The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-15 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHEII.II7 CIRCUIT, Liverpool, Dec. 14.
The winter assize for the southern division of Lanca
shire commenced here to-day.
(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
Thomas Cawley was indicted for the manslaughter of
his wife. Elizi*Cawley.
It appeared that on the night on which the deceased
met with her death the prisoner, who is a working man,
came home from his work. The deceased, his wife, was
very much intoxicated. The prisoner was sober, and
complaked of her neglect in not having prepared tea for
himself and the children. High words, in consequence,
took place between them, and one of the neighbours (a
Mrs. Rushton) hearing the quarrel, went in to see what
was the matter. The prisoner threatened to knock the
deceased off her chair. She replied with some taunting
language, on which the prisoner went towards her,
apparently for the purpose of striking her. He made
a blow at her, but Mrs. Rushton interposed, and his
hand merely inflicted a slight scratch upon her fore-
head. He then raised his foot for the purpose,
apparently, of kicking her, but the witness having her
face towards him, for the purpose of keeping him
off Mrs. Cawley, did not see whether the blow
reached her. The deceased, however, instantly screamed
out, and fell forward on the sofa. Tke prisoner imme-
diately lifted her up, and said, " Eliza, have I hurt thee?
I would not hurt thee for the world." It was then found
she was bleeding copiously from the lower part of her
person. Mrs. Rushton desired him to go for a doctor,
and he immediately left the house for the purpose. He
went to the house of a Mr. Berry, and stated that his
wife was very ill—that he had kicked her. On Mr.
Berry reaching the house, he found deceased exhausted
from loss of blood. He tried to arrest the bleeding, but
the deceased sank and died in a few minutes. There
was no external laceration, but a postmortem examina-
tion showed that a contused wound had been inflicted
internally, rupturing a number of small vessels, the
hemorrhage from which had caused her death.
The witnesses, on cross-examination, stated that the
deceased was occasionally intoxicated. The prisoner was
usually affectionate and kind to her.
Mr. ATKINSON addressed the jury for the defence,
contending that it was not clearly established that the
haemorrhage in this, which the medical men admitted
was a most singular case, bad arisen from the violence
offered by the prisoner at the bar.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN having summed up,
The jury found the prisoner Guilty, recommeading
him to mercy.
Ilia LORDSHIP sentenced the prisoner to be imprisoned
three calendar months.

(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
William Bridge was indicted for cutting and wounding
his brother, Richard Bridge, with intent to do him some
grievous bodily harm. _

