The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-14 00:00:00

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.

• EDINBURGH, PERTH, AND DUNDEE.
The half-yearly general meeting of shareholders in this
company was held at Edinburgh on Thursday; Mr. John
Balfour, of Balbirniei chairman of the company, pre-

It rota the report it, appeared that the receipts for the
past half-year had amount‘xl to 66,837/. Bs. Id., and the
expenditure, including the working of the line, the de-
benture interests, &c., to 52,9771. 6a., leaving a balance
of 13,8601. 2s. id. This sum, with the balance of
11,446/. 14s. , 2d. on the half-year ending July last,
givei on the financial year an aggregate surplus of
25,3061. 15s. 3d., after payment of working expenses and
the debenture interests at the reduced rate of three-and-
a-half per cent. ; but, deducting the working expenses
only, the actual free revenue for the year ending 31st Jan.
last amounts to 53,400/. 10s. 4d. From the surplus on the
present account, interests to the amount of 7581. 2s. sd.
have been paid on bonds over property, and no other obli-

,:itions. Since the accounts Were closed the following fur-
ther payments have also,been made : —9741. ss. 5d7 as a
half-year's interest to the Granton Ferry proprietors at the
reduced rate agreed upon, with them, and 6,929/. 2s. 2d.
as a half-year's interest on the debts due to the banks,
at the, rate .of 3 per cent. per annum, in terms of the
arrangement formerly reported ; the remaining sum of
4,,1981. 12s. ld. (less 4261. 18s. id. appropriated by
parties having claims on capital account) has been depo-
sited-in bank, for the payment of a half-year's interest to
the other creditors, which theayrgvfeaioilrlfstr;heecps.eneivaien
sous
aieirtoeuist
interests;
atrnhe
ye- duced rate set forth in the scheme for the general ar-
theeotnhiepadnisyc'hs aff
r4ig
surplusem enr
et of
main after
same will be appropriated among the
parties entitled
thereto, after the bill now before parliament has been
passed. _ .

- The
were unan reportimously and aadopteccompd.anying statement of accounts
The next business was to consider the working agreement between the Edinburgh and proposed
Company and the Leven Railway Company Perth
. The
company proposed to undertake the
constructionla oftter
a
branch line from the town of Leven to the main line of
the other company at Thornton
miles—and to furnish
a. ---a distance of about six
motive for the traffic. Upon
loco
the. completion of the branch the Edinburgh and Perth
pany undertake to work and maintain it for 25 Ye?or:
finding the -necessary
of the locomotive. The terms were that thee Lev
dividends,
pany should undertake the ?apnea °f. ti: Edinburgh, Perth,
interest on loans, &c., and to pay the
fEurct
each train, the
and on
Company h. a mile. fur
a between the two
surplus revenue to be equally divided r°lling stock, with the eexneeb3otim.
companies. . • by
the
a f -4., ratifying
After considerable discussion, ma,jori.,,
thorising
was ''carried
by a Leven Company, and au
agreement with the L.evien
the usual form.
the directors to execute it, ~. the chair-
manmotion
The meeting then separate

Fox CLUB.—The second meeting of the Fox Club this
f Z tland • Mr. F. Pundas, ~ .P.; Sir R.
—the Earl o e ,
year was held on Saturday evening at Brooke's. Present.
the lion. R. S. Carew ; Captain Towns-
the Right H. Lord. M. Hill, ME;
Mr.! oil,.
ABlasrtto.,;) ;
enj, rt 2,..; my.; the Ron. C. C. Cavendish, M.P.;
114 r 8.... A. Sqnfurd ; Colonel the lion. R. Boyle, M.P.;
5i,...A. j. Chohneley,, Bart.; the Hon. I.H. Duncan -
.31r. S. F. Stephenson; Lord Saye and Sele ; anci
Colonel Sir 11. J. F. Davie, Bart., M.P.
31ANsiori AT BALMORAL.—We understand that con-
utendeLeof
tracts have been entered into for the building of a new
deTritiheewosurkpsena.re to h car-
ried
Smith, architect.—Aberdeen
mansion for her Majesty and Prince Albert, at Bal-
moral, and that the works will be proceeded with
o soonur
9 as
utf
from
townsman,eoi
nw ea
designsth permits.andlv.
un
just Town
to hand by
foul:ital.
uos i rR
Oct.l u. A
last, . —T
which
e hi
el
ilio
hasbar t Tow Guardian of the
16thA
ship Panama, states that the number of emigres the
landed at Melbourne the who
Octo-
ber last was 3,000, and thateek finding the 12th of Oct
the Forest Creek diggings the amount of gold which°-
that month amounted had yielded up to the 12th of
to 6)699;4831. oterlisg.

