The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-01 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON", MO

RESULTS OF ASTRONOMY. •
According to a conjecture first made by the great
Herschel], and afterwards further developed and ren-
dered intelligible by Madler, the entire system of fixed
stars forms, if we may use the expression, a single
lens-shaped canopy. That is, we, with our sun, are
situated nearly in the middle of a space, having the
form of two watch-glasses, placed with the concave
surfaces towards each other. The surfaces of this
canopy are studded tolerably equally with fixed stars.
But as we are a thousand times nearer those situated
above and below than those at the edges of this hollow
lens, so the distances between the stars immediately
above us seem greater, whilst the legion of those dis-
tributed at the edge are seen in densely crowded masses
We may consider the Milky Way as] the edge arid
furthermost limit of this set of fixed stars, where the
infinitely distant crowds of stars are collected in such
masses, that their light flows together into a whitish
cloud, and no longer permits us to isolate one star from

783
23
77
280

2,74

2,050

24
47
318
92

1,594
9
4

another.
Beyond this our lens, Herschel and the most recen,
astronomers imagine that the spots of clouds which
appear like oval flakes in the sky, are other entirely dis-
tinct and independent systems, which float at such an
immeasurable distance from us, that the light has to
wander millions of years in reaching to us.
It is, however, as we before remarked, sufficient for
our purpose to take into consideration only the stars of
the twelfth magnitude, from which the light can travel
to us is four thousand yqrs. From what we have al-
ready said, viz., that the ray of light meeting our eye is
not sent forth from the star at the same moment, but
arrives here according to the corresponding and requisite
number lof seconds, minutes, or years, it follows that
we do not see the star as it is, but as it was at the time
when the ray of light was emitted.
Thus we see the star in Centaur as it was three years
ago, Vega as it was twelve years and one month ago,
and so on to the star of the twelfth magnitude, which
we look upon as it shone four thousand years ago.
Hence follows the conclusion which has frequently been
made by astronomers, and which in its result has become
popular, viz., that a star of the 12th magnitude may
have been extinguished, or set four thousand years ago,
whilst we, nevertheless, continue to see its light shining.
This conclusion, when applied to each of the former
positions, gives the following results.
We do not see the moon as it is, but as it was a second
and a quarter before; i. e., the moon may already have
been dispersed into atoms for more than a second, and
we should still see it entire and perfect.
We do not see the sun lks it now is, but as it was eight
minutes befere; Jupiter as it was fifty-two minutes;
Uranus as it was more than two hours before; the star
in Centaur as it was three years ago; Vega as it was nine
and a quarter years; and a star of the 12th magnitude as
it was four thousand years ago.
These propositions are well known, and have already
been published in popular works upon astronomy.
It is really marvellous that nobody has thought of
reversing them, and of drawing the very remarkable and
astonishing conclusions which pour upon us in a full
stream from the converse; and it is our intention hero to
examine the converse and the inferences which may
thence be drawn.
The following is the relative view of the matter : as
we have before remarked, we see the disc of the moon
not in the form in which it now is, but as it was five
quarters of a second before the time of observation.
In exactly the same way an imaginary observer in the
moon would not see the earth as it was at the moment of
observation, but as it was five quarters of a second before.
An observer from the sun sees the earth as it was eight
minutes before. From Uranus the time between the
reality and the perception by the e) e being two hours
and a half apart ; if, for example, the summit of the
Alps on a certain morning was illumined by the first ray
of the sun at six o'clock, an observer in this planet, who
was provided either with the requisite power of vision,
or a sufficiently good telescope, would see this indication
of the rising of the sun at half-past eight of our time.
An observer in Centaur can of course never see the
northern hemisphere of the earth, because this constella-
tion never rises above our horizon. But supposing it
possible, and that an observer were standing in this star
with such powerful vision as to be able to distinguish
all particulars upon our little earth shining, but feebly
luminous in its borrowed light, he would see, in the
year 1843, the public illuminations which, in the year
1840, made the cities of our native country shine with
the brightness of day during the darkness of night. An
observer in Vega would see what happened with us
twelve years ago, and so on, until an inhabitant of a
star of the twelfth magnitude, if we imagine him with
unlimited power of vision contemplating the earth, sees
it as it was four thousand years ago, when Memphis
was founded, and the Patriarch Abraham wandered upon
its surface.
In the immeasurably great number of fixed stars
which are scattered about in the universe, floating in
tether at a distance of between fifteen and twenty bil-
lions of miles from us, reckoning backwards any given
number of years, doubtless a star could be found which
sees the past epochs of our earth as if existing now, or
so nearly corresponding to the time, that the observer
need wait no longer time to see its condition at the re-
quired moment.