Mr. Cross conducted the prosecution; the prisoner was
not defended by counsel.
It appears that the prisoner, his brother (the prose-
cutor), and their father, are colliers, living at Rochdale.
On the 7th of December there had been a kind of village
festival, called " rushbearing," at Rochdale, and most of
the parties engaged in it had wound up the evening, it
would appear, by convivial meetings at public-houses,
in which more ale was imbibed than prudence would
sanction. The prisoner, his brother, and their father
were together at the house of a person of the name
of Dearden. The prisoner was teazing kis father
and pulling his hair, on which the prosecutor
interfered, and after some high words had been ex-
changed between them, they came to blows. Mr.
Dearden, the landlord, interfered, and the prisoner was
put out. Ho remained outside the house until the pro-
secutor and his father left. When they got out of the
house, Dearden being with them, they found the prisoner
there, and he kicked over a tub belonging to Deardea,
which was standing there, and behaved with so much
violence that Dearden, to prevent a collision, took him
back into the house until the others should hare pro-
ceeded some distance on the road. The prisoner, how-
ever, on leaving the house went forward to overtake
them, and, being about to attack his father, the prose-
cutor interfered, on which a scuffle took place between
them, in the course of which the prosecutor found he
was wounded in the side. The wound was in a dan-
gerous place, but had fortunately been given in a slant-
ing direction, and the results were not serious.
The prisoner in the dock seemed exceedingly peni-
tent, and he received an excellent character for kindness
of demeanour and quietness in his usual habits when
not excited with drink.
When taken into custody he said " I know I've done it.
I was not my own person."
The prisoner was found guilty of an assault, and seri-
ously admonished by his Lordship as to the evil conse-
quences arising from habits of intoxication, and sentenced
to be imprisoned three calendar months.
Shewell was indicted for cutting and wound-
ing Jeremiah Dooley, with intent to do him grievous
bodily harm.
Mr. Monk conducted the prosecution; the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Pollock.
The prisoner, it appeared, when this occurrence
touk place, was at a public-house at Much Woolton,
near the borough of Liverpool. He was much intoxi-
cated, and was finally put out of the house. At the
door the landlord pushed him and he fell. On getting
up the prosecutor saw something in his hand, and cried
out, " He's got a knife." Immediately afterwards he
was assailed by the prisoner, and cut in several parts of
his body. None of the wounds, ho Never, were dangerous.
His LORDSHIP, in summing up, left it to the jury to
say with what intent the prisoner had committed the
act. Generally, a person must be held to intend that
which is the natural consequence of his act, and if his
intent was to do grievous bodily harm, the tact of his
being intoxicated would not render him less guilty. It
prisonereb.ietel
indictment,
mightc tmablee ntnoto:fionhramwv ehai
imhnaivgtheht, however, be a question for the jury whether the
chi
case
intent
they
enyot
foinxt intoxicated etk
be
eda
justified
ua
alleged
eet
ddo
in finding him guilty of a common assault.
HisV er dti co tR,
DGS
Hu ill
pt
ionfpaanssainsgsasuelnt.tence, again commented
on the serious consequences arising from intoxication
and sentenced him to bo imprisoned six calendar months,'
recommending that he should be kept in separate con-
finement. He had no power to make that a term of the
sentence, but he was willing that the prisoner should be
spared so far as possible the contamination of a gaol.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
NEW COURT.

(The case of Barr, Brewer, Batfe, and Carter, continued
from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Counsel addressed the jury at length for each of the
prisoners, and several witnesses gave Ralfe an excellent
character.

The RECORDER, in summing up, occupied an hour
and twenty minutes, and the jury retired.
After delib?.rating about an hour and a half,
they returned a verdict of Guilty against all the pri-
soners, but recommended Ralfe to mercy.
The COURT took time to consider its judgment

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Lord William Vane Powlett, of 19, Curzon-street,
Mayfair, was brought into court, just at the close of the
business on Monday, and placed at the bar, charged
with having stolen two embroidered slippers, value 125.,
from the chop of Mr. Emanuel Stahl, bootmaker, Bur-
ling ton-arcade.

Oakley, shopman to Mr. Stahl, said. on Fri-
day evening the prisoner came into his master's shop
and asked to be fitted with a pair of Blucher boots. Ho
went up stairs into the wareroom but could not find a
pair that would do, and he came down and told the pri-
soner that he had none that would suit, but he would
take his measure and make a pair. The prijoner said
he was in a hurry for the boots, and he requested wit-
ness again to go up stairs and see if he could not find a
pair. Witness did as requested, but, being unsuccessful,
he came down again and took the prisoner's measure,

and also his name and address. The next day the boots
were sent to eet, and paid for. Shortly after•
wards two embroigereof slippers, one red and the other
yellow, and both for tlic same foot, were missed from the
window. The slippers were worth about twelve
shillings, and witness had seen them Ale in, the window
when Lord PoWlett was in the shop. Witness also
recollected that he saw a red slipper in Lord Powlett's
hands when he was coming down stairs from the ware-
room.
William Allen, shopman, said, as soon as the slippers
were missed, and suspicion had arisen, he was instructed
to go to Curzon-street and make inquiries. He went,
and on telling his business to the footman he received a
message from his Lordship that he had taken the slip
pers, and they were then in the house. Witness re-
turned and mentioned what he had learned to William
Oakley, and afterwards he went with William Oakley to
Lord Powlett's house, and then saw Lord Powlett.
Lord Powlett said he would not have had the thing
occur for 501. He said he took the slippers to ascertain
which would fit him best, intending to call and take that
pair which he might fix upon. Lord Powlett also said
that Mr. Stahl was in the shop when he took the slip-
pers. The foreman contradicted this, asserting that he
was the only one present in the shop at the time. Wit-
ness received both slippers from the footman; they
were the same that had been taken from the window of
the shop.
Inspector Tedman proved that he had been applied to
by the witness Oakley to take Lord Powlett into custody.
Lord Powlett, in defence, said he took the slippers but
certainly with no intention of stealing them. He had
offered to pay for them when the first application was
made at his house.
The foreman observed that it was rather singular for
a nobleman to carry away slippers in his pocket.
Mr. BINGHAM said, 'it appeared to him that, consi-
dering the prisoner had given his 'correct address, had
paid for the articles he ordered, and, above all, tint two
odd slippers could have been of no use to any one, the
probability was there had been somo oversight or mis-
apprehension, rather than that a person of the station of
the accused should have taken the slippers without any
assignable motive. It was a question, however, to be
decided by a jury if the prosecutor thought fit to proceed
further.
The foreman said, his original impression of the case
was in some degree altered by the view taken by the
magistrate of the whole affair. In the absence of instruc-
tions from his employer he should not be inclined to go
further.

