The Sun.
London, England, 1863-09-24 00:00:00

TIM SIN. LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 24, 1861

'he Le igh Hay-making Case.--Defence of

the Magistrates.

The lustices at Leigh have published a defence of
their conduct in the form of a letter written by their
clerk, Mr. Richard Marsh, who asserts that the
facts of the case have been distorted and misrepre-
earned. He says :--" So far as the course pursued
by the justices, in point of law, is concerned, the
Atherton 1.3e-ach is fully prepared to sustain the
convictions it. felt bound to pronounce, and it will
await with confidence the judgment of a superior
tribunal, should the defendants be advised to have
its decision. reviewed. In the meanwhile, however,
it is due 'to the justices who convicted in this case
to put the facts in their true light, and so to pre-
vent the further circulation of the gross misstate-
ments which have been, and continue to be dissemi-
nated. Such misrepresentations, though they pro-
duce but little effect on the intelligent and well-
disposed, may, nevertheless, mislead the ignorant,
and are calculated to excite hatred against the ma-
gistrates personally, and to bring their administra-
tion. of justice into disrepute in the estimation of
the labouring classes. It is, nerefore, hoped that
the press will act in the inaerests of justice and
truth, and give publicity to the following account of
the matter. Long before the bench interfered the
attention of the local police had been called to the
numbers of working people in a state of drunken-
ness on a Sundfay in the vicinity of Leigh and
Atherton. In the, early part of July a man was
summoned before the magistrates for being drunk
on the previous Sunday, when ho stated as his de-
fence that he got the drink for making hay on that
day; and o n the next Sunday, July 12, the police
found a cart filled with drunken men returning
from a %lay's haymaking in the neighbourhood, and
on the following day (Monday) a clergyman made a
forms.' complaint to the magistrates that he and his
consaregation had been disturbed while in church by
the. noise of the haymakers at work in an adjoining
fir Id during the hours of Divine service ; and in
la ddition to this, the police stated to the magistrates
i a open court that Sunday haymaking was be-
coming very general in the neighbourhood, and that
much drunkenness and disorderly conduct was pro-
duced thereby. In consequence of such a state of
things, Mr. Superintendent Orton's officers on the ,
next Sunday, July 19, visited the fields of the de-
fendants, Howartb, Battersby, and the Cleworths,
having been informed that haymaking was then
going on. In the fields of each of these defendants
the police found numbers of men, some at work, and
others in a state of intoxication; and upon inquiring
from some of the men themselves it appeared that
'they received no wages for the Sunday's work, but
only their meat and drink, or, as they expressed it,
"a good blow out." In the defendant Howarth's
field the greatest number of the men were employed
in spreading the small grass coils. In Cleworth's
field part of the hay was in windrow, and the re-
maining portion was grass which appeared only to
have been shaken out that day. Consequently that
portion could not possibly have been fit for carry-
ing in less than two days; moreover, the weather
was fine and settled, and there was no appearance
of change foreboding damage to the crop. So much
therefore for the truth of the assertion that the
Cleworths had a meadow of hay ready for carrying,
which, from the state of the weather, they were ap-
prehensive of being lost, and were therefore com-
pelled to resort to Sunday labour as a work of ne-
cessity to save the crop from ruin.
" Such was the case in its general bearing and
antecedents with which the magistrates had to deal
when the defendants abovenamed, with some cf the
men employed, appeared before the bench at Ather-
ton to answer the charge preferred against them
under the Lord's Day Act. And now, it may be
asked, what were the magistrates to do ? It will
be observed that the desecration of the Sunday,
flagrant as it was, was not in this case a breach of
any Act of Parliament only ; besides being an in-
fraction of the law, this Sunday haymaking was
the producinq cause of drunkenness and disorderly
conduct atrhong the working people, and it there-
fore becP.rne the duty of the magistrates to use
every.le gitimate means to put an end to this open
violation of law, attended as it was by such mis-
chievous consequences.
" The statute under which the defendants were
summoned is precise enough in its 'terms, and the
bench considered the facts proved, in evidence fully
brought the defendants within its scope. No case
of necessity was made out on behalf of any of the
haymakers, and therefore there were no grounds for
extending to them the execution contained in the
statute. Still, however, the bench was unwilling
to convict, the object of the magistrates being re-
pression rather than punishment, and the court
offered to let the defendants off en payment of the
costs only ; but this clemency was misconstrued
into an indication of timidity on the part of the
justices, and was indignantly declined by the de-
fendanter Cleworth, who refused to pay either pe-
nalty or costs until compelled to do so.
" The bench thus set at defiance had but one
course to pursue in order to make the law respected;
and to put an end to the repeated and indecent pro-
fanation of the Sunday, with its attendant coon-
quencee of drunkenness and demoralisation ; they,
therefore, most properly convicted the offenders in
the penalty of ss. each, and the costs of the prose-
cution. The defendants and their sympathisers
sought to impute unfairness and partiality to the
magietrates for having dismissed the case against
the coalheavers, also summoned with the haymakers
for a breach of the Lord's Day Act ; but in this
case of the coal labourers it was satisfactorily shown
that their Sunday work was a work of necessity,
which brought them within the proviso of the act.
In such a case, had the magistrates convicted, how
would tleeir conduct have been attacked as oppres-
sive ar,d. 'unjust; yet this acquittal, humane and
discriminating as it was, has been tortured into a
Partial and one-sided application of the law by
those who seek to raise the howl of popular preju-
dice against the proceedings of the Atherton jus-
tiel'll and the local police.
Public feeling has also been appealed to as to
the conduct of the police when they proceeded to
enforce the sentence of the petty sessions. What
are the facts? One of the defendants of the five
against
Whom distress warrants were issued is
alleged tohave been in indigent circumstances, and
sympathy has been sought to be evoked by the pic-
ture of the constable's cruel mission to his poverty-
stricken dwelling
; the poverty of this individual
has in the first place been grossly exaggerated; but
besides this it
appears that he was not distrained
upon at all, for the Police retired leaving his volu-
ble wife mistress of the field without removing an
article of his property, As to the dwellings of the
other four defendants, they are confessedly comfort-
ably furnished; their
Yards well stocked, and on
them the police most Properly levied sufficient to
satisfy the penalty and costs Which
up to the last
the defendants obstinately refused to pay. The
property so distrained
consisted in all of only two
pieces of household furniture and
a COW Which have
since been sold by public action, to be bought in
with much parade by or on behalf of the
owners.
"Thus, therefore, the police, so far from acting
harshly; acted upon the side of leniency, for they
halted in the execution of their duty at the first and I
only cry of poverty that was raised. As to the en-
forcement of the penalty and costs against the other
four defendants, it would be difficult for even their
advocates to suggest how the magistrates or police
could have acted with greater moderation, unless
indeed the authorities were to suffer the law to be-
come a 'dead letter, and its execution to be resisted
by every sturdy and contumacious offender.
~ The magistrates of the Atherton bench at pre-
sent only desire to repel the imputation of partial
and oppressive administration of justice. They are
not responsible for the policF, be it good or bad, of
any piece of legislation on which it is their duty to
however, be well to tell the defenders
of It may,
of Set-;day labour
that the act of Charles II , on
which they
have expended a great deal of ignorant
criticism, is not the only legislation on the subject
to be found in our statute-book. This statute is
only an extension of various acts of the legislature
passed in preceding reigns, the principle of which
may be traced back even to the days of our Saxon
ancestors; and so far from the statute in question
having become forgotten or obsolete, its existence
has been recognised in several acts of parliament
relating to the Barn subject down to the reign of

