The Sun.
London, England, 1838-04-14 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNAL&

The Times must certainly be of opinion., kith Pope
Alexander VI., that there is little differerte between the
gallows and a statue—lc7 diserimen :;)77iibulum inter et
statuant—or instead of making a sort of bo ist of it's bad
character, it would feel ashamed rF it. However, like Snake
in the play, it lives by its ba.d character, and would be
ruined in the estimation of the Tories by a good one, being
thereby unfit to do their dirty work. .The following is the
first sentence of its leading article of yesterday :—" Some
years have now elapsed since, in the high career of reform,
and after old abuses were wiped away, we began to think
that some bounds ought to be put to the excessive lust of
change then becoming prevalent." Then, too, came " the
excessive lust of change" on the part of our much-respected.
Contemporary, and all of a sudden, at the end of 1834, it
chopped round to the opposite point of the political compass.
Till then it had dashed headlong on in "the high career of
reform,''and was still rushing forward at a speed so furious as
to be really alarming to others engaged in the same coursz,,
when all at once it drew bit, and not only pulled up, but
turnssd short round, in order to drive back again over the
vev..y ground it had travelled, in the hope and with the de-
clared intention of undaing all that had been accomplished.
For this, too, it now would take credit, just as if the public
knew nothing of its corrupt motives, and would attribute
its political vagary to conscientious conviction and the
purest love for valuable but endangered establishments.
Ask the Tories, who made and make the Times their daily
tool, what they think of the matter. But let the reader
mark the reason assigned by our amusing- Protcusof Print-
ing-house-square .—" This thought (i.e. that ' some bounds
ought to be put to excessive lust of change') had no sooner
risen in our minds, than on taking as considerate a view of
the future prospects of the country as we were able, we
saw, or thought we saw, that this tendency to overthrow all
that had been sanctioned by time must ultimately embrace
the Church in its sweep;:ng desolation." In other words, no
sooner had the Times made up its mind to turn about than it
discovered that a useful pretext might be found in the cry of
Church in danger! Of course, therefore, it declared its
hostility to all other improvements, because it was possible
that :those improvements might " ultimately embrace the
Church"—not merely, as our worthy friend explains, the
Church of England, but the Church of the three kingdoms.
No reform of any kind was to be undertaken, lest in some
way or other " the great and revered establishment" should
directly or indirectly be affected. This is the language of
the Times of Friday, and it is only necessary to turn to the
Times of the day before to show hew grossly and unblush-
ingly it contradicts itself. The habitual readers of that
paper may be inclined to give it some praise for its twenty-
four hours consisteney, knowing that it not unfrequently
happens that one part of the same day's paper refutes the
other ; but in the Times of Thursday is inserted a leading
article, the sole object of which is, on various grounds, to as-
sail Ministers for fixing the Coronation at the end of June.
Now, one of these grounds is no other than the damage the
country will sustain from the alleged postponement by
reason of the Coronation of bills for the reform of
the Church ! Let those who arc incredulous, if an ,
ril
such there be, read the following quotation :—" The grea '-
measures," quoth the mighty antagonist of Church Refor
•' by which the temporal welfare of the Church in both island
including the Established Church of Scotland, must be of
fected for better or for worse, are now in so backward and
unripe a state that it would require the uninterrupted in-
dustry and labour of the present Session, were it prolonged
to the Ist of August, to carry them, even without serious
opposition, through both Houses of Parliament." If there
were any pretence, or even affectation of consistency in the
Times, instead of making it a matter of charge against Go-
vernment, that these " great measures" seem to it likely to
be deferred, it ought to rejoice, `°as never yet did any man
rejoice," that something may occur to lengthen out the ex-
istence of the Church of England, Scotland, and Ireland for
another Session. It suits the purpose of the Times. on
Thursday to found an accusation rgainst Ministers upon its
own gratuitous supposition that " great measures" " for the
temporal welfare of the Church" will be delayed ; and it suits
the pesepose of the Times on Friday to forget what it said
the day preceeding about the imminent peril to which the
Church will inevitably be exposed by the intended changes.
