The Sun.
London, England, 1849-08-21 00:00:00

THE NEW NOVEL.
Now ready, at all the Libraries, in three vols.,

THE FO'itTUNES OF WOMAN.
Edited by Miss LAMONT,.

"The Fortunes of Wcman is a novel of no ordinary character, and
must achieve for the author a high literary reputation. It will take
its place in public estimation by the side of `Jane Eyre.' The story
is at once life-like and interesting, ftill of everyday events, and yet
possessing all the charm and freshness of a romance, and abounding
in graceful and delicate delineations of character and passages of
ma-ly and vigorous thought, and earnestness of Purpose."—Morning
Herald.

Henry Colburn, Publisher, 13, Great Marlber•ugh-street.

LA'l M.. KUYAL, HAYMA$iir i.
Mr. B. Webster, Sele Lessee and Manager, Old Brompton.
THIS EVENINt,

Will be performed THE HOP PICKERS. Principal characters
by Messrs. Lambert, Boyce, Wright, Paul Bedford, Hughes, Mun-
yard, 0. Smith, CullenfOrd, Worrell, Madame Celeste, Miss Woolgar,
Mrs. F. Matthews, Miss Taylor, Miss E. Chaplin, &c.
After which a new grand Extravaganza, entitled THE DEVIL'S
VIOLIN AND THE REVOLT OF THE FLOWERS.

ASTLEY'S ROYAL AMPHITHEATRE.
Proprietor, Mr. W. Batty.
Under the Patronage of her Majesty the Queen, his Royal Ingham:lS
Prince Albert, &c.
THIS EVENING,
The performance will commence with a Grand Military Equestrian
Spectacle, entitled
MOOLTAN and GOOJEKAT ; or, the Conquest of the Seikhs.
To be followed by an Inimitable display of SCENES IN THE
CIRCLE. in which Marie Macarte will appear, supported by the first
Equestrian talent of the clay.
To conclude with a favourite Melodrama.
Box-office open from Eleven till Four.
,tazo Manager, Mr. W. West.

ROYAL SURREY ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS.
IMMENSE AND UNPARALLELED SUCCESS.
Coder the patronage of her Moss Gracious Majesty, her Majesty the
Queen Dowager, his Royal Highness Prince Albert, &c.
The Public Press has unanimously pronounced the Storming of
Badajoz to be the most perfect and life-like exhibition.
Celebrated German Band and Chorus.
Engagement of Mr. Roberts, the celebrated Welsh Harper.
The Nubility, Gentry, and the Public are respectfully informed
that this favourite place of fashionable resort is open every
MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, AND THURSDAY.
Danson's gigantic modelled Panorama of the TOWN AND
FORT OF IIADAJOZ, pronounced by the voice of public
opinion to be the most perfect and life-Me exhibition ever
presented—Splendid Menagerie—German Band and Chorus—Vo-
cal and Instrumental Concert—Several Favourite Songs and
Ballads by the Misses Wells and Mr. George Tedder—
Solos by Richardson (Flute)—Violin and Violoncello by
Viotti and George Collins, varied alternately—and other at-
tractions, concluding with a vivid representation of the Storming of
Badajoz, pourtraying the advance of the British army—bombard-
ment and attack—gallant defence—rush to the breach iv real troops
—and final tableaux in honour of the " Hero of a hundred fight..."
REFRESHMENTS.—The frequenters of these Gardens have long
complained that Refreshments from the Confectionary-rooms only
could ba procured. Arrangements have been effected, and a distinct
portion of the Gardens set apart, where Refreshments may be had
of the first quality, and at the usual Prices.
Doors open at Nine o'Clock, a.m. ' • feeding of the animals at Five ;
Pelicans and White Bears half-past Five; Concert at Six; Storming
of Badaioz, at Ten.—Admission One Shilling.

• TO-MORROW the Boys of the Greenwich hospital School, accom-
panied by their Band, will visit the Gardens.
THE SEA. SERPENT AT LENGTH.— This celebrated but hi-
therto apocryphal monster is no longer a doubt - he will make hie
.first appearance shot tly at this'Establishment —that is, his head may
be relied on, and his tail, s7:ould it arrive in time.

WEATHEB.—SIIN OFFICE, AUG. 21.
THERMOMETER, Lowest, 55 Highest, 67; Noon, 66.
BAROMETER, 30.4.
Wind W.—moderate breeze and cloudy.

utou wArEit AT LONDON iIitIDOE.

,Tote DA7 —Morning, 47 rain. after 3 j Eveninc, 7 min. after 4
To- N 1 011110 W— vt,rmnb, 28 mm. alter 4 1 Evening, 48 min. alter 4

4#""e
f-16
046,
•N. • Ron t.,4,1.-
Wr'4"s"''-
, I

etilening '51.1111.