his late Majesty William IV. Indeed, the observ-
ance of the Sunday, not as a pharisaical Sabbath,
but a day of repose from the ordinary labours of
the week, is a time-honoured ' institution among all
classes of Englishmen; and it deserves the support
of all who are the real friends of the working com-
munity—' it humanises by the help of conversation
and society the manners of the lower classes ; it en-
ables the industrious working man to pursue his
occupation in the ensuing week with health and
cheerfulness.' The Sunday is in every sense the
poor man's holiday,' to which every hard-handed
peasant in the kingdom is entitled as his inheritance
—a birthright which the law in its humanity will
not allow him to sell. The Atherton magistrates,
therefore, deserve not the reproach but the grati-
tude of the labouring population in their neighbour-
hood for protecting them against those who, for
their own interest, seek to deprive the weekly la-
bourer of his Sunday's privilege, and who are sordid
enough to get a day's work out of their poor neigh-
bours by the temptation of drink instead of the
payment of honest wages."

The Ghost Visiting the Lord Chancellor,

BASINGSTOKE, Wednesday.
THE PATENT OF DIRGES AND PEPPER, ON THE OPPOSITION
OF LOIBL AND SONNHAMMER, WILD, KING, AND OTHERS.
Yesterday afternoon the Lord Chancellor was visited in
his lordship's library, at his mansion, Hackwood Park, near
this town, by no less a personage than the übiquitous Ghost
and a number of gentlemen all claiming more or less legiti-
mate relationship with him. Messrs. Loibl and Sonnham-
mer, the proprietors of the Pavilion Music Hall, at the top
of the Haymarket, took him down. Mr. Wild, of the Al-
hambra, Mr. King, of Bath, and Professor Pepper, of the
Polytechnic, and others, were also in attendance, supported
by their respective legal advisers. The facts of the case are
as follow :—ln February last, after Messrs. Dircks and
Pepper's ghost had turned out a " hit" at the Polytechnic
last December, they obtained a provisional specification,with
a view to patent ; in the following March, just before it was
time to obtain the Great Seal, the other parties above named
lodged objections according to the Patent Law Amendment
Act. On account of these objections the patentee obtained a
further month's provisional protection to answer them.
Affidavits were further filed on both sides, and the Lord
Chancellor fixed yestez day for the disposal of the case, so
far as the issue of the Great Seal was concerned.
Messrs. Loibl and Sonnhammer were represented by Mr.
Bower, jun. (Bower, Son, and Cotton, Chancery-lane); Mr
Mr. King by Mr. Clarke, Messrs.
DircksW i Wild bya
Pepper Mayhew,nd
pperbyMr. Hughes (Hughes, Kearsey, and
Co., Bucklersbury).
After disposing of some legal technicalities, which his
lordship adjusted to meet both sides,
Mr. Bower went into the merits of the case. He put in a
number of affidavits tending to prove that the invention was
by no means new, and that it had been exhibited in London
otr.seenmien grefteorrerdesthiosn
loHrdesrhripDotbolaerp, le
and throughout the country as far back es 1845 the pa-
aybill
brernatteadgecoonjfuri
the period, wherein one Palmer exhibited it for his benefit
at Margate. As the proprietors of the pavilion had taken a
model stage down with them, all complete, the " house was
lighted up," and his lordship had the pleasure of witnessing
the ghost business very conveniently. He was also shownb
ghost
photographs, taken by King, of Bath, and Sylvester
of New Bond-street, in 1860. Mr. Sylvester is also a ghost'
exhibitor, and has met with singular success at Canterbury
Hall. As Mr. Pepper is in the arrangement there was no
opposition from that quarter. Mr. King was also a patentee
in rivalry with Mr. Pepper, and has undertaken to indemnify
all his customers against any hostile action on the part of
that gentleman.

In the course of the argument his lordship said he remem-
bered seeing the same thing when a boy, t 5 years ago ; it
was exhibiied by Belzoni, the celebrated traveller, and an
account of it published.

It was urged that by Messrs. Pepper and Dircks exhibiting,
it in December last year at the Polytechnic, it was a publi-
cation that barred the right of patent. On the other side,
affidavits were put in from Sir David Brewster and Profes-
sor Wheatstone, testifying that the invention was new.
The Lord Chancellor delivered a very clear and elaborate
judgment at considerable length. He reviewed all the affi-
davits, and said the objectors had no grounds before him ;
they came in at the last moment and wanted to overturn
all the three hearings of the Attorney-General, who must
have been satisfl3d of the merits before he remitted the patent
for the Great Seal. If he withheld it the patentees had no
remedy, no appeal elsewhere; but by granting the patent
he placed them in a position to prove and maintain their
right to it. Nor would this inflict any wrong on the ob-
jectors, as they could try the value of the patent in a court
of law. His lordship then directed the Great Seal to issue
with all costs and charges against the objectors.
The case extended over three hours.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT---Sept, 23.
OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Byles.)

