The Sun.
London, England, 1853-01-21 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH-JAN. 20.

THE QUEEN (ON THE PROSECUTION OF DR.
ACHILLI) v. NEWMAN.

Sir F. THEsiazu (in continuation of what appeared in
our impression of yesterday) said—Dr. Achilli had said
he believed charges were made againgt him by his ene-
mies after he left the Dominican order, and that his
friends might have taken them up and rebutted them,
but he had not done so. It was a remarkable circum-
stance in the evidence of this woman that her exa.mina-

tion in chief and her cross-examination took place on one
day, and her re-examination on the next day. On the
first day she made no statement that Dr. Achilli had
connection with her on more than one occasion; but the
next day, on re-examination, she was asked, whether she
ever visited Dr. Achilli again, to which her answer was,
" Yes." She was then asked, "And was the same thing
repeated ?" To which she replied, " Yes, that seven or
eight times she had gone to the sacristy in November or
December." Now, he asked, had the witness communi-
cated that fact to her attorney or not ? Was it possible
that so important a fact could have been lost sight of on
the first day by the array of counsel who appeared for
Dr. Newman ? The addition of such an important fact
on the second day had a most suspicious appearance. It
was asserted that a girl, 13 or 14 years of age, had been
violated, and that she immediately became pregnant ;
but the difficulty which that evidence suggested was the
next day removed by the additional evidence that con-
nection had taken place seven or eight times. The al-
leged rape took place on Good Friday, 1840, but the
childtwas born in October. Another important 'circum-
stance was the age of this young woman. Her mother,
on cross-examination, stated her own age to be 59,
and that she was 25 years of age when her daughter was
born ; so that the girl was born in 1818, and if this event
took place in 1840, she must have been at that time not
13 or 14, as she said, but 22. This was one of the cir-
cumstances which he (Sir F. Thesiger) had put to the
jury along with others, and how was it possible for the
Court, who had not seen the witnesses, as the jury had
done, could decide that the jury had no right to come
to the conclusion which they had, and that they were so
dissatisfied with the verdict that the case must be sub-
mitted to another jury ? The next charge referred to
what took place in the lonian Islands, but before he
came to that part of the case he must refer to the docu-
ment which had been produced from the Inquisition at
Rome. The learned counsel here read the document.
The learned judge (Lord Campbell) had suggested a dis-
tinction which existed between the parts of this document,
upon which the learned counsel commented at great length.
He then referred to a supposed discrepany between Dr.
Achill's affidavit, upon which the rule was granted, in
which he alleged that he had never been deprived of his
office, whereas it was said the document itself showed that
he was sentenced to perpetual sutpension. But the
affidavit was speaking of the charges of immorality, and
Dr. Achilli said he had never been reinoved upon any of
the grounds so alleged against him. ! He positively de-
nied that he was ever brought beforeithe Inquisition for
anything but his religion. It was wbrthy of note that
in that document no mention was made of any single
party, and there was nothing whatever to contradict
Dr. Achilles declaration that he was never brought
before the Inquisition for anything but erroneous teach-
ing. The 14th charge was that Dr. Achilli, in July,
1843, at Corfu, debauched the wife of Garamoni, a
tailor ; and afterwards publicly cohabited and committed
adultery with one Albona, the wife of one Vincenzi
Coriboni, a chorus singer. As to Garamoni's wife, the
charge of adultery, even if all the evidence was true,
entirely broke down ; and the latter case depended
chiefly on the evidence of Mr. Reynolds, one of Dr.
Archilli's congregation, whom Dr. Achilli had on several
occasions reproved for his intemperance. At the same
time there were other persons who might have proved
that charge, but who were not called. If Dr. Achilli
had been the notorious profligate at Zante, which Mr.
Reynolds alleged he was, it mug have become well
known at Malta, where, it appearedi Dr. Achilli was re-
ceived with the greatest respect, allowed to establish a
Protestant Chapel, and appointed to the most respon-
sible office of professor of the Malta'College. The next
charge against Dr. Achilli was the 15th, which stated
that Dr. Achilli had been dismissed from his office of
professor in the Malta College for an offence, which the
authorities could not get themselves to describe. The
fair inference which almost any person would draw from
that imputation was that Dr Achilli had been guilty of
an abominable crime.