(From the Times.)
Mr. Fitzroy has just brought before tha
.House
of Commons the startling principle of English law
that women are of less value than Poodle dogs and
Skye terriers. They do not receive the same mea-
sure of protection as these nobler quadrupeds.
Where punishment consists in fines, of course the
amount of the fine affords us a certain measure of
value as to the worth of the object injured. Our
ancestors, who were rather curious in such matters,
arranged a sliding scale after a fashion of their
own, in which the value of a life was estimated ac-
cording to the social position of the party who
inijlat happen to be knocked on the head. Accord-
ing to this table, any sporting gentleman in good
circumstances might have shouldered his crossbow
and given himself the relaxation of peasant shooting
without any serious detriment to his fortunes. A
yeoman was somewhat higher game—he cost more ;
a nobleman was set at a still higher price ; but woe
betide the audacious sportsman who bagged an
ecclesiastic. Nothing less than the sacrifice of
his whole fortune in convents and monasteries
would purge away the sacred ichor from his mur-
derous hand. The form of English law is altered
in regard to such matters, but the substance re-
mains the same. Let us take—as Mr. Fitzroy
has done before us—the cases of donkeys, poodle
dogs, and women. Under the Cruelty to Animals
Act any ruffianly fellow who ill-treats a donkey
may be imprisoned for three months with hard
labour. Any peculator who infringes against
the provisions of the Dog Stealing Act may be
imprisoned with hard labour for a period of six
months, or be sentenced to pay a fine not exceed-
ing 201. With regard to women, any man may,
at his pleasure, kick, bruise, beat, knock down,
and stamp upon them, and all that the magistrate
can inflict by way of summary punishment is a fine
of 51., or, in default, two months' imprisonment
with hard labour. It would be a very material
improvement in the position of women if a short
clause were introduced into the Cruelty to Animals
Act which should include them in the provisions
of that beneficent statute. All that would be ne-
cessary would be, " And be it enacted that for the
purposes of this act any woman or women shall be
taken and held to be beeves, ewes, donkeys, cats,
dogs, and not otherwise ; and that any person or
persons who shall be proved to have inflicted bodily
injury upon any woman or women as aforesaid,
shall undergo the same penalties and punishment as
though he had inflicted bodily injury upon any of
the beeves, ewes, donkeys, Sze., as aforesaid."
Now, Mr. Fitzroy wishes that women should at
least be placed upon the same footing as the lower
animals, and receive the same amount of protection
from the law. He asks merely that the powers of
magistrates should be extended to the infliction of
a penalty of imprisonment, with or without hard
labour, for a term not exceeding six months, or a
fine not exceeding 20/. This is no very great ex-
tension of their powers, and, surely, in the opinion
of the mildest humanitarian, can scarcely be judged
an inordinate punishment for the offence. For
ourselves—we confess it frankly—we go much fur-
ther, and are rather disposed to agree with the
recommendation of Mr. Phinn, the new member
for Bath. The case of brutal violence to women
and children is one which can only be met by cor-
poral chastisement. In the first place, the present
form of punishment is evidently no check whatso-
ever upon the offence. It is seldom, indeed, that
our police reports do not contain the record of
some such case. They are of daily and nightly
occurrence in all the courts and blind alleys of
London to an appalling amount, for the police
reports inform us but of an infinitely small per-
centage of those which actually occur. The pre-
sent scale of fine and imprisonment does not deter
from the offence. We much question whether the
extension of the magistrates' powers—which exten-
sion, however, we heartily recommend—will meet
the difficulties of the case in any very considerable
degree. Then, again, with regard to the parties
to be punished, the usual argument of the humani-
tarians entirely breaks down. There can be no
question of " degrading " a man who inflicts a
course of violent and continued brutality upon a
woman or a child. The truth is, the brute is so
degraded already that, short of miracles, his fears
constitute the only channel by which his actions
can be touched. If he have any feeling left it is a
feeling for himself, and the fear of the lash would
operate upon his conduct in the same way that it
tames the viciousness of a four-footed brute. This
case is very different from that of soldiers or sailors,
who in former days incurred the penalty of flogging
fcr breach of martial discipline. A man may vio-
late martial law, and retain all the noblest feelings
of humanity. You may degrade him. You may
stifle the better feelings of a lad who is dull at his
tasks or oversteps bounds by flogging him before
his schoolfellows ; and so on with reference to si-
milar cases. But the ruffians whose punishment
we require as a protection to those unfortunate
beings who are the object of their violence show
by the mere commission of the crime that there is
no inch of their persons and no portion of their
minds which can receive anything but benefit from
as sound a flogging as a stout arm can administer

