
if they believed his story with regard to the finding of the
clothes in the passage was correct, it certainly involved a
very serious subject for inquiry. He must remark with re-
gard to this witness that he could not be mistaken with re-
gard to the fact that he deposed to, and he could not dis-
cover any grounds for imagining why he should have come
forward to tell a wilful untruth, or what motive he could
have had for doing so. If he really did find the clothes there,
it was, as he before said, a most important fact. They could
not have come there by any rightful means, and the sugges-
tion no doubt was that the clothes were thrown down in
this passage after the act of setting fire to the house had
been committed, and that they were taken off there before
going out to the back of the house ; and the material ques-
tion appeared to him to be, whether they could place reli.
ance upon the evidence of this witness. The learned judge
then said that the question was purely one of fact for their
consideration. The burden of proof was on the defendants,
and if they had not satisfied them by the evidence they had
brought forward that the plaintiff had wilfully set this place
on fire, they were not entitled to a verdict. He repeated
that before they could come to this conclusion, they must
at the same time be of opinion that the plaintiff had been
guilty, not only of arson, but of perjury, fraud, and almost
murder,these offences being accompanied by dire ingratitude
to his best benefactor, Miss Cope. The point involved was
one of very great importance to the public generally, and
all important to the plaintiff. They would consider all the
facts, and say what conclusion ought to be arrived at.
The Jury immediately returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Mr. Bovill said the amount of interest would be £277

16s. sd.
The jury said they gave a verdict for the plaintiff for that
amount also, making a total of £i,277 16s. 61d.
It was understood that this verdict would decide the other
insurances, and that the amount of the whole of them, with
interest, would be paid to the plaintiff.
Mr..l3ovill, addressing its lordship, said it had been a
very long and arduous inquiry, and he asked his permission
for the jury to be
Paid a gainea a day instead of the usual
fee of one guinea each forthe trial.
doubts whether he had the power to do
whatß a
was
a Bramwell
requested of
—jot unless both sides concurred. He
remembered in one instate° where it had been done a new
trial that ground.
quite willing on the part of the de-
fendants proposition of his learned friend.
T
tly paid a guinea a-day for their
attendance,en hdea j
ny , weremakinge seciuh
natotal of 60 guineas.
]u rw.aL s
Lush
to appliedsai
dconsent for
he
wast uponot
ucre

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

SATURDAY RERIEW.—M. von Bismark has satis-
factorily explained that absence of Prussia from
the Frankfort mewing which required no explana-
tion. H - has, however, managed to draw the at-
tention of Europe to what might otherwise have
escaped observation, and has revealed the extreme
indifference with which the Emperor of Austria
regarded the opposition of a King of Prussia who
has fallen so low as 'William I. The Emperor, to
the delight of all Continental gossips, went spe-
cially and in person to Gastein. There he saw the
King of Prussia,and:proposed a meetingofSovereigns
for discussing Reform. The King, prompted by M.
Bismark, pointed out, in the most convincing way,
that it would never do—that there must be all sorts
of diplomatic conferences first, and that, at the very
least, it would be necessary to wait till October.
The Emperor seemed to acquiesce, and went away;
but a few days afterwards up rode an aide-de-camp,
and brought an official invitation to the King to
attend a meeting of Sovereigns in a fortnight. Di-
rectly the Emperor of Austria found out that there
was to bo no competition on the part of Prussia, and
that he was to have a monopoly of reform, he was
quite easy. The iron was so hot that he could not
think of waiting till October to strike it. He knew
that Prussia would be absent, but he thought that
it was quite worth while to try to lead Germany in
the absence of Prussia. Of course the King of Prus-
sia was not to be induced to attend, however
ardently the leaser Sovereigns might regret his
absence ; and unquestionably Prussia had excel-
lent reasons for keeping aloof from the
movement if she chose to do so. She can al-
ways urge, and M. von Bismark does urge on
her behalf, the unanswerable argument that no
manoeuvres and shiftings of the Federation can bind
a member thatis strong enough to act independently,
and chooses to exercise her power. Prussia an-
nounces that the Sovereigns may make any arrange-
ments, and pass any resolutions, and set up any
sort of sham authority they please, but that she will
go on just the same, and think only of her own in-
terests. It is also easy for Prussian statesmen to
pick holes in the Austrian scheme. The proposal
of Vienna is not half liberal enough for such zealous
Liberals as M. von Bismark and his master. They
cannot stand a House of Delegates from Diets—
they must have a real popular Assembly freely
elected by the people, and the number of represen-
tatives must be in proportion to the population. It
such an Assembly were constituted, Prussia, as M.
von Bismark hints, might b 5 incined to respect its
decisions. The population of Prussia is rather more
than double the German population of Austria, and
M. von Bismark, therefore, meatat that Prussia
might act in harmony with an Assembly in which
her representatives were rather more than double
the number of the representatives of Austria. This
is quite in the established sine of Prussian policy.
The King and his Ministers have inherited a policy
which they did not invent, but which they cannot
abandon. It is very intelligible that Prussia should
say that all Federal Reform is moonshine until it is
settled who is to rule in the Federation : and that
Prussia, having double the German population of
Austria, and being in sympathy with the German
people, intends to rule. This is the line which all
Prussian statesmen have taken in recent years ;
and M. von Bismark talks as his predecessors have
done. He maintains the pretensions of Prussia,
but then he has done all in his power to make
the pretensions of Prussia absurd. If Prussia
were really able to lead Germany in arms, and
were the fountain of domestic liberty, the Prussian
notions of Federal Reform would be very plausible.
And, in theory, Prussia is strong and liberal. M. von
Bismark always speaks, when he is not addressing
the Prussian Chamber, as if Prussia were very
strong and very liberal. But facts are stubborn,
and facts are wholly against M. Von Bismark.
Prussia is weak, timid, and contemptible in its foreign
policy, shuddering at France, and catching con-
vulsively at the skirts of Russia ; while at home it is
reactionary and absolutist. M. Von Bismark and
the King, or the clique they both obey, have, for
the present, made the standing policy of Prussia in
Germany absurd and impossible. In words, they
are as brave as ever, and stick to the claims of their
country. But practically they have managed to
make Prussia and its opposition a nullity. The
statesmen of Vienna have seen this, and have taken

