The Sun.
London, England, 1865-11-18 00:00:00

Extensive Robbery of Jewellery.

At the Mansion-house, yesterday, Mr. Frederick Waller,
who formerly carried on business as a jeweller, in Hatton-
garden, under the firm of Waller and Co., was brought
before the Lord Mayor, in the custody of John Mark
Bull, a detective City officer, charged with stealing a
diamond bracelet, and two brilliant and turquoise pins,
value £70., the property of Messrs. Nathan and Co.,
wholesale jewellers, carrying on business in John-street,
Bedford-row.

Mr. G. Lewis appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Buchanan attended on behalf of the prisoner.
Mr. Lewis, in opening the case, said that although the
prisoner was only charged on the present occasion with
having misappropriated property of comparatively small
value, he was afraid that in reality the amount of property
of which the prosecutors had been defrauded was very con-
siderable, ho believed to the amount of £1,500. The cir-
cumstances of the case were also somewhat peculiar. The
prosecutors had known the prisoner for several years. He
had formerly carried on business as a jeweller at Hastings,
but came to London, and for some time carried on business
as a jeweller in Hatton-garden, under the firm of Waller and
Co., but he did not appear to have been successful, and he
requested the prosecutors to allow him to have goods to
sell on commission, the arrangement being that there should
be a settlement every month, and that the prosecutors
should draw bills upon the prisoner for the amount of the
goods that wore represented to have been sold. Things ap-
peared to have gone on in this way for several months,
when the prosecutors insisted on a settlement, and the re-
sult of the inquiries that then took place was that the pro-
secutors found that they had nearly £1,500 worth of bills
that were dishonoured, and the prisoner admitted that ho
had pawned a great many valuable articles, which he had
previously represented to have been sold, and applied the

proceeds to his own use. The prisoner then asked them to
redeem some of the articles that had been pledged, and he
proposed that he should sell them, and that any profi t that
resulted from the different transactions should be applied in
reduction of the prosecutors' debt. The prosecutors agreed
to ibis, but insisted upon a settlement being made every
night, and the prisoner was then intrusted with various
valuable articles, among which were the diamond bracelet,
and the brilliant and turquoise pins, that were the subject
of the present charge. The prisoner appeared to have re-
presented to the prosecutors that ho had sold these articles
to Mr. Johnson, of Threadneedle-street; but in the first in-
stance he represented that gentleman desired that the pins
should be altered and made into shirt pins, and he mid that
if this was done he would give .£lO for them, and £3O
for the bracelet. The pins were accordingly obtained, and
the prisoner himself made an entry in the book to the effect
that they had been sold to Mr. Johnson ; but it was disco-
vered that this statement was entirely false, and the pri-
soner was given into custody on the present charge.
Mr. S. Lewis Nathan, one of the prosecutors, was ex-
amined, and he detailed the above facts, stating distinctly
that the prisoner told him he had sold the bracelet and the
pins to Mr. Johnson. Ho called upon that gentleman on
Thursday afternoon and ho then ascertained that the pri-
soner's statement was utterly false, and he immediately
sent for the prisoner and asked for an explanation. The
prisoner then admitted that he had not sold the articles to
Mr. Johnson, but to another person, and he said that he
had kept the money. The prisoner at the same time said,
but not in a defiant tone, that he was ready or resigned,
and witness might do what he pleased. Witness then
asked the prisoner if he had sold a diamond braclet to Mr.
M. Moses, a jeweller, in Oxford-street, as had been repre-
sented, and he said he had not. He inquired who he had
really sold it to, and the prisoner appealed to his solicitor,
who was present, and inquired whether he should answer
the question. Mr. Buchanan told him he might do as ho
pleased, and the prisoner after some hesitation said he
should decline answering the question.
Mr. Johnson and Mr. Moses were then examined, and
they deposed that they had not any such transactions with
the prisoner as he had represented.
Mr. Lewis then applied for a remand for a week, which
was granted, and the prisoner was removed from the bar.

LARGE CAPTURE OF SEALS.—The fishing smack
Alma, of Grimsby, arrived at Stromness on Monday week
with 43 fine seals on board. Tho vessel was cruising off
the Stack and Skerry in search of cod, but was not suc-
cessful. The day being favourable for effecting a landing
on the Skerry, the crew took the boat and went on shore,
where they discovered an immense number of fine seals,
enjoying themselves, as seals only can do, on solitary
skerrios. In a very short time the boat's crew captured
the above number, and immediately made sail for Strom-
ness to convert the result of their sport into cash.—Orkney
Herald.