Charles Jestico, a man of middle age, described in the
calendar as a "dealer," was arraigned upon an indictment
charging him with feloxiously receiving certain valuable
securities which had been stolen from a post letter, well
knowing them to have been stolen.
Mr. Clerk and Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted ; Mr. Sleigh de-
fended the prisoner.
The prisoner had been a lettercarrier in the General Post
Office for 17 years, but relinquishing that situation he had
latterly kept a beershop in St. George's-circus, Blackfriars-
road. There he became acquainted with one Robert Dowle,
who lodged in his house, and to whom, on removing to
Chelsea, he let the shop, which Dowle has since used for the
sale of boots and crinoline, having at the same time a resi-
dence at 30, Manor-place, Welworth. It appeared that to-
wards the end of June last Mr. William H. Nicholson, a
banker at Rochester, and a shareholder in the Scinde Rail-
way, was, with others of the shareholders, offered by the
company a certain number of new shares, which were then
being issued. He and members of his family signed five let-
ters of acceptance of such new shares, representing in the
whole 115 shares of £2O each, and in respect of 72 of which
Mrs. Phillips, his sister, had signed. They were then selling
in the market at D. per share premium. On the Ist of July
Mr. Nicholson enclosed the five letters of acceptance in a
letter addressed to Messrs. Upward, of 15, Throgmorton-
street, his brokers. That letter, which was posted at Roches-
ter by one John Lough, his servant, never reached its des-
tination; and the prisoner, with an accomplice, was found
dealing with the letters of acceptance, which had been en-
closed in it, the very next day after it should have been de-
livered in London in the ordinary course of post. On the
2d of July, about 2 o'clock in the day, the prisoner called
upon his acquaintance, Dowle, at the shop in St. George's-
circus, and after some ordinary conversation as to how he
was " getting on" asked him to have something to drink.
Dowle had an apprentice named Itedpath, a boy of 12 or
14, whom the prisoner sent out for some beer and gin.
While the lad was absent on that errand the prisoner pro-
duced a quantity of gold and silver, and asked to speak to
Dowle privately. With that view they went to the private
bar of the Duke of Clarence Tavern, hard by. There, ad-
dressing Dowle, the prisoner said it was a pity a smart
young man like him should be "hard up." Dowle replied
it was, but he could not help it. The prisoner said he had
it in his power to make his fortune, and with that he pro-
duced a pocketbook, from which he took a half sheet of letter
papar, partly written and partly printed. Opening that,
which proved to be one of Mr. Nicholson's letters of accep-
tance, he said, " This is what we are doing now ;" explain-
ing afterwards that it was one of several allotments of shares
he had in the Scinde Railway. He asked Dowle if he knew
any stockbrokers. The reply was that he knew two. "So
much the better," said the prisoner, adding that if he would
go and sell the shares next morning his (Bowie's) share of
the profit would amount to £24 or £25. Dowle led the
prisoner to believe that he would do so, and made an ap-
pointment to meet him the same evening, but which he did
not keep. The prisoner, as he was leaving, said the matter
about which he had spoken was only a trifling affair, but
he had something in his pocket representing £4,000. To
realise that, however, would require a journey to St. Peters-
burg. Dowle, on parting with the prisoner, went forth-
with to the Bow-lane Police-station, and made a communi-
cation on the subject to the authorities there. He met the
prisoner next morning, according to appointment, at the
Obelisk in the Blackfriars-road. The prisoner taunted
him with not being quite smart enough, and then, pointing
to a man who was approaching, said " If you won't do it,
here's a man that a ill." The person referred to, one
John Calder, is now a prisoner in Newgate, having since
been convicted and sentenced to penal servitude. Dowle
and the prisoner parted, and as they did so the latter told
Calder to walk on to the Oxford publichouse, in the West-
minster-road, and he would join him there.
Mr. Francis Austin, a stockbroker, of 25, Tokenhouse-
Yard, was called as a witness for the prosecution. He said
he remembered Mr. Bennett, a stockbroker, bringing him
the rive letters of acceptance in question on the 3d of July,
and their having
a transaction with respect to four of them
—one, representing 72 shares, being excepted. The shares
were then at a premium in the market. The four letters of
allotment represented 43 shares of £2O each, and the pre-
mium on them was £l3. Having completed the transaction
he handed Mr. Bennett a cheque for the amount, less his
brokerage, declining at that time to deal with the allotment
of 72 shares.

Mr. Frederick Bennett—l am a stockbroker at 2, Cop-
thal-chambers. On the 3d of July a man named John
Calder called on me with the five letters of allotment in
questi,,n. After some conversation with him I went on the
same day to Mr. Austin, and sold the shares at £1 premium.
The fifth allotment, representing 72 shares, was also sold,
subject to inquiries as to the genuineness of Airs. Phillips's
signature. As I kit my office to go on this business I met
the prisoner Jestico, about two minutes' walk from my
door. I had known him when I was a clerk in the Post_
office. He was at that time a letteremrier in the same office.
I spoke to him and asked if he was in the habit of delivering
mazy letters at the office of Messrs. Freston, solicitors, in
Coleman-street, and if they were respectable people. Calder
has 61ven me their names us referees. The prisonersaid he

thought they were, adding that he had then left the Post-
office. I found Mr. Freston at my office when I returned.
I gave a "sold note" to Calder, together with a cheque, and
gave back the acceptance letter for 72 shares to Mr. Freston
for verification, in the presence of Calder. I was in attend.
ante at Guildhall Police-court when prisoner was taken
there in custody on this charge. He same to me and said,
"Mr. Bennett, if I had known these things were going to
be brought to you, I would not have done it for double the
money." I turned away, making him no answer.

The convict Calder was called, and deposed that after
meeting the prisoner at the Obelisk on the 3d July, they
went together to the Oxford tavern in the Westminster-
road, when the prisoner handed him the five letters of allot-
ment, saying he wanted to convert them into money, and,
accompanying him to Copthal-chambers, showed him Mr.
Bennett's office. The prisoner remained outside while wit-
ness went in. Witness received a check for £lO odd from
Mr. Bennett and handed it to the prisoner, who gave him
£6 as his share.

