The Sun.
London, England, 1853-01-15 00:00:00

• ,7, ,
);
,4,..04
.5, ,
.‘
(p,....
....---
7.,,,,,i5.*:_t, . .., ~-,...,, . ..., ~ • ~.. •t ..
_____
,i,:t. / ON TEE PRE T S7ATE
c Liamil,
• ~.:44,7r--;4,-..-,.,1-) , - _
,
QUESTION
efft - ' C 0.- u r ~,.., , ..(X, ~4 , _. ._ _..
„ . . _
. . .., , .
.1.; .
.--- 1 - --- c
•
~
- ~.., .
4--,,---, t,-
_-,-<--.- ,„ -,-„ ~„ , ...,..,,,„,,...,• 0 4.,., , ,
~,
-4,,A,,
,u-=1 .4
~. ~.• ' • N. ...., " '-/
..
''' ' ' .1, ,:,,,:',.. - , .... , 1
1 . MA ' ::'`. -,
~
, ..
0
~....ki, ...-,
~ .
•c
kg, : .
• ,,t,, ' „.., 7 fr, it ...
: _,,, '
i 0 4'
s i -,,f'l* -:--,
''''
''',,,-..'s__,......A.:;i'''' , ~;iii: 1 331;"13. it.:41./: '...,:r—A
/71111111,*,' .I,l•'S' ' 4, '',' ;14:41:: -t''7/7.;‘''
' -A---s..s*v--"-.4.‘-
t"...
1
)., ,
"4" '*' 1 , +' ' 4. /%' ---' • :"V; ,-",t'
, 7,v. .
Cile:r ''''..:<, ft, -.-- 4.,. • ,".• ..,,,,...✓
!,44.,. '
, ft ;
r f . *.l* ''':.. -z., , 'll' ,"-.A014 °44 in ,
't• )-. i,Y
re00:-/' •

[PRICE SD.

TBE MADIAIS.

th.e Morning
Advertiser.)
our Columns an
We ye;t(erFdraeynv into
able article from the Times, denouncing the perse-
cuting spirit of the Church of Rome, and bringing
home to her the charge, of having been the delibe-
rate, cold-blooded murderer of Francesco Madiai.
We quote from our contemporary to-klay another
article, written. in a similar spirit, and holding up
to the abhorrence of religion and humanity, with,
if possible, still greater effect, the insatiable thirst
of that Church for the blood of those whose con-
sciences lead them to differ from her. To this arti-
cle from the Times we bespeak the attention of our
readers.