His Lordship was then discharged.
Herman Geiger, a foreigner, with his face nearly
covered with hair, was placed before Mr. Bingham,
charged with violently assaulting Benjamin Schrader,
assistant to Mr. Young, pawnbroker, 51, Princes-street,
Leicester-square.
The prosecutor said, on the previous evening he was
in the adjoining house to his place of business, having
his tea, when he was alarmed by hearing the shop bell
ringing violently. He immediately proceeded to the
shop, and as soon as he entered his attention was at-
tracted to the prisoner, who was conducting himself in a
most violent manner towards one of the shopmen. On
looking at the prisoner he directly recognised him as a
man who had been in the habit for some time of trying
to pledge articles at his employer's shop for more than
their value. He was, therefore, determined to give him
into custody. He informed the prisoner of his intention,
when he abused him (prosecutor) in the vilest terms.
The prisoner at length got so violent that prosecutor at-
tempted to put him out ; in doing so the prisoner laid
hold of his (prosecutor's) hand, and inflicted a severe
wound by biting it with his teeth. The prisoner then
ran out of the shop down Princes-street. Prosecutor
followed him till he saw him enter a tailor's shop in
Cranbourne-street, and he then procured the assistance
of a constable, and gave him in charge.
Henry Edward Bonham, shoprnan, to Mr. Young,
stated that yesterday evening the prisoner came into his
employer's shop, and put down four brooches on the
counter, upon which he wanted witness to advance the
sum of 30s. Witness looked at them, and asked the
prisoner if they were gold? The prisoner said, " Yes,
they are, and if you do not like them I will take them
away." Witness then proposed to ascertain whether
they were gold, whereupon the prisoner snatched three
of them away and put them into his pocket. Witness,
however, tested the other and discovered that it was not
gold, but a species of yellow metal. He then gave it
back to the prisoner, and told him he need not trouble
himself to come again with them. The prisoner said,
" What do you mean by that?" Witness replied that
he (prisoner) had been often told not to come to their

shop, and that he need not try anything on again. With
that the prisoner began to make a very great noise.
Witness told him that he would not allow any noise
there, and if he did not desist he would send for a con-

stable to take him out of the shop. The prisoner per-
sisted in making a disturbance, and behaved in such a

manner that witness sent for a constable, and rang the
bell for last witness, who immediately camo to his
. .

assistance.

The prisoner, in a long rambling statement, denied in
tote the charge of violence imputed to him. He also
denied telling the last witness that the mountings of the
brooches were gold. The value of the brooches was not
in the mountings, but in the settings. The brooches he
offered in pledge were Roman mosaic, and considered a
great rarity in this country, and each brooch cost him at
least 20e.