Lord Campbell said he did not understand that such a
charge bad been made.
The Attorney-General said he never made such an
imputation.
Sir F. Thesiger said he was glad to hear that explana-
tion, because it would relieve Dr. Newman from the
load, which would otherwise rest upon him, of falsely
making such a charge against Dr. Achilli. It was clear,
however, to his mind that the words of the libel were
calculated to convey the imputation. So far was it from
there being any charge of the kind referred to, that it
appeared that no charge whatever had been made against
him for immoral conduct. While Dr. Achilli was in
England, a charge of immoral conduct was made against
two students, named Leonini and Zaccares, which was
at first dismissed, after an inquiry. A second inquiry
and he sent
was afterwards ordered, but Dr. Achilli thought no re-
liance ought to be placed in the testimony of Kaossi,
th the
charge,
r subsequently
came to
Zaccareshad
intobrought
Sicily. forward
Achilli
p
England, and the committee in this country being an-
noyed that Dr. Achilli should have left his post, and
also disapproving of Dr. Achilli's sending Zaccares
away, determined to break up the college. He was
thus removed from his professorship. The learned
counsel then came to the cases which were stated to
have occurred in England, in two of which actual adul-
tery was alleged. The first was that of Catherine Gor-
man, a servant in a lodging-house, who stated that Dr.
Achilli had twice taken liberties with her, but that she
had said nothing of what had occurred, except to
her confessor. She said nothing about this to her
mistress, and, under these circumstances, he thought the
jury were justified in giving credit to Dr. Achilli's state-
ment on oath, rather than to the story of the girl. The
next girl, Harris, was dismissed by Mrs. Achilli for be-
ing dirty, and without a character, and had, while in
Dr. Achilli's service, made no charge of the sort. The
next witness, Jane Legg, charged Dr. Achilli with adul-
tery • but iturned out that she was dismissed by Mrs.
Achilli for allowing the visits of foreigners, and on one

occasion having a young man in the house under suspi-
cious circumstances. This woman, having left the ser-
vice of Dr. Achilli, was confined, but she never made
any claim upon Dr. Achilli for the expenses which her
confinement entailed. The oath of Dr. Achilli was set
by the jury against the evidence of the servant dismissed
under such circumstances as they were detailed by Mrs.
Achilli, and he submitted that the jury were justified in
finding the verdict as they had done. The last case was
that of Wood, who stated that Dr. Achilli had forced
her in his room ; that she lived in his service for several
months afterwards without telling any one. She did not
tell even her own mother, or the friend who had formerly
placed her in a House of Mercy ; but the first communi-
cation she had made on the subject was to an attorney's
clerk. All these circumstances showed that the jury
had acted rightly in not giving credence to these wit-
nesses.

Lord Campbell called the attention of Sir F. Thesiger
to one point which he seemed to have pass over, viz., the
refusal of Dr. Achilli to answer certain questions. That
had been much relied on, and probably would be again.
Sir F. Thesiger said he was much obliged to his lord-
ship for calling his attention to that point, and contended
that as Dr. Achilli had come into the box to answer par-
ticular charges, he was justified in not answering ques-
tions which had no relation to them. Then it was said,
had Dr. Newman suborned these witnesses to commit
perjury ?, He (Sir F. rr hesiger) knew not who had
suborned them.

Lord Campbell said it was not necessary to impute
blame to any one, and it was not probable that any one
was to blame.