It is a melancholy reflection, that of all the Go-
vernments of Europe, none but that of Prussia
adopted any steps to rescue the two Madiai from
the olutches of their Popish persecutors. We be-
lieve—and we record the conviction with unbounded
gratification—that
,our own Sovereign did send a
letter of remonstrance to the Grand Duke of Tus-
cany,against ,the incarceration, of these two poor
people in loathsome dungeons,- their only offence
being that they read their .Bible in their own
humble abode. That letter from. her Majesty also
contained an earnest appeal to Leopold the Second
to release the Madiai from the prison to which
they had been consigned, and, restore them to
their liberty. But the, letter was written in the
Queen's private capacity—if, indeed, any act of
her Majesty can strictly, be said to be done in her
private capacity. The Derby Government did
nothing in the matter. Nor could any energetic
interference be, expected of that Government
with such a man as Lord MalmeSbury in the Foreign
Office. A , person in his • poiitiOn,. filling the office
of Foreign Secretary, who could allow Austria to
maltreat, with impunity, Mr. Mather, in the way
she did, was not a person likely to interest hint-
self in the fate of the two poor Madiai.
Prussia, we repeat, of all the Governments of
Europe, did alone take a deep interest in the case of
these excelle4 unoffending people. We record
the fact to the lasting shame of this country, and
of every other civilised country in Europe. Nor
can we expect, now that one of the victims of the
relentless malignity with which the Church of
Rome pursues those who dare to differ from her,
has been transferred from his dungeon to his grave,
—that those, European Courts which have been
inactive and silent hitherto, will either take any
action, or raise their voice, with a view to the
liberation of the remaining victim of Popish ven-
geance. • Need we add that there is, therefore, no
hope for poor Rosa Madiai ? No one' who compre-
hends the true character of the Romish Church, will
be so simple as to suppose that she will relax her
iron grasp of the surviving widow, either from a
sense of shame, or from a consciousness of injus-
tice. She was never yet influenced by any such
considerations, and never will. Her vengeful spirit
will not be satiated until she has exacted the life of
Rosa also. Rome thirsts for the poor woman's
blood, and until she has drunk it, the course of per-
secution will proceed unchecked. The long list of
those who from first to last have been slain—some
suddenly, and others by a slow lingering process—
by the Romish Church furnishes a frightful com-
mentary on the Scriptural expression as applied to
that Ohurch—" Drunk with the blood.of the saints."
Though there is, and can be, but one universal
feeling of profound grief at the death of Francesco
Madiai, or, to speak more plainly, at the murder of
that innocent man through the instrumentality of
the Church, there is every reason to anticipate, that
the fiendish malignity with which that Church has
persecuted the poor man to the death, will be pro-
ductive of incalculable good. A large proportion
of the Protestant population in this country, were
impressed with the notion that the Popery of the
present time was altogether unlike the Romanism
which lighted the fires of Smithfield. It was be-
lieved that the Roman Catholics, like everybody
else, had yielded themselves up to the softening
and subduing influences of a growing liberality,
consequent on the progress of intelligence, and
that their Church would, as much as Protestantism
itself, shrink from sending to prison and putting to
death any person for his honest convictions.
No one possessing the reasoning faculty will any
longer labour under this delusion. Any such
delusion will hereafter be found impossible. The
murder of Francesco Madiai, and the anticipated
martyrdom of his wife, prove in a manner which
must bring home conviction to the most sceptical
mind, that the Church of Rome is just the same
in her spirit and character now, as she was when
she consigned, in scores, the most excellent men in
the land, to the fires which, with her own hand,
she lighted in Smithfield.

If home does not use the logic of the stake or
the scaffold in this country, it is not because her
faith or her disposition has undergone 'any change,
but, solely because she is not invested with the ne-
cessary civil power. The dungeon, the rack, and
the-scaffold, are still her favourite weapons of war-
fare frithle'retici. And nothing could have been
to her the source of greater mortification and 're-
gret, than that, when she "resolved on 'the aggres-
sion of 1850, she could not, instead of parcelling
out the country into Popish bishoprics, deal with
the most eminent heretics among us, as she dealt
with our Protestant ancestors in the days of the
Bloody Mary.
The Romish Church has no bowels of compassion.
She is a stranger to the feelings of humanity. In
her intercourse with those who reject her creed and
repudiate her authority, she would regard humanity
as worse than a childish weakness, if not as an un-
pardonable sin. Give her possession of the reins
of 'Government, invest her with the requisite au-
thority, and she will, without an hour's delay, em-
bark heart and hand in the enterprise of extirpat-
ing Protestant heresies, by all the appliances at
her disposal, and especially by the unsparing use
of the dungeon and the stake.