It must be owned that our admirable and honest contem-
porary always writes to a purpose, only it would be better
if that purpose were the same for two consecutive days.
But a word or two about the coronation, the Tories, and
the Times on their behalf, being ready to bite their fingers
off that they are destined not to have. the nomination of
the new Peers. How cruel of the Ho-use of Commons not
on a single occasion to give them A inajority, in order that
they might have come in office ust in time to have made
their own selection ! The Que'en's wishes would have gone
for nothing with them, and air Francis Burdett, Sir James
Graham, Mr. Peter Bortlawick, Sir Edward Sugden, Colo-
nel Sibthorp, and other stanch and gifted supporters would
have been elevated, to the House of Lords without the
consideration of any other claims than the signal services
they had rery:ered to their party. Besides, these appen-
dices to t'-se peerage would have been so consistent and
accordant with the additions made by the Tories in former
reign's, that it is a thousand pities they were prevented from
stzeking on

"These ornaments to grace the front of honour;"
and we almost think that the Liberal party in the Lower
House will repent their obduracy against Tory merits and
Tory entreaties. This, in truth, is the source and origin
of all the Times has recently said and inserted blaming
Ministers for what? For being too economical—for re-
fusing to continue an expenditure not far short of 230,0001.
upon the coronation of Queen Victoria, as upon the coro-
nation of George IV. Elsewhere we have printed a letter
upon this subject, with some useful observations and im-
portant details. The writer refers to the motion made by
Mr. Hume for an account of the expenditure by the Go-
vernment of Earl Grey on the coronation of William IV.,
and he adds a conjecture that it did not amount to one-
tenth of the sum expended by 11ie Tories upon the coro-
nation of George IV. We believe that such will turn
out to be the fact when the document is laid upon the
table of the House of Commons ; and we cannot but think
that many of the more reasonable of the Tories will them-
selves rejoice that in the present state of the finances of the
country her Majesty will sanction no such extravagant
absurdity, with all its feudal nonsense, as a banquet in
Westminster-hall, which only for eating and drinking cost
the country 25,0001. How well, too, all this becomes the
Times—the Times .1 which for weeks has been crying out
at the top of its 'voice against the disbursement of a few
hundreds more or less upfra the mission of the Earl of
Durham, for the pacificPA:ion and permanent settlement of
our five great Nortb'irn American colonies. Cannot our
excellent and vw",satile contemporary, by way of making
other people ,!..s incons:stent as itself, induce the Marquis
of Chandc,s, on the reassembling of Parliament, to bring
forward a proposition for laying out 150,0001. or 200,000/.
up,an fitting up Westminster-hall, that about 250 indivi-
duals may dine in it? This would most appropriately fol-
low his late motion for limiting the expenses of the Earl of
Durham. We should like to know what the Times would
not have said, and said unanswerably, against the criminal
lavishness of Ministers, if with a deficient revenue, though
with improving prospects, they had been so besotted as to
propose that a quarter of a million should be laid out upon
an idle piece of pageantry, totally unconnected with the
digniked solemnity of a coronation.—Morning Chronicle.
The Ministers, it is obvious, are much disturbed and
frightened at the state of things existing between themselves
and the Government of Mr. Van Buren. In the convic-
tion that it was our bdunden duty to make known to our
countrymen the indisputable truth with regard to matters
which involved the most serious interests of the nation, we
have for these two or three days past been placing calmly
and conscientiously before the public the facts which have
occurred, as described by the latest arrivals from North
America, and the conclusions which every man in his
right senses must draw from them respecting the proba-
bilities which are before us. We are not conscious of
having exaggerated, distorted, or in any manner misrepre-
sented a single circumstance which we undertook to state.
