The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-07 00:00:00

LANDS.

Lord LYTTELTON wished to ask a question from
the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies—it was
with reference to New Zealand. There were a great
many difficulties connected with this subject,
but he hoped that the present Government
would consider it their duty to take some notice of a
measure which the late Government had in contempla-
tion, and which he believed would be of the utmost im-
portance, and theprinciples of which met with the greatest
concurrence. Ile desired to know what were the intentions
of the Government respecting that measure? The second
question which he desired to ask was with regard to a
measure respecting the Australian Waste Lands, which
was also introduced by the late Government, and laid
upon the table of the House.
Earl GREY said he hoped that the Government
would be able to pass both measures this session, late as
it was. The draft of the Bill was found in the office
when the Government came into power and he consi-
Cered it was most necessary that some Bill should pass
regulating the future Government of New Zealand. With
regard to the second Bill, the Government found it ne-
cessary to modify it in some particulars, but they fully
agreed in the principle of the Bill. He proposed to in-
troduce it on Tuesday next, and he would then move
its second reading, and desire that the House should go
into Committee pro forma, in order that he might state
what alterations he should propose.
POOR-LAW REMOVAL BILL.

Earl GREY then moved the second reading of the
Poor Removal Bill. Ho would not ask their Lordship's
to pass it if it was to be a final measure, for
the subject of settlemant would require the most
serious attention of Parliament at a very early period.
Reserving final legislation on the law of settlement, the
question now was, should they interfere with the exist-
ing evils which were well-known to attend the operation
of the present poor-law? By the law, as it now stood, if
a poor man went in early life into the manu-
facturing districts and passed a considerable por-
tion of his life there, he was not entitled to any
relief, should he require it. This, it would be generally
admitted, was a great hardship ; and it way to meet`
that case that the Bill was introduced. A strong ex-
pectation was excited when the Corn Bill was intro-
duced, that such a measure would be brought forward,
and it was to meet that feeling that he asked their
Lordships to give the Bill a second reading.
The Duke of RICHMOND objected to the Bill. He
thought that as the whole law of settlement was to be
ennsider6d next session, it would not be advisable to in-
terfere now with the law of removal. This was one of
the boons which was promiset to accompany the corn-
laws.—(Laughter.) He was against union settlements,
as he believed that they would grind the poor to the
dust. He agreed that the hardship pointed out by the
Noble Earl was very great, but, instead of any tempo-
rary regulation of the law, they ought not to interfere
till a permanent measure was brought forward. As he
considered that this Bill would give rise to a great deal
of litigation, and as he considered that such au important
question should not be lightly touched, he would press
upon the Noble Earl the propriety of postponing his Bill
till next session.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH objected to the Bill.
It was not the Bill which was intended to be brought
forward by the late Government, and he could not there-
fore support it.
Earl GREY—It is the same Bill exactly.
Earl of ELLEN BOROUG H—Then, if it be the.same,
he must say that alterations were introduced into
it in the house of Commons which completely changed
it from that contemplated by the late Government as
supplementary to the Corn Bill.
Lord REDESDALE supported the Bill. The general
principle of the Bill he was most happy to adopt, though
he thought it admitted of further amendments.
The Marquis of SALISBURY said it was only on the
last day that the House met he asked the Noble Mar-
quis opposite a question on this subject, and the Noble
Marquis replied that he considered the subject of very
great importance, and he was induced to think it would
not be pressed on so quickly. He was also under the
impression that it was intended to make five years
residence a settlement. A pauper might apply to the
relieving officer under these circumstances, who might
answer that he should go to a magistrate and prove his
statement, and that the magistrate would then decide
whether he was entitled or not to relief. But what was
to become of the wretched pauper in the meantime.
This Bill, if it were carried, would remain a disgrace
on the statute book.

The Marquis of WINCIIELSEA said be hoped
the Noble Earl would consent to the postponement of
this Bill. If this Bill were passed it would lead to end-
less litigation. He would ask the Noble Lord on the
Woolsack what was meant by residence ? He main-
tained that this Bill did not place the pauper in a
proper position. With respect to lunatics there was
considerable injustice done, and he knew a case of recant
occnrrenca where a poor woman was removed from all
her friends to a distance of 300 miles.

Earl ST. GERMANS said that the Bill intended to
provide an exemption from removal. He fully admitted
that the measure was by no means complete, but he con-
sidered that it was an improvement on the present state
of the law, and he must contend that the Bill was not
materially altered from the one introduced by the late
Government. He, therefore, trusted that the House
would not reject it.
Lord BEAUMONT said that the promise which ac-
companied the Bill was of such importance that he would
not throw cold water upon it by voting against it.—
(Hear.) Because that promise bound them to give deep
attention to the question of settlement, and recognised
the principle that a residence should give a claim for
settlement.

The Duke of RICHMOND desired his Noble Friend
on the Woolsack to tell him what period of residence
would give a claim for settlement ; in fact he believed
that there was an appeal in every clause of the Bill from
any possible decision which would be made.
Lord CAMOYS considered that a certain period of
residence ought to give a claim to settlement, and the
great aim of the Bill should be to do as much possible
justice to parishes with the least possible inhumanity to
the poor. He considered that every person in the parish,
whether he paid rate or not, should be upon the rate.
books, which would prevent unjust claims. The utmost
practical difficulties arose in every clause of the Bill.
He should support the Bill, however, as he considered
it was an improvement.
The LORD CEIANCELLOR said that a similar
measure existed in Scotland, and though there was no
abstract definition of the term residence, there was no
practical difficulty in administering the law.—(Hear,
hear.)
The Duke of GRAFTON said that he considered that
the Bill would do a great deal of harm, and felt confident
that it would produce endless litigation.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the grounds
upon which he would vote for the second reading were,
that the Bill recognised the principle of itnprovement in
the poor-law, and because he felt sure that if it was once
placed upon the statute book they would find it impos
Bible to stop, but that they should go on and pass such a
measure as would give universal satisfaction. The mea-
sure was precisely in the state in which they received it
from the late Government, and there had been
no alteration in it except of the most trivial
instances. Their Lordships were aware that therewas
a cruel law upon the statute-book, which prevented
those who had passed their best year?, and expended
their toil and money in a place, in their moment of ad-
versity from receiving, the slightest aid frJrn the local j
authorities if he had not been born in the locality, Now
that was a cruel and unjust principle, and he
recognised.
in the present measure a great improvement, and he
would, therefore, support it as a step in advance in the
right direction. He, therefore, hoped their Lordships
would sanction the second reading of the Bill.
The Marquis of SALISBURY said that he would not
press the House to a division, although he believed that
the Bill would be the source of endless divisions.
Lord REDESDALE said that if they passed the Bill

they would be enabled to discover the inaccuracies of its
working, and thus have the benefit of the experience
which they would obtain by next year.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed this day week.
Lord CLARENDON, in the absence of the Marquis
of Clanricarde, moved the second readings of the Irish
Prisons Bill, the Grand Jury Assessments (Ireland)
Bill, and the Shannon Navigation Bill.
Lord MONTEAGLE desired the Noble Lord to
postpone the Shannon Navigation Bill, as objections
had been made to it.

The Bill was then withdrawn, and the two others re-
ceived a second reading.
The House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, August 6.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four.
REPORTS.

The reports on the Bishop of Norwich's (North Lynn
Rectory) Estate Bill, Borthwick Estate Bill, and Lowe-
stoft Charity Estate Bill, were agreed to.
THIRD READINGS.

The Manchester and Lincoln Union Railway Bill,
Chesterfield and Gainsborough Canal Bill, and the New
Zealand Company Bill were read a third time and
passed.
POST-OFFICE.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Tho-
mas Mitcham, a letter-carrier, complaining of the hard-
ship of being dismissed from the Post-office in conse-
quence of having given evidence before Mr. Peacock, the
solicitor to that establishment, and praying for inquiry.
CORK AND WATERFORD RAILWAY.

On the motion of Mr. WYSE, the Bill was ordered to
be read a second time on Friday next.

Captain PECHELL presented, pursuant to notice, a
petition from the Rev. Edward Duncombe, rector of
Newton liyme, in the county of York, complaining of
the misappropriation, by the York Central Diocesan
Society, of the sum of 3,5001., granted by the Committee
of Council of Education for the purpose of building
Normal Training Schools for the benefit of the children
of the labouring classes. The Hon. Member gave notice
of his intention to-morrow to move that the petition Le
printed.
VAN DIEMEN'S LAND.

Mr. HUME presented a petition from the free colo-
nists of Van Diemen's Land, setting forth the hard-
ships under which they laboured, and praying for a
representative form of government.
On the motion of Sir GEORGE GREY, a Select
Committee was appointed for the revision of the stand-
ing orders relating to Private Bills, consisting of Mr.
Estcourt, Mr. Strutt, Captain Jones, Mr. Gibson Craig,
and Mr. Greene.
FLOGGING IN THE ARMY.

Sir J. C. HOBLIOUSE presented a petition from
Nottingham complaining of the practice of flogging in
the army, and praying the House to take the subject into
consideration.

Mr. lIUME moved for a return of the number of
floggings that had taken place in the army during the
past year. -
MORTALITY IN TIIE ARMY.

Mr. HUME also moved for returns of the mortality
in the British army in different parts of the world during
the past year.
DECCAN PRIZE MONEY.