Cross-examined by Mr. Sleigh, witness said he was con-
victed at the last session of the Central Criminal Court, and
that before his conviction he had mentioned the prisoner's
share in the transaction in question. Witness received
first of all £1 for his share, and afterwards £5 more on the
completion of the transfer of the 72 shares. He had no
reason at that time to believe that it was not a perfectly
fair and legitimate transaction in the way of business. He
had known the prisoner about a fortnight or three weeks
before. Witness had been a clerk to Mr. Freston, of Furni-
val's-inn and in Coleman-street, until about 15 months
ago. He had been in other employment' since, but not
permanently.
Edward Hancock, a city detective officer, apprehended
the prisoner at his house in Manor place, Walworth, on
the Slst of August, on a warrant. On being told the
charge against him, the prisoner said he did notunderstand
it, Witness told him that Calder, who had been convicted
and sentenced to six years' penal servitude, said that he,
the prisoner, had given him the letters of allotment, and it
was for him now to say where ho had received them. At
first he said he did not know Calder, but on the way to the
police-station he said a man of that name used to come to
his beershop, and that a short time ago he met him in the
Blackfriar'a-road, and had a glass of ale with him.
Mr. Sleigh, in a brief address to the jury on behalf of the
prisoner, confessed the difficulty he felt in struggling against
the facts stated in evidence. He could only say that the
prisoner had made a solemn asseveration that his share in
the transaction in question was an innocent one. To shy
the least, much of the evidence against him was tainted
with suspicion, and if the jury thought the case was sus•
ceptible of doubt they would give the prisoner the benefit
of it.

Mr. Justice Byles, in summing up the evidence, remarked
by the way that the witness Dowle had been exposed to a
great dealt of temptation, but had probably remembered the
old-fashioned injunction, "If sinners entice thee consent
thou not." Another man, who had given evidence on the

•
trial, had unfortunately not listened to that advice, and the
jury knew what had become of him. Addressing himself
to the facts, the learned judge dwelt upon the circumstance
that the prisoner was found in the possession of the letters
of allotment the day after they should have arrived in Lon-
don in course of post. If the jury believed Calder, he was
only the cat's paw in getting rid of the shares, Who stole
them there was no evidence to show; but that was imma-
terial, for whether the prisoner stole them or received them
knowing them to have been stolen, in either case he was
guilty, It was for them to say whether there had been a
conspiracy on the part of the witness for the prosecu-
tion, in which case they would acquit the prisoner, but, if
they believed there had been no such conspiracy, they
would probably think the case had been made out against
him.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty.
Mr. Metcalfe, counsel for the prosecution, said he ought

now to state that with respect to a man named Macdonald,

tried and convicted there last session for passing a check
which had been stolen from a post letter, the prisoner Jes-
tico was discharged from the Post-office for having induced
him to missort money letters,
Mr. Justice Byles, in passing sentence, said the prisoner
had been convicted on irrefragable evidence of the offence
chargedin the indictment. It appeared that he hen already
seduced one man into being an accomplice, who had been
convicted and consigned to six years' penal servitude.
Whether the allegations now made against him as to having
seduced another was true or not, he (Mr. Justice Byles)did
not know, but he was not going to act upon that. The sen-
tence he had to pass upon him was that he be kept in penal
servitude for eight years.

Helen Hannah Margaret Englehart, a respectably-dressed
woman, was indicted for manslaughter.
Mr. Orridge conducted the prosecution, and the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Sleigh.

The case was a very painful one, and its investigation
occupied the Court a considerable time. 'the prisoner and
her husband were married in April, 1859, and resided at
Eltham-green, in Kent. She had a child before her mar-
riage—namely, in October, 1858—by her husband. Its name
was Constance Augusta, and at the time of its death it was
barely five years old. Mr. Englehart was in the habit of
coming to London daily to attend his business, and of re-
turning home in the evening. The principal witmas was a
young woman named Jane Maynard, their domestic ser-
vant, and according to her the child had dirtied the carpet
in the dining room on the 31st of July last. It was then
between 5 and 6 in the evening, and the teathings had been
taken into the room. The prisoner was then up-stairs dress-
ing. On returning to the room she was angry at what the
child had done. The child was then sitting on the floor,
and a milk jug was upset beside it. She called the servant
from the kitchen, and telling her that she had often pro-
mised the child a cold bath. but would now give it one,
ordered her to prepare a cold bath and put it on the sink
in the back kitchen. This the servant did, and the pri-
soner having taken the child downstairs and stripped it
quite naked, put it into the bath. She tied a duster round
the child's mouth and dipped its head two or three times in
the water. Then she took the child out of the bath and
placed it on the edge of the stone sink t' drip. That done,
she put it on the floor and wiped it, giving it immediately
afterwards some cod liver oil, which she poured from a
bottle into its mouth. In doing that she spilt some of the
oil on its breast, upon which she took the child up, and
holding it with one hand under the sink, pumped water on
its head with the other four or five times. The child did not
cry while that was being done. She took the duster off the
child's mouth on removing it from the bath. She kept it in
the bath about 10 minutes. After wiping the child she took
it upstairs to the top of the house, but had not been gone
more than two or three minutes when she brought it down
in an insensible state. She then said she had let it remain
too long in the cold bath, and she ordered the servant to
prepare a warm one, which was done. The prisoner put the
child into the warm bath, but as it did not recover she told
the servant to go to the house of a Mrs. Wcod, a neighbour,
for some brandy. Mrs. Morrison, another neighbour, was
at her gate when the servant returned, and she accom-
panied her into the house. The servant had then sent for a
doctor. On seeing a bruise on the right temple of the child,
Mrs. Morrison asked how it had been caused. The pri-
soner's reply was that she had let it fall downstairs. She
had not before said anything to the servant about letting it
fall. The servant was in the kitchen while the prisoner was
upstairs with the child. The kitchen door was open and
close to the stairs, and the servant said she must have heard
the child fall if it had fallen, but she did not. Mrs. Morri-
son took the ohild from the warm bath, and putting it into
a warm blanket, kept it there until a surgeon came. The
prisoner explained to her that she had put the child into a
cold bath as a punishment, that on taking it out it was blue
and cold, and she put it into a warm one; that she had be-
fore putting it in the warm bath taken it upstairs, and was
returning with it when her sleeve caught the bolt of a little
gate at the top of the stairs and the child fell over the
baluster to the foot of the stairs. Mrs. Morrison remained
with the child until 10 o•clock. It died next morning
about 5. Mrs. Morrison, who assisted in washing it after
death, described it as being covered with bruises from head
to foot, It appeared that for some time before the prisoner
had given the child cold baths with salt put in the water,
on the advice of a surgeon, with a view to strengthen it,
and a suggestion on the part of the defence was that the
cloth was put over the child's mouth to prevent its swallow-
ing any of the salt water. The servant said the prisoner's
general treatment of the child was unkind.