CHARGE OF MURDER.—In our last two numbers we
have given reports of an inquest, that was several times
adjourned, on the body of a child, of poor parents, named
Mary Ann Cleveley, whose death was caused, according
to medical evidence, by a fracture of the skull. It was
not considered judicious at the time to publish the evi-
dence of one of the witnesses examined—namely, of
Eliza Hale—as, from what came out in her own testi-
mony and in that of other witnesses, considerable suspi-
cion attached to her, although insufficient to justify her
being then placed in custody. For the same reason, the
jury hesitated in coming to a positive conclusion, and
accordingly returned an open verdict, the coroner at the
same time 'hinting to the inspector of police, who was
present, that if he thought the presumptive evidence
against Hale sufficient to justify such a course, she might
be taken before the magistrates and examined on the
charge of ill-treating the deceased. Acting on this sug-
gestion, and following up his previously instituted inqui-
ries, Inspector Hill lost no time in searching as closely
into the matter as possible, and at length, on Monday
last, the girl was brought before the mayor and other
magistrates, and an examination gone into. Hale was
shown to have been one of the lodgers in the house
where the deceased was kept by Mrs. Sutton, and on
several occasions to have used angry expressions con-
cerning her, such as " If the child was mine, I'd kill the
young —," &c. On the day on which the injury was
inflicted on the child, she said to Mrs. Sutton, on her
return home, "The child has fell down and broke her
skull ;" and at the same time Mrs. Sutton observed a
large nail on the floor, which she had seen shortly before
to be in its usual place, in the chimney, although loose.
This nail was just such a weapon as would have pro-
duced the hole that was afterwards found in the child's
skull. This and other circumstantial evidence of a simi-
lar kind, was considered by the bench sufficient to ren-
der it their duty to send the case before a higher tribunal,
and they accordingly committed Hale for trial at the
next assizes, upon the charge of wilful murder. Wilt-
shire Indvendent,
DEATH OF' THE OLDEST CLERGYMAN IN LONDON.—The
Rev. William Antrobus, 8.D., rector of St. Andrew
Undershaft, in the city of London, and of Acton, Mid-
dlesex, died on Tuesday last, in the 94th year of his age.
The rectory of St. Andrew Undershaft, to which the
rev. gentleman was instituted in 1794, is worth 1,800/.
rienl7g9e7, 0
gentle-
that a-year, and is in the gift of the Bishop of London.
Th rectory, of:.A.cton, rendered vacant by the death of Mr-.e
Antrobus, is also in the gift of the Bishop of
London
and is worth about 1,2001. a-year. The
man was instituted to the rectory
of
Acton v.
that he has been a beneficed clergy of the diocese of
-London nearly 60 years,
aMinraiEnse,dAwtkitYho.—h erations
at CLEWtiiese BmAinvesCoaPrePErau
Mates, in his last increasedw e ekl y ep activityort,
states—" Since my last report
and promise. Captain
we have made great pro-
gress into the hill, and the appearance of the? ode, which
yafoot
captain'switdeeelh waiter ; for the rich purple ore
is
Cornishnea I feel sure, make any
which came out of it
once the increasing yeosf yesterday (Wednesday) tells at
out right well, and the mixture valuethis mine. The water spouts
t of quartz and splendid
greasy clay stamp it at - mine •11 ere
once to be a that will
long pay more than its own working."
LONDON, BRIGHTON, AND SOUTH COAST RAILWAY.—
The accounts for the half-year ending the 3lst December,
1859 •
directors
-, having been submitted to the board, the
/lave decided declaration of a
e upon recommending the
dividend for the half-year of 21. 12s. per cent. upon
the
consolidated stock of the company, after settinla.ssictw!di
sum of 10,000/. -towards the sinking fund. 1.-Dl5l.
make the dividend for the year 1852 amounts to
per cent,

OF T.IIJ

(From the Weekly Dispatch.)
Ma. EDITOR,—The argument on vote by ballot was
long since exhausted. The topics connected with it,
whether logically or rhetorically, have been drained to
the very dregs. There is nothing more to be said ; that
is past question ; the only remaining inquiry is, what is
to be done ? or to be not done ? Of course .thi:3 inquiry
was not to be escaped by the new Administration.. It
has been answered. The ballot is not adopted by the
Government, but it is to. be an open question. That is
where we are, and let us endeavour to understand our
position.

Facts warrant the assumption that the ballot is a tine
qua non of Reform. It is advocated by every news-
paper and periodical heartily devoted to the cause of Re-
form. It stands in the programme of every association
formed to promote the progress of Reform. It is a popu-
lar topic at every great public meeting that entertains
subjects connected with question of Reform. In truth,
it is, as much as any particular item can be, altogether
one with Reform. Some who claim to be Reformers
would be satisfied with the ballot alone. Others, and
they are far more numerous, require its combination with
other measures, such as a large extension of the suffrage,
the abolition of small constituencies, &c., as essential.
But both these sections agree that the ballot cannot and
must not be dispensed with. They unite to say that if
there be no ballot, there will be no Reform.
From a Government pledged to.progress, it might have
been expected that something more on such a subject
-would have been avowed than mere neutrality. Popular
questions, it is true, pass through the form of open, be-
fore they become cabinet questions. This ceremony has
been many times repeated. Hence many people -have
rather prematurely rejoiced in the supposition that a
step bipvdrds has been taken in making the ballot an
open question. There is a step taken, indeed ; but it is
a very little step, and much shorter than. they supposed.
The ballot has really been an open question for many
years. It was left so by the Whig .Government that
carried the• Reform Bill in 1832. 'lt -remained so with
the last Whig.M.inistry. Several members of that Go-
vernment voted with Mr. Henry Berkeley during the
late Parliament. I might name Sir A. Cockburn, Page
Wood, and Sir John Romilly, while holding office.
What we have really gained now consists of two points ;
first, that it is an open question, not merely for the
members of a Whig Government, but of a coalition
Government, comprising the leading statesmen of all
parties ; and secondly, that this openness extends not
only to the members -of the Government, in the large
sense of that word, but to the Cabinet itself, where the
ballot has at least one staunch 'advocate in the person of
Sir Williain Molesworth. These are our gains ; these
and no more, whatever be their worth or their worthless-
ness.