They were all, indeed, drawn directly from the official docu•
silents published in North America. It would have been
an insult to the understandings of our readers, but we sub-
mitted to them any argument connected with those ques-
tions which would not bear strict examination, and the folly
would soon recoil upon ourselves. Let the Ministerial prints
which have been ordered to abuse and vilify this journal
for its plain speaking upon the affairs of North America
try to shake any one assertion that we have made, or to
refute any given deduction, to disprove our statement—lst,
that the war lately carried on upon the Canadian frontier
was not a rebellion by revolted subjects, but a foreign in-
vasion attempted by American citizens ; 2d, that the mili-
tary stores, arms, and resources of the United States have
been openly employed by their own subjects in the direct
invasion of Upper Canada ; 3d, that the American Secre-
tary of State has in one prominent and important instance
made, on the part of his principal, Mr. Van Buren, common
cause with the invaders, and with their crimes and out-
rages against England, by impugning our right of self-de-
fence, condemning as an unjustifiable aggression our capture
of a hostile vessel, which before the eyes of the republican
authorities had been engaged in palpable warfare upon the
British Crown, and thereby substantially adopting and sup-
porting the criminals guilty of those acts, which even the
proclamations of Mr. Van Buren had reprobated in the
face of the world. Mr. Forsyth, the Secretary of State for
the Republic, ought to have felt the necessity of choosing
one side of the question or another. If, in conformity
with the avowed system of his chief, he really condemned
the aggressions upon England committed by invading bodies
of his fellow-citizens, he ought, according to the most ma-
nifest consistency, to have held blameless those acts of the
Queen of England's officers which, as laid down by all
writers on the laws of nations, came within the simplest and

clearest rn Os cf *the recognized jurisdictiisn of iniured Gc-
verttttehis—such as the following t,C'.. their den, wherever
that might be the otlirt‘A-ie unpunished and unmolested
violators of the national sovereign* of Great Beltain, or,
-et the contrary, denying the right of Eliiia4A it) :protect
her own soil and subject' ill swell a 'cane. Mir. Forsyth
ought frankly entl ttstlncily—,-not VI- infplic,tation—to pro-
claim that the seizure of Navy 'sand, and the fire kept up
thence on British subjects navigating the St. Laurence,
were lawM and perfectly justifiable nets ; and that, while
American citizens had a tall right to attack the terri-
tory of England when they pleased, British subjects
should net be permitted with impunity to punish the
assailants, or to protect themselves from injury Mr. Vor-
ii th has not acknowledged this to ht his doctrine ; but he
has plaiuly Implied it, and either so indiscreet, or so obdu-
rate, Las the gentleman shown himself, as to prejudge the
whole result of the inquiry, which he asserts to be in pro-
gres,f, n behalf of the American G,,vernment, and to an-
ticipate that it must end in establishing, with regard to
the capture and destruction of the Caroline, a case of just
complaint against Great Britain, and of " redress" or quar-
rel ! Will it not be an awkward matter for Mr. Forsyth to
recede from such peremptory pretensions ? And would it
not, therefore, have been more wise to ascertain-Ist, whe-
ther they could be justified by facts ; 2d, whether they would
be submitted to by England ? Now, with these things star-
ing us in the face, we ask whether the Times can be blamed
(abused, of course, it would be—but honestly blamed)
for pointing out soberly and temperately, as it has done,
what has been the villany of the Republican pirates who
invaded Canada ; what the conduct of the Republi-
can Minister, who has loudly condemned the only_
proceeding of British subjects, whereby the outrages of thej
pirates upon Canada could be effectually resisted ; and what
the consequences likely to ensue from the premises thu
brought under public notice ? It is not by vague assum
tions of a desire in two Governments to preserve the peat
that the question can be logically or rationally settle
what
whether one of them does or does not really cherish such
pacific dispositions? A petitio principii is no proof. There
may be a pressure from without upon the Cabinet of Mr.