Mr. David King, a surgeon at Elrham, deposed that he
was called to see the child about a quarter to 7, and that he
found it in a state of collapse and almost pulseless, so much
so that he thought it would have died immediately. He
remained with it about an hour. The result of a post
mortem examination which he made went to disclose a large
quantity of extravasated blood on the brain. That, in his
opinion, was the cause of death, There was a fresh bruise
on the right temple, and that, he believed, had caused the
extravasation. There was also a recent bruise on the top
of the left foot and other minor old bruises, which might
have been produced by the child tumbling about the house.
In cross-examination, he said a fall downstairs might have
caused the appearance on the temple. It was a delicate
child. The plunging a delicate ohild into a warm bath
after it had been taken out of a cold one would rarely pro-
duce such extravasation as in this case, unless the brain
had been previously diseased. There was no disease about
the brain of the child in question.
Mr. Blakeley, a surgeon, hi reply to the Judge, deposed
that he knew the child, and had attended it about a year
ago. It was a weakly child, suffering from general debility
and he recommended, among other things, coal-liver oil,
and occasionally a cold water bath, with salt in the water,
to strengthen the system of the child. He thought the
child ought not to have been kept longer in a cold bath
than five minutes.

11,Tr. Sleigh, for the defence, contended that what the
prisoner had done was at the worst a mere error of judg-
ment in keeping the unfortunate child longer in the water
than was consistent with prudence or safety, but that would
not constitute the crime of manslaughter. That, he sus-
pected, was the only conclusion warranted by the evidence,
and ho commented on the testimony of Mr. Blakeley, the
surgeon, who had some time before recommended to the
prisoner the use of cold baths with salt in the water for the
child, and of cod-liver oil, with the view to strengthen its
weak constitution, lie dwelt upon the prisoner's weak state
of health, and upon the pain and grief she had experienced
in reflecting on the painful result of her error of judgment

minehnedretdrehaetrmthentthoef
mthee crcihfuil, and on thoseldconsideration ofgi •othUn she
jury. com-
Mr. Justice Byles, in presenting the case to the jury, ad-
verted to the tender age of the child and to its being—adopt-
ing the language of the prisoner herself when before the
coroner—" a little weakly creature which a alight gust of
wind might blow over." It was important, he said, that
they should bear in mind the state of the child and its age.
It was born before marriage; but any one would:think that
that would be far from sufficient to overcome a mo-
ther's maternal instincts towards her own offspring. On
the other hand, there was evidence that the prisoner's gene-
ral behaviour towards the child was unkind. Nobody pre •
tended that the prisoner intended to kill the child, but she
was charged with manslaughter, and it became necessary to
inquire what wasthe cause of death. According to the medi-
cal man, the child did not die from the effects of the cold
bath, however improper or cruel, but from the blow on the
temple, which, he said, undoubtedly was the cause of the
extravasation of blood on the brain, all the other organs be-
ing healthy. The extravasation on the brain being the cause
of death, the question arose was that extravasation caused
by a blow inflicted by the prisoner after she had taken the
child upstairs, or by a fall ? If they believed she had given
it a blow, and that that was the cause of death, she was
guilty of manslaughter ; but there was no direct evidence
that she had, and they were not to convict on mere suspicion.
The jury, after some consider able deliberation, returned a
verdict of Not Guilty.

The prisoner was then tried on the same evidence, and
convicted of an aggravated assault upon the child by forcing
it into the bath.
Sentence was deferred.

eVerywhere, but no one could see her right again ; she was
afraid, for no medical than could do her any good.
The Chairman—Are you aware of the nature of the
charge against you; that you caused the death of deceased
by your conduct on the 3d August ?
The Prisoner—That night 1 I will tell the truth. That
night I went to the Swan very bad. I went up to the old
gentleman and asked him to go home with me, to do me
good. He said he would not go. Gibson took him up and
put him in my face, as he said to kiss me, but I did not want
him to do that, as I had a husband of my own. A number
of plaiters (of straw, for bonnets) came in and said, "How
bad this woman is." There were 40 or 50 people there,
few of them men. They got him out. Some shoved him,
some stoned him, and did more to him than I did. I begged
and prayed that he would go home with me, but he de-
clared he would not unless he liked. Ido not deny that I
put my hand to his head, but I was so bad I could not lift
a dog ; and this man hero (Stammers) took him by the
heels and thighs and threw him in the water, and then he
(Stammers) jumped in and got him out. I may die any
moment. There was one there who did not touch him, and
that was Mrs. Bruty, who said she was afraid of him. That
is the truth.

Stammers simply said he was not guilty.
The Chairman committed the prisoner to Chelmsford
Gaol for trial at the March assizes.