Sir F. Thesiger said he believed that the evidence pro-
duced under the circumstances which he had detailed was
perjured, and he cared not how the witnesses had been
procured. He knew not whether Dr. Newman had taken
a personal interest in the management of hi's case, or
whether he had left it to the zeal of his friends ; but it was
clear that many of the charges were false, and known to
be so. He would not dwell upon that subject, but would
remind the Court that in a case where there was evi
dence on both sides, and circumstances of probability on
both sides, fairly and justly to be weighed by the jury,
and where the jury had taken all those circumstances
into their consideration, and the case was one peculiarly
for them, the Court was called upon to say that the
jury had been wrong, and that it was the duty of the
Court to interfere and say that a new trial must take
place before another jury. If that course were to be
followed, where would that course of proceeding end?
Suppose another jury should come to the same conclu-
sion—why, in that case, if the Court should grant a new
trial now, it would be their duty to do so again. It
must be borne in mind that it was agreed on all hands
that it was quite impossible that a verdict of not guilty
should be entered on the defendant's plea. The result
of the new trial, if granted, must be substantially the
same. On the other hand, if the jury had found a ver-
dict of not guilty, it would have been impossible for Dr.
Achilli, it being a criminal case, to obtain a new trial.
Unless, therefore, the Court should be of opinion that
justice had miscarried, and the conclusion should be
overwhelming that the jury had not come to a right ver-
dict, they would not interfere, for if they did so, they
would commit great injustice towards a person who,
under extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances,
had triumphantly established his innocence of the im-
lpeuatrnateidoncso
uwn !lei ht h
eh an ds a
tb
de eonwn broughtafter
an ai n
addresss t him.
of
ne(rharlye
five hours.)
Sir F. Kelly followed on the same side, and said that
after the address which had just been delivered by his
learned friend (Sir F. Thesiger), he felt he could add but
little to what had been already said, but considering the
unspeakable importance of the case to the gentleman for
whom he appeared, as well as its general importance, he
should be excused if he occupied some time with some
general observations on the case, as well as upon the
evidence. The learned counsel then, proceeded to argue
that as there was but one plea of justification, contain-
ing a great variety of charges, it was a matter of cer-
tainty that a verdict of guilty must finally be entered,
inasmuch as no attempt had been made, or would be
made, to support the great majority of them, Of what
use, then, would it be to grant a new trial, if the ver-
dict must be the same ? The defendant had already
admitted that he had no evidence to support some 13 or
14 out of the 23 charges which the plea of justification
contained, so that he was self-convicted of uttering all
that slander and falsehood, and he now called upon the
Court to grant him a new trial, in order that he might
have an opportunity of proving some few of the charges,
when he had already admitted that he had no evidence
to sustain the great majority of them. Would the Court
do that ? He trusted they would not, but leave the case as
it now stood. The learned counsel then proceeded to
comment upon that part of the evidence which was ad-
duced to show that Dr. Achilli's character for profligacy
at Viterbo was quite notorious, and that he had com-
mitted enormous crimes which had become well known ;
and he contrasted that evidence with the undoubted evi-
dence of written documents which showed that during
that very period Dr. Achilli had been held in high
honour in the Church, and had been appointed to several
offices of honour, requiring the greatest purity of cha-
racter. He contended that it was quite impossible to
believe that a man who had attained such criminal noto-
riety could have been so honoured by the highest digni-
taries of the Church in the very scene of his wickedness,
and that, too, by persons who it was said knew of his
enormities, and at first concealed them, though it was
stated that they at length instituted an investigation.
The jury could not reject one part of the case, and he
thought that they were fully justified in coming to the
verdict which they did, when they found that the man
who was now accused of so many crimes was at the
time held in such estimation by those members of
the Church of Rome who were intimately acquainted
with him. The learned counsel then proceeded to com-
ment upon various parts of the evidence, and particularly
relied upon the evidence given by Maria Principe's mo-
ther, which showed, by a calculation of dates, that her
daughter, instead of being, as alleged, 14 or 15 years of
age when the supposed rape took place, must have been
at least 23. He did not accuse Dr. Newman himself of
any share in the production of false evidence. He
thought him incapable of such conduct ; but when, in a
moment of religious zeal, he had read these is putations
in some publication, and thought that a great part of
them were true, and had published them, it was pro-
bable that other persons, probably not Englishmen, had
procured those witnesses to support the charge stated
in the record. He (Sir F. Kelly) thought that
the refusal of Dr. Achilli to answer questions as to his
whole life ought not to be construed to his disadvantage.
He denied, on his oath, that he had any connexion
with any woman named in the case, and he also denied
that he had had intercourse with many women ; but
when he was asked whether he had had intercourse with
any woman, he said he declined to answer, on the
ground of his privilege. And when the Court bore in
mind that the period more particularly referred to was
Dr. Achilli's youth, he living, too, under an Italian sky,
he felt sure that his not answering ought rather to weigh
in his favour than against him. Upon the whole, then,
he trusted that the Court would allow Dr. Achilli to en-
joy the acquittal which he had obtained, and would not
send the case down for a new trial, there being good
ground for believing that the jury were satisfied that
this was a false and suborned defence.
Mr. Ellis then rose to address the Court on the same
side, but, it being past 4 o'clock,
Lord Campbell said the learned counsel might be
heard in the morning, and adjourned the hearing.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, JAN. 20.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
IN RE FRANK CASTELLI.
This was a sitting appointed to take into consideration
the question of certificate in the matter of Frank Cas-
telli, of Bury-court, St. Mary-axe.
Mr. Lawrance said, he was instructed to oppose, and
wished to examine the bankrupt.
Mr- Martiaty, who appeared in support of the bank-
rupt's application, said, perhaps Mr. Lawrance would
be good enough to state, on behalf of those for whom he
appeared, the grounds of opposition.
Mr. Lawrence said, he appeared for Messrs. Lafuente
and Webster, who had entered a claim for 6,0001.,
and also for Mr. Lafuente of Alexandria. The main
features of their opposition were disclosed by the
balance-sheet in the bankrupt's general transactions.
He (Mr. Lawrance) charged the bankrupt with reck-
less and improvident trading, not only in connexion
with the firm, down to September, 1850, but down to
the stoppage in August, 1851. He charged him
with having dissolved that partnership covertly, with
having possessed himself of the partnership property in
fraud of the joint creditors, and with continuing to trade
on his separate account, and with having contracted
new debts to the amount of 400,0001. on his separate
estate between September, 1850, and the stoppage in
August, 1851. He charged the bankrupt with having
applied upwards of 50,000/., acquired intermediately be-
tween 1850 and 1851, in payment of liabilities of his
former partners out of the pockets of the separate credi-
tors in exoneration of those former partners. He
charged him with having, under false colour and pre-
tence of being a partner in the firm of Castelli, Gius-
tiniani, and Company, contracted these debts by fraud
and false pretence, so as to bring him within the language
and the spirit of the third clause of the 256th section.
He charged him with having expended on his own per-
sonal support, at the time when there were no profits, a
sum of 2,8261., and immediately between September,
1850, and the ate of the fiat. There were no profits on
the trading during that period, but, on the contrary, a
loss of 60,0001.
The bankrupt, upon being examined by Mr. Law-
rance, said—l have been in business in this country
about 20 years. I first began to trade here in the year
1836, not on my own account ; it was in partnership.
There were a number of partners. You have got their
names on the balance-sheet. That continued down till
April, 1841, and was then dissolved. The style of the
firm was " Castelli Brothers." In 1841 a new partner.
ship was formed under the style of " Castelli, Giustiniani,
and Company." That style continued until 1847. In
1848 another alteration took place. The partnership con-
sisted of the following :—Frnk Castelli, general partner;
Francisco Francescovitch Braggiott, general partner.
All the others were en commandite partners. In 1847
a new firm was constituted, and continued till Septem-
ber, 1850. It consisted of Frank Castelli, J. Baptiste
Giustiniani, Brizio Giustiniani, Liverio Caatlelli, Lee.