[ADVERTISEMENT.] —Du Barry's delicious and health
ratoring Revslents Arablca Food, which oontains three
times the nourishment of the best meat, saves fifty times its
cost in other remedies, restores perfect digestion, strong
nerv, 5, sound lungs, healthy liver, refreshing sleep, func-
tional regularity, and energy to the most disordered or en-
feebled, removing speedily and effectually indigestion (dys-
pepsia), habitual constipation, diarrhoea, haemorrhoids, liver
complidnts, flatulency, nervousness, biliousness, fevers, sore
throats, catarrhs, colds, influenza, noises in the head and
ear., rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions, hysteria, neu-
ralgia, irrita'Ality, sleeplessness, acidity, palpitat"on, heart-
burn, headache; debility, dropsy, cramps, spasms, nausea,
and sickness, sinking fits, coughs, asthma, bronchitis, inci-
pient consumption, scrofula, tightness of the chest, pains at
the pit of the stomach, between the shoulders, &c. Certi-
ficate No. 20,410. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew
Ure, 31. D., ; Dr Harvey; Wurzer ; Dr ;
Dr Campbell. We quote a few out of the 62,0 0 cures : —Cure
No. 5",314. Tittenson • I cannot express my gratitude for
the benefit I have derive d from Du Barry's food. My ap-
petite is perfectly restored, the pains in my leg, back, and
chest are quite gone, and I am fast gaining strength and
flesh. Mrs A. Owen.—Cure No. 51,812. Miss Virginia
Zeguers, cured of consumption, after her medical advisers
abandoned all hopes of recovery.— Cure No. 49,832. 01 fifty
years' Indescribable agony from dyspepsia, nervousness,
asthma, cough, constipation, flatulency, spasms, sickness at
the stomach, aed vomiting. Maria Joly, Wortham, Ling, near
Diss, Norfolk.—Cure No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, of
Nazing Vicarage, Waltham Cross, Hcrts, of extreme nervous-
ness, indigestion, gatherings, low spirits, and nt rvous fancies
also Phillips,Graee htureaehde!satlreerest, ;4,
4K,
In tins, 1 lb., is. 9d. ; 21b., 4s. 6d ; 51b., lis. ; 121 b., 228. ; 241 b.
10e.—Barry Du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, London;
-street ; likewi -e
a tOl,
street Within ; 63, 150, and 298, Oxford-street ; 330, Strand ;
54, Upper Baker-street ; 103 Tottenham-court-road ; 96,
Upper-street, Islington, N. ; Harvey, Notting-hill ; Close
Brothers, es, King,
49, Bishopsgate-
High-street ; and Stubbs, Queen's-terrace, St.
John's -wcod, London; and all respectable grocers and Ole-
miste.—Beware of spurious imitations.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNAL S.