Van Buren, as well as on a Cabinet nearer home—a
pressure from the worst class of the population in both
countries, but still of a population which has votes to give
in support of a Minister or in opposition to him. A large
portion of the frontier inhabitants of the United States—
we might go further and say that a very large portion of
the people throughout the whole of the frontier States, in
those States which may be supposed to have views on Upper,
Lower Canada, and New Brunswick, viz., Ohio, New York,
Vermont, and Maine, are not the most pacifically inclined
towards Great Britain, or the most anxious for an equitable
as compared with a favourable termination to the existing
controversies. Certain persons of great influence in Maine
have importuned the President and Congress to let the
State of Maine take the law into their own hands, and run
,the boundary line of their north-east frontier through New
ißrunswick,by their own authority, according to the full
measure of their own claims, without condescending to ask
leave of the British Government, and at the peril of the
'whole confederated republic. Such patriots would have no
rvery strong objection, we fear, to any, even the most war-
like enclitic, of the still anadjusted disputes. Qu.—Can
the President venture to disappoint them, admitting, as we
Itio, that his intentions are perfectly pacific? -But there
Ire other points of difference, and in more distant quarters
of North America. We believe that a project has been
actually announced by the President of the United States
for taking and holding possession on the Pacific frontier
of the vast and fertile territory circumjacent of the
Columbia river, to which under old, and till of late, un-
disputed prescription, the title of Great Britain is actually
unassailable. In that quarter, as we are given to under-
stand, the encroachments of the United States within the
last eighteen years have been regular, rapid, and enormous.
There was (we believe about the year 1828) an agreement
that matters should remain provisionally as they then were,
and that in the year 1838 (now) they should be definitively
settled. It appears, however, that we run some risk of
having an unilateral settlement of that question provided
for us, the President having, upon an alleged report of
some persons employed by him, demanded " appropria-
tions" for taking the country bodily into the hands of
the United States, and securing the " conquest," for
such it would be, by a military station. Lord Palmer-
ston therefore had better look about him. The country
will have made a precious bargain of it, if this in-
capable, yet presumptuous, Minister, after having
brought the foreign affairs of the nation into a like
state of prosperity with that wherein Mr. Spring Rice
from week to week exhibits our finances, shall adopt
the same expedient for extricating himself which
some of our contemporaries within these few days
have ascribed to the nimble-heeled Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, and fairly run away. But again we ask, is a per-
son of Lord Durham's petulant, vain, and schoolboy cha-
racter, the sort of guardian in whom to repose the adminis-
tration of the national interests in North America at a pe-
riod so fraught with perplexity and danger ? Where has
he given proofs of statesmanlike ability ? Where has he
satisfied any shrewd observer that he could govern men—
where that he could inspire them with confidence in his
abilities as a directing statesman ? Rejected by three
English Cabinets, he has (for its own, not English, pur-
poses) been flattered and bedizened by one despotic
Court. There is a " pride which licks the dust ;" there is
a vanity so blind that it sets mortification at defiance. Has
Lord Durham ever asked himself—" Why does Lord
Melbourne send me across the Atlantic ?" We suspect
he has not.—Times.

The Dorchester Unionists, who were so brutally treated
by the Whig Government in 1834—and who have just re-
turned to their native country—arc about to be marched
in procession through half of London on Monday next, and
afterwards to he entertained at a public dinner by the
Radicals at White Conduit House ! We are exceedingly
sorry that these poor men should have lent themselves to
such an arrangement. They have been most cruelly treated
by the Whigs—but the persons who are about to parade
them through the streets are not the persons who will find
them compensation for their wrongs. No. The Radical
getters-up of this White Conduit House " feed" are anxious
only to forward their own selfish projects by the intended
display. The money to be expended on eating and drinking
mould render the Dorchester " victims" independent for
life ; but the White Conduit House Radicals, while they
will spout without limit on the grievances of their " victim-
guests," will carefully keep their money in their pockets
We are, we repeat, exceedingly sorry that the Easter Mon-
day foolery in question is to take place at the expense of
men who have already sufferred so much as these victims
of Whig misrule have-
done.—Morning Herald.
A grand procession of the various trades of the metro-
polis, in honour of the return of the Dorchester labourers,
is to take on Monday next. The order of the procession
appears in another part of our impression. The regula-
tions are certainly well calculated to secure the maintenance
of order, and sustained, as no doubt they will be, by that
decorous and peaceable demeanour so pre-eminently charac-
teristic of the English artizan, there need be scarcely any
apprehension entertained of those immediately taking part
in the procession not conducting themselves with the ut-
most order and propriety. We know the Trades, and ap-
preciate their character too well to feel the slighest appre-
hension that they will not be found perfectly competent to
conduct themselves on any occasion of a general manifesta-
tion, without any outbreak of violence and disorder. It is,
therefore, from no apprehension of this kind that we regret
that any such procession should have been resolved upon.