-.LAW INTELLIGENCE.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir J. K. BRUCE.)
MOXIIAY V. INDERWICK.
This suit was instituted by the plaintiff, who is the
well-know n proprietor of the Flail of Commerce, for the
purpose of enforcing a contract :for the sale of the in-
closure in_ Leicester-square. In 1839 the inclosure was
put up fe r sale on behalf of Mr. Inderwick, by Mr.
Robins, at id was purchased by a Mr. liyams, for the sum
of 450/9. Hr. liyams then entered into a contract with
Mr. Most iay for the sale of his purchase. It appeared
that at the time of the auction it was stated in one of
the particulars that there was a covenant in the criginal
lease to pre vent any purchaser from building upon the
land. The defendant being now called upon to
complete the contract, refused to do so unless the
purchaser would enter into a covenant similar to what
he had himself entered into not to build. It appeared
that the purchaser had now delayed the completion of
the contract for three years, but having recently been
informed that the covenant not to build did not run with
the land, and could not be enforced against him, he had
now commenced these proceedings. It was obvious
that there would be a very material difference in the
value of the land, since, if it were built upon, it would
be worth several thousand pounds, instead of the pur-
chase-money, 450/.
His HONOUR thought that there was sufficient evidence
to show that the purchase must be completed. He did
not see that there was any case made out of abandoning
the contract, or of lashes in coming for its completion.
lie should, therefore, direct a reference to the master to
approve of a proper conveyance under the contract, as
to whether the covenant not to build could now be en-
forced. That would be a very difficult question, and
) would require much argument. At a future time it
would be necessary to try that question in a court
s of law.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Jan. 30.
(Sittings in Banco.)
After the motions had been brought to a conclusion,
the Court ordered the "new trial " paper to be called on.
EGLINTON V. RUCK AND OTHERS.
The arguments in this case, which had been com-
menced on Friday, were the first.
Mr. Martin was about to continue his arguments is
opposition to the rule for a new trial, when
The LORD CHIEF BARON, in interrupting him, said
there must be a new trial. There appeared to be no
chance of the respective counsel agreeing upon the facts,
so as to have a special case drawn.
Mr. MARTIN had a great objection to the case going
to a jury. He had seen the manner in which a jury had
treated just such a case as this.
The LORD CHIEF BARON said he thought juries ought
to be spoken of more respectfully ; their duties were of
the highest importance, and ought not to be spoken of
so slightingly.
Mr. MARTIN said he had nothing to say against juries
individually; but he had seen hundreds of wrong ver-
dicts given by juries. In the present case an agreement
had been made between the parties that the Court of
Exchequer should, upon the facts proved, draw such
conclusions as the Court might think proper, and either
party objecting might have a special verdict, and might
take the matter to the Court of Error.

The LORD CHIEF BARON said, to enable the opinion
of the Court to be taken, the parties must agree as to the
facts, and that had not been done.

After much discussion upon the subject,
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said that, in his opinion, the
matter could be settled by the Lord Chief Baron, in the
same way as the late Lord Tenterden had been accus-
tomed to settle cases where counsel could not agree upon
the facts. Each counsel sent in a list of the facts he ad-
mitted and those he rejected, and then the case was
settled upon such facts as to his Lordship deemed pro-
per and just.
Mr. MARTIN said he would be quite content with such
a course.
The LORD CHIEF BARON said the Court were anxious
to carry out the objects of the parties in such a way as
that justice should be done. He would therefore make
another effort to settle a special case.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Jan. 20.
rilE LATE CASE OF MILITARY FLOGGING AT
HOUNSLOW.