Sir HENRY WINSTON BARRON rose, pursuant
to notice, to put the following questions to the Presi-
dent of the Board of Control:—What was the amount
available of the debt and prize money since the last dis-
tribution in 1832 of the Deccan Prize Money ?—Had the
Nagpore jewels, in the custody of the East India Com-
pany at Benares, been adjudicated, as set forth in the
Printed Paper of the House of Commons, as printed in
the year 1838 ?—When will the distribution of the debt
and prize money take place ; and has the dispute which
prevented the distribution of the said prize money been
settled, if not what is the nature of the dispute ?
Sir J. C. HOBIIOUSE said that the last distribution
of the Deccan prize money took place in 1842, and not
as stated by the Hon. Member in 1832. With reference
to the other questions, he thought the Hon. Member bad
better move for a continuation of the returns moved for
by the lion. Member for Montrose on a former occasion
on this subject.
QUARANTINE LAWS.

Captain LAY-ARD wished to ask the Secretary for
the home Department, whether Sir William Pym,
Superintendent General of Quarantine, had within
the last two years been employed by Government to pro-
ceed to the Continent for the purpose of obtaining in-
formation on the subject of quarantines from the au-
thorities of different places, or for some other purpose ;
and to know if he made a report on his return ; and, if
he made a report, whether there be any objection to its
being printed, and laid on the table of the [louse ;
also that Government may institute an inquiry, by com-
petent persons, as to the nature of the fever which pre-
vailed last year on board her Majesty's ship Eclair; and
if shown to have been the true yellow or black-vomit
fever, that the inquiry should then extend to the ques-
tion as to whether it has been proved that such a disease
is transmissible from persons labouring under it to
others in health.

Mr. M. GIBSON said Sir W. Pym was employed to
inquire on the subject, and the report had been laid on
the table •of the House; with regard to the second
question, he said that there had been an inquiry
into the subject of the fever, and the result was
that Sir W. Pym, one of the persons appointed to in-
quire into the subject, came to the conclusion that it
was an infectious disease, and Sir W. Barnett had arrived
at a contrary opinion on the subject.
SECONDARY PUNISHMENTS.

Mr. HUME gave notice that, on Monday next, he
would ask some questions of the Government relative to
the subject of secondary punishments.
Mr. PROTHEROE moved for copies of any corres-
pondence between the First Lord of the Treasury and
the Master of the Rolls, in the year 1845, respecting
the building of a Public Record Office.—Agreed to.
RELIGIOUS OPINIONS BILL.

The order of the day for the second reading of the
Religious Opinions Bill, on the motion of Lord J.
RUSSELL, was then read.
The NOBLE LORD wished, on this order being read, to
make a statement respecting the nature of the Bills to
be repealed, and he might first observe that the greater
part of these Acts were altogether unworthy of being
retained on the statute-book. These Bills might be
divided into various classes, and among the first might
be stated an ordinance which prevented any Roman Ca-
tholic from holding lands in this country. There was no
doubt of the general desire to g3t rid of this nuisance.
The next in this class was that which required that
all Jews should wear a badge of degradation. This
was a power which he thought no one would wish to re-
tain. All Jews were admitted to all the privileges
of the Constitution, and it would therefore be absurd to
keep up a distinction which had been practically abolished
already. The next class of Acts which he was desirous
of sweeping from the statute book was that which im-
posed penalties for not attending public worship ac-
cording to the rites of the Established Church. By the
5 and 6 Edward VI., any offender was liable for the first
offence to imprisonment for six months, for the second
to premunire, and for the third to the penalties of high
treason where any party was proved not to be in connec-
tion with the Established Church. By the 29th Eliza-
beth, every person not attending public worship in the
Established Church was liable to a penalty of
201., and for a second offence was liable to a
forfeiture of all his goods. The next class of Acts
which it was desirable to repeal were those which
also induced prosecution for religious opinions
and especially those which instituted punishment for,
allowing the supremacy of the Pope in this country.
The Act itself was one of the reign of Elizabeth directed
against Popish recusants. It was subsequently enlarged
in the time of James, and imposed for the first offence
the fine; for the second, loss of all the goods and chat-
tels of te offender; and for the third, the punishment
of a premunire. He (Lord John Russell) thought there
was little to fear from the Pope's supremacy in
this country in the present day, and that the Act
might with safety be erased from the statute-book.
He said Lord Denman and several eminent judges had
given their opinion against these enactments, and there-
fore the Government was convinced that there was no
danger whatever of the supremacy of the Crown
in this country. He did not think there
was any advantage in keeping up these penalties ;
that the mere assertion that the Pope ought to have
supremacy in this realm, if it were the person's
opinion, ought not to be punished. If any
person made his assertion of the Pope's supre-
macy in such a shape as to bring it before
a court of law, he would be dealt with according to the
common law of the country. These Acts, the 13th of
Elizabth far example, were enacted in times when there
certainly was an assertion of the authority of the Pope,
and an attempt was made to free men from their alle-
giance to the throne of this country by authority of
the Pope, and after that time all persons who introduced
bulls into the country were pronounced guilty of high
treason. Now the question was, whether it was desirable.
to keep up the penalty for this. He said it was not 111
the power of any one to prevent the introduction
of bulls into this country. These were necessary
for the appointment of bishops and priests
to sinthitnhke
Roman Catholic community., and it was
snm former
rs mu such
of ti
an
preventing their tbheeimr
made
eeing as
they
yodhuaced dr.eadSueptpoi
days—and yet it was extravagant to suppose that any
attempt should be made by the Pope to interfere with the
Sovereign authority of this country ; and he did
not believe that any Roman Catholic would be affected
by any bull to that effect—still if any one acted under it
so as to infringe the common law of the country, he
would be indicted on a charge of hightreatshoeny
and law would deal with the offence. If there
was anything treasonable in these
bulls,
if
fotuhledre bweasrenaocthheidegbiyn
tthheemlaowf a
of the
treasonable country,
characterand
why then it was unnecessary to maintain those laws.
mHieghwtogulidvesaryisethtoatsoamfteerctohnefußsiiollnhiadtphaes ed, it certainly
law,
contradiction. There was nothinng
in the Bill though
iet
rnoo.
duced to alter the oath which was now taken, and which
would continue to be taken, namely, that the Pope
neither has, nor
ought to have, any jurisdiction, eccle-
siastical spiritual,•
s! or in these realms, while, at the same
time, there could be no doubt that he actually exer-
cised such authority. Such was the case at present, and
so it would remain after the Bill had passed. He always
interpreted the oath to be, that in the opinion of the
person taking it no jurisdiction of the Popes' in this
country could be enforced by law, and ought not to be
so, but at the same time he thought it was not to
be taken without proper consideration. He did not
intend, on the passing of the present Bill, to relieve the
people from the of necessity ' that oath. He thought that
it was desirable to introduce this Bill alone, as its intro-
duction with any others of a similar nature might impair
its benefit. The late Government came to the conclu-
sion that such a Bill was necessary, and Lord Lyndhurst
thought that it would be more desirable to introduce
the Bill aloe() than to encounter the difficulties
attendant on the protracted consideration of it which '

would inevitably ensue if it remodelled the whole slues.
tion of religious opinions. Ile did not wish to give any
opinion on the other parts of the subject, but he thought
the Hou.se would do right to remove many of the ab-
surd penalties which could now be inflicted by the pre-
sent system of legislation ; and, with that impression,
he should move that the Bil be read a s. cond time.
Cul. SIBTIIORP said that he had always pursued
one course of conduct in that House, and he always
would do so. He did not bear any unchristian feeling
towards those who differed from him in opinion, but he
certainly was attached to the national form of worship,
and he could not subscribe, and never would subscribe,
to any otn:ssion of a departure from the xi!'"
necessary to esta'Aish its supremacy
.in this empite•
He knew the Bill had been prepared to another place
by the Lord Chancellor, but the high position of the
authority from whom it proceeded would not preclude
him from offering it his most determined opposition n('
for he considered it might be both too passive
too active. Ile knew his opposition would be futile,
but, nevertheless, he should not hesitate to enter his pro-
test against it now, and reserve a more detailed state-
ment of the nature of his opposition until the future
stages of the Bill. He regretted the absence of the Ho?'
Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford Olf,
R. H. Inglis), because he was satisfied he also weak,
have opposed the measure. The Noble Lord (J• Russ
sell) had endeavoured to console the House on the subJec-
This was a happy knack on the part of the Ministers,
in order to enable them to get comfortably over the sea'
sion. They should not, however, forget that they be
got in because the others were an extremely bad set.
(A laugh.) They promised well, as they had not ytt
.ceived the House—(flear)—and he should not entertain
a bad opinion of them until they did deceive the house*
Ile objected particularly to that portion of the Bill re.;
listing to oaths, and considered that the Bill, as „ii
stood, would have the effect of undermining the national
Church.
Sir H. W. BARRON entertained great respect
the the National Church of this country. If the Gault,
Colonel had such great veneration for our ancestors, 'lO
might have recollected that they established the Rcnaa..;
Catholic religion, and had handed down every gra"
principle which was worth contending for in that Ilonsee
and that a Roman Catholic Archbishop forced
tyrant King John to sign the Magna Chatta•
He was not going then to enter at large into this gal;
tion, but he believed no man could contradict this sea' pt
fact., that the acts of their ancestors, which the Gab%
Colonel so much admired and so much eulogised, we;l,-
the acts of Roman Catholics.—(Hear, hear.) --Now, w`il-
regard to the principles of the Bill itself, he would 0%
say one word. One of the oaths prescribed to be taken
by Members on entering that House was, he would
tolerate the spiritual jurisdiction of any foreign fine
in this country, and yet it was notorious that the liafs
of Rome had an established and acknowledged jurisur".
tion over the Roman Catholic Church in this country; h
Mr. ESTCOURT complained of the time atyvhll,l
this Bill was introduced, when the greater proportion
Members had left town.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill 13,„110
only been in the hands of Hon. Members for a 01
hours, and be could not be supposed to be acquaialo
with the provisions of the Bill. The Noble Lord WI.,
introduced the measure had said that bulls were, Ise
fectly necessary to enable the professors 01 nor
Roman Catholic religion to act in a Pri;of
manner. He (Mr. Estcourt) did not know bad
correct that statement was, but he found that there. ing
existed for a great number of years a law pro it
their introduction into this kingdom, and he thouq be
too much that at so short a notice the House shout to
called upon to repeal that law, and consea-tbe
the importation of bulls. He thought tbal,osi
provisions in the Bill regarding oaths should be p?iti';„,ith
until the subject could be considered in connexion t the
a Bill of a more general nature. He hoped tba s
Bill would not be pressed forward this souse
He considered this was not the way in which the
,rd bf
should be treated. The lion. Member conehluetbses
moving that the Bill be read a second time that dal
months.