nardo Giustiniani, Francisco Francescovitch Braggiotti,
and Vincent Giustiniani. From 1846 to 1847 Messrs.
Roberts were the general bankers, but the Bank of Eng-
land and the London Joint-stock Bank had also been
our bankers. They continued so from September, 1850,
down to the stoppage. The accounts at the London
Joint-stock and the Bank of England were discount ac-
counts. The name of the firm was used. The shares
of the business were divided into 62 parts, of which I
had 33. The capital was 56,9211. 15s. 7d. The capital
actually belonging to the partners generally was 46,000/.
In addition there was a sum of 15,6431., which is still
owing. The money was in the hands of the firm. The
gross profits between June, 1847, and September, 1850,
were 64,2171. The losses or bad debts, &c., were
79,4061. ss. 9d., showing a general loss of 15,0541., and
that was irrespective of the partners' drawings. It was
agreed in September, 1850, that the partnership should
be dissolved. I did not communicate that fact to the
bankers, owing to the terms of the agreement which was
drawn ; there were certain contracts to fulfil—that was the
reason; transactions were pending which were not fulfilled.
I am not prepared to tell the amount of purchases be-
tween September, 1850, and August, 1851. I cannot
say whether it was upwards of 500,0001. I cannot say
whether it was more or less. It may be 200,0001.,
300,0001., or 500,0001. I cannot, in fact, give a posi-
tive answer. The books will show. I now owe about
400,0001: There are assets altogether to the amount of
280,0001. There are acceptances to the amount of
133,0001. upon our bills out. It was usual to draw on
the house here or on credit. There was a verbal an-
nouncement that the firm was in course of liquidation
to a great many persons, among others to Messrs.
Rucker and Eldemaun. In the way the arrangement
was made notice in writing could not be given. Messrs.
Robarts held security for part of their debt—between
4,0001. and 5,000/. I think it was more. They are
creditors for 14,6101. As I took from them documents
of the old firm I supplied them with others to cover
any deficiency. I deposited property purchased by me
since September, 1850. The amount of new property
they hold is 4,660/., and 1001. of property of third par-
ties. The last stock taking showed their affairs up to
1848. We agreed to dissolve in 1850. We did not make
any supplemental account. It was to be carried on till
it was liquidated. It would have been impossible to
to have struck a balance at that time. In September,
1850, the liabilities were 887,0061., the other side of the
account showing 898,5531. in good and doubtful debts
and property. Those figures were arrived at after the
bankruptcy. Advances had been made on produce
valued at 746,0001. Afterwards credit was taken for
losses upon the realisation of property to the amount of
120,0001. In the liquidation account credit was taken
for 131,6621., being losses on realisation of property of
the joint firm. These losses were sustained by the fall
in the markets between September, '47, and August, 1851.
I had a capital on beginning the new firm. The figures
do not say I had none. I cannot say that, supposing
the joint property to have realised 800,0001., I should
have had 887,8131. to have paid—the way you put it
(addressing Mr. Lawrance) is the difference. There
would have been a surplus of 23,0001. divisible among
the partners.