Mr. BINGHAM said he had heard the statement made
by the two witnesses, and also the defence made by the
prisoner. lie (Mr. Bingham) was clearly of opinion
that the prisoner was attempting to commit a fraud,. and
that the prosecutor was perfectly justified acting as
he had done. He also considered that the prisoner had
acted with a degree of violence towards complainant
perfectly unjustifiable. Ile therefore thought it a case
that ougkt to be sent to the sessions, and if the prose-
cutor desired it, he would send the prisoeer there.
The prosecutor said Mr. Young wished him to pro-
secute the priconer to the utmost.
Mr. Brionsu accordingly ordered the depositions to
be taken, and committed the prisoner for trial.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
LIVERPOOL, DEC. 14.
STOCK EXCITANOE.--The sales to-day have been :
Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junction, 311. Shares,
6 dis.—Caledonian,
halves, 2% dis._Lancashire and York-
shire (late
Ditto, Fifth;M % dia. and L.
—Lancaster and Carlisle, 54—London
and North-Western, 1511/,—Ditto, New Quarters, 81A, Ix—
), 8 dis.—Ditto, Quarters, 2N dis.—
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, 74—Ditto, Quar-
ters, No. 1, % p.—Ditto, Eighths, 3 dis.—Ditto, Preference,
I dis.—Preston and Wyre, Halves (13),
North Staffordshire,
par—Midland Stock, 108—Ditto 401. Shares, 4214 c.—
4 p. South-Eastern and Dover, 31—Ditto, Consolidated,
No. 3,5% dis.—Ditto, New, No. 4, 13,i dia.—York, New
Ii -
A
castle, and Berwick, Extensions (Newcastle and Berwick),No. 2, i p.—Ditto, G. N. E. Purch
nish, 4.:!.i die... ilv s c • p.—Dutch Rhe-

LEEDS, . 13.
STocK EXCIIANGE.—The following prices have been ob-
tained to-day, with but a small amount of sales :—East Lan-
cashire, New, 3 q n. dis.—Ditto, Quarters 18s. n. dia.
Glasgow
1,
a ucas h
raen
and
n Dumfries, ui n fri es, Yorkshire
Leeds and Dewsbury, 35% n. dis.—Leeds and Thirsk, 16 n.
dis.—Leicester and Bedford, 4s. dis.—North British, Thirds,
Is. 6d. p.—llitto, Quarters, 6s. 3d. n. dis.—North Stafford •
(West Riding Union), 525. n. dis.
and Berwick, Preference,
3s. 9d. p.
shire, 6s. n. dis.—York, Nort'hern,.6 n. dis.—
Lancashire

_
MANCHESTER, Dac. 14.
Srocic Fact'Awax.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanca-
shire, and Cheshire Junction, z-,:y4
heda, 32 dis.—Ditto, Thirds, 10% dis.—East Lancashire,
New Quarters, S dis.—Edinburgh and Glasgow, Halves, 3
2Wd3i'sr.e-1 halveslon do n (
andii) '7
North-
die.— Huddersfield and Manchester Railway and Canal (241.
paid), 1% Thirds,dis.—Ditto,die.—Dublin and Drug.
% dis.—Lancashire and York-
shire, Quarters, 3 die.—Ditto, —Ditto, West Riding Union, 2 11-16
..16 p .—Leeds‘n
(M veB t
e r
anchester and Birmingham ), 59—Manchester, Sheffield,
anddis.—TDll
ii
rtst
ko,,
Preferential,
tai
air,
and Lincolnshire, Eighths, 28,4 c. die.—Ditto, Preference,
1-16 c. p.— Ditto, Sheffield and Grimsby (20/. Shares), 4 11.11
dis.—Ditto, Sheffield and Lincolnshire, 4% die.—North
Staffordshire. 5-16 dis.—Oldhani Alliance, 31e. dis.—South-
Eastern and Dover, No. 4, 13.16 dis.
BIIMINGH.AM, Dim 14.
STOCK EICIIANGE.—The business yesterday was so limited
in amount that no official list of sales and prices were pub-
lished by the sharebrokere. To-day the sales were—Edin-
burgh and Glasgow, 46—Ditto,
lQuarters, 11!4—Birming-
ham, Wolverhampton, and Dud ey, 33, _ .
/4 P• (for preceding
account)—Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Stour Valley,
28s. 9d. dis. (for the preceding )—North Staffordshire,
3s. 9d. dis.—Shrewsbury and. Birmingham
(A), 3% die.
(fur p. ace.) —Shropshire Union, ')l4 die.
(for p. acc.)—
South Staffordshire, lion Ditc. 13.
STOOK EXCHINGS.—The salesare-Groat Northern, 41.
11s. 6d.—North British, Thirds,
21.
.--1-1---Ditto, Quarters'
41 ' D'ito Extension, lie. . _ ok, , Newcastle, and
No. 2 (late New Berwicks), 12
1/2 e.—Ditto, G. N.
Berwick,
E. Purch., 914•