Bail was accepted afterwards for Stammers, himself in
£5O and two sureties of £5O each. Similar bail would have
been taken for the female prisoner, but as it could not be
procured she was convey ed to prison.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Tleas.—lf the abolition of slavery is being fought
out in America by the largest armed hosts in the
most obstinate battles history has recordetl, the "sup-
port" that can be given to the "cause of Emancipa-
tion" by a public meeting, a few speeches, and a
string of resolutions, is very superfluous. A straw
carried to a conflagration, a drop of water poured as a
contribution into the Gulf Stream, would have as
much practical effect as the " support" that can be
given by a little discussion to a cause that has four
armies behind it, and counts half a million of
slaughtered men as the sacrifice it has already de-
manded. Eniancipation,if this civil war is serving
it, has long passed beyond the point at which it
could derive aid or assistance from any expression of
sympathy. The addresses of encouragement to the
North made at the meeting in the Leeds Music
Hall are of as much avail for assisting the question
at issue as the exertions of the Spanish Coastguard
officer who, when reporting a shipwreck to the
authorities, added that he gave the unfortunate
crew of the stranded ship every possible assist-
ance—through his speaking trumpet. But the
second purpose of the Leeds meeting was
to strengthen the British Government in con-
tinuing
.that neutral policy which, notwithstand-
ing
all evidence to the contrary, the North and its
friends in this country will seem to think is always
in danger of yielding to some pressure. The Go-
vernment certainly requires no " support " in a
policy which completely represents the general feel-
ing of the nation. From the first, the nature of the
conflict plainly warned us that any interference in
the quarrel could produce nothing but difficulties
of all kinds; and among the many explations of
English feeling made by Mr. Forster, the chair-
man, to the representative of the Federation, he
might fitly have added that no admiration of the
manner in which the South has borne itself in the
war has as yet created any strong movement in
favour of England taking any part in the struggle.
He should also, in fairness, have abstained from re-
presenting the differences of opinion as distinctions
of the feeling of classes. This was unjust, and
we must add, notoriously incorrect. There is not the
slightest ground for ascribing Southern sympathy,
as is too commonly the case with our most wrong-
headed Rarticals, to the " upper classes," to men of
rank. and title, and opposing it invidiously to the
feeling of the nation at large, the middle ranks, the
commercial interests, end the working men. All these
sections of society have abundant opportunity of
making known their beliefs and convictions ; and if
they have not spoken out, in the tone approved by
the Emancipation Society, it is because they found
their‘ feelings pretty accurately represented by those
c
upper classes" who have so offended Mr. Forster
by an independent judgment that does not happen
tojump with his own. If Americans take Mr.
Forster's description of English sentiment on this
subject as a coned explanation, they will be fur-
ther from understanding us than ever. As the
real object of the Leeds meeting seems to have been
the clearing up of popular misconception on both
sides of the Atlantic, the chairman, as the self-ap-
pointed exponent of British feeling, ought not to
ha. ve spoken in the narrowest spirit of the platform
of Exeter Hall. What could be gained by mystifying
the American clerical representative, the Rev. Mr.
Channing, to such an extent ? Wo beg him not to
believe that the manufacturing population are
not such arden't Abolitionists as Mr. Forster
asserts, or that they hevo borne the distress the
war has inflicted en them more by reflections
on the blessings the negro is to derive from it
than the subscriptions and the relief given by
the District Committees. To prove this argument,
Mr. Forster should have gone a step further,
and assared Mr. Channing that if slave-grown
cotton ever again finds its way to Manchester the
spinners will indignantly refuse to touch a hank of
it as a thing accursed in its origin, and that they will
prefer continued suffering to full work at full wages
from the polluted bales of New Orleans. Any feeling
as to the question of slevery had as little to do with
the endurance of the cotton-spinners in their dis-
tress as it had with their condition when they were
prosperous. Then, like their employers, they cared
little whence or how the material of their indus-
try reached them, and would gladly flock to the
mills to-morrow, if supplied on precisely the same
conditions as before the war broke out. What the
men have nobly felt during the pinch of the cotton
famine is that the calamity was brought about by
nu act of their rulers, and that the disaster was one
that no possible action of the Government could
remedy; and they also fully appreciated the gene-.
rous manner in which all classes of their coun-
trymen came to their assistance in the time of need.
If a clear understanding of the state of feeling
on both sides does not grow out of an observation of
facts, we fear that public meetings called to set
matters right by mutual explanation are not likely
to produce it. The expounders are apt to be men of
extreme views and strong opinions. They give
everything their own colouring, and leave very much
unsaid. Both the English and the American advo-
cates at the Leeds meeting require a good deal of ex-
tension and correction. Both suppressed much that
bears vitally on the question. Can Mr. Channing
explain when President Lincoln's Proclamation be-
came a " noble and generous offer," when its author
still describes it as merely an act of military neces-
sity ? It does not spring from the "law of kindness"
to the negro, but the desire of damaging his master,
and involves about the same degree of real bene-
volence as General Gilmore's incendiary shells. Mr.
Lincoln's real opinions on slavery are those he re-
peated and affirmed in his inaugural address in
March, 2861, when " he declared he had no purpose,
directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institu-
tion of slavery where it exists ;" adding explicitly,
" I believe I have no lawful right, and I have no
inclination, to do so. Those who nominated and
elected me did so with a fall knowledge that I had
made this and similar declarations, and had never
recanted them." It is Mr. Lincoln's misfortune
to have become, under the pressure of the merciless
philanthropists of his party, an instrument for ex-
terminating the whites. But a Liberator of the
blades, on the benevolent theories of Wilberforce
and Clarkson, he neither has been, is, nor can be.
Their successors of the societies that are, as far as
England is concerned, extinct bodies, still use all
the phraseology in vogue thirty years ago, the " man
and brother" period of Emancipation, and seem to
think that freedom to the American negro would be
what it was to the petted and protected " African"
of our West Indian colonies. Our Abolitionists are
dreaming of " raising the black race" to a higher
status. Their coloured freeman is an imaginary being
that unhappily the " free soil" of North America
will not allow to become a reality. There the
liberated black is the most despised of Pariahs—
kicked, cuffed, spit upon, driven out of every field of
employment, by law expelled from some States,
massacred in any popular tumult in others, detested
in all as a nuisance. These are the facts that make
freedom to him a most cruel gift—facts that our
early Emancipationists had not to dread for the race
as a consequence of their principle. Will any Ameri-
can make it clear to English minds how it is possi-
ble that the people of the North can make really
free a race they thus socially despise and hate with
an intense hatred ? Englishmen do not think that
such contradictions can be reconciled, and therefore
believe that, with the exception of a few fanatics,
those who make Abelition the purpose of the war
are not sincere. Other object's are too evident to
allow the assertion to pass unchallenged that philan-
thropy is all that is to be enforced at the cannon's
mouth. President Lincoln is perfectly indifferent
on the principle of Abolition, and uses it only. as a
weapon of attack. A restoration of the political.
union, "with slavery or without it," ho himself
defines an the object of the war. The purpose is
distinct enough, but a high degree of morale cannot
be claimed for the means employed to effect _ The
fact is that English public opinion on the Civil War
remains the same as when that of the most eminent
men of America was identical with it. We think
now, as Lincoln and Seward, Scott and Everett,
thought before the actual outbreak, that the rupture
of the political compact was a catastrophe that war
would only aggravate. Passion has swept people
and leaders alike far beyond this point. But to make
it a complaint that spectators of the horrible con-
flict have not approved the plungeinto uMional