His Honour —lt appears to be 10,740/.
Examination resumed—l agree with Mr. Cooper (the
official assignee's clerk) that it would be 10,800/. I was
to have 33 parts. The drawings were 7,0001.
Mr. Groom (the official assignee)—The good debtors
appear to be 1,0841., and property 119,0001. The whole
items of the balance-sheet must be taken.
The Bankrupt—l understand there was a large capi-
tal-30,000/.

His Honour—Taking the difference between the lia-
bilities and the assets there appears to have been 11,000/.,
and you say 30,0001.
Examination continued—The profits made by me be-
tween Sept., 1850, and August, 1851; were 1,7831. 6s.
Bd.; the losses were 68,0951. I drew out about 1,5001.
for myself. I paid away 2,8261. during that period,
but there was property to go against it. Upon obtain-
ing goods from abroad, the usual course of my trading
was to retain the bill of lading, and until the bills
drawn against them were becoming due ; but this
course was departed from about six weeks before
the stoppage. They were goods shipped to my or-
der and invoiced to me. I never pledged a bill of
lading until the bills arrived at maturity, until with-
in a month or six weeks of my stoppage. I cannot
tell the amount of the bills of lading. I did pledge
without the books. It is impossible to give an idea. If
you had given me notice of the question I should have
been prepared to answer it. Among the debts contracted
a short time before the bankruptcy was that of Messrs.
Lafuente, of Alexandria-2,000/. I believe the first of
the bills in their case became due after the stoppage. I
received the bills of lading for these goods in June and
July. I pledged them on the 9th and 11th of August.
I stopped payment on the 16th of August. I made up
my mind to stop at four o'clock on the evening of the
15th. I obtained the last advance on the 9th or 11th
of August ; the amount of it was 11,2001., from Messrs.
Rucker. The value of goods I deposited with Messrs.
Rucker was the amount I have mentioned. I deposited
Lafuente's goods on the 9th and 11th of August. I have
not paid Lafuente any money On account of these goods.
I made no payment to Messrs. Lafuerrte in anticipation
of the bills becoming due. I pledged the goods chiefly
with Messrs. Robarts, Messrs. Rucker, and others.
Examined by Mr. Manisty—ln 1847, when the firm
was changed, there was a complete separation between
the old and new firm. As regards the London houses,
lam enabled to say what the position of the firm which
ended in 1847 was. In 1847 the firm which then started
had a capital of 41,0001., and.with that capital we traded.
until September, 1850.. But in 1850, when I alone un-
dertook to represent the firm, there was not a line drawn,
and realisation and liquidation as in 1847. I can ascer-
tain my liabilities in September, 1850, by working out
the accounts in my books. Everything is stated in the
books. When I set down the assets of the firm then at
898,583/., that was by valuing the produce at the then
existing prices. When my partners went out I believed
there would be a large surplus upon all grounds, and
subsequent events proved the justness of my calcula-
tions. From September, 1850, to February, 1851,
prices continued to rise. There was a considerable
rise. Had realisation taken place between September
and February there would have been a surplus of 100,000/. I,
beyond the capital of the house. I always gave
my orders with the anticipation of a fall. I always
allowed a margin for a fall. I was urged to increase
my limits, and I was told by my correspondent that I
was too tight, and the letters of Peter Clarke and Co.
and of others will tell that. I believed that I must,
unless something unparalleled happened, make money to
a large extent. In March and April of 1851 there was
a great flatness in the markets, but in May an r.ctual fall
took place, and it fell for a long period constantly from
that time. The experience of any London merchant will
bear out the statement that the fall in the markets from
May downwards was without parallel. I obtained ad-
vances during the period, and did the best I could. I
gave orders to my consignees not to sell without my
orders. I was unwilling to realise at a fearful loss. I
was under the impression that I should, by a turn in my
affairs, be able to retrieve my position, otherwise I would
not have sacrificed 25,0001. I consulted others in my
position. On the 30th June a report got abroad that I had
suspended payment, but that was not at all true, for I
had at that time a balance of 5,0001. at my bankers.
However, I then consulted with my friends, who
advanced me 25,0001. without security. I continued
to receive from my friends assistance and advice up to
the last moment. Had I been able to effect an ar:
rangement, 50,0001. would have been advanced to
me. The market has considerably improved since I sus-
pended payment. If I had held on I should not have
been here now ; I should have been more than solvent.
I should have had a fortune for myself. That can be
ascertained by the current prices of the respective pe-
riods. My books prove the truth of everything. I have
given all my book., leccers, dm, to the official assignee,
and the creditors have got the full
sbenefit of every shil-
ling that remains of my property. I never engaged in
any accommodation or bill transactions either in 1850 or
in 1851. I never gave acceptances until after the
goods were purchased. I allowed parties to draw bills
upon me for consignments they forwarded. There was
always value for all the bills ultimately. I was entitled
to half of the surplus capital of the old firm—rather more
than a moiety. The loss which occurred was entirely
attributable to a fall in the markets. Those who know
me can answer that I was unremitting in my attention
to business. Messrs. Lafuente never asked me for pay-
ment in respect of the goods spoken of. They nego-
tiated the bills with other parties. They pushed them-
selves upon me. I might have done business with them
and obtained goods from them to a much larger amount
had I so chosen.

