The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-08 00:00:00

THE AFFAIT? OF THE TRENT.

I At the meeting of the Juridical Society held last night,
at their rooms, St. Martin's-place, Trafalgar-square, the
points of national law involved in the arrest of Messrs.
Slidell and Mason by Captain Wilkes were again discussed.
At the last meeting of the society, Mr. Charles Clarke read
a paper upon the subject, in which he deduced from judg-
ments delivered in the Admiralty courts the following
principles :—" First, that as a rule a ship is part of the soil
of the country to which it belongs, subject to certain excep-
tions—one of which is the right of a belligerent ship to
search it, though a neutral, fcr contraband of war; se-
condly, that it has the general right of freely sailing over
the seas, carrying cargo, papers, and:persons ; but this cargo
must, not be contraband, nor must the neutral engage itself to
do the service of a belligerent transport in the conveyance
of persons or papers between the belligerent mother coun-
try and its colonies ; for in such a case it may be lawfully
treated as a belligerent transport. Thirdly, that where a
neutral vessel is bona fide pursuing its ordinary employ-
ment between a neutral and a belligerent country (a multo
fortiori where it is doing so between two neutral countries),
the fact that the vessel has received on board in the ordi-
nary way as casual individual passengers or papers, the offi-
cers or despatches of one belligerent will not authorise the
other belligerent to stop and search it, nor to take the per-
sons or papers from on board it. Lastly, that it is unlawful
for a vessel of one nation to stop the vessel of another na-
tion on the high seas, to take out of it a person charged as
a criminal, for such an act is an exercise of a municipal
jurisdiction by one state within the limits of another which
can only be permitted by treaties previously existing be-
tween the two parties.
Mr. DANIEL, Q.C., last night carried the argument fur-
ther, and showed that between • neutrals the rights of belli-
gerents did not intervene. If such aright was conceded there
was no limit to the length to which it might be carried, and
Capt. Wilkes would, under such circumstances, be as much
justified in seizing Mr. Slidell subsequent to his landing at
Southampton while crossing from Dover toCalais. The learned
gentleman quoted from Marriot's Reports the judgment of
Sir G. Hay in the case of the Hendrik and Alida to show
that a ship sailing from one neutral port to another, and
carrying munitions of war and also officers the proven
enemies of a belligerent, had a free right of passage over
the high seas. Mr. Westlake then called attention to the
opinion of the Hon. Caleb Cushing, formerly Attorney-
General of the United States, upon the subject. He denies
that the question is to be governed upon the principles
which regulate impressments, the right of search, the arrest
of persons on foreign national territory, or on board a ship,
which is quasi national territory, as fugitives from justice ;
the fresh pursuit of a public enemy ; of the seizure of ene-
my's despatches ;or the arrest of military persons. It rests
entirely, ho states, upon the principle laid down by Lord
Stowell, and accepted by the best modern authorities, that
a belligerent has a right to stop, in Ware, enemy's ambas-
sadors, they being as yet unrecognised by the State to
which they were accredited, and much more so when they
were the unrecognised ambassadors of an unrecognised
State. In contravention of Mr. Seward he denies that the
case of Mr. Laurens is one in point, as it appeared from his
own narrative that the vessel in which he sailed for the
Hague was a ship belonging to Congress, and not a neutral
ship, as has been alleged in America. Ha also denies that
it at all matters whether the captain of the Trer t was aware
either of the political character of Messrs, Slidell and Ma-
son, or knew of her Majesty's proclamation, the points re-
lied upon by Mr. Edwin James ; and he likewise throws
aside, as unimportant to the issue, the question of violence
on the part of the captors, and the fact that the Trent was
voyaging from one neutral port to another. The subject
was further discussed by Mr. Marshall and Mr. Lush-
ington, &c., and the proceedings terminated in the usual
manner.

BENSON'S WATCHES AND CLOCKS.—" Perfection of
mechanism."—Morning Post. Gold watches, fS to 1(0 guineas;
silver watches, 2 to 50 guineas. Benson's new Illustrated
Pamphlet, free for two stamps, descriptive of every construo-
Lion of watch, enables persons in any part of the world to
select with the greatest certainty the watch best adapted to
their use. Watches sent free and safe by post on receipt of
a remittance. —J. W. Benson, 33 and 34, Ludgate-hill, 46 and
47, Cornhill, Loudon E.C. Established 1749,

THE FATAL ACCIDENT AT ST.
MARTIN'S HALL.