[ Mr B. ESCOTT supported the Bill, but conWwere•
: clausessthat tdhiednprevious
he Bi
loei 1 lh
et chroenßt alp:
lur.
ee
sdelnct lt awußassei l sl
hwihsha id
dc he
si
mitrber,°, raolliaves:
future stage of the Bill, to submit some clauses °OA°
greater effect to the measure, and he trusted tbe,„ tor
Lord would have no objection to his doing sc, or ''''
[ introduction. fallen
~ ~
. Mr. SPOONER, entirely concurred in what 1i50.,„. of
from the Honourable Member for the Universi'lliri"
. Oxford, and if he pressed his amendment t.„° „11, ge
sion lie would vote with him against the l)"" J3lll
r• considered it was improper to press theossion•
; forward at the present period of the S' os/#
He certainly thought that this Bill ought to be
not b 8
poned, for he conceived that the discussion should o_,ben
taken now, at so late a period of the session, 'ex.
many of the Members had left London without any the
pectation that the Bill would at all be brought 00 at
present moment, still less that it would be brought. o_4
all at this period of the session. On these grounds he I.lloc
that the Noble Lord would assent to the postpone
the
of the Bill till next session. Then, with regard
."-this
penalties to be imposed for the spread of sedition to 01
country, he would beg to ask the wereAttorneY-Ge-
how, when under the oath of supremacy, 00'
bound to resist the exercise of any supreme authe,re,,
in this country, whether ecclesiastical or civil, t.". 1,
waswere to
purelym e eatnt he
ecclesiastical influence oof
documenta bul l u a
emanatings i, abu llvitcw.`i
couldecclesiastical t , a
aunt hd otrhi a fallacy
in :
wa
in the assertion that sedition, spread by means of a boo
Nsoac thereforeon a
ctlea ct ry m ofanitiet,"
of the Pope, could be stoppA by any such means. o_,
Mr. HENLEY said he rose merely to give his r ,°.O
sons fur the vote he intended to give on this Bill. ,0•7,1
said the Hon. Member for the University of ford
I complained of being called on to vote on this. tee
• which had been circulated only to-day, 0111(01-
' more that it was at this period of the 7werei
If this had been a new matter, upon which theisereeu;
entering, he (Mr. Henley) would have (Si he
u
with the Hon. Member; but this Bill had beeilLr At
substantially introduced by an Honourable Difelll- f th°
, previous period of the sesion. The Ministers .(s) Dill,
, then Government advised the withdrawal °f kirtusll3:
• because another was in the Upper House „vi- That
including all the principles contended for in''' resell'
Bill recited, he believed, all the Acts which the Potion
Bill recited. This was the way he got over the cluwilieb
of time. What, then, was there in the Bill itself_ life of
any one could object to? He could not, for th'of the
him, see anything to object to in the substance_e god
Bill. It did harm to no one, and if it did no an or
to any one, the Bill ought to be passed out littbalie
sideration of the prejudices of their Roma° •ng the
fellow-subjects. Indeed, it was happily beelie theky!
policy of the times, and, for his part, he Si6l e let it ul.
was a mark against any man, in God's nain,ieh be
. Y " t see
removed. As for the Act of Supremde
_,9.d not for
been introduced on that occasion, he oi Aot ,c-
-that the Bill at all interfered with that .0.... t teoU
it was his opinion that all who rittau a
the oath of supremacy would o.°„ passe i
at preseu e to
have to take it, if this 131"iieved Oa
With regard to many parts of the Bill, he best, or otbeer
every Member in that House was in some
subject to some of the penalties which it ab:°lslitsiltiuedtio°l4/:
could see no harm or danger to any 00e for r a measure
the Bill, and therefore he should vote useful one-
which would in many respects be a very nred---
The House then divided, when there app ° - 79
For the second reading ................. 10
For the amendment ....................
......69 „o
Majority ...................... •.. •
or
'
The Bill was then read 4 second time, and °•1
be committed.
SUGAR DUTIES BILL
• ,ttee °ll
On the motion being put for going into Cortire'
this Bill, , yebich "
Mr. V. SMITH rose to put a question 0. for the
had given notice, to the Under Secretary of Sta
_it° 000
Colonies. He wished to know if any,rgtesteller'eg
had been made in Mr. Secretary utZeedret4,;r"
arrangement for the appointment of Under "' de's--;
to the Colonial Department? Mr. Gladstone b bade r't
mined upon agentleman forthe' office who 00 #
&par t to
been previously connected with the " uniusffiee-
aud this system was considered to be •l 0
"-AO° iv the
the gentlemen connected with the v- , 0111.7 the
Mr. Gladstone proposed to sweep away o°"ks of ",00
head clerkship, but also the probationary elerouet
office, and he thought such a course of otoit the
highly objectionable, and caused a great WO dea to t
jury to a very valuable class of persons, he anti arse e
clerks in the Colonial-office. The more manly c Mort
have adopted, would have been tocome down to the
ut,se'
and state that there was a necessity for an Assistianrope
He would have gladly supported such 2/r neW
but he objected to any insinuation to ere, tee,
te A 11
wilt
T aEni subjectsmil
da
ed
declined
tievnhoei
involved
sheandatodrt inht
est
hht
presentaaetei
cimu n
aee nsottri.rnoei ;10 r
aouoerferag_tpeilherecre,
„is
jeaot
ni 0c,009..
so i sectary.i
co ett
He
e
the Hon. Gentleman to the consideration of the ~,tigu enter"'
loMufgeMtmhirnbeteorlifece, and had consulted with tos" retar-r of
nourable Gentleman the previous in aPr uur„..
the colonies, he did not think he would lee:a er:‘,l)ffi'
position to give the answer required. Toh!S;eol.os_et: he
ever, who had been referred to had pr
in
ettic a he
cient officer. With regard to the clerks in an
would bear witness to their general efficient effeel7put,
._.,,e, ,
fully and cheerfully gave his testimony to t''"„ efiici-ad
Mr. HUME thought, if the clerks were 5-were, "te
they ought to be better treated than 00' a, ill '
should not have parties placed over their bell 00
way referred to. to .
owe pe
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that in refer veil . a
a . tio
office of Assistant-Secretary, the duty we's,..,roons„ re,
euliar one, the party filling it having the e;:therer:de,
of all colonial matters. The appointment v",,foily 173 010
a very important one, and should be eariort to be
He was quite ready to agree to the propeo;„, 00C
..,eri•
important business of legislation 00,Ill'a.eatlewthe
carried on without the services 01, f and ant
who were acquainted with the princr; itaporrow ecl
practice of the law, and especially in But it see° the
jjests 0' The
office of an Under- Secretary of State-
to him that in this case the interi-otecl.
roes,
senior clerks ought not to be negoetiv Octal*
duties of these gentlemen were "Moe
erforro toll
and there were not too many persons to P
The appointment of Mr. Rogers al)
proper one, and he did not think thaoLous fee:ioo
judgment had been made, or any erfro that post'
exhibited, in putting a gentleman i t
„uics.
roe
who was intimate to
the routine of itsae! 'reeerella
The Earl of LINCOLN thought t ,ht Floe, guide
i,
had been made to the conduct of a tenworde tiget
of his, he might be allowed to say a evilith his ,'"o uh
House. He had held a conversation 71,:ect, tee 030
Hon. Friends at the time on this very °J
~.snuld assure •110
n `
and be i ula g
not an official correspondence, .e „entie ~;, ive
peered
atnoybew:iioet:
Hon. Member for Montrose, that tu 5.
ecreterYs"'efe ose
had been appointed to the Assistantangc, but
of
selected, not because be was a su re duties i P.
he was a lawyer, and acquainted with tu
office.