LONDON, TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1849.

We have received several communications respect-
ing the observations which we thought it our duty to
offer on the subject of Mr. BIN ,HAM'S decision in the
case of the Countess of LANSFeLDT, two of which
will be found in other parts of our impression—the
one from a " Provincial Magistrate," a gentleman of
considerable experience and intelligence, who fully
c Arcides 'with the views we; put forwari; the other
from a Mr. SINGLET, strongly impugning these views,
and supporting the judgment of Mr. BINGHAM, who,
in his opinion, " acted with humanity in holding the
lady to bail" in place of sending her to prison until
the prosecutor could " get the proper witnesses from
India to come forward," for such, in fact, was the
application of the opposing counsel, who, as we have
already stated, was not in a position to prove that
any legal crime had been committed. As
our correspondent has thought it necessary to
come forward " in correction of (what he is pleased
to term) our errors," it becomes our duty to show
that we committed no mistake whatsoever, and that
the volunteer censor is himself the party in error in
every part of his argument in which he dissents from the
opinions which we really put forward. We say
really put forward, because our correspondent ascribes
to us statements which we not only never asserted, but
never even for a moment contemplated. Like the
mighty THOMAS THUMB,
" He raises the giants first, and then he kills them."
His first objection is that the continued absence
of Captain JAMES for more than seven years without
any communication having taken place between the
parties, is no answer to the charge, because "it appears
to him that she (the Countess) had every opportunity
of ascertaining that Mr. JAMES was alive by
making application at the India House, where
there is a list periodically published of the British
army in India." And he adds—" But there is a bet-
ter answer than this—the decree of the Ecclesiastical
Court is within the seven years ; this, therefore, is a
conclusive answer." Now our correspondent is totally
in error in both points. If acquainted with the com-
monest rudiments of law, he must know that the Act
9 Geo. IV., c. 31, being a penal statute, must be con-
strued strictly, and that no intendment will be made
to bring the defendant within its scope. The express
words of the enactment, which we have already
quoted, are " Provided always that nothing herein
contained shall extend to any person marrying a
second time, whose husband or wife shall have been
continually absent from such person for the space of
seven years then last past, and shall not have been
known by such person to be living within that time."
Here it is not necessary that the party charged with
the offence should institute any particular inquiries
as to the existence of the former husband—it is
sufficient if she establishes the fact of continuous
absence for more than seven years, and when that is
clearly proved the 011U3 rests upon the prosecution of
showing that she knew him to be living within that
time, the evidence on which point must be perfectly
clear and unequivocal. Now the very witnesses for
the prosecution proved the continuous absence for
more than eight years and a half. It was proved by
Captain INGaam that she arrived from India on the
20:h of February, 1841, and that he received her on
board in the month of October previously. Here
then was the most direct and unimpeachable testi-
mony as to the absence, and it was not even
suggested on behalf of the prosecution
that any communication passed between them,
or that it could be proved that she had received any
authentic account of his existence during the interval.
Under such circumstances there was a total failure of
the case as completely as if there was no proof that
Captain JAMES was living at the time of the second
marriage, and the presiding Judge would necessarily
direct an acquittal, without even leaving the case to
the jury, consequently the magistrate should have
refused to entertain a case so defective, and should
have at once discharged the defendant from custody.
The case for the prosecution could not in any
degree be helped by the fact which Mr. SINGLET
thinks so conclusive, that the divorce was pronounced
within the seven years (in October, 1842)—that
decree did not show that Captain JAMES was living at
the moment it was delivered. The Rev. JOHN JAMES
in his deposition, stated that he had received a letter
from his brother about three months previously,
which letter must have been four or five months on
its passage. So that in fact there wasnot a scintilla of
evidence that Captain JAMES had been heard of since
the January or February preceding (more than seven
years previous to the second marriage). Even if his
brother's testimony should be considered a sufficieLt
warning to the lady of her husband's being alive,
when he was asserted to have written that letter, on
this point it should not be forgotten that
that Mrs. JAMES
proceedings, did not appear during the
and that the
decree was pronounced in her absence. With respect to his second objection to our
er
men t, that there was no positive proof g;
Mr. JAMES was alive at the time of the seconda
marriage, he first asserts that there is no
analogy between the investigation before a magistrate
and before a grand jury. 1f this be so, what becomes
of the arguments of those who. declare that investi-
gations before grand juries wEhin the metropolitan
districts are useless firms, which may safely be
dispensed with, because greater protection is afforded
to the accused by the inquiry before a paid magistrate,
who had received a legal educatien and had a sound
knowledge of law. What, in fact, would be the use
of that office if parties were to be sent to trial oa