We regret it because we see no good to be effected by the
demonstration ; and whenever exhibitions of this kind
take place without an adequate object and result, the
moral influence of the parties becomes impaired. What
was the result of the former procession in reference to
these identical Dorchester labourers? Did it hasten
their pardon ? No. Did it not, on the contrary, for a
time weaken to impotency the influence of the {Trades'
Unions, of whom, judging by the result, it might rather
he regarded as the funeral procession, than as a demonstra-
tion in behalf of their oppressed brethren? That proces-
sion was either ill-advised, or the trades, in not subsequently
taking ulterior measures for carrying their object, shewed
themselves inefficient to the task they had undertaken.
That, however, was an error of judgment, for which the
genera! sympathy felt towards the sufferers readily furnished
an excuse, but for the proposed demonstration on Monday
next, we must candidly admit that we can perceive neither
pretence nor excuse. There is no adequate object to be
gained. Everyone must rejoice in the victims of tyrannical
persecution being at length restored to their families,
friends, and country—and the occasion of their return is de-
serving of a jubilee—but a procession savours more of a
triumph than of a rejoicing ; it assumes something of a
minatory character, an air of defiance, which on the present
occasion we think misplaced and uncalled-for. We should
wish to see the Trades husband their strength, and reserve
these general demonstrations for occasions when great na-
tional interests are at stake—such as when the men of
Birmingham mustered their forces under the banners of the
Reform Act. The object then was worthy of the effort,
and the effort proved equal to the object. But what
triumph is now to be achieved ? What is expected ? No
good is anticipated ; and confidently as we rely on the good
conduct and demeanour of the Trades, there is much to be
apprehended from evil-disposed persons—thieves and pick-
pockets—who infest every metropolis, making the procession
an opportunity of creating disturbance and disorder, in
order to facilitate their usual avocations. The deeper our
sympathy with the Trades, the more we prize their co-ope-
ration in support of the principles most essential to the
general welfare, the greater our regret at seeing any the
slightest expenditure of their valuale energies without a
commensurate purpose.—Morning Advertiser.

Notwithstanding the ancient adage, that every body
knows his own business best, we do moat potently believe

ti_K SUN LONDON; SATURDAY, APRIL 14, Og;

that the respectable publishers are altogether wrong in sup-
posing that the proposed extension of the duration of covy-
right world to ,their interests; . We Silk this
net with a -View to the ifiiiiiediaN intereSts of tWo or three
vvltoeiWelitiiiiiiiiissiotis, held by virtue of a public and
general right, Might perhaps be interfered with by the ex-
tension of copyright to the rettresentati'vea of Atktifers they
might feel the alteration of the law to be a temporary mis-
chance. 130.t their own sense of justice would wen b finish
that feeling .; and with regard to their business on a bioad
and general scale—looking to future copyrights, as well as
to those now.in their possession—we are satisfied that the
alteration would work beneficially for them. An in-
stance has lately been brought before the public
to induce a different conclusion. Mr. Tegg asks
some questions about " Lord Clarendon's History of
the Rebellion," the answers to which he seems to think
must be conclusive against the proposed extension of
copyrght. But this instance has no more resemblance to
the state of the law which Mr. Talfourd's Bill proposes to
establish than chalk has to cheese. If Mr. Ttlfourd's
Bill proposed to vest copyrights in wealthy corpora-
tions, or to give a perpetual monopoly to any particular
establishment of the printing of valuable works, there
would be some cogency in the example he brings for-
ward ; but, as it is, there is no cogency at all. His
example exhibits only what logicians call ignoratio cleachi.
He forgets or mistakes the thing he wants to confute.