_t
er a few words from Mr. WOOD,
aThe House went into Committee on the Bill, and the
s
eaere,l clauses were read, and agreed to.
beThe House resumed, and the report was ordered to
brought UT) to morrow.
Th. C°l-TRT OF COMMON PLEAS BILL.
tr, is Bill was read a third time and passed.
/1 „Ice reports of the Cop) hold Bill, the Turnpike Act
tii; the Stock in-Trade Bill, the Highway Rates
and the Loan Societies Bill were read and received,
grow
Bill
ow . 8 were ordered to be read a third time to-
he p
orms (Assessed Taxer) il was read a second
and ordered to be committed B
tol-morrow.
g THE SPIRIT LICENSE BILL.
the motion that thi; Bill be road a third time,
h herhe CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
14 tad lately received a deputation from the chemists
toet3ollfd°,l,l, and he had
,desired them to go to the chair-
s!! the Board of Excise. Ile had understood that
lath objections were removed, and came into the llouse
he fotuat luipression; but since he came into the House
to and that they were not entirely so. He was ready
teeet°B444 such alterations as might be considered
ti
IIiii.raYVAR:LEY was by no means satisfied with this
laeaus't would be supported by the wholesale dealers I
hut., eit would throw a monopoly into their hands. It
take a render it necessary for :3,000 more druggists to
aafe'Plit licenses under this Bill, or they would not be
hesalin having a still or even a retort upon the premises;
ts, the Bill had only been in the house eight days.
equitLuerefore, wished to ask whether it aas just or
jar able that a Bill, affecting in such an extensive way
throug! class of persons, ought to be pushed hastily
eta,. g" the House without time being allowed for dis.
ale, • ,
hetide It? What the persons who would be affected
tiltalr,7awas, more time, to enable them to become ac-
eatseu with its provisions, as the chemists and drug-
tiann,' whom it would most materially affect, knew no-
thet6theef nature.—(Hear, hear.) They considered
lanee Principle sought to be introduced was
.altogether
Gone dry with respect to them, as the object of the
tsem-sn.ment might be obtained by less objectionable
at al.' as it required them to take out an annnal license,
eae6" cost or ea 2s. a year. The feeling against the
Neil taws was sufficiently strong already, but they
3,000 render those laws more objectionable by placing
k Persons under the surveillance of a supervisor. If
to tae
was necessary to prevent fraud, it ought not
Sleet hastily passed, He would not move any amend-
Pest ("lt would Dress the Right lion. Gentleman to
afferl3,oe the measure until Monday week, in order to
Qat "tne for deliberation. He was authorised to state
etait:h factious opposition would be offered : on the
ObjerY, the parties would do their best to promote the
t the Government had in view.
Pre t' HUMS wished to know if any report had been
erissented to the House, relative to the evils which
tot ted under the existing law? If such a report had
een fight the ought not to pass a measure which
mad_ affect 3,000 persons. Some case ought to be
11411? out, yet he had heard nothing of the subject ;
Lulng of the frauds on the revenue. No reason had
CI assigned by the Chancellor of the ExclrequFra,a,lend-
fethieasure ought to be postponed
withhisuntiltheya
la
;nation on the subject. He agreed
nHonF.
etierld (Mr. Wakley) that the excise-laws were obi-
noble enough.
sir DE LACY EVANS also advocated the postpone-
-14 ent of the measure, on the ground that the Bill had
°
Members
been printed since Friday last. Even many Hon.
Wt
had only been able to obtain copies within the
lt!t hour. He trusted, under all the circumstances, the
Would Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer
ould see the necessity of postponing the third reading
fora week or ten days.
After a few words from Mr. DUNCAN, which did
llot reach the gallery,
iliThe CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the'
till was prepared by the late Government in conse-
thence of great frauds which had been committed on
„..Exeise and the real object of the Bill was to provide
ifelist a recommittal of such frauds.—(Hear, hear.)
the_had, however, no objection to take the third reading
Leda and defer its passing till that day week. He
ta,s shine amendments to make to the Bill, and
aa„! amendments should be added and the Bill after-
ois reprinted.
kr.
the B • ESCOTT presumed that they were to take
till eensideration of the Bill on the question that the
404 pass•—(Yes, yes.) Ile thought that some time
,L'e given for the consideration of the measure.
PvVILLIAMS said it was strange, at the close of
Pree,-,'"ssicn, for the Government to push forward the
alres-icilt Bill. He complained that the Excise laws,
that aY So stringent, should be further extended, and
tioe,-e,,w Parties were to be brought under their opera-
rkettanr-t-ellere was no necessity, in his opinion, for the
lt•
dr
11. as``4NLEY thought the Bill should be recommitted
-4 IRitZted with the amendments, so that the country
~,,ere The aware of the nature of the measure.
d'tIA.NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER con-
„
eotad that the course he proposed was a fair one. It
Wouldliet be recommitted at that stage. His proposal
Ptintee enable the Bill with the amendments to be
be and time would be given for their provisions to
parties considered. The Bill would not bring fresh
simply under the operation of the Excise laws, but
to the eux-i7 operation of the officers of the Excise
Mr. so'n,t,„Proposed in the measure.
saw n difference
he wished to say was, that he
sub unterence between putting parties not hitherto
Jeer to them under the Excise laws and under the
th else, inasmuch as the officers could only act through
e law.
t•Pi r. WAKLEY wished, for the way in which this
11,1-- would affect London, that the clauses to which he
-,,forrnerly alluded should be postponed or amended.
tlo'ne CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would
-.ink of it.
The Bill was then read a third time, and ordered to
be engrossed.
everal:
deied t 13ills, brought down from the Lords, were er-
° eon the table.
GAUGE OF RAILWAY BILL.
ao9n the order of the day being read for going into
Intnittee on this Bill,
Mr• I) as
ve,., • - • -a. STEWART opposed the Bill as being of a
poi., unsatisfactory nature, and did not tend to settle the
pe,.rt in a proper manner. Uniformity of gauge was
evicetetly desirable, and this Bill would only multiply the
al` "Y adding 500 miles more the broad gauge than
4aas at present existing. There were 2,700 miles of the
;Ow, and only 300 miles of the broad gauge.
lil 4." M. GIBSON said that Parliament was responsi-
the for this Bill, and it was brought forward simply for
e Purpose of carrying out the recommendations of the
truniissioners appointed by both Houses of Parliament.
e,ePtl not think the proposed Bill would at all multiply the
Drlelvcef.,t break of gauge. It would have the effect of
g an increase. in the number of those breaks by
of rag certain Bills which had. received. the sanction
to tbs. Legislature without containing any provision. als
very
gauge of the railways. Uniformity was certa:in y
la dsirable, but that uniformity would not be obtained
rut the outlay of very large sums of money.
be,r. PROTHEROE said that the broad was much the
-bgauge in existence, and the carriages moving upon
roe '4"41 gauge lines were much more commodious and
ahtieb better ventilated than any others ; and they were
hue to travel at a much greater speed. He thought the
b-Tvenience of the break of gauge was not so much to
ueprecated as the break of management which there
Ilheen in certain cases.
ire House then went into Committee on the Bill.
ah; P,Oll clause 1 being read, a short discussion arose, in
her Mr. Ewart, Mr. Russell, and another Hon. Mem-
th' tc3lt part, upon the subject of locking the doors of
e Great Western Railway, which ended in
w r. RUSSELL saying that the directors of the Great
-stern Railway were anxious to afford every possible
en 4Yenienee for the public ; but he was sure that every
41
rangenaent made would be always attended with some
partial, inconvenience.
p. M. STEWART thought the country. must
a:lhtl come to the decision of obtaining uniformity of
‘,l",ge, and he thought it would be better to grapple
iLtn the difficulty when there were only 300 miles to be
tered, instead of having, as they shortly would if this
111 Were passed, to alter 800 miles.
Clause 1 was then agreed to.
Clauses 2 to 4 were also agreed to.
-Upon clause 5 being read,
Ildr. SPOONER made some remarks on the necessity
°Lp giving to Birmingham a competing line, on the broad
atige, to London. This could not be effected by the
provisions
of the present Bill, as there would be three
InOonvenient breaks of gauge.
After a few words from Mr. M. Gibson, Sir J. Pak-
itt°ll, Mr. Williams, and Sir R. Ferguson, clause 5
has agreed to.
The remaining clauses of the Bill were agreed to.
,
e House resumed, and the report was ordered to be
'elved on Monday next.
NAVAL
MEDICAL SUPPLEMENTAL FUND
SOCIETY BILL.
oalhis Bill went through Committee, and the report was
iired to be received to-morrow.
tinge Steam Navigation Bill and the Rateable Property
Were postponed till Monday.
1,1,, DUBLIN WIDE STREETS BILL.
4,5 Bill was read a third time and passed.
ois tilln 0 FISHERIES (IRELAND) BILL.
'he order of the day for going into Committee on
tillaPtain JONES expressed his dissatisfaction with the
:and after referring to the law relating to the
eetiotine7isaizntended that the evidence taken before the
, a report of which he held in his hand, was
Who. Y opposed to the provision of this The
he toe of the North and Ireland were opposed to it, and
rn,Za% surprised that, under such circumstances, the
was 32 are proposed to the House.
Pile,' FABOUC HERE said the subject was a very com-
hea,e" One, but having looked carefully into it in all its
clene-ings he had come to the conclusion which his pro-
(cessor had arrived at, namely, that the Bill was the one
Recalculated to do the greatest amount of good.—
eati ,•) It was supported by the majority of the influ-
sitieaL People of Ireland, and he did not think the oppo-
aeo,,h,eof the Hon, and Gallant Member opposite was well
a`" d.llear.)
which FERGUSON pretested against the system
th 4 Bedard of Works pursued towards the fishing
Interest of the north of Ireland.
sagipe 4-IGoTT said the Bill had been introduced at the
it 4,1" sti°ll of a number of highly respectable individuals
I -ested
with th_ in the trade, and based on their suggestions,
jitiless !.recommendation of the Board of Public Works.
saltboo Bill passed this present session, the season of
the he:sailt ing would expire on the 20th of August, and
of the extension of the period sought would
tht be lost for the present year.
°light to M. STEWART thought the Government
measurepause ere they passed such a Bill. A similar
producingahad been tried in Scotland and had failed in
After any beneficial results.
4 few Words from Captain JONES, to the effect

that uniformity. of season could not be obtained in the
manner sought.
Mr. PIGOTT explained that, according to the 3d
clause of the Bill, the Board of Public Works were
bound to exercise their powers, and to say yea or nay
whenever it was called to their attention that the season
was such as to render its extension expedient.
The several clauses were then read and agreed to, and
the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
The House resumed.
BATHS AND WASHHOUSES (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. HAWES intimated, in answer to an Hon. Mem •
ber, that it was intended to extend the provisions of the
Bill to Scotland.
STEAM NAVIGATION BILL.