ruin is unreasonable almost to childishness. The
communities of Europe have merely retained the
power of reflection which Americans have lost in
the excitement of battle. While grieving over the
incidents of the war, we cannot applaud its purpose,
which still seems unattainable by force. Whatever
may rise out of the wreck, it will not be the old
Federal Union of America. When reason could
make her voice heard, that was the prediction of
American statesmen, and is still the general con-
viction of Europe. This is the real explanation of
what Americans in their present feverish state of
mind cannot understand, and • causes the English
" want of sympathy" to appear to it, as Mr. Chan-
ning said, the " wonder of wonders."

HERALD.—The Polish enlistment ease has termi-
nated favourably to all parties concerned except
her Majesty's Government. For the sake of avoid-
ing a little unpopularity with its Radical supporters
the Government, so ready to pounce upon steam
rams and Alexandras, declined to interfere with
Lieut. Styles, who was manifestly infringing the
laws of the country, and left to the Russian autho-
rities the responsibility of vindicating our munici-
pal law. The infraction of the Foreign Enlistment
Act was, however, not only clearly proved against
Lieut. Styles, but actually acknowledged by his
counsel, and it is to the consideration of the pro-
secutors that this foolish young man now owes
his liberty. The object they had in view was
stated from the first by Mr. Poland to have been
not so much the punishment of the accused as the
prevention of a mad enterprise which might have
led to the most mischievous results. This having
been attained by the pledge voluntarily given by
Lieut. Styles, and the decision of the Recorder, they
virtually abandoned the prosecution. Lieut. Styles
is lucky in having bad to do with the Emperor
of Russia. It might have fared worse with him
had the prosecutor been Earl Russell at the suit of
Mr. Adams.

POST.—The anti-slavery meeting held on Mon-
day evening last in the Music Hall, Leeds, may
fairly be regarded as a type of a class of public de-
monstrations with which the past two years have
made us familiar. The subject selected on these
occasions is the American Civil War, regarded from
an ultra-Federal point of view ; the platform inva-
riably contains a solitary member of Parliament,
surrounded by a few unknown clergy men and civic
notabilities, and the bulk of the audience is com-
posed of that large class of persons which is always
ready to attend any meeting whatever the admis•
sion to which is gratis. The resolutions are always
carried by acclamation, and as their several pro-
posers and seconders, more frequently than other-
wise, affect to speak in the name of the entire Eng
lish people, the proceedings of the evening are
invested with all the appearance of a popular de-
monstration. The meeting over which Mr. Forster,
the member for Bradford, presided, wanted none of
the characteristics we have noted. That gentleman
sustained the part of the solitary legislator. Of his
companions on the platform we confess to having
never before heard even the names. With respect
to one of them, however, our ignorance is excusable.
He was, after the chairman, the most brilliant
star of the evening. The Rev. W. H. Channing,
an American clergyman lately arrived from the
Northern States, kindly consented to furnish the
good people of Leeds with the true version of the
history of the great civil war, and to clear up many
of those misconceptions which the hon. chairman
regretfully admitted were entertained in this
country both in respect to its origin and to its pos-
sible consequences. It is needless to say that Mr.
Channing fulfilled his task to the complete satis-
faction of his hearers, and the meeting cheerfully
and unanimously endorsed the sentiment that the
present war is prosecuted by the Northern States
with view to the wider dissemination of the prin-
ciples of civil and political liberty. The speakers
at the Leeds meeting having in the first place as-
sumed that which they were bound to prove, made,
as might have been expected, extremely plausible
speeches in favour of the Federal Government. If
you begin by boldly asserting that the North is
warring against the South for the sole object of
abolishing slavery, and that the Southern States
have organised a resistance from no other motive
than a desire to retain in servitude those who ought
to enjoy the most complete liberty, it is of course
easy to prove that the population of the North are
very good and philanthropic, whilst that of the
Si uth are in a corresponding degree base and
wicked. And this is precisely what Mr. Forster
and the Rev. Mr. Channing did on Monday even-
ing in the Music Hall at Leeds, and what Mr. John
Bright has done over and over again, both in his
place in Parliament and on the public platform.
" The principle at stake," us Mr. Forster expressed
it, "is simply this, whether upon the continent of
America the principle of slavery or the principle of
freedom shall predominate." In the truth of this
statement we cordially concur, though we may give
to it an interpretation somewhat different from that
attached to it by the hon. member for Bradford.
The contest between the North and South un-
doubtedly does involve a question of freedom or
slavery, since its involves the question whether six
millions of human beings who have hitherto enjoyed
the privileges of self-government shall continue
to do so or not. That this .issue is at stake
in the present contest no one can deny who admits
that the Southern States prefer an independent
government. That the victory of the North would,
however, result in the emancipation of the South-
ern slaves, is, to adopt the most favourable view,
extremely problematical; but even assuming that
it did, the question would still remain open—
whether the enfranchisement of between three and
four millions of negroes war not rather dearly
purchased by the extermination or enslavement of
twice that number of whites. Negro emancipation,
in connection with the American civil war, is one of
those topics on which but very few men can be
folind to speak dispassionately, and it is no great
matter for surprise that a member of Parliament
who prides himself on being considered fanatical
in his views upon that subject, and an American
clergyman, fresh from New York, should have re-
presented the war in which the Northern States
are engaged as a religious crusade specially favoured
by Heaven. When a gentleman like Mr. Channing,
who, it may be presumed, is acquainted with the
princip'es of the American Constitution, describes
the President's emancipation proclamation as "an
honourable and proper proceeding," and when he
adds, " If ever there was a noble and generous offer it
was contained in that proclamation," we know tha t
it is useless to argue with him. Two centuries ago
the English people discovered that the doctrine of
Divine right in kings could not be sustained, and
we cannot but be astonished at finding the descen-
dants of those who, in the reign of George 111.,
raised the standard of independence in the Ameri-
can colonies, now investing an elective magistrate
with a species of Divine sanction to which, even in
the middle ages, the Lord's anointed did not ven-
ture to lay claim. According to the gloss given by
the present generation of American patriots to that
article of the Constitution defining the office and
duties of a President, a state of war converts a re-
sponsible governor into a despot, and empowers a
magistrate, elected for a brief number of years, by a
stroke of his pen to confiscate the property of many
millions of his fellow-citizens. But it might be asked
if the emancipation proclamation was the honour-
able and proper proceeding which Mr. Channing
describes it to be, why did not the President of the
United States extend its operation to the slave
population of Maryland, Western Virginia, and of
such portions of the Southern States as were sub-
ject to the dominion of the Federal Government?
On what principle, let ns ask " the friends of the
slave"—for to this title the gentlemen who
shared the platform at Leeds with Mr. Forster
and Mr. Charming aspire—on what principle was
it that the Federal Government, who, we are told,
are warring for the abolition of slavery, conferred
the blessing of liberty on the slaves of the disloyal
alone? Charity is proverbially said to begin at
home, and why not also the sister virtue, philan-
thropy ? The work of emancipation, whenever it
is in reality commenced, will, it is universaily ad-
mitted, necessitate the exercise of considerable cau-
tion. Why, therefore, does not the President of the
United States, by way of getting his hand in, begin
by manumitting the slave population of Maryland ?
These are questions which the true friends of the
slave in this country ask, but to which they have
never yet succeeded in obtaining satisfactory
answers. Pending the time when those answers
will be given, we must be pardoned if we stigma-
tise the speeches made in the Leeds Music Hill as
mere hypocrisy and cant. So long as this unfortu-
nate war lasts we may expect that meetings will from
time to time be held similar to that which we have i
now noticed. There is, however, one consolation
which the real friends of liberty in this country can
lay to heart, and that is, that no one, either ou this
or on the other side of the Atlantic, is deceived by
demonstrations of this kind.