It is one thing to sho,v that the vesting of a copy-
right for ever in a wealthy Corporation is prejudicial to
the interests of the booksellers and the information of
a cheap-literature-fancying public ; and quite another
thing to show that the extension of copyright from
twenty-eight to sixty years is not for the encouragement
of " authors," and the promotion of good and sound
literature. It is to be observed that Mr. Talfourd's Bill
does not profess to be for the encouragement. of booksellers
and the promotion of printing, and if it should appear that
authors could not obtain justice without diminishing the
gains of booksellers and printers, that ought to be no reason
against the alteration of the law. But we are happy to
believe that in this case justice to authors, and prosperity
to publishers and printers would both be promoted by an
alteration of the law. If Lord Clarendon's history had
been under the operation of such a law as Mr. Talfourd
proposes it would long ago have been public property, and
Mr. Tegg might have printed it on whity-brown paper,
with fifteen mistakes in every page, and have sent it by
ship-loads to America or any other place he thought proper,
at no other expense than that of the coarse materials and
clumsy workmanship employed. But supposing any work
not so peculiarly circumstanced as Lord Clarendon's, and still
within the sixty years of copyright, can any man in his
senses doubt that the representative of the author, whether
for his own profit, or for the fame of those from whom he
inherited, would hesitate to deal with the publishers upon
such fair terms as should allow an abundant circulation of
the book ? "We have experience to guide us in these
matters, and we venture to affirm that copyright does not
interfere with the abundance and the cheapness of good
editions, but it does interfere with those coarse jobbers in
publications who send out by the cartload their bales of
printed trash, fit only for the wrapping up of butter and
cheese, and not at all for being read by those who esteem
correctness as of any value. We ask of any one just to
look at the editions of Scott, of Byron, of Southey, of
Crabbc, of Wordsworth, which have been recently pub-
lished in five-shilling volumes, during the existence
of the copyright in the authors or their assignees.
Will it be pretended that such editions would have
been brought out cheaper or more abundantly if there
had been no copyright, and if any ono who pleased
might have printed and sold these works ? We appeal to
publishers whether they think these works would, or could,
have been " got up" more cheaply, and yet in a manner as
useful for the public generally, if there had been no exelu-

give property in them? We -think we may venture to say
that we know they could not. Neither Mr. Cadell, nor
Mr. Murray, nor Messrs. Longman, nor Mr. Moxon, would
have ventured to go to an expense which nothing but an
immense circulation can repay, except that they kew they
were protected from the competition of vile, coarse, incor-
rect editions, which the tasteless and the unwary would be
induced to buy, on account of their cheapness. The
monopoly, as some foolish objectors please to call it,
works two way. If it hinders every printer who hap-
pens to want a job for his office from undertaking
a " cheap edition," it protects those who venture to go
to great expense upon a cheap edition, relying upon
the extensive and exclusive sale. It would he well for such
as wish that justice and common sense should prevail in
this question to compare the cheap editions of Dr. John-
son's works published within these ten years with the cheap
editions of Dr. Southey's works. In the former there is
no exclusive copyright—in the latter there is. The
volumes of Johnson, containing about the same quantity
of printed matter, arc actually dearer than the volumes of
which the copyright is still in existence, and they are upon
bad paper, badly put together, and the printing is most
vilely incorrect. We have a very great respect for Lord
Clarendon's " History of the Rebellion," and we should
gladly see it in the house of every man who has a
library, but we protest that we should rather it re-
mained as scarce as it is than see it come forth like
a certain edition of Doctor Johnson's works in six volumes,
which the gentleman who sighs over the limited sale of
Lord Clarendon's work may perhaps know something
about. We say, then, that putting justice to authors out
of the question, and supposing that, from the lightness of
their tasks, the little research they require, the healthful-
ness and hopefulness of their occupations, the honour and
deference which is shown them in British society—suppos-
ing that, from all these equally true and cogent reasons,
they are to be denied anything beyond a twenty-eight
years' right in what they produce, still it is for the benefit
of the public—for the advancement of what is correct and
elegant, rather than that which is incorrect and coarse—
that Mr. Talfourd's Bill for the extension of Copyright
should pass.—Morning Post.