The House went into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. P. M. STEWART wished to know whether the
Bill had been altered from its original form.
Mr. M. GIBSON said it remained almost as it stood
at first. It was intended, however, to compel paddle-
wheel steamers to carry paddle-box boats, unless in par-
ticular circumstances, in which case the Board of Trade,
if it thought proper, might license them to sail with only
the common description of boat. As to the mail
steamers, they would be subjected to another super-
vision than that appointed by the present Bill.
Mr. P. M. STEWART said the Oriental Steam Com-
pany had been in correspondence with the Admiralty ;
trial had been made of the paddle box boats, and it
ended in the Admiralty being of the Company's opinion
that the attempt was a failure, and the expense was

useless.
The whole of the clauses having been agreed to, the
House resumed, and the Bill was ordered to be reported
to-morrow, (this day.)
Mr. BROTHERTON, in the absence of Mr. Hutt,
who had previously given notice of the motion, moved
for a return of all the appointments made by the Se-
crwary of State for the Colonies, since the Ist day of
September, 1841, to public offices in any of the colonies
or dependencies of the British Crown ; stating the
name and previous employment (as far as it is known)
of each individual so appointed, the date and nature of
his appointment, and the salary attached to it.
Mr. LABOUCIIERE obtained leave to bring in a
Bill to provide for removing the charge of the consta-
bulary force in Ireland from the counties, and enlarg-
ing the reserve force ; and to make further provision
for the regulation and disposition of the said constabu-
lary force.
The Bill was brought in and read a first time.
The remaining orders of the day were then disposed
of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter to Ten
o'clock.

ASSIZE IN TELLIGENCE.
lIOILIE CIRCUIT.---Guildford, Thursday, Aug. 6.
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE and a Special Jury.)
COOKE V. WETIIERELL, CLERK.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Mr. John
Mynde Cooke, against the Rev. Charles Wetherell, his
father-in-law, for criminal conversation with his wife.
Mr. Sergeant Shee, Mr. Mostyn Chambers, and Mr.
E. James appeared for the plaintiff. Sergeant Channell,
Mr. Clarkson, and Mr. Lash were for the defendant.
It will be remembered that this action was tried at the
last summer assizes, at Croydon, when a verdict was re-
turned for the plaintiff, with 3,0001. damages ; but upon
subsequent application to the Court, a new trial was
ordered, which now came on to be disposed of. The
proceedings appeared to create a great deal of interest,
and the Court was crowded the whole day.
Mr. Sergeant SHEE addressed the jury, and detailed
in his novel, clear, able and forcible manner, the cir-
cumstances of the disgusting and horrible case which
he said it was his painful duty to have to lay before
them. He then called the following witnesses :
Mr. W. H. Reade examined by Mr. James—l have
known the plaintiff for several years, and was present
at his marriage with Mrs. COoke at St. George's, Hano-
ver-square, on the 25th September, 1842. The marriage
took place in presence of the father of the lady. About
nine or ten days afterwards, I called upon the defendant
in order to ascertain what liabilities the defendant had
incurred by his marriage, and this was done in conse-
quence of a bill having been presented to the plaintiff,
accepted by his wife. I saw the defendant and made
the inquiry of him, and mentioned one bill of 5501., of
which his daughter was the acceptor. The defendant
said there was but this one bill, and that it would forth-
with
be arranged. I saw the defendant a second time
the same day, and he told me he had seen his solicitor
since I was with him, and he should decline having any
further communications with me upon the subject. In
the beginning of October I went down to Byfield, ac-
companied by the plaintiff, and I there saw the defen-
dant and his daughter. There was a difficulty about
our admission to the meeting, and Mr. Cooke said he
had only come to demand to see his wife, and to take
her away with him. He was eventually admitted, and
I heard some conversation in a loud and angry tone be-
tween the plaintiff and the defendant, bat we all left, and
by arrangement with Mrs. Cooke returned to Byfield
on the following day, and it was fully arranged that
Mrs. Cooke should accompany her husband back to
town, and she did so on the following day. This was
on the Sunday fortnight after the marriage had taken
place. Mr. Cooke appeared very kind and affectionate
to his wife. At that time he had only just come of age,
and he had been admitted and was practising as an at-
torney. I know nothing of any liability incurred by the
plaintiff except the bill I mentioned.
Cross-examined—l am a bill discounter by profession.
My offices are in Duke-street, St. James's. I have had
money transactions with Mr. Cooke, and at the time of
his marriage I owed him five or six hundred pounds. I
paid him that sum, and ho has once owed me money,
but he purged himself of the debt in the Insolvent Court.
I did not know the marriage was to take place forty-
eight hours before the ceremony. Captain Gadsell and
Mr. Waddy signed the marriage register. I myself
fetched Miss Wetherell in Mr. Cooke's brougham to
be taken to be married. Mr. Wetherell proposed to sell
everything at Byfield and Eaton-place, and settle the
proceeds on his daughter, and then go abroad and re-
side. I afterwards took possession of the house in Eton-
place, and when Mr. Wetherell endeavoured to move in,
we refused to let him do so, and he remained outside for
an hour or more. Mr. Waddy, Mr. Cooke, and my-
self went the day after this down to Byfield, but I swear
it was not our intention also to take possession of the
property there. I wished nothing of the kind. I did
not see any one seize a poker, neither did I see Mrs.
Cooke throw her arms mind her husband's neck dur-
ing the altercation that took place at Byfield. Ido not
know where Mr. Cooke is living now. His last resi-
dence was in Seymour-street Edgeware-road. Ido not
know a Mr. Baynton.
Re-examined—Mr. Waddy is a Parliamentary agent,
and Mr. Gadsell is a captain in the army. At the time
Mr. Wetherell agreed to dispose of the property in Lon-
don and at Byfield, it was stated that everything had
been bought with Miss Wetherell's money, and it was in
consequence of this statement that Mr. Cooke took pos-
session of the house and property in Eaton-place. Mr.
Cooke did not owe five shillings beyond what he could
pay at the time of his marriage, and all his embarrass-
ments had occurred since.
The letters of the sth and 6th October, written by
Mrs. Cooke to her husband were here put in and read.
Mr. G. H. Corfield, examined by Sergeant SHEE—
I am an attorney, and acted in that capacity for Mr.
Wetherell in 1842, as referree to the affairs of Mr.
Cooke, and it was part of my duty to ascertain the
liabilities of Mrs. Cooke previous to her marriage, and
I found the amount to be from 1,5001. to 2,000/. I re-
member in particularr one acceptance of Miss Wetherell
for 550/., and the furniture in Eaton-place had been
seized as security for the payment of this bill. Mr.
Wetherell and his daughter took up their residence at
Mivart's Hotel, in Oct. of the year 1842, and Mr. Cooke
endeavoured to see her, and I and Mr. Wetherell ar-
ranged that an interview should take place on the 22nd
of November, and Mr. Cooke came about seven in the
evening. He did not, however, see either Mr. Wetherell
or his daughter, because the former objected to it, and
he sent me down to pacify Mr. Cooke, and while I was
gone he took his daughter away in a cab. Mr. Cooke
was very much disappointed and excited at this proceed-
ing. Prior to this I had seen Mr. Wetherell near
Gray's Inn. Mr. Cooke was with me, and when Mr.
Wetherell saw him he ran away. I followed and over-
took him, and insisted upon his accompanying me to the
chambers of a gentleman named Nesbit, to clear up
something he had stated I had said respecting Mr.
Cooke. I then told him that Mr. Cooke had come to
me in a very excited state, and said that the defendant
had said, that I had told Mivart that Cooke's wife was
unchaste when he married her, and I asked the defend-
ant whether he had ever made any such statement,
and the defendant admitted he had, and persisted
in the statement of my having said so to Mivart.
The witness corrected himself, and said this occurred
ten days after the proceeding he had alluded to at 111-
vart's, and not before. He now proceeded with his evi-
dence. I insisted upon the defendant accompanying me
to Mivart's, and after objecting for some time he agreed
to do so, and two cabs were ordered, but when we ar-
rived at the hotel the defendant made his escape, and
would not see Mr. Mivart. Another appointment was
made, but the defendant did not come. During my
connexion with Mr. Wetherell he frequently made use
of strange expressions towards the plaintiff, and on the
28th of October, when at my office, after discussing
different matters, he said he had heard a strange charac-
ter of Cooke, and asked if I knew him about town. I i
replied that I did not. He then sail he had heard
amongst other things that he was a man-whore, and that
he drove about the parks for hire. Upon another occa-
sion, when the defendant was endeavouring to induce
his daughter not to return to Mr. Cooke, he said amongst
other things that if she went back to him he would dis-
ease her, and another time I was present when the de-
fendant made his daughter take an oath that she would
never retnrn to her husband. I thought he seemed to
possess very great influence upon her, for whatever reso-
lutions she came to when alone, they were all upset the
moment her father had been with her, but she generally
seemed anxious to return and live with Mr. Cooke. Ne-
gotiations were at this time going on regarding the first
nuptial settlement, and it was agreed by all parties that
Mr. and Mrs. Cooke should live apart until the set-
tlement was completed. I acted professionally fur
Mr. Wetherell, on the 25th November, and I then gave
up all the papers to Mr. Nesbit.
Cross-examined—I was acting in these matters as the
attorney for Mrs. Cooke, and had not had any conversa-
tion with Mr. Cooke before. She was very anxious that
such a settlement should be made as would have the ef-
fect of protecting her father from legal proceedings.
When the defendant made his daughter take the oath
that she would not live with her husband, I said,
" Surely, you only wish this to be during our
The oath was proposed ; but I cannot say positively
whether it was taken or not. Mr. Wetherell all along
appeared to have the greatest animosity and antipathy
for the plaintiff. I once heard Mr. Wetherell say, that
his daughter's life was in danger from Mr. Cooke, and
she repeated the statement ; but I cannot state the time
when this occurred. I never heard from Ur. Cooke that