It is just possible that such a penalty may cause
them to realise to their own minds the true nature
of their offence.

To these very cogent reasons for at least making
trial of corporal punishment in this most offensive
class of cases we may add the absolute impossibility
of dealing with them adequately in any other way.
You would not hang a man—you would scarcely
transport him, for giving his wife a pair of black
eyes, knocking ont half her teeth, and jumping
upon her, unless her life was affected. Nor, on the
other hand, does it answer any purpose to consign
the dastardly fellow who is guilty of such acts to
imprisonment for a month or two. His offence is
too small or to great to be touched by any existing
punishment. If the magistrate commits him, the
humanitarians will take care that he is provided
with minced veal and a celestial globe to solace his
temporary retirement. In point of fact he rather
rejoices in the so-called punishment than otherwise.
Now, we do not ask that the term of imprisonment
should not be continued—let-it rather be length-
ened ; but, at the same time, let the man who has
made so foul an abuse of his physical strength
carry away with him a memorial—feel that society
will make reprisals, and protect the feeble and the
helpless. We ask for the establishment of corporal
punishment, but only in the case where a man has
shown that he has no claim to consideration as a
man by acts of brutal violence against a woman or
a child.

PROBATE AND LBGAOT DUTIES.

BRIBERT.-THE BALLOT.

(From the Neekly Dispatch.)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer has now an ample
opportunity of developing the resources of his dexterity.
Like the manager in distress, all his company of players
are quarrelling about his part. Parliament assumes the
attitude of a meeting of his political creditors ; and it
must be confessed that he answers their demands with
as much imperturbable lubricity, and fobs them off with
the same successful plausibility, as Charles Mathews in
_ the play of Speculation. In his main plea for being ex-
cused from assenting to the motions of those amateur
"many friends of the hare," who volunteer budgets for
him, we confess we think there is much force. If we
were in his place, we are not sure that we, ourselves,
should not also object to the anticipation of his financial
statement by partial propositions of taxation, or remis-
sion of imposts relative to single articles, which leave
out of view the whole area of the incidence of revenue
duties. Unless he could succeed in checking this rush
of one-ideaed financiers, it is obvious that, like the man ,
with two wives, one of whom disliked his white hair
and the other his black, if he gave all the oppor-
tunity
ydl. depilatating from our fiscal system whatever
not like, he would be left as bald as a coote,
with an exchequer
as empty as Sibthorp's head. He has
been whispering soft nothings to Polly Williams and
Lucy Hume
and beseech'him tonovf they both fall upon him at once,
arry their " Ways and Means "
Unfortunately, he
read in the art of
e dealing
henot appear to be quite so well
with such dilemmas as Captain
Macheath—or, perhaps,
xpediels more foolishly confident
in the fertility of his e nts and the power of his
blarney. He had not the
cover of the exclamation--
prudence to escape under
me
~a together
While you both teaze
To neither a word will I y. ,
He must needs give his reasons for object'
aLcalmbeth
merits, to the propositions of the members on the
and Montrose ; and reasons are at all times
ous ware, in which wise men deal but sparingly_angvv-
could have excused his postponement of the discussioe
until the day of Pentecost, the Greek Kalends, or
the
Budget, whichever should happen last. But when he
so misapprehends the measure of his own capacity to
grapple with the subject as to undertake a pitched bat-
tle on the spot, in defence of the exemption of real pro-
perty from the legacy duty, he compels us also to anti-
cipate the natural period of discussion, and to examine
the grounds of his opposition to the principles of Mr.
Williams's motion. We should be sorry to endorse the
accusation of those who, in ecclesiastical concerns, ac-
cuse Mr. Gladstone of being a Jesuit. His exposure of
the Government of Naples is the best answer to the im-
putation of Puseyite tendencies. But we are not so
. satisfied that he escapes the charge of being a sort of
logical smasher in 'debate—passing bad change with
singular dexterity, indeed, and with unscrupulous steadi-
ness of face, but with a frequency perhaps encouraged
by the absence of detection. It is scarcely possible to
present a proposition of which the proof is plainer or
iner3otent than that the probate and legacy duty was
partially imposed by a house of landowners upon per-
sonal Property, and that realty was exempted from its
~,iii
*Peration b3e, a combination of freeholders against the
rest of the
e tax to land Why,by Paitdtishtaindeetxpbrielsls;ly
aeuxd-
tho"unity'
on per
le
Lord gislators of the day passed the act levying
sonalty, and rejected that iihiCh extended
Lord Lauderdale put a protest on the