irdr:esndering it so
Macassor Oil,
ofßohwail
i
nonothi
PERSONAL GRACEs.--The countenance is rendered
additionally pleasing by the well-arranged curl, the
braided plait, or the flowing tress. In dressing the hair
admirably soft, that it will lie in any direction, producing
beautifully Bowing curls, and by the transcendent lustre
it imparts, rendering the head dress truly enchanting.
eithern nothing
ca
a equal
natural t hoer effect
artificial
Rowland's Kalydor is a preparation of unparalleled
efficiency in improving and beautifying the skin and
complexion, preserving them from every vicissitude of
the weather; and Rowland's Odonto, or Pearl Dentifrice,
is alike invaluable for its beautifying and preservative
effects on the teeth and gums. Caution—It i, necessary
to see that the word " Rowland's" precedes the name of
the article on the wrapper of each, as spurious imitations
are abroad.
CHURCH-BATES AGAIN.—A known correspondent
informs us that in the parish of St. Botolph, Bishops-
gate, tho following distraints have just been made:—
From the Friends' muting-house, lioundsditch, forty-
two chairs; from Thomas Butler, Houndsdita, ninety-
seven brushes, value 4/. 13s. 4d.; from Thomas Bax,
Bishopgate Without, four sacks of flour, value 104;
from Charles Gilpin, Bishopsgate Without, the repre-
sentatives of the " Church" having found the till, ab-
stracted therefrom 61. 75. 10d.; from Evans and Clarke's,
Bishopgate Without, they also took cash to the amount
of 54 10s. 6d.; from Henry Page, Bishopsgate Without,
seventy pieces of paperhangings, value 7L; from John
Peirson and Son, Sun-street, twelve coppers, value
8/. 15s. He adds that these were all taken under war-
rant, signed by William Taylor Copeland, Alderman
of the ward.

ON IRISH TENANT RIGHT.
(From the Weekly Dispatch.)
Mr. Editor,—That strange political fungus, Irish
Patriotism, is developing itself just now to an extraor-
dinary degree. It is an unparalleled specimen of full-
blown impudence. All its energies are concentrated on
getting money out of Great Britain for Ireland, with little
regard to the class from which the money is extorted, so
that it be English money; and about as little regard as to
where itgoes, provided that its destination be somewhere
or.somebody in Ireland. Daniel O'Connell himself," albeit
unused to the blushing mood," would have blushed for
the present condition of his tail and its preposterous ex
hibitions. Surely the sons of that extraordinary man,
who, whatever his failings or failures, achieved his
juvenile desire to inscribe his name on an important
page of his country's history," might cherish and
gratify a loftier ambition than that of being the
begging leaders of a beggar population, or the
bullying leaders of a turbulent population. Between,
eight and nine millions sterling have been expended hal
the mitigation of Irish calamity. The balance of ten
millions voted for relief remains to aid the working.
of the Irish poor-law. And this is not a time, while
so many thousands of hands are unemployed
in the manufacturing districts, to call for further
taxation upon the overburdened industry of England.
Irish patriotism, if it deserves the name should feel
its present mission to be that of arousing the spirit and
energies of the country, and infusing into the people the
determination to do something for their own support.
It is sad to see a starving multitude, with untilled and
unsown fields at their back, and the broad sea before
them darkened by its shoals of fish, sitting supine, shiver-
ing in their rags and wretchedness, with open mouths
waiting for the insertion of Government rations. Some
wiser counsel might have been given at such a time,
than that.suggested in the missive to " my dear Ray,"
for the " Catholic Lord Archbishops and Bishops of
Ireland," to come over bodily, and begirt the Imperial
throne " beseeching or besieging," with clamorous peti-
tions for further alms-giving; prepared, we supposed,
this august hierarchy, to expire begging on the steps of
the throne, while the lay :patriots verify their promise,
for Ireland's salvation, to " die on the floor of the House
of Commons."
Feargus O'Connor has taken possession of the place
formerly occupied by Sir R. Peel in the British House
of Commons, with the evident intention of installing
himself also in the throne formerly occupied by Daniel
O'Connell in Conciliation Hall. Hence the old regular
Irish Repealers are put upon their metal. There is com-
petition in the field. Feargus trumps the best cards in the
pack of Agitation. He outbids the grandest promises of
the out-and-outers. If John O'Connell will die for Ireland,
Feargus O'Connor will be d—d for Ireland. The effect
of this stimulus is evident in the pertinacious obstruc-
tion offered to the measure for a little mitigating assas-
sination in Tipperary. It is absurd to call this a Coer-
cion Bill. None of the characters of those unhappy mea-
sures are to be found in its proposed enactments. It is
a stringent Police Bill, for times and places (and such
only) where murders are abundant. That it should be ob-
structed in every stage, under the pretence of claiming
accompanying measures, of large immediate money
grants, and of remedial laws affecting the entire struc-
ture and relations of society, and of course requiring
time both for preparation and for operation, is simply
the demand for a longer license to crime and outrage.
There is only one measure which can, with any show
of reason, be claimed as an accompaniment; and that is,
the promised Tenant Right Bill. This might, very
wisely and usefully, have been introduced at the same
time; or, at any rate, have been clearly described as to
the extent which the Government is willing to go in
meeting the popular opinion upon this subject. Perhaps
Ministers themselves are in difficulty on this point.
Tenant right is a complicated theory, and a questionable
practice.