he was born in 1522. Mrs. Cooke always appeared to
me to be very fond of her husband. I should consider
her good. looking on an evening but not on a morning.—
(Laughter.) She is well got up.—(Renewed laughter.)
By that expression I mean, she was alwayt very well
dressed. _

In answer to a suggestion from a juror, the witness
said he declined to state the reason why he declined to
act any longer for Mrs. Cooke. He said it was in conse-
quence of an opinion he had formed.
The juror—Was it one of disgust ?
Witness—l should rather not answer the question or
give any further reason ; but I declined to act in con-
quence of an opinion I had formed founded upon parti-
cular facts.
S ezeant SHEE —Was there anything in the conduct
of Mr. Wetherell towards his daughter, or in her con-
duct towards him, which induced you to decline to act
any longer for the lady ?
Witness—l would rather not state my reasons. I was
acting professionally for the lady, and I do not think
I ought to state anything m
Sergeant SIIEE —Did you see anything in the conduct
of the father? Witness—lt appeared to me that there
was a most extraordinasy degree of intimacy between
the father and the daughter, and that he had an extra-
ordinary influence over her.
Baron PAnxe----How old is the defendant ? Witness
—I should think about sixty.
Sergeant SHEE then put in a ,letter, without date,
from the plaintiff's wife to her father, and the letter of
the defendant to her, signed " The Wretch." They will
be found in the copies of the correspondennce.
Gordon, the clerk to the plaintiff's attorney, was then
called, to prove, that upon an exectiii ni being served
against the effects of the defendant, the letters that had
been produced. and a number of othere, to,ether with
some envelopes, addressed to T. C. M 11 , Esq., and a
copy of the letters sent by the plaintiff's wife to her
husband, were found in a box among his property.
In cross-examination, the witness said that there were
five or six hundred letters in the box. Some envelopes
were addressed T. C. Mills, Esq., but he did not see any
letter addressed to Miss Mills. Mr. Cooke was now
living in Great Ormond-street. Before that, he lived in
Seymour-street. Mrs. Baynton was the landlady of the
house. He said he had not seen her present when the
witnesses who were to be questioned were present ; but
he would not swear that she had not been in company
with Mr. Cooke in the Queen's Bench Prison. He did
not see Mrs. Baynton in Croydon upon the occasion of
the last trial, and he had not seen her in Guildford since
these assizes commenced.
Some other letters were here put in and read.
Mr. Baron PARKE observed that he did not see how
those letters could, in strictness, be produced as evi-
dence.
Sergeant CIjANNELL said he did not object. He wished
the documents to be read.
The first nuptial settlement was then read. It com-
menced by reciting that a debt was due from the defen-
dant to his daughter amounting to 15,0001., and the
defendant undertook to repay the amount by yearly in-
stalments of 5001., the whole of which was placed at the
disposal of Mrs. Cooke, and the plaintiff did not take any
interest or advantage under the deed.
At three o'clock the Court and jury adjourned for a
few minutes to take some refreshment, and the trial was
t hen proceeded with.
Eleanor Williams, examined by Mr. JAMES—I am at
present chambermaid at the Rummer Hotel, Bristol, and
in 1843 I was in the same capacity at the Beaufort
Arms, Chepstow, and I remember inquiries being made
of me in June, 1845, relative to some parties who had
come to the Beaufort Arms in August, 1843. I remem-
ber an old gentleman coming to the inn at Chepstow in
that month. He was accompanied by a young lady ap-
parently about eight-and-twenty years old. There was
nothing particular about the dress of the gentleman, but
I noticed that he wore gold spectacles. I saw them both
upon their arrival in the inn, and they engaged a bed-
room, a sitting-room, and a dressing-room. Two of the
rooms were numbered 12 and 13. There was a large
bed and a small bed in the bedrooms, and
they selected the room which was usually
occupied by a lady and gentleman. They stopped
two nights in the hotel at Chepstow, and both
occupied the same bed. When they went away from
the hotel they left a box in the care of the boots, and I
am not aware of anything else being left. I left my
situation at Chepstow to go to Bristol, in December,
1844. After the lady and gentleman left, some appli-
cation was made about a cloak and an umbrella, but I do
not think the articles were found, and I do not know
who made the inquiry respecting them. I was first asked
whether I could identify this lady and gentleman in the
summer of last year. Two gentleman came to the
Hummer Hotel, at Bristol, aad I saw a portrait, in the
bed-room, of one of them. I was taken to the Queen's
Bench prison in June last year, and I there saw the gen-
tleman whom I had seen before at the Beaufort Arms
with the young lady. He had gold spectacles on, and
I recognised him immediately. I afterwards saw the
lady in the same prison. lam sure they are the parties
who were at the Beaufort Arms at Chepstow, and who
slept together. I went back to my situation at Bristol,
and in a short time the plaintiff, Mr. Cooke, and another
gentleman, came to the Rummer Hotel, and it was on
this occasion that I found a portrait in their room. It
was the portrait of a clergyman in his robes, and I
believe it to be the one now produced. I had not seen
the portrait before I recognised the gentleman in the
Queen's Bench prison. I saw the same gentleman sitting
in the Court at Croydon upon the last trial, and I pointed
him out.
Cross-examined—There was another chambermaid at
the Beaufort Arms when I first went there, and we
shared the perquisites. She had them one week and I
had them the other. I cannot tell whether she had left
the service in August, 1843. The lady and gentleman
came to the inn in a postchaise. I will not swear that
they did not come by water. I will not swear either
way, or that a waterman did not bring their luggage.
I cannot say whether any other party came to the inn
that day. No. 13 was the dressing-room, and 12 the
bed-room. I cannot exactly say what number their
sitting room was, but I think it was No. 12. I have
learned since that Mr. Cooke was one of the gentlemen
who applied to me at the Rummer. He was accompanied
by a lady, and they both occupied one room. The lady
first spoke to me upon the subject of the lady and gen-
tleman coming to Chepstow. I don't think Mr. Cooke
said anything to me upon the subject till the next morn-
ing. Mr. Pring is the landlord of the Rummer Hotel.
I believe the lady said that they were in search of a gen-
tleman, and lady, and that the gentleman was an elderly
man, and that he stooped, wore spectacles, and bad the
appearance of a clergyman, but I cannot say whether
I replied that I did not recollect any such
persons. I will swear that this did not occur
in the presence of Mr. Pring. The gentleman
did say to me, " Try what you can recollect by to-mor-
row." I went to London on the following day. I was
alone. I went to 29, Seymour-street, where I saw Mrs.
Baynton, the lady whom I had previously seen with Mr.
Cooke at Bristol. I was taken to the Queen's Bench
prison on the same day. I cannot swear whether I saw
Mr. Cooke and Mrs. Baynton the next day, or whether
they examined me. To the best of my belief, I cannot
say. Mrs. Baynton gave me the money to pay my fare
back to Bristol, and I was afterwards sent for a second
time by Mrs. Baynton, and it was upon this occasion I
was taken to the chapel of the prison, where I saw the
defendant and his daughter. Mrs. Baynton paid my ex-
penses both on the first and second visits. I showed the
portrait that was left in Mr. Cooke's room to the house-
keeper, and several other of the servants. I afterwards
took the portrait with me to Seymour-street. Mrs.
Baynton accompanied me to the last assizes in a cab. I
saw Lee, the boots at the Rummer, at Mrs. Baynton's,
in Seymour-street, but he did not stay till the trial. He
was one of the persons to whom I had shown the por-
trait. When I was examined upon the last trial, I said
that I had never seen a portrait, and I repeated the
answer, although I was asked the question several times.
I did not know what I was saying. I don't think I said
a word about finding the portrait in the dressing-case. I
have never said that the rooms occupied by the parties
were Nos. 13 and 17.
Re-examined—There was no other old gentleman
and young lady stopping at the house at the time in
question. I recognised the gentleman again the moment
I saw him in the Queen's Bench. A man named Screm-
miger was with me, but he did not point him out to me.
I was taken ill, and fainted about the time. I was exa-
mined respecting the portrait. No one did show me the
portrait. I found it myself. lam still in the same ser-
vice at Bristol.
Mary Anne Hall—l am a married woman, and carry
on the business of a washerwoman in Hill-street, Dorset-
square. In the early part of 1843 I was in the habit of
washing for Mr. Wetherell and his daughter, and I
noticed from the first that a portion of his linen had
been washed with scented soap, and his shirts4iave been
sent to me wet. I noticed similar appearances upon the
linen of his daughter.
The rest of the evidence of this witness was of a simi-
lar character, and may not be further alluded to.
Mr. Wm. Pitman, clerk to a stock-broker, proved
that during the year 1841 he sold out 18,000/. standing
in the name of Miss Wetherell, by direction of Mr.
Wetherell. This daughter was present, and sanctioned
the proceedings of each sale of stock.
Mrs. Russell deposed, that she and her husband were
in the service of Mr. Wetherell in April, 1843. They
were engaged as general servants, and had the charge
of the house in Eaton- place. They were in the habit
of going backwards and forwards to Byfield. Mrs.
Cooke's bed-room was on the first-floor, and her father's
was next to it, and a dressing-room adjoining it. The
witness then said, when I had been in the service a
short time, not more than a week, I saw Mr. Wetherell
come out of his daughter's bed room at half-past five
o'clock in the morning, and he had nothing on but his
dressing gown and slippers. I saw him come out two
mornings running, and about the same time. The first
time I saw him he made a kind of stop or baulk ; but
the second he did not appear to take any notice of me,
I went into Mrs. Cocke's bed-room the first morning I
had seen her father come from it, and I found her
setting at a table, with only a dressing-gown. On one
occasion, when I looked at Mrs. Cooke's bed, I have no
doubt that two persons had slept in it. My husband
was assisting me to make the bed at this time, and I
pointed his attention to it. I never saw Mrs. Cooke's
night dress in her bed-room, and it struck me as being
a remarkable circumstance. I do not know where she
put her night-dress. I never saw it except on her
person. Mr. Wetherell always used to make his own
bed, and his daughter gave me directions not to
make it, as she said her father always did so him-
self. I never saw his bed, or the condition
as though it had been slept in. I remember the de •
fondant and his daughter going away alone in August,
and being absent about ten days. I do net know where
they went. On the previous June and July I had re-
marked that Mrs. Cooke appeared getting much stouter,
and I had much difficulty in getting her dresses to meet,
and I saw her altering two of them. She said to me,
on one occasion, that if I could not fasten her dresses
without tearing them that her papa should dress her.
When she came back, after being absent about ten days,