OUTRAGES ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN. journals of the Peers, calling fora suspension of the
Personalty Act until the Realty Bill should have become
law, on the very ground of the grossness of the class legis-
lation which adopted the one bill and rejected the other.
The transaction is so barefaced in its one-sidedness, that
Mr. Disraeli, himself the organ of the landed interest,
acknowledged the interested inequality of the impost—
and yet Mr. Gladstone stoutly denies it, and stands up
in justification of the fairness of the exemptions. And
how does he substantiate his justification ? Whv, by at-
tempting to show that the imposition of the duty on
personalty is so clumsily devised, that, by means of set-
tlements, trusts, and so forth, a large proportion of
property liable to the tax escapes and evades it ?
Astonished at the hardihood of this act of passing "false
and counterfeit logic resembling, or intended to resemble
the current common sense of the realm," poor Mr. Wil-
liams involuntarily exclaims, " Why that is what I com-
plain of !"—whereupon the imperturbable Mr. Jenkinson
of the Cabinet, who by talking of the " cosmogony of
the world," can pass off " a gross of green spectales " for
a good dray-horse, coolly rejoins that the evasion of the
tax on personalty by settlement is evidence that the
imposers were not actuated by selfishness, in exempt-
ing their own peculiar description of property
from the operation of the impost ? Nor is
his next proposition, although it be a good Brum-
magem imitation of sense, and sounds very like it, at all
first-rate in serving its professed purpose. Indeed, for
a clever man, gifted with that sort of circumspection
which does not venture to aim at clear and undeniable
success and conviction, but simply at that amount of
plausible mystification which will present no salient
points for defeat, we have seldom witnessed a more de-
plorable exhibition of what may not inaptly be termed
casuistic suicide. Mr. Williams's motion simply is, that
real property should be subjected to the same burdens
of [probate and legacy duty as personal estate. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer answers that it ought not ;
and on what ground, think you, gentle reader ? Why,
chiefly on the assertion that—real property is subjected
to the duty ? Annuities, quoth he, charged on land,
the proceeds of land hen sold under bequest, em-
bracing nine out of every ten wills, leaving land, pay
legacy duty. Indeed, he had been told by some Mr.
Trevor (one of your " very respectable men" and eminent
practitioners typified in "Bleak House" by Mr. Vholes),
and apparently he believed that 7-16ths of the legacy
duty was paid from property arising out of land. Now
we will not stop to inquiretoo curiously into the honesty of
this representation. It is intended to pass the bad change
upon the House and the public, that the term "arising
out of land" is equivalent to the term "real property,"
whereas it is only true as referring to those leasehold or
other tenures of landed property which Mr. Williams
was careful to separate from the category of realty.
Annuities arising out of land mean, in Mr. Gladstone's
private vocabulary, simply obligations to pay money
annually, secured by the guarantee of realty. Mort-
gages are only acknowledgments of the loan of money,
for the repayment of which land is to stand responsible
in the last resort. The legacy duty on annuities or
mortgages secured on land is not paid by the owner of
the land mortgaged, but by the legatee or the lender of
the money, or the purchaser of the annuity ; and it is
merely juggling with and hocus-pocussing the question,
to class these instances as legacies arising out of land.
It is the earner and producer of the money paid
or lent alone whose commodity is in either case
taxed by the state, not the proprietor of the realty
over which it is secured. But two other answers
remain to the proposition. Mr. Pressly, a far more