TimEs.—The rebellion of the negroes comes vei y
home to the national soul. Though a fleabite com-
pared with the Indian Mutiny, it touches our pride
more and is more in the nature of a disappointment.
In the Mutiny the public anxiety very soon con-
centrated itself on particular cases of suffering and
danger, and on the more conspicuous movements of
the army. There was hardly such a thing as a
general question raised. We must put down the
Mutiny, and there was an end of it. The wound is
healed, and has not left a rankle—no, not even a
scar. But Jamaica is our pet institution, and its
inhabitants are our spoilt children. We had it always
in our eye when we talked to America and all the
slaveholding Poweis. It seemed to bo proved in
Jamaica that the negro could become fit for self-
government ; that he could be a planter, a magis-
trate, a member of the Legislative Assembly ; that he
could preach and pray with unction and even deco-
rum ; that he could behave like a gentleman, and
even pay taxes. Certainly the outside of things was
delightful. There was only one white to about fifty
'coloured people; only a handful of soldiers ; scarce a
ship of war ever in port; and within a day's sail a Black
Republic. This was the outside, and of the inside little
enough was known. Of course the negro's own
special friends did not abuse him, and a couple of
thousand white families had something better to do
than to reopen an old sore. We were told, indeed,
by those whose fate had ever cast them on that
shore,' that the negro was incurably idle, intractable,
insolent, that he needed a strong master, and was
incapable of either self-control or gentle manage-
ment. It was clear that he would have valued his
freedom more if he had earned it and not had it for
nothing. But very little of this came out. The clergy,
indeed, reported a miserably low morality, gross and
grotesque fanaticism, a readiness to follow any leader,
a love of wild revivals and of secret meetings for
any purpose. We were prepared for this, and could
not help it. But, at any rate, there was the broad
fact that Jamaica was black, free, almost self-
governing, quite self-taxing, prosperous, quiet, and
happy. Who could gainsay the fact ? Alas for grand
triumphs of humanity, and the improvement of
races, and the removal of primeval curses, and the
expenditure of twenty millions sterling, Jamaica
herself gainsays the fact and belies herself, as we
see to-day. It is that which vexes us more than even
the Sepoy revolt. Then they show themselves so won-
derfully unchanged. Who will believe in race, and
the old English doctrine of family, when the re-
mote descendants of the King of Dahomey's sub-
jects show themselves in a moment " the very
moral" of their African forefathers ? They are as
treacherous, and as ready for deeds of blood, hideous
and ridiculous, as when they could slay thousands
to fill a trench with human gore. The very women
can show that irreverence for the human form
which Mr. Gladstone makes the great distinction of
barbarian races, . as compared with his beloved
Greek. Like the old Gauls hewing down the Patres
Conscripti, the sable mob fired into the Court-
house, and wreaked their blind vengeance at once
on the impersonations of law and order. For an hour
they revelled in blood, and in still more outrageous
insult to the survivors ; for days they indulged in a
drunken dream of negro mastery and white slavery.
It was Africa, hitherto dormant, that had broken out
in their natures. So little wit, or forethought, or
common sense had they that they carried the spoil
to their houses, and encumbered themselves with
the evidences of their crime. In their eyes it
was raid to be done in a day, whether to be
then forgotten or retaliated they hardly seemed
to have asked. One wish, however, crops out
strong enough. They desired the extermination
of their emancipators. This is all sad indeed. We
hardly know which will be most felt at our religious
and philanthropical firesides—the horrible ingrati-
tude or the evidently unimproved intellect of the
savage. Had he made a decent fight, or shown the
least forethought, we might have consoled ourselves
with the sorry reflection that we had educated him
for independence, though we had not changed his
heart. But it is too evident that head and heart
are both the same. We have been trying now the
best part of a century to wash the blackamoor
white, with all kinds of patent soaps, infallible dyes,
sweet oils, soothing liniments, rough towels, and
soft brushes. But he remains as black as ever, as
thick-skinned as ever, his hair as woolly, and his
cranium as hard. Of course we shall hear a great
deal about the strong measures taken to stamp out
the flame. There will be plenty of critics, both
abroad and at home, to review at their leisure the
proceedings of the courts-martial, the summary sen-
tences and rapid executions, the reprisals upon
chapels and cottages found to contain spoil. We
may ourselves wish that the tone of the despatches
had been more guarded, but we know that the wish
is utterly idle. A man pursuing agang of treacherous
murderers for several days, through rivers, moun-
tains, and morasses, under a burning sun by day,
and in pitchy darkness at night, without more than
a few minutes' sleep now and then, and with
horrid spxtacles fresh in his eye, can only write as
in a frenzy. Body and mind, and every part of the
frame, will be affected by any violent energy of
action. Nay, they will share any strong contagion.
Soldiering is always a rough business, but never so
rough as when savages are to be dealt with. Martial
law is in fact the law of necessity, for there is small
choice under such circumstances. A few men fol-
lowing the scent of treason or blood, through a
difficult country in the hands of the foe, cannot
encumber themselves with prisoners. The truth is,
a rising of this sort must be crushed at once, and if
a few hundred soldiers and volunteers are to do the
work of a large army they must make themselves
übiquitous, and they must everywhere finish their
work thoroughly, leaving nothing to the morrow,
which they may never see. Immediate justice is
the best mercy in the 'long run, for to the lower
class of minds death loses nearly all its terrors if it
is seen at a considerable interval. The acts of jus-
tice done we see no reason to impugn. The tone in
which they are described we can only regard as the
inevitable result of such a strain on the muscles,
nerves, and senses as we hope to be spared our-
selves. If any are disposed to be hypercritical, we
beg of them to consider at least the possibility of
kindling a fresh flame by apparent sympathy with
the rebellion.