The coroner's inquiry into the causes that led to the
deaths of Richard Wood, Patrick Coghlen, and W. Sabey
was opened yesterday at King's College Hospital.
Mr. St. Clair Bedford (the coroner) and the jury having
examined the bodies of the unfortunate men,
Mr. David Sabey, of Pitman's-buildings, St. Luke's,
identified the body of Walter Sabey. He was my nephew.
He was about 23 years of age, and was a carpenter. I was
engaged at the hall when the accident took place.
Coroner—l will take the identity of the bodies before I
enter into the circumstances relating to the accident.
Mrs. Wood identified the body of Richard Wood as that
of her husband. He was a gasfitter, and was 21 years of
age.
Margaret Maley, of No. 2, London-passage, identified
the body of Patriek Coglin. He was a bricklayer's labourer,
and was about 25 years of ago.
Mr. John Barr Brown, house surgeon of King's College
Hospital, said—l saw the three injured men when they
were first brought to the institution on Friday last. They
were in a very bad state. Wood was totally insensible, Sabey
was partially so, and Coglin sensible. Wood had a broken
leg, a broken arm, a broken rib, and symptoms of a broken
head. Sabey had a broken arm and other injuries. Ceglin had
a broken arm and rib, and evidently an injury to the spine.
Wood was put to bed and the usual remedies applied, but
he died within half an hour after his admission. Sabey
continued in a state of stupor till five o'clock the next
morning, when he died ; and Coglin became delirious a
ttale ,llefore seven, in the evening, and after being so for
bout' half At •htlftti he died at eight o'clock. There has
been a post-mortem examination in each case. Wood died
from an extensive fracture of the skull; Sabey died from
the shock received, combined with the injuries ; and the
same circumstances had caused the death of Coglin.
Henry Daniels, a labourer,:said—l was employed by
Stephens, a zinc-worker in Old-street, to erect the scaffold
in St. Martin's Hall. I erected it from Mr. Stephens'
verbal directions, and it was completed on Friday morning.
Stephens was not present during the whole of the time I
was engaged in performing the work. I cannot say that
Mr. Stephens said that he was satisfied with the werk after
it was done, Mr. Prince furnished the materials for the
scaffolding. He resides at 74, Melton-street, Fore-street.
Coglin, the deceased, and Huggett assisted me in selecting
the board s.The scaffolding veasrequired to fix the chandeliers.
He considered that the scaffolding was sufficiently strong
to support eight men. I should not have hesitated to have
gone:on it with that number of people. I think there must
have been some sudden jerk. Stephens told me there would
be three or four men at work on it. I asked Stephens what
weight he wanted on it, and he said three or four men. 1
saw seven or eight men on the scaffold just before it fell.
After the accident I saw one of the cross poles which sup-
ported the flooring was broken. I belies e the pole would
have borne the whole weight of the men provided there
had been no jerk. There were 9 feet 6 between the two
uprights, and 12 boards rested upon the cross poles.
The Beadle—The boards weighed 421 b. each.
Witness—Some were thicker than others. Breaking of
the pole, I am certain, was the occasion of the accident.
Mr. Stephens saw the poles and boards before they were
loaded to be brought away. lle said he thought they were
sufficient for the purpose. I put up the poles because,
when I first spoke about the scaffolding, it was proposed to
use cords, and Sabey said cords would not be strong enough.
Mr. Stephens told me to erect the scaffold for three or four
persons. The scaffold was never tested to see whether it
was secure. Mr. Sabey who was foreman of the carpenters,
said he thought the scaffolding would act very well.
By Mr. Boulton, for Mr. Stephens—l first went to work
for Mr. Stephens on Monday week. I saw him in the
morning while we were getting the beards ready. I have
known the poles to have been used once previous to being
taken to St. Martin's Hall ; they then carried a greater
weight than they were expected to bear at the Hall, I was
directed to select light poles.
By a Juror—l don't know that by a light pole a short
one is meant. I was directed to get some light poles, and
I did so.
The inquiry was then adjourned.