eminent authority on this subject than Mr. Trevor, de-
clares his belief in his evidence before the Lords—that
the whole legacy duty affected by that section of the
proceeds of the revenue does not reach 400,0001. ; and
that it cannot amount to much more is obvious from the
fact that Mr. Gladstone himself does not state the case
higher than to allege that settlements arising out of land
constitute seven-sixteenths of the whole ; and as the en-
tire duty does not exceed 1,300,000/., it is clear that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's own data do not afford
him more than a return of 600,0001. from this source, a
small proportion of the nearly 6,000,0001. which Mr.
Williams demonstrates can be derived from the extension
of the tax to real property. It is only-our respect for
facts, and our desire that Mr. Gladstone's perversion of
them shall not pass current with the country, that has
induced us to notice these inaccuracies ; because really
the case against Mr. Gladstone is much better substan-
tiated by treating his assumptions as true than by
exposing their inaccuracy. His own argument is
the most convincing evidence of the falsehood of his
conclusions, because if, under an Act which exempts
realty from probate duty, seven-sixteenths of
the whole tax is the produce of that which
it was the intention of the legislature to exempt from its
operation, that is the very best reason why the privileged
portion of real property should not escape the exactions
to which the rest is subjected. A Chancellor of Exche-
quer must indeed be hard pressed for the means of
heating off a motion when he can betake himself to the
jejune plea which has formed the pons asinorum of his
predecessors, that realty pays a heavy stamp duty on
its transfer. In that it does no more than personal
property ; and if receipt and bill, personal bond, insu-
rance, stock and share, and other stamps on the transfer
of moveable effects, were reckoned up, it would soon
appear that, even of that burden, realty pays by no
means in proportion to its share. Nothing also can
be more puerile than the attempt to plead the burden of
local taxation upon real property as a set-off against its
exemption from imperial exactions. When Mr. Glad-
stone asserts that "of local taxation personal property
knows nothing," we confess our amazement at its hardi-
hood. Is it the proprietor of freehold land or houses that
pays the poor rate ? No—that heaviest of all local imposts
is levied exclusively upon the tenant or occupier, who
pays a heavy rent to the owner of the land, heavy
tithe to the parson, heavy highway, police, sewage, light-
ing rates, to the local authorities, and a heavy rate for
the relief of the poor—dues levied entirely from the
person, and not at all from the property. Indeed,' the
only connexion which property has with the tax is
simply this—that the amount an occupier pays to his
landlord is made the measure of what can be squeezed
out of him for the maintenance of the parochial paupers.
Nothing could well exceed the boldness of the official
peroration. Only conceive the hardihood and powers of
face which could sustain even a Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer in the attempt to plead for land exemption from
legacy duty, on the ground of the injustice with which
it is treated under the property and income-tax. It is
the most literal fact in the prose of fiscal exaction, that,
under that latter impost, a thousand pounds in money is
taxed as much as a thousand a-year in land—and Mr.
Gladstone urges that circumstance as a good reason for
exempting land from probate duty altogether. We have
thought it best to commence the examination of this
subject by clearing this official rubbish out of the way.
We shall take a future early opportunity to afford the
public the full benefit of the admirable speech and the
valuable facts contributed by Mr. Williams to the solu
".on of this infinitely important question.