PESTILENCE IN AMERICA.—A mortal plague,
said to be the same as the " Black Death" which raged so
fatally in England and in Europe some five or six centuries
ago, has broken out in the western and south-western borders
of the United States. As yet it has been exclusively confined
to the Indians. It attacks the head and loins suddenly, and
with dreadful pain ; and in about two hours the victim is a
corpse. The body then swells enormously, and turns instantly
black. Some idea may be formed of the fearful progress and
havoc of death on the prairies from the fact that within a few
weeks more than 33,000 savages died. Of a lodge of 1,600
Mandans (a noble tribe) only 35 remained alive. 10,600
Assineboins have died ; and deserted wigwams, newly-made
mounds, or putrifying corpses, attended only by the croaking
riven and the screaming eagle, mark the mournful desolation
of the Indian forests and prairies. The Crows and Black
Feet, so eloquently described in Irving's " Astoria" and
" Rocky Mountains," have suffered dreadfully ; and more
than one of the smaller tribes have been summoned, man,
woman, and papoose, to the tribunal of Manitoulin, the Great
Spirit, not one remaining to tell that they were once a nation
of warriors I The disease is supposed to have originated from
small-pox amongst the traders, and from them to have been
communicated to the Indians, where it soon appeared in the
aggravated form of " The Black Death."
An inquest was held on the 31st ult., at Kelvedon,
on Elizabeth Partridge, aged 22, wife of John Partridge,
shoemaker, Kelvedon. Various rumours circulated respecting
the cause of her death, which induced the parish authorities to
institute the inquiry. About three weeks ago Partridge, the
husband, forced deceased, who was in very delicate health, to
leave the house at midnight, almost in a state of nudity, and
afterwards severely beat her with a large cord, and otherwise
ill-treated her. A post mortem examination took place, but
from the evidence of the surgeon little was elicited to prove
that the death was occasioned by the injuries. The external
parts bore evident marks of violence, being very much disco-
loured. The Jury, after seven hours' close investigation, re-
turned a verdict of " Manslaughter" against the husband, who
was committed for trial at the Session this week ; but circum-
stances having transpired to give the case a more serious cha-
racter, it has been transmitted to the Assize, and the parties
bound over to prosecute for murder.—Essex Herald.

According to the most recent accounts from St.
Petersburgh, a great change has been made in the plan of the
journey of the young Grand Duke Alexander, the Emperor's
eldest son. His Imperial Highness will go first to Stockholm
and then to London, where he will probably remain till after
the coronation of Queen Victoria ; then visit the Hague ; af-
terwards make a tour in the fine countries on the banks of the
Rhine, visit the capitals of southern Germany, and arrive in
Vienna towerds autumn. After some week's stay there, his
Imperial Higness will go to Franzensbrunn, in Silesia, where
the Empress, his mother, intends to take the benefit of the
mineral waters. The Emperor of Russia will go from Berlin
first to Toplitz, and thence also to Franzensbrunn, which seems
to be intended as the rendezvous of the Imperial family.
HYDROPHOBIA.—About two months ago a spaniel
bitch, belonging to William Brown, milkman, of Cromer-
street, St. Pancras, had pups, when, whilst looking over
them, the bitch bit him on the hand slightly, to which he
paid little or no attention, until the wound began to inflame
and fester. He became alarmed, and caused the animal to
be killed. The wound gradually healed,
nhisTuesday morning last he
milk,
and
dd
aNplpr.eaßowrordtno
be
o-enito rgoouondd
lwthalakodas
supsiirliatls.witoh
went with his milk as usual to some of the officers at the
E Division Station-house, in Judd-street, Brunswick-square,
where he conversed cheerfully with the officers, and returned
home, and complained to his wife of being very ill, and be
laid down ; but a very short period had elapsed before he was
seized with the most alarming symptoms—he foamed at the
mouth, and became raving ; and it required four men to hold
him down, in order to prevent his committing violence, and
eventually a straight-waistcoat was put upon him. Drs.
Roots, Skinner, and Hayman, were called upon to attend him,
when it was ascertained that he was labouring; under symptoms
of hydrophobia, and every thing that medical skill could devise
was done for the unfortunate man, to no purpose; he continued
to rave and struggle in the greatest agony until ten o'clock on
Tuesday night, when he expired. The deceased was about 40
years of age, and has left a wife and family.