rHE QUEEN, ON THE PROSECUTION OF MR. WAKLEY
HEALEY AND COOKE, THE PROPRIETOR AND PUBLISHER

OF TIIE " MEDICAL TIMES."
In this case a rule had been obtained by the Attorney-
General, at the instance of Mr. Wakley, M.P., and
Coroner for Middlesex, calling upon the defendants
to show cause why a criminal information should not
be filed against them for the publication of an
article in that periodical of the Ist of August,
last, which charged Mr. Wakley with having conducted the
well-known inquiry at Hounslow into the death of White, a
thethaenimsdimanner,Dir.
pisoldiers
taaco hmc withitic capacity
Kabeingnwtoiufol
lennioonNs coroner,
private in the 7th Hussars, in an improper and disgraceful
having,otclinha Q.C.76ei
with
hh:
awi.hinted,sbb:iaetrf:o.
0 (with
Eftneharsttnahwhbds
sharing
whom
ucnmhsogaubv,Wilson,trsuggested,
habit
3,tandooferegrsa.i
voef p so il
post-mor-
tem -omrevidence,noerd_
I)Bwhompilinalnihnteig:
cti)loi
make such examinations.
showed cause against the rule. He said these proceedings
arose out of a matter which would, no doubt, be still in the
recollection of their Lorehips, namely, the inquiry at Houns-
low into the death of a soldier named "White, a private of the
7th Hussars, who died after receiving corporal punishment in
the barracks in question. The punishment was inflicted on
the 15th of June, and he died on the 11th of July. The in-
quest was commenced on the 15th of that month, and was
adjourned from time to time, for intervals of about a
week each, until the jury arrived at the opinion that the man
had died from the punishment to which he had been sub-
jected, Several articles appeared at that time in the Medical
Tim2s, commenting upon the conduct of Mr. Wakley in con-
ducting the inquiry.
Lord DENMAN said, if he recollected rightly, the article in
question was much more than a mere comment—it attributed
conduct to Mr. Wakley out of court in connexion with the
inquest, which certainly could not come under that defini-
tion. It contained comments on what happened in court.
Mr. COCKBURN said, no doubt the article complained of
consisted of comments on Mr. Wakley's conduct in prose-
cuting the inquiry. Although he did not mean to set up
that all the expressions used were justifiable, yet he intended
to contend that there was so much irregularity in the way in
which the inquest was conducted, that many of them were
perfectly so. Besides, the whole matter had been freely
commented upon by Mr. Wakley in the House of COM-
MODS, and at a public meeting at which he presided,
Having read the :lltehgeedaffilibdaelviattilielendgbtlyi,
show ins that the defendants had a perfect right
to comment in a like manner, not only on the policy of
opinionsry which were inrceluodfetdheinintqhueiryartiacnled,
the punishment, but on the way in which Mr.' Wakley con-
The course adopted
medical testimony, was
danudatebdetmheedinicqauli
ahtlshtfeertw.hcievnuiatsnekoqinoue
fye read,stsh,weiNlvarious,),
iie hi at ndr deest
ptaaoeidlcic,3toodumtrtonmh
mee
thene comment
tot,
sun.
completely at variance with the Act of Parliament—namely,
the 6th and 7th Win. IV., c. 81--which detailed the course
still adopted at inquests with respect to such evidence. Mr.
Wakley had held a vast number of inquests, and therefore
could not be ignorant of the line of conduct, which the Act
pointed out. That Act enacted that it should be lawful for
a coroner to issue his order to compel the attendance of the
surgeon who attended, or two
was p resent at the death,
of the person on whom the inquest was held, or if no one
so attended, or was present at the death of the person on
whom the inquest was held, then some medical gentleman
residing in the vicinity ; and that if the jury were dissatisfied
with his or their testimony, that the jury should supply
the coroner in writing with the name or names of
any medical practitioner or practitioners whom they might
wish to attend, either for the purpose of giving evidence, or
Wheilsognavien ththeme
firstthe
for the purpose of making a. post mortem examination.
Now when he told their Lordships that the surgeons were of
the first class, and sent down by Sir John Macgregor, and
that Mr. Wakley must have known that their testimony
" go by," and took the evidenceb
had acted in direct contravention of the Act. Instead Lt
• of Mr. Day, who was called in the first
instance, they could not but eof opinion that Mr. Waklev