Against these gains we have to set the yet unbending
hostility of two such influential statesmen as Lord John
Russell and Sir James Graham. They profess their
minds to be still unconvinced, and their antagonism
unabated. We must take the fact as we find it. To
solve the intellectual phenomenon would not be easy.
To assign or imagine motives, would be a less difficult,
but also a less agreeable, if not an unworthy occupation.
One inference may be safely drawn. If not now con-
vinced, they are never likely to be. The arguneentefor
the ballot cannot, by the nature of the case, ever become
stronger. The proceedings in the late elections bring it
to a climax. Intimidation the most fierce, and corrup-
tion the most foul, have done their worst. For the
electoral system, there is no deeper abyss of degradation
into which it can possibly sink. The credit of represent.
ative government itself is imperilled. But there is no
need to bestow proof upon the existence or magnitude
of the evil. It is confessed. Lord John Russell con-
fesses it now, as he confessed it 18 years ago. He has
been confessing it all that time. He has been thinking
all along that " this gear must be mended." He is like
the sinner in the "Night Thoughts," who "resolves and
re-resolve, then dies the same." "There must be some
remedy," argues his lordship, " but I will not consent
to take vote by ballot for that remedy." What will he
take, then, for a remedy ? He does not know. He pro-
poses no equivalent substitute. The experience 18 years
has revealed nothing to his" mind. The thought of
18 years has suggested no remedial device. All the op-
portunities of observation which office confers have been
repeatedly enjoyed by his lordship, but he has discerned
no means of obliterating this dark plague spot. Inter-
vals of leisure have enabled him to possess mental free-
dom. He has had time to read Thomas Carlyle and to
edit Thomas Moore ; but neither in the excursiveness of
invention, nor in the intensity of meditation, has he ar-
rived at a remedy for gross and, growing electoral abuses.
He is only now going, as he told the electors of London,
"to turn his mind to those other means which he thinks
may perhaps be devised, in order if not to extirpate, at
all events to diminish those scandalous scenes of bribery
and corruption which have unfortunately been wit-
nessed." •So we are put off with a possibility. The ex-
clusion of the ballot is made absolute by his lordship ;
the exclusion, or even the mitigation of corruption; is
only subject to a "perhaps" and a "may be." Thee is
not the way to deal with a nuisance which the country
feels, and has long felt is not to be endured.
The tenacity with which Lord John Russell clings
to open voting puts him into bad company. It
sorts him with those members of the ruling classes
who are determined to remain the ruling classes
as long as possible, in spite of the progress and just
claims of the industrial classes ; who strive for
oligarchical Government under the forms of democracy ;
who will concede the show of voting, provided the vote
can be bought or commanded ; who regard popular re-
, presentation as machinery to be worked for aristocratical
purposes ; and who will consent to no reforms that
will endanger their own ascendancy. The -antagonism
of this class to the ballot is perfectly intelligible. They
are actuated, not by a hostile principle, but by a hostile
interest. Their real objection is not to the secrecy of
voting, but to its freedom. While fully acquitting Lord
J. Russell of any such sinister motives, I cannot but re-
gret that he should so far identify himself with them ;
that he should obstinately stick, in this matter, to their
obsolete politics ; that he should grace their bad cause
with- the lustre of his name, character, and talents ; and
that he should cater for them by suggesting reasons,
arginnents, and excuses, which they have not the know-
ledge or the wit to devise for themselves.
Eighteen years ago, Lord John objected to the irre-,
sponsibility of ballot-voting ; now he objects to its
secrecy. The ground is shifted ; the objection remains.
I.shall not stay to refute either. lam not arguing the
question of the ballot, but commenting upon Lord John
Russell's conduct and language in relation to it, and on the
position in which reform and reformers are thereby placed.
It must, however, be observed, that the last, and, I hope,
the final form of the objection is merely that of a senti-
ment. Lord John declared on the hustings his senti-