In Ragland no doubt would exist. Here, tenant right
would mean the right of the tenant, dispossessed unex-
pectedly of his farm, to remuneration for outlays on its
improvement, which had not had time to repay them-
selves. In Ireland the phrase meaust his—and it means
a great deal more besides ; and often something very
different. In crossing the Channel, words, like many
other things, seem to " suffer a sea change," though not
always " into something rich and strange." An out-
going occupier in Ireland claims a sum of money, as
tenant right, of his successor, though he had never ex-
pended a shilling on the improvement of the farm ;
though the cultivation may have been utterly and shame-
fully neglected, and though he may not have stopped
the weather holes in the thatch of his hovel, nor have
propped a fallen pig- stye. What is sold, under this de-
nomination of tenant right, more resembles the "good-
will "of a shop, than anything else in this country. It
is the goodwill of the neighbourhood; of the "farmers'
boys" who handle blunderbusses. 101. per acre is not
unfrequenily given. The amount occasionally reaches
to 'ha As much as forty years' purchase of the rent
has been paid in some instances. In Ulster the land-
lords recognise this right. Elsewhere they connive at it.
They have an interest in doing so. All Irish tenants
are in arrear, and all Irish landlords want money. The
unpaid back rent is deducted from the tenant right money,
and handed over to the landlord. This is the landlord's
best chance for his arrears, and so he fingers the cash,
although the principle on which it is paid be in fact tanta-
mount to a claim of joint proprietorship in his estates.
Tenant right has beencalled a species of copyhold. Itis so
in Ulster, where it seems to have originated amongst the
Scotch settlers in the time of James I. A confiscated
estate having been given to some favourite, who had not
the least purpose of turning an English courtier into an
Irish farmer, he was expected to settle some industrious
yeomen under him—who, in their turns, conditioned for
not being turned out at pleasure. With their descend-
ants the system has worked well. But Tipperary is not
Ulster. The notion of such a right has become gene-
rally popular ; though the disposition to make a prudent
tine of it remains as peculiar as ever. All chance of im-
provement is often superseded, for the new tenant ex-
hausts his little capital in paying the tenant right, comes
moneyless into his occupation, meets his rent with diffi-
culty, irregularly, and soon not at all, toils and moils
under a growing burden, is unable to cope with his em-
barrassments, and at length takes his own tenant right
to market—gets his payment from some hungry compe-
titor, who, perhaps, borrows it for the purpose—finds
the whole of it swamped by the landlord and other cre-
ditors, and quits his abode and subsistence a beggar and
a desperado, like his predecessor, to be followed in due
time, along the same dreary path, by his successor.
Such is the history and mystery of Irish tenant right.
Whether good or evil, this is the law of the land to the
peasanty and small farmers. This is the agrarian code
enforced by the sanction of assassination. Landlords
and tenant alike, if they violate it, fall victims to their
temerity. The murderer is as impartial as the death he
deals. He is the executioner of an unwritten law. It is
quite a mistake to represent landlords as the exclusive
objects of outrage. The poorest peasant offender who
takes a potato patch without settling with the previous
occupant, is in peril quite as great as the largest " tyrant
of his fields." Distress is not the source of these out-
rages. They are least frequent in the most suffering
districts. "It is the cause, it is the cause, my soul."
Hence the sympathy of the population. There would
be no such toleration for murder committed in the pur-
suit of plunder. The " wild justice "is what the people
recognise. And not only so, but it is evidently recog-
nised also by the Catholic priesthood. The Romish
Church believes in tenant-right. Its clergy assert it on
the hustings to excited thousands. True, they de-
nounce the crimes ; what priesthood would not? Priest-
hoods always preach morality. When they persecute,
it is for the glory of God and the good of souls. They
imprison, hang, and burn, from the love of their neigh-
bour and for his salvation. We have been told so a thou-
sand times. But the Irish priesthood, in all that plenitude
of power which confession, penance, excommunication,
and absolution bestow, has not put down murder, or
rather it has not put down that species of murder which
is perpetrated for the enforcement of the tenant-right
law. There is no want of charity in the inference that
exhortations against crime, however fervent, are crip-
pled in their influence by adhesion to the moral auttio
rity of the agrarian code. The Church does not strike
with its full force. The blow falls short. The mur-
derer remembers how good his cause is, and forgets
how bad his deed is in the estimation of the priest. ills
conscience is not scared. Self-honour is not aroused.
Opinion keeps him in countenance. The secret tribunal
which he serves only (as he assumes) dooms the guilty;
courts of law inflict martyrdom.