ought to have been takenfirst,aonfdi‘tihra.t
hearing the evidence
according to his own state-
instance to examine the body, and who made that examina-
tion, and who being unconnected with the army was an un-
alqdleicYs'tion, and because he was not
mbieabsste,daswkietdn7isr,.
MDary. War
satisfied with the way in which he had performed the cross-
examination, he thought proper to suggest to the jury the
appointment of another medical gentleman, and he appointed
Mr. Wilson, who had been his pupil—a protege of his
their evidence in the ordinary and legal way, no imputation
thrown, as he contended there Huron their
own. If the gentlemen so sent had been allowed to give
would have been
testimony, and credibility in the minds of they. The
that the inquiry was adjourned on the 27th, for the purpose
of affording another medical gentleman time to make an Learned Counsel then proceeded with the affidavit. It stated
ex-
amination. On his way home, in his carriage, he met Mr.
Wilson in Oxford-street, and after informing him that Mr.
Day had omitted to examine the man's spine, ha desired him
to do so, and to make a report to the jury; that examination
was made, but the medical gentlemen connected with the army
the '
the affidavit concluded by a positive denial of charges
shared the pro-
were excluded. After detailing the qualifications of Mr. Wilson
conveyed in the article, that he had never .
I l h
in conducting the inquiry he was actuated ao e„..y e 3;_a con-
acientious desire to promote the ends of justice.
affidavitria ttlk: t
pro-
ceeds of post-mortem examinations with Mr. Wilson and that
of Mr. Wilson entirely corroborated the of Mr.
Wakley. The 'Learned Counsel then proceede
comment on the affidavits filed in reply. Thed to read and
affiyadits of
Mr. Healey and Mr. Cook stated that they believed that the
statements in the articles in question, with a few a
xceptions,
were true, and that they were written and published solely
for the public benefit, and not for any other object whatever,
the inquiry having been one of the utmost importance
team
to
medical gentlemen. The'words " partner in the post-mo
fees" were not susceptible of the interpretation which had
been put upon them, and were not intended to convey that
they shared the proceeds of such examinations. It meant
that the frequency with which Mr. Wilson was so appointed,
adding that he had em
and the fees which he received in that capacity, and Mr.
Wakley, as coroner,looked -in post-mortem
like a partnership
elnvaaskiferyeq, frequently.
examinations on account of this frequency, and not that Mr.
Wilson handed Mr. Wakley part of the proceeds. Mr.
and had been under g ril aoteed3b lnli
Wakley admitted havin lowed Mr. Wilson 25 times,
Dr. Hall sought the publication of the medical testimony
in the Medical Times, as he and the other medical men had
not a fair opportunity
of adducing
Mr. Wilson had been for some time sub-editor of the Lancet,
he (Mr. Healey) thought was calculated to bias his opinion,
and to render him an unfair witness. Then Mr. Wakley
othergat
ions medicalt
o Mr.m
presided at a meeting at Exeter-Hall, which was called for
the purpose of forming a society to promote the abolition of
corporal punishment. Several privates of the Guards were
wpreacent. The Learned Counsel read a report of the speech
stigmatised
h Mr. Wakle made from the Morning Chronicle, that
the infliction ofcorporal punishment as most
un-
civilized and brutal
in the highest degree, and recommended
that a subscription should be set on foot to liberate
the two •
privates Cook and Mathewson, who gave
evidence at the inquest, and produced a cheque which
Mr. Collett, M.P
•
~ had sent with that view. He also stated
that the warrant
under which the punishment was inflicted
was
.signed before the meeting ofthe t t. l
that it
was moat improbable thatofficer,
a.
commanding
under whose direction it was called, would modify the punish-
ment which considered
they
ought to be inflicted. He
also replied to the variousre articlesfieetib(r
u which
his had
conduct.been
lished in the newspapers
he (Mr. Cockburn) did say that such lnanguage and suChowa
proceeding on the part of Mr. Wakley disentitled him to
the interposition a the Court. After the inquest had been
held—immediately after—he came and • forward presided
at a public meeting, and in
an inflammatory speech,
froah from the CZOrCi4O of his public fauctious, ad.*