the opportunity of giving an accidental preponde-
rance to the influence of Austria. Everything
confirms the opinion that the project of Austria
cannot possibly be carried out, bat that Austria has
set a real reform on foot which its promoters have
a fair chance of controlling. The sovereigns have
hitherto occupied their time in settling the constitu-
tion of an imaginary Directorate, and very subtle
provisions have been devised for the election of the
members of a board which has no chance of possess-
ing real power, and which, if it had any practical
control, would seriously endanger the independence
of the smaller States. Nor is it to be wondered at
that German reformers laugh at the notion of a
Parliament which is only to meet once in three
years, and is to be composed in a great measure of
the nominees of the reactionary nobility. A still
more fruitful source of discord is the proposal of

Austria that the Federal Council shall determine

by a bare majority when the Confederation shall
defend the non-German possessions of any of
its members. It would be strange if Austria
could not command a barn majority, and
then she would at any time be able to bring the
whole force of Germany to guarantee her tenure of
Venice or Hungary. If there were any reality in
the details of the proposed reform, it would have
been a serious blunder in Austria to have made a

proposal which seems as if her object in taking up
her new position in Germany were a selfish one, and
exposes her to the imputation that all this appara-
tus of reform is nothing more than a manoeuvre to
strengthen herself in the provinces where she is
conscious of weakness. It is inconceivable that
Prussia should ever acquiesce in a change which
would make her the slave of Austria and oblige her
to renounce all independent action in Europe. One
of the most sensible acts of the late Prussian parlia-
ment was its declaration that it was no concern of
Prussia to keep Austria safe in Venetia ; and the
Prussian parliament, patient and long-suffering as
it is, would scarcely endure to have its decisions re-
versed by a body of which a very large proportion
would be simply nominated by Austria. Nor could
neighbouring Eurepean States regard with indiffer-
ence an alteration in the constitution of Germany
which would have an important bearing on the
balance of power. So long as the movement now set
on foot can be regarded as solely intended for the
defence of Germany, no one can complain ; and if it
can be said to be directed against France at all, even
Frenchmen would allow that Germany is quite right
to take care of itself.
SPECTATOR.—WhiIst the Ultramontane faction
and its favourite organs, the Armonia in Italy, and
Le Monde in France, endeavour to stir Catholic
faith by working on the superstitious feelings of the
fanatical and weak-minded, the liberal section
of northern Catholics resort to proceedings
more in harmony with the spirit of the age.
The Belgian archiepiscopal metropolis, Mechlin,
batter known under its French denomination
Malines, has been the scene of a remarkable
gathering of renowned Catholics. The assembly
might well be denominated a council of the Church,
were it not for three reasons; it was not convoked
by the Pope, it had no dogmatic object, and, above
all, the majority was composed of laymen. Morita-
lembtirt, Albert de Broglie, and Prince Czartoryski
sat there, in company with Monseigneur Sterckx,
Archbishop of Malines, with the Papal Nuncio and
Cardinal Wiseman. The famous M. Veuillot was
absent, and Le Monde scarcely deigns to mention
the important meeting; two circumstances which
alone would suffice to stamp the assembly with a
liberal character. Theology has nothing to do with
the Congress; and, in fact, if we accept the dogma
of the temporal power, scarcely any point of faith
was raised. The dignitaries, priests, and laymen
of the Church assembled together for merely poli-
tical purposes, and fall therefore legitimately under
newspaper criticism. Reserving and qualifying our
approval, we must sympathize with many ad-
mirable words that felPfrom the lips of the speakers.
It is a good sign of the times that even Roman
Catholic cardinals feel compelled to associate with
the laity in a public Congress, to listen compla-
cently to almost revolutionary appeals, and to
applaud with several hundred conscientious Church-
men, Montalembert's bold thesis—" a free Church
in a free State." The Congress;of Malines lasted
five days, and there were several public sittings
held in the Seminary of that ancient city. After
high mass wes celebrated, the members went in
procession through the streets, headed by Cardinals
Sterckx and Wiseman in their red gowns. The
masters of ceremonies wore ribbons of the pupal
colours, white and gold, and the hall was orna-
mented with an ivory crucifix under a red canopy,
and a portrait of Pius IX. over it. The Archbishop
of Malines opened the proceedings by a short
speech, in which he maintained that "men must
associate if they wish that their labours may LA
prove barren." It was certainly a startling though
gratifying fact to hear a cardinal of the Church of
Rome, the primate of a Catholic kingdom, conclude
with the generous words, "All honest opinions may
be put forward, all measures bent on propagating
good may be proposed, both may be supported, dis-
cussed, and refuted with the greatest liberty." The
Archbishop gave his blessing to the kneeling con-
gregation, in the saeramental words :—Benedictio
Del omnipotentis, et Full, et Spiritus Sancti descendat
super vos, et maneat, and the real business of the
Congress was opened with a speech by the working
president, Baron de Gerlache, the learned and re-
spected first president of the Belgian Cour de, Cos-
.