The Derby Election Committee has concluded a
searching inquiry with a comprehensive and particular
report. It has discharged all its duties, and the curtain
drops with all the dramatis personce on the stage. Mr.
Horsfall is unseated, and his civic crown transferred to
Mr. Heyworth. With even-handed mercy, both of
them have been allowed the opportunity of exculpating
themselves from all knowledge of bribery. The petition
against Mr. Bass has been declared frivolous and vexa-
tious. Thirteen recipients of bribes, three agents, the
principal, Mr. Thomas Morgan, and the man that
brought the money, have all been designated, and the
recipients ignominiously struck from the poll. Many
more would probably have shared their fate had they been
necessary ; but thirteen were more than enough to give
Mr. Heyworth a majority over his rival. The commit-
tee further report the prevalence of corrupt practices, at
former elections, and recommend that parties engaged
in them for the future should be punished with the' loss
of their franchise. The only point in which the com-
mittee appears to have failed is one that is usually
rather unattainable, and that is the detection
of the parties that set the bribery going and
supplied the sinews of war, or the " nail-heads,
as they were called in this instance. Three per-
sons had been mentioned to the committee, but one
was ill in bed, and. the other two were not to be found,
it being, in fact, no such very difficult matter 'to evade
a committee of the House of Commons. As Mr. Frail
and the illustrious "W. B." had already received their
meed of fame from another committee, it was hardly
consistent with British notions of Justice to repeat their
names again. But, with these exceptions, the whole
story of the Derby election has been told, if not in the
report, at least in the evidence. The sum Mr. Horsfall
was ready to stand, the amount he set down, the figure
actually drawn,—all " for legal expenses,"—and the ex-
act amount of the bribes in each case, are all stated with
an exactness not always attainable in the Court of Bank-
ruptcy or Insolvent Debtors. On the whole, it may be
pronounced quite a pattern report. It is a case to legis-
late upon. What makes it all the better is that there is
nothing abnormal, monstrous, or extravagant about it ;
no enormous expenditure ; hardly even a shadow of a
mystery. There is a minuteness in the scale and a con-
cinnity in the design which seem to have adapted it ex-
pressly for Parliamentary use, like a neat little cause got
up by lawyers for the purpose of trying a principle, di-
vested of superfluous issues.
But does not every case of corruption admit of a like
expos 4 ?—and why have we not at once a ready cure for
this great public scandal ? Nobody ever doubted that
it was in the power of the House of Commons to extin-
guish corruption, were it to set about the task in good
earnest ; but there is the rub. A good committee, such
as that which delivered its report yesterday morning,
would probably unseat at least half the sitting members,
and disqualify a respectable fraction of the borough con-
stituencies. Conscience still whispers "Let him that is
-without sin cast the first stone ;" so no member will
begin; tahned,atitfack. It is only the defeated candidate who
will interfere
heto preserve the purity of the representa-
tion
and his inclic;
enxoit. a pocketful of money, and a few
zealous and clever
tain an army of Ann
, order utries he may as well pocket his
aetelon. The petitioner has to main-
an ey s,
remotean d
prospectcounsel o' f ftooraugnserseatfohriseriv.ivdaeln, evidence, t
ha totnolry-
getting in himself; and happy is
he if he gets off with less than 2,0001. Clearly so great
a national duty as that of depfteinodaing the British Legis-
latureaou
aygnhdt privatenot
ho a bn ed leftat
from the arts of co
s
to disappointed candidates, or to
gonporoocneettngs of
all. But hitherto all the legislationn
edd o, iwtei,nariare
as much
as the house on this delicate subject have
position that it was the business of the public at large to
purify the house, and not of the house itself ;
ic isyyouourcanpl;acbeutt,ofornetceurnretuuern;
ncloet
as to say,
an
and to unseat
ourselves ; that's your business, if you like dirty
this because it is evident there are
goainwgayto "denounce, to de ame,.
work." We say ,
various methods of dealing with such a case as that of

ireST. of the
extended
+7,7e....
, ''''. ~ f tutorial
-- ..,, 1. e duty o
, ".71 to reali
'..1,-":-f-
. ~....---
30 0