Were the Government to announce some measure
tending to reconcile this unwritten with the written law,
they would give their " Crime and Outrage" Bill a
moral force of which it is at present destitute. It is
vain to try the old warfare of the physical against the
mental. The " Tipperary boys" have to be disarmed,
not only of their pistols but their prejudices. You
cannot bayonet an opinion, or knock down a notion with
a policeman's bludgeon. The Parliamentary law is
confronted by the local law. Until they be made as
nearly as possible to harmonise, there will be no per-
manent cessation of outrage. Disarming will not do.
Murder has many weapons beside the musket. Stones
will beat out the brains. Every hedge is an armoury,
and every ruined hovel. Popular sympathy cannot bo
produced by Act of Parliament; nor put down by Act
of Parliament. To settle the country, the question
must be settled. Make oue rule of right for all classes,
concocted from what is just in the claims of all classes.
Let the moral blow and the physical blow fall at the
same time, and paralyze not only the murderer's arm
but his thought. Isolate crime from any semblance of
justice. Strip it: excuses, till it stand in the naked de-
formity of guilt. Consecrate the right between land-
lord and tenant, or between tenant and tenant, by the
soundness of acknowledged law. Draw the line with
the carefullest regard to fairness, and that will begin to
appear, even to the peasant mind, " a murder, which he
thought a sacrifice.' This is the best chance for stop-
ping bloodshed; and even for gaining, for the law, the
allegiance of Tipperary.
Difficulties will, no doubt, attend the adjustment of
such a question. The minimum of tenant right will
not be enough for one class, and it maximum will be too
much for another class. Could the existing tenants be
compensated by portions of their land in freehold, per-
haps the wisest course might be at once to pronounce
the recognition of its claim, and its abolition. Its ope-
ration is by no means favourable to agricultural im•
provement. Rarely can it be any real benefit to the
peasantry. Its afiiaities are more with a feudal state