His Honour said he would give judgment in the course
of the ensuing week.

TnE OLD WOMAN OF ELTON.—We regret to learn
that the all-conquering king, though baffled often, has
triumphed at last, and that the " oldest woman in the
world" has been gathered to her fathers. This event,
which must have been so long anticipated, occurred last
week, and on Friday Mary Benton was quietly interred
at Elton, where she had so long resided, and which she
has contributed to render famous by the extraordinary as-
sociations attached to her name. There seems to be some
dispute as to the precise age of this wonderful woman.
On the coffin-plate it was stated to be 117, but it is
generally supposed that this is considerably beneath the
fact. The correspondent before alluded to, who appears
to be tolerably well acquainted with her history, states
that if she had survived until the 13th of February next,
she would have attained the unprecedented age of 122
years, and from other circumstances we are inclined to
believe that this is correct. The old lady was, regarded
with unusual interest in her own neighbourhood, and her
cottage was seldom free from visitors, to whose bounty
she was no doubt largely indebted for the happiness and
comfort that gilded her declining days. Her form, as
might be expected, was very much bent, and in this re-
spect only did she resemble Otway's " wrinkled hag
with age grown double," for her conversation was free
and lively, and her eye, though dimmed, retained much
of its former lustre, and she was able to dispense with
the assistance of spectacles to the last. We may just
add, in conclusion, that this interesting personage was
a native of Cockfield, in this county, and that she
Ahder.
re-
sided for some time at Long Newton, previous
to
coming to her daughter's house at Elton.—Durham
Ad-
vertiser. iser.