she seemed to be poorly, and was much thinner. I told
her she looked ill, and she said she had been ill, but when
I said she ought to have a doctor, she replied that her
papa was her doctor. The witness then proceeded to
describe the appearance of some linen that was brought
home by the defendant's daughter, upon her return wills
her father from their journey, and said that in her
opinion it d,noted that a miscarriage had taken place.
She likewise said when Mr. Cooke was taken into cus-
tody, and the inquiry took place at the Queen-square
Police-office, upon their return home she heard Mrs.
Cooke say, that sooner than live with her husband again
she would see him transported beyond the seas.
Mr. R. G. Shute, a surgeon residing in Mecklenburgh-
square, deposed that be was in extensive practice as a
surgeon and accoucheur, and he expressed an opinion
that the appearances described by some of the witnesses
denoted a miscarriage to have taken place, and could not
be reasonably accounted for in any other manner in the
case of a young healthy woman.
In answer to questions from the Court, the witness
said that some disorders of a character peculiar to fe-
males might produce somewhat similar results.
Mr. Sells, another medical gentleman, gave a similar
opinion as to the appearances described being the result
of it miscarriage.
James Russell, the husband of the former witness, de-
posed that in consequence of a communication made to
him by the husband of the laundress, he was induced to
pay particular attention to the conduct of the defendant
and his daughter, as they thought there was something
very wrong going on. After he had gone to bed, he re-
peatedly heard the doors of the bed-rooms of Mr.
Wetherell and his daughter open and shut, and this hap-
pened at all hours of the night. The coachman (Revell)
also used to watch, and he had seen him listening on the
staircase. He once went into Mr. Wetherell's bed-room
without knocking, and he found them both there,
and Mrs. Cooke appeared very much confused, and
her hair was hanging about her shoulders. She
complained to her father of his going into the room,
without knocking, and he replied, "Oh, never mind
Russell." He had seen Mrs. Cooke go into her father's
bed-room with nothing on but her dressing-gown. They
used to be very loving at meals, and used to shake one
another's hands, and if she happened to forget to bring
any thing down stairs, they would playfully struggle
together and push each other to try which should be first
to get it. They used to drink love to each other at
dinner time, and he had often seen Mr. Wetherell's
arm round his daughter's waist. He had seen her also
lying upon the sofa after dinner with nothing but a
dressing-gown on, and with her hair hanging about her
ears. Upon another occasion, about seven o'clock in
the morning, he missed Mr. Wetherell from his bed-
room, and his suspicion being excited, he knocked at the
bed-room door of Mrs. Cooke, and she said something
in a low tone and sent him away. The witness went on
to state, that before Mrs. Cooke and her father left town
in August, 1843, he had observed that the former ap-
peared to be getting very stout, and on their return she
appeared very much thinner, and seemed to be very ill.
Cross-examined—Witness and his wife went to the
house in Eaton-place in April, 1843, and it was under-
stood that they were to remain there until the house was
let, and that they were in the mean time to wait upon
the defendant and his daughter. Could not say when
the occurrence took place of his not finding Mr. Wether-
ell in his bed-room ; it might have been in May, June,
July, or September, or perhaps August. He had re-
ceceived 101. from Mr. Cooke, and the money was
marked in the presence of Mr. Wetherell and a police-
man ; and on this occasion Mr. Wetherell told him not
to be bought cheap. He had seen Mr. Cooke at the
house in Seymour-street, but he did not know that
he was living with Mrs. Baynton at that house.
He saw Mrs. Baynton two or three times in the
year 1844, but he denied having asked her for any
money. Mr. Cooke was present on those occasions, but
he did not examine him, or inquire the evidence he had
to give in her presence. When he said that he had seen
Mrs. Cooke with nothing but a dressing-gown on, he did
mean that she had no other articles of clothing on, but
she had taken her gown off, and put on a dressing-gown.
It was hot weather at the time, and Mrs. Cooke was
said to be very poorly. When he was examined at the
last trial, he did not say a word about the defendant and
his daughter toying together when they were at dinner
Mr. Wetherell would say to his daughter at dinnef4
" My love to you, my dear."
Mr. CLARKSON—And did you think that indecent ?
Witness—l did. I thought their conduct was improper.
Baron PARKE—I think you should give some other
reason for your opinion than what you have just stated.
By Mr. CHAMBERS—Had lived in many respectabk
families, and he never saw a father act towards her
daughter in the manner Mr. Wetherell did to Mrs
Cooke. _ _ _ _ _

At half past seven o'clock the further proceedings in
;he cause were adjourned until this morning.

QUARAN T INE.