mental antipathy to secrecy. He cannot abide it, He
hates it as Shylock says some men hate " a harmless
necessary cat," and others "a swollen bagpipe," that
sings i the nose." He declared that he was against
secrecy in everything; that, "as he was against secret
trials in our courts of justice, that as he was against se-
cret debates in our Houses of Parliament, so he was
against secret votes in our election." This fudge and
clap-trap were unworthy of the speaker. Is he against
secret prayer ? or secret almsgiving ? or secret consulta-
tions in the Cabinet ? or secret writing in Reviews ? or
secret letters in the Post-office ? When the right of se-
cret debating. in the House of Commons was asserted, in
the last Parliament, by Mr. John O'Connell, and the re-
porters were excluded, did his lordship's horror manifest
itself in any attempt to repeal the standing order which
authorises such secrecy? Does he ever object when the
galleries are cleared for a division, and the farce
performed of a secret voting by the members, which
lis published in the newspapers the next morning ? Of
all men, Lord John Russell ought to know that, in cer-
tain cases, secrecy is that which he holds in most pro-
found respect, viz., a constitutional principle. Public
opinion, guided by a sense of public utility, has set at
nought that principle in certain cases, such as those just
specified, and in which, practically, it no longer exists ;
but that same public opinion, guided by that same sense'
of public utility, demands the application of the principle
in certain other cases. It is unfortunate that his lord-
ship's protests against the principle are reserved for the
instances in which it is required for the protection of the
people.
Trials are public, that the judges may be held to their
responsibility. And so Lord John contends that the
voters should be held to their responsibility. But to
whom ? There was a time, regretted by an old lady in
Scott's "Heart Of Mid-Lothian," when judges were sub-
ject to the same responsibility as voters are now., and the
" pebble the judges with stones
populace could always
If this be still good for the
when they were bad boys."
voters, why not good again for the judges ? If it be
right that the judge should be protected, why not that
the voter should be protected ? And, to make the cases
analogous, we must suppose a wealthy man sitting on
one side of the judgetoup-on the ben*, with a purse of
gold in his hand, be given if the summing up
of the evidence accorded with his wishes ; and a
bludgeon-man on the other side of the judge, ready
to break his head should the summing up not teecord
with his wishes. Secret trials would be something.
better than such practices.. It may be said that we pre-
clude them, and yet retain publicity. That is true ; but
how' can that be effected in the case of the voter? That
is the problem; and Lord John leaves it with a "per-
haps, it may be."
Vainly seem the years to have passed over Lord Jolene
Russell's head, since, on a public , occasion, early in tho,
year 1835, he said, "I am sensible, no man more sire;
ez,
the progress which the question of? the ballotthehtas,
as n
during the late elections ; nor will I
deny it • but let
ultimate remedy, we may be obliged to adopt e of public
us first exhaust every other. If be
hlee eestigation and
' opinion and public shame—if by rigid
eans to Cheek in;
exemplary punishment—we can find in
evil been
And has the c
timidation and corruption, let these means
And have they not been tried ?
made
steady, rapid, and
be fully tried.'
checked ? nay, has it not
frightful progress ?
cenTlnreeiihe,aveeedbeeenll ctohnevicrteisor
of
dt ihse_
franchisements,
the ballot. Whatever could sharpen
commissions, that are, or are likely
addling and feckless e
to be substituted for
the discovery of a remedy as good
Lord
John's wits for
as the ballot has occurred, and left him still destitute of
lldoes not affect to have entered upon
:iny ;remising process a suggestion.ess of discovery. He has only the
forlorn
hope that something may turn up. Are Reform-
ers content o
t
shows
for that ? The very flimsiness of the
objections s
the strength of the 'innate hostility.
There is nothing left for it but to show an obstinate man
that others can be as obstinate. If he persists without
Act, arguments, or reasons, why should not we, who
have them, persist also ? If reason be resisted, pres-
sure must be applied. For that, with due consideration
of the
time and manner, Reformers should prepare
theselves.
PUBLICOLA.