( the ximes,..).
• we. rliewleme de Seivign6 Strang Ingether emery
expression of amazement in the French language to
describe the impression produced at Court by the
projected marriage of " La Grande Mademoiselle"
with M. de Lauzun, it may be doubted whether
• any royal or imperial marriage has caused as much
- astonishment in the world as the intended alliance
of Louis Napoleon, Emperor of the French, with
Donna Eugenia Montijos. But the times we live
in are not like those when the foundations of the
world seemed to be shaken by a violation of the
usages of a court ; and in a country like France,
' where everything bears the stamp of adventure, we
see nothing in such a marriage that is not extremely
appropriate to the circumstances of the parties.
As a mere question of personal dignity, Louis Na-
poleon has done well to show that he is more inde-
pendent than was supposed of the formalities of
royalty; and, though he may become ridiculous
when he imitates the traditions or habits of the
great courts of Europe, he has an instinctive con-
sciousness that his strength lies in his sympathy with
popular predilections, which coincided in this in-
stance with his own tastes. What would be con-
sidered most absurd, extravagant, and unl ooked
for in other princes may fall naturally into his
part, and even serve the purposes of his singular
destiny. One of the secrets of his power is its
originality, and he owes a large share of his suc-
cesses to abrupt and unforeseen resolutions, which
it would be impossible to defend upon any of the
ordinary rules of human conduct. The political
combinations founded on royal marriages are com-
monly so worthless, that a marriage of inclination,
as the French call it, is- far better than an
ungracious alliance with an unknown bride out
of some declining house ; and there is nothing
incongruous in the decision which raises a young
Spanish lady, of good family and great personal
attractions, to the throne of Josephine.
This decision, on a matter of so much importance
to his own position and to the future prospects of
the Empire, is of course the exclusive result of
Louis Napoleon's own and it has been taken
in defiance of the strenuous opposition of all his
family and all his habitual advisers, with the ex-
ception, we believe, of M. de Moray. After an
intimacy with the Emperor of some months' dura-
tion, during which the young Countess Theba had
attracted a considerable amount of public attention,
a sense of what was due to her own reputation ap-
pears to have led the lady and her mother to an-
nounce their intended return to Madrid, since it
was only as the consort of the Emperor that she
would consent to accept his homage. This blow
had its effect, and the imperial Pamela obtains her
reward, in spite of some passages which were
thought to indicate a different conclusion, but
which have left no unfavourable trace on the fame
of the future Empress. The formal announcement
of the marriage will be made to the Senate and the
Council of State to-morrow. The Countess Theba,
and her mother will then proceed to take up their
residence in the Palace of the Elysee, and in two
or three weeks at latest it is believed that the
marriage will be solemnised.
We learn with some amusement that this ro-
mantic event in the annals of the French Empire
has called forth the strongest opposition, and pro-
voked the utmost irritation among those who have
hitherto been the warmest adherents of the Bona-
partist cause. The Imperial family, the Council of
Ministers, and even the lower coteries of the
palace or its purlieus, all affect to regard this mar-
riage as an amazing humiliation, and they deplore
the failure of the Royal marriages before on the
tapis, as if they were not satisfied with the dignity
and grandeur of their own Emperor until he had
cohabited with an Archduchess. We do not pass
for very warm admirers of Louis Napoleon's politi-
cal career, and on that subject we shall, without
the permission of the Moniteur, continue to ex-
press our opinion ; but he appears to have acted in
this instance with a just appreciation of the tone
of public feeling fn a country in which Josephine
was regretted and Marie Louise despised. He has
nothing to expect from the goodwill or the respect
of what is called good society, for he has never en-
joyed them. He has nothing to gain by a nearer
personal alliance with the Courts of Europe, for he
does not belong to them, and they cannot trust
him. But he is the ruler of France, invested with
absolute power, and we heartily wish he had never
used it for any worse purpose than to marry the
woman whom he likes. As even the greatest King
Who ever reigned at Versailles married the widow
Scarron, and lived with her as his clandestine
Queen, we can see no reason why an Empress
should not be created in these days on far easier
terms.