ITERALD.—Whether Charlotte Winsor is to pay
the penalty of her crime, or to escape through a mis-
carriage of legal process, will be decided within a
few days. IVith the story of this atrocious murderer
every one is sufficiently conversant, but the question
raised by her counsel, and for the decision of which
she has been respited, requires some explanation.
It will be remembered that at the spring assizes at
Exeter Charlotte Winsor and Mary Harris were tried
for the murder of the child of the latter, before Mr.
Baron Channell. The case was commenced on a
Friday, and the judge concluded his charge,about
six o'clock on the evening of the following day.
The jury remained in consultation till midnight,
and then, on being questioned by the judge, declared
that there was no prospect of agreement to a verdict.
All the business of the assize had been concluded,
and the judge, under the impression that a verdict
could not be received on Sunday, was unwilling to
confine the jury for twenty-four hours. The jury
was, therefore,. discharged, and the prisoners were
remanded into custody, to be tried at the summer
assizes. On the 27th July Charlotte Winsor
and Mary Harris were arraigned before Mr.
Justice Keating ; and the prosecution, actuated by
a desire to punish the greater criminal, caused
Mary Harris to be removed from the bar and
placed in the :witness-box. Charlotte Winsor
was convicted and sentenced to death, and she now
lies in Exeter Gaol to await the result of the points
of law raised in her favour. The method by which
questions of law will be brought before the Queen's
Bench will be by setting out the above facts on the
record, and by bringing error in law on that record.
But the case will derive its chief interest, not from
the excitement created by the particular circum-
stances of Winsor's offence, but from the discussion
of a matter which has lost none of its importance
from the mere fact that it no longer involves the
peril of political persecution. The principal ques-
tions that will call for decision are—first, what
circumstances lend authority to a judge to discharge
a jury before verdict? Second, what is the result
of a wrongful exercise of such power of discharge?
The history of judicial practice displays an extra-
ordinary fluctuation of opinion. An examination
of the period preceding the Revolution leads to the
conclusion that there was a gradual relaxation of
Lord Coke's rule against the power of discharging
juries, culminating in an arbitrary and capricious
exercise of that power to meet the exigencies of
political prosecutions. It was, indeed, the gross abuse
of right which in the time of the Stuarts brought
the whole matter into question, and induced the
judges to revert to the more strict and ancient rule.
Probably there was no attempt to revive the prac-
tice of carrying juries to the confines of counties,
and precipitating the dissentients into ditches, but
the uncompromising nature of the resolutions, as
stated by Lord Holt, were calculated to satisfy the
most earnest admirer of a forced unanimity. '1 hese
were—" That in capital causes a juror cannot be
withdrawn though all parties consent to it ; that in
criminal causes not capital a juror may be withdrawn
if both parties consent, but not otherwise ; and that
in all civil causes a juror cannot be withdrawn but
by consent of all parties." But although such reso-
lutions might well satisfy the feelings of men who
had experienced the iniquity of political persecu-
tion, it was clear that many cases of necessity would
arise in which the judge would be compelled of his
own act to discharge the jury. No one would dream
in the present day of driving juries to such extre-
mities as to subdue conscience by hunger and secure
unanimity by torture. A reasonable delay—such

an one, in fact, as would give room for the re-
moval of prejudice and the avoidance of rash
conclusions, neither so short as to tempt to an
evasion of duty, nor so long as to ?nflict bodily
pain, has recommended itself to the more liberal
sentiments of the present day. Indeed, whatever
may be the modern practice as to criminal cases, it
is notorious that in civil cases the judges display a
readiness in discharging juries well calculated to vex
the soul of Blackstone or Lord Coke. Assuming,
however, that Mr. Baron Channell improperly ex-
ercised the power of discharging the jury, no case
.of " necessity " having arisen to justify the course
taken by him, there remains the more important
question whether the prisoner can take advantage
of that mistake and obtain a reversal of her con-
viction by bringing error. In order that this result
might be attained it would probably be necessary
to show that the mistake on the part of the judge
would constitute error in the record, and entitle the
prisoner to judgment. Let us put an extreme case.
Suppose the facts had been different, and that the
discharge had been absolutely capricious, would it
even then be in the power of the Court to say that
there had been error, and that the prisoner was
.entitled to an acquittal ? Now, it is well known
that there are many acts done in the daily per-
formance of judicial duty concerning which there
are definite rules of practice observed by judges.
To these rules they are bound to adhere and
yield, and no doubt a departure from those rules is
improper. But it by no means follows that a non-
observance of such regulations constitutes errors in
law, and entitles the aggrieved party to a reversal
of judgment given. Such an example might be
afforded by the wrongful admission of certain evi-
dence, and however much it might be thought that
there was a good equitable claim to a pardon from
the Crown, yet the mistake would not entitle the
prisoner to an acquittal. Now, it remains to be de-
cided whether the assumed mistake of Mr. Baron
Channell falls under this class of errors, and here a
field of argument is open which has all the greater
attractions because the soil still retains traces of a
virgin character. It is true that there are modern
cases touching nearly on the point ; but there has,
we believe, been no direct decision to conclude the
matter. That at this day the relations between judge
and jury, and the effect of a mistake in the process
of criminal administration, should afford debate, is
not a little remarkable, and speaksvolumes for the vi-
tality of legal questions. Possiblythose who have not
been inoculated with sufficient awe of the forms and
principles of law might fancy that a decision, even
on such important points, would be dearly purchased
if the cost was to be the acquittal of Charlotte
`Vinson Should the result of the judicial sentence
be unfavourable to the prisoner there can be no
doubt that she will suffer death. There have been
instances in which the lapse of time, or a suspension
of the punishment from some cause or other, has
been considered a reason for commuting the origi-
nal sentence. Indeed, the respite awarded to Con-
stance Kent rests on no other ground than an inter-
val of time between the murder and conviction; for
the hypothesis of possible innocence would lead to a
totally different state of things. But we may safely
conclude that in this case neither the efforts of self-
styled philanthropists nor the excuse of a conditional
respite will interfere. It is difficult to exaggerate
the offence of the unhappy woman, and unless the
operation of a legal principle effects her deliverance
no ground can be discovered for mercy.