Full benefit of reduced duty obtained by pur-
chasing liornixnan's pure Tea; very choice at 3s. 4d. and
4s. "High Standard" at 4s. 4d. (formerly 4s. Sd.), is the
strongest and most delicious imported. .Agents in every
town supply it in packets.

[A DVERTISEMENT]. Ifolloway's Pills and Ointment.
—ln angiy or indolent sores, and all skin diseases oriei-
nating in impure or weak blood or depraved secretions the
joint agency of Holloway's Pills and Ointment is perfectly
irresistible. It is of little consequence how long these
disorders may have lasted, or how sluggish, obstinate, or
malignant they may seem, the daily application of the
Ointment to the parts affected, and a course of these match-
less Pills will most certainly sffict a cure, not temporary or
superficial, but complete and permanent. Both the Oint-
ment and Pills are composed of rare balsams, unmixed
with mercury or any other deleterious substances. They
are accordingly as mild and sate as they are powerful,

Dreadful Tragedy.—Two Children Murdere
by their Father.

On Tuesday evening a frightful tragedy was enacted at
West Bromwich, which occasioned much excitement
throughout the town and neighbourhood, by a man named
Benjamin Holding, who is employed as a " bundler" at
the Albion Iron Works, Wednesbury, having murdered his
daughter and son, aged respectively four years and fifteen
months, by cutting their throats. It appears that Holding
left off work about three o'clock on the afternoon of the dar
in question. About five o'clock he was sitting in the
kitchen quietly reading the newspaper, when he asked his
wife to go to his father's, who keeps a small greengrocer's
shop, about sixty yards distant, to fetch some potatoes. In
a few minutes after he went to his father's house himself,
when on seeing his sister and mother, who were just entering
the doorway, he said, " I have done it." His sister replied,
" Done what, Ben ?" Ho answered, " I have murdered
the two children, which I have wanted to do for some time,
and you can make the best of it and the worst of it." His
mother and sister, in great alarm, immediately ran off to
Holding's house, where a heart. rending and horrifying spec'
table presented itself. One litt e girl, Mary Jane Holding,
was lying dead on the floor. On lifting the body a pool of
blood was discovered beneath it, while her throat had been
so deeply cut that her head seemed as if it would fall off
The little boy, whose throat was also cut in a similar man-
ner, was lying on his back on the sofa weltering in hie
blood. A large carving knife, about 13 inches long covered
with gore, was found on the floor of the room. The police
were called in, but Holding did not attempt to escape.
The prisoner, since he has been in the police-station, has
conducted himself in a quiet manner. At eleven o'clock
yesterday (Wednesday) morning Mr. Kite, police-sergeant,
went to him to ascertain the state of his mind. H°
replied to all questions in a rational manner, but ;said
that he had been " feeling badly in his kead," and had been
low in spirits for three or four years previously. The pri
soner, in explanation of his conduct, said " it was trouble ;"
but little more than this remark escaped his lips. An in-
quest on the bodies was held yesterday evening at the Red
Lion Inn, before Mr. E. Hooper, the coroner for the district,
when the above facts were elicited in evidence.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

,b,

NEWARK.--WEDNESDAY.

An average supply of wheat at our market, with a fair
demand, at about 2s per qr lower than last week's prices.
Barley not much in request, and prices rather lower. Beans
commanded good prices. Oats a fair show, and in order to
effect sales prices gave way 6d to is per qr.
White wheat new, 42s to 46s ' Barley, grinding.. 21s to 323
Red do. 4oa to 42s 1 Oats, old, .. 27s to 303
Old white 4es to 48s New do 22s to 243
Red do. 39s to 43s Beans. 38s to 41s
i
Barley, malting.... 35s to 39s Beans, new.. —s to —0