There is, however, one inference to be drawn
from this occurrence which may be deemed more
significant. This marriage is another, and a very
striking instance of the impenetrable secrecy and
uncontrollable wilfulness with which Louis Napo-
leon forms and acts upon his own propensities and
resolutions. No doubt, all the ordinary considera-
tions of policy, decorum, personal dignity, and usage
might be urged, and have been urged, against this
marriage. All the Ministers remonstrated ; several,
of them resigned in consternation, when they thought
of the ridicule and contempt with which such an
affiance would be spoken of in the salons of Paris
and the Courts of Europe. Louis Napoleon heard
what they had to say, refused to accept their resig-
nations, and confirmed his decision by ordering M.
Fould to make the formal demand of the young
lady's hand. We are not, as we have said, disposed
to take an unfavourable view of this decision ; but
it is impossible not to see that a state in which such
events are possible is governed by coups de tete, and
that any other sudden caprice of desire, resentment,
or ambition, which should get possession of the Ira-
pesial mind, would be gratified with the same dis-
regard to all existing modes of opposition. In
short, a man who acts thus is not only absolutely
without control, but he takes a certain pride in de-
monstrating that neither the advice of his Ministers
nor the motives by which men are commonly affect-
ed, have any power at all over one of his decisions.
The course of conduct to be pursued by sueh a man
is wholly beyond the reach of foresight and of ar-
gument. It is impossible to affirm with certainty
that there is anything he will not undertake • it is
difficult to be prepared for those things on which he
is secretly intent.

Although this marriage is not calculated to alter
the opinion we entertain of the Imperial Court, it
will not have the effect of raising its dignity in the
estimation of foreign States or of society at large ;
and here, perhaps, is its chief inconvenience. The
Northern Powers have not recognised the new
Emperor with cordiality, and they will be still less
inclined to do honour to an Empress whom they
have known under different circumstances. The
marriage of the Emperor increases the probability
that those hereditary and dynastic claims will be
persisted in which have not been acknowleged by
the rest of Europe. A state of things in which the
reigning head of a powerful and irritable nation
is not likely to obtain from foreign Powers all the
deference and respect they are accustomed to pay
each other is not one of great security. For it
must be remembered that, as the continental
States have fallen under the yoke of absolute
Governments, their policy is more likely to be
affected by the personal considerations by which
Governments of that form are most affected. The

peace of Europe depends on the policy of France ;
the polioy of FrAlltie uu the will of Louis Napo-
leon ; the will of Louis Napoleon may now be

_
biassed by the influence of an energetic, adven-
turous, and high-spirited consort ; nor shall we be
surprised to find that, before this strange drama is
ended, the young lady whose name now falls within
the range of public discussion may have had some
effect on the fortunes of the world. We sincerely
wish her a better fate than the princesses who have
last occupied the perilous position to which she
aspires.

How TO ENJOY THE RHINE.—If a good painter
would consent to rough it on a raft going down the
Rohhilnee,le_erwouunlddergeatspseoemtse subjects,ufinknenownt
o and
they
n
theevsrryda traveller by the steamer. The fires of the charcoal
burners on the hills by night, the solitary lights from
the watchers' huts among the vines, the frowning tower
and beetling crag, awful in the darkness, would suggest
a thousand new ideas to the poet and the painter ;
while, to a man who really understands German, the
talk of the boatman, full of story and superstitions,
would not be without its charm, and his expenses would
not exceed a shilling a day ! Rowing against the stream
of the Rhine is unfortunately out of the question, and
in consequence of shifting sands and other things it
would be, I am told, dangerous to row down the
stream, otherwise a pleasant thing enough. Theesos
of the people seems to go a hundred years back, and
acquiredurng
aiwi wild
dhpianctunruaesql uienvcasohairr
ote f the
rthafurtiseignere. altogetherAt
lost
Rh
sameinemu in July. peasanta in December
Theis eareepskin coat,ryffdierentt the
fur
cap, the
cap, the muff, the snow shoes, make quite a character
ionfdhieedm., asnpdenthde
eird dressesxeweeks,to oo,f
athtecowhoiemnetna ahriewpinrettetry,
thanand you
in willascore know
ofmore
su I
no fmt
summers.—Dickens's
se .
asThu,whensen
Visiting
s ue
tg o
Household
Asylum,
wn
m Jus-
ticesay
Words."
TOH
esL
haveeuxN A
CountyT
increasedlC AsT
Pauper
mu
thep.e—r weekly sum to be
reEtyri
the
3:t ie
expenses of each inmate belonging to the
paidca county uCCn°°t Lofl
ny:f confined there, from Bs. 2d. to Bs. 9d., and for
each inmate not belonging to the county the charge has
been increased to 14s. per week. This increase in the
cost of maintaining the pauper lunatics is attributed to
the higher terms at which the contracts lately entered
into have been concluded, and from the bread supplied
to the inmates being now baked on the premises, which
is found to be not so economical as having it baked by
contract, while the advantage obtained is that of having
a better and more wholesome quality of bread.

,e

r-,;70%4