The following is the report of the Academy of Mcdi-
cinc.of Paris upon this much-agitated question:—
" We have lately shown how urgent it was becoming
that reforms should in introduced into the existing sys-
tem of quarantine ; we demonstrated the evil conse-
quences arising out of the maintenance of rigorous
measures, the only effect of which is to create difficulties
in our relations with the East without insuring more
security to public health. England and Austria have
long since freed themselves from this excess of useless
precaution, and experience has justified their temerity.
Consequently, unless we choose wilfully to abandon
the advantages of commerce with the East, it is high
time for us also to modify the rigour of our sanatory
rules now enforced at Marseilles.
The experience of those two great nations is alone
sufficient to show that the limits of the danger are much
more circumscribed than one would suppose. This im-
portant question has, however, been submitted to the
Academy of Medicine and the Academy of Sciences. Of
these two learned bodies, the latter is more particularly
charged with enlightening Government on all points
where public health is in question, and has already made
its report. That of the Academy of Medicine has just
been delivered, and it does not appear favourable to the
sanatory precautions actually taken in France. An
opinion may be formed on this subject from the follow-
ing extract from it:—
" This important document is the work of a commis •
tvi d
wehdieh into
the four
plaguepar parts:—The :a
sion composed of Messrs. Adelon, Begin, Dubois
(d'Amiens), Dupuis, Ferrus, Londe, Metier, Pariset,
Poisenille, Royer-Collard, et Prus (reporter). The re•
—s
aTrhiseenfiorsrt
strielflearrissteos
spontaneously. The second relates to its epidemic or
sporadic character, and to the manner in which it pro-
pagates itself. The third treats of the transmissibility
countries ntr is
sies divided
of the disease. In the fourth and last part, the object
of the Commission was to inquire what is the common
or exceptional time for the incubation of the plague.
Then are introduced the applications that may be made
to the question of quarantine.
" What definition is to be given of the plague?—lt is a
disease of the whole organisation, in which the nervous
and lymphatic systems, as well as that of circulation, are
principally affected, and which is commonly characterised
externally by buboes, carbuncles, and petechire. From
the numerous documents consulted by M. Prus, the
plague thus defined has arisen spontaneously at different
times, not only in Egypt, Syria. and Turkey, but also in
a great number of other parts of Africa, Asia, and
Europe. At the present moment it is almost exclusively
from Egypt that we have to fear the importation of that
disease. But if in the view of health we compare the
different points of the globe acknowledged to give birth
to the plague, we are amazed to see in Egypt, in spite of
its fine climate, a miserable population inhabiting villages
composed of filthy huts, unfit for human beings, living on
spoiled seeds, unsound meat, and putrid fish ; we aro
surprised to see even the towns—even Cairo—encum-
bered with cemeteries, and composed of houses built ou
sepulchral caves, where dead bodies lie mouldering. The
same circumstances are to be met with at Erzeroutn, a
large town, having 50,000 inhabitants, built in a penin•
sula formed by the two northern sources of the Eu-
phrates. This city, where the plague arises spon-
taneously, is traversed by filthy streets; dead animals lie
in them unheeded ; every description of filth is thrown
into them ; the butchers kill animals in these streets,
which are, in short, as unhealthy as they can possibly
be. The population of it are, generally speaking, very
poor.
" The same poverty is to be met with likewise on the
banks of the Danube, and the want of rapidity in the
current of that river produces tho same effects as do
marshes. On its banks the diseases, which are frequent
in all seasons, frequently assume, after hot weather, a
remarkably serious aspect. In the autumn of almost
every year very dangerous intermittent fevers appear,
and are soon followed by the plague, which is generally
sporadic, but which in some years assumes the epidemic
form. It is thus ascertained that in all countries where
this disease has been observed to be spontaneous, it
may reasonably be considered as arising from deter-
mined causes ac;,ing on a great portion of the population;
these causes are, living on a marshy soil near the Medi-
terranean sea, near certain rivers—the Nile, the Eu•
phrates, or the Danube ; living in houses that are low,
not well ventilated, and where there exists supera-
bundant accumulation of inhabitants ; hot and damp
air ; the action of animal and vegetable substances in a
state of decomposition ; and, lastly, great moral and
bodily misery.
" All these generating causes being united every
year in Lower Egypt, the disease is endemic in that
country, where it is observed to assume the sporadic
form every year, and the epidemic about every ten
years. Besides, if we consult history, we shall find that
during the reign of the last of the Pharaohs, during the
194 years of the occupation of Egypt by the Persians,
the 301 years during which lasted the dominion of
Alexander, the dynasty of Ptolemus, a
, and a great por-
tion of that of Rome, Egypt was free from the plague.
This absence of any epidemic for the long space of time
during which good administration and the sanitory
police of the country conquered the producing causes of
the plague, justifies the expectation that the same means
will be followed by the same results.
" Epidemics of the plague have appeared in Syria, in
Turkey, in the regencies of Tripoli and Tunis, in Mo-
rocco and Algiers. Algiers being excepted, it may be
said that these countries haring remained in the same
state in which they were when the plague broke out,
there is no reason for thinking that similar epidemics
may not do so again. Algiers forms an exception, be-
cause the Arabs and the Fables living, the first under
tents, the second in abodes placed on the tops or sides
of mountains, cannot give birth to the disease ; and
also because that several marshy parts of that country
have been made more healthy, and the truly remarkable
improvements introduced into the construction and
police of the small number of existing towns there
seems to be a sufficient security against spontaneous
epidemics of the plague. From this statement (which
is a summary of the first part of the work of the 'com-
tmission), we may draw this important conclusion—that
the progress of civilisation and a constant and general
application of the laws of hygiene can alone furnish us

with the means of, preventing the outbreak of spouts-
tlious plague. Let us now pass on to the second part.
" Is the plague an epidemic disease, according to the
sense of this word ? _ .

" A disease is epidemic wlaen, in a given time, it at-
tacks a great number of persons. Epidemic diseases
present characters by which they may be distinguished'
from those that are not so. 1. There is a special march
in their progress. Three periods are generally admitted
—the commencing, the confirmed, and the declining or
ending period. These often display neither the same
symptoms, the same alterations, nor the same gravity.
2. Dining the reign of an epidemic disease other dis-
tempers arc less frequent, and bear the stamp of the
predominant affection. 3. Whilst an epidemic disease
is raging, it seldom occurs that the persons who retain
their health do not feel, more or less, the general in-
fluence. 4. Epidemic diseases often return and disap-
pear in the same season, and last generally the same
length of time. 5. Au epidemic disease is often pre-
ceded by other affections, offering various degrees of
gravity, which are more or less general, and seem as it
were its precursors.
All these characters having been observed in the
plunge when it has raged with violence in Africa, Asia,
and Europe, it ought, under these circumstances, to be
considered as an epidemic disease.
" But sometimes, in countries where the plague arises
spontaneously, it attacks a small number of separate
individuals; it is then termed sporadic, and is wanting
in the characters belonging to epidemic diseases.
" The plague, the influence of those labouring under
the disease tenor, put aside, is propagated in the same
manner as the generality of epidemic eases—that is to
say, by the action of general causes.
"After this follows, in the third part, an inquiry into
the important but difficult question of the transmissibility
of the plague, both within and without the epidemic focus.
"Is the plague transmissible by inoculation? Is it
transmissible in and out of the focus of the epidemic by
immediate contact of those that are infected, by that of
their garments, of goods, and by the miasmata exhaled
by the persons infected, and which are conveyed by the
air?
" The following are the answers to all these questions,
such as they flow, with so much order and lucidity, from
the conscientious and profound discussion established in
Al. Prus's report.
" The inoculation of blood drawn from the vein of an
infected person, or the pus taken from a bubo, only gave
equivocal results; the same attempt made with serosity
taken from the plycterim of a carbuncle of the same na-
ture, always failed to give the plague. It is consequently
not proved that the plague can be transmitted by inocu-
lation, even within the focus of the epidemic.
" A severe and attentive examination of the facts of
which medical science is posssessed, establishes, on one
hand, that in the focus of the epidemic the immediate
contact of infected persons by thousands proved to have
no ill effect on those that were exposed to it in the open
air or in well ventilated places; on the other hand, that
the pos,ibility of disease being transmitted by the simple
contact of persons infected is not demonstrated by any
rigorous observation.
" A great number of facts prove that clothes having
belonged to infected persons di.l not communicate the
plague to those who made use of them without any pre-
vious purification in a country actually or recently sub-
mitted to a pestilential constitution. The facts which
seem to have offered a contrary solution, can only be-
come of any value by being confirmed by new observa-
tions made without the epidemic focuses, far from those
of miasmatic infection, and from countries where the pest

is endemic.
"The transmissibility cf the plague by goods, in coun-
tries where the distemper is endemic or epidemic, is by no
means proved.
" Within the focus of the epidemic, the plague is trans-
missible by means of the miasmata arising from infected
persons.
" The pest is indubitably transmissible without the
epidemic focuses, in ships at sea, or in the lazarettoes of
Europe.
"Nothing proves that the plague is transmissibls
without the epidemic focus by the immediate contact of
those who are infected.
" It is not established that the pest is transmissible out
of the epidemic focus by clothes that have been used by
persons infected.
"It is in no manner certain that goods can convey the
plague out of the epidemic focus.
" The classification existing in our lazarettoes for ob•
jects liable and not liable is not grounded on any facts or
experiments worthy of credit.
"The, investigation into the proper means of disin-
fecting clothes and goods has not yet been achieved. To
make it rational it would be necessary that it should be
preceded by the proof that these objects can be impreg-
nated with the principle of the plague.
" The plague may be conveyed out of the epidemic
cases by miasmatic infection—that is to say, by air
charged with miasmata exhaled from the bodies of per-
sons infected.
" From the various facts exposed in the chapter re-
lat'ng to the transmissibility of the pest, it may be in-
ferred that infected persons, by vitiating the air of lo-
calities they inhabit, can create focuses of infection liable
to transmit the distemper.
" These focuses may remain after the persons infected
have been removed.
" When once formed by the presence in a ship of one
or a greater number of infected persons, the focuses of
infection are liable to be carried great distances.
" Patients labouring under the sporadic plague do not
appear to have the power of creating focuses of infection
sufficiently active to enable them to transmit the dis-
temper.
" The degree of transmissibility of the pest varies ac-
cording to the intensity of the epidemic, according to the
period it is in, and finally to the organic dispositions of
individuals exposed to the action of the pestilential
effluvia.
" If it is not proved that the existence of a pestilential
constitution in a country where the plague has been im-
ported be necessary to its transmission and propagation,
it seems certain, however, that it can make no great
ravages without finding in the climate, in the atmosphere,
and among the inhabitants, favourable conditions to its
increasing.
" The fourth and last part of the report refers to the
time of incubation of the pest. This is the name ap-
plied to the space of time during which the plague may
remain concealed in an infected person previous to its
becoming manifested by evident symptoms.
" The time of incubation of the plague is very variable;
it depends on the period of the epidemic, and likewise on
other power ful influences. These variations, however,
are restricted within certain limits. It is the knowledge
of these that is of importance, for it is by them that the
duration of quarantines is to be logically ruled.
" It has been observed that when a pestilential epi-
demic commences in a town, the incubation is excessively
short. Hence those cases f plague which prove mortal
in a few hours.
"In the second period of the epidemic, the duration
of the incubation is from three to five days.
" It is the same in the third.
" If it be true that a fixed and absolute limit cannot
be ascribed to the time of incubation, it seems, however,
obvious, from well-known facts, that at a distance from
countries where the pest is endemic, and out of the fo-
cuses of infection, the distemper never broke out among
persons that had been exposed to its action, after they
had been isolated for eight days.
" The small number of facts seeming to depart from
this rule are all liable to different interpretation.
" This extract, on account of the limits within which
we are forced to keep, cannot give an idea of the extent
of the work from which it emanates, but it is sufficient
to show that among the numerous questions the Com-
mission had to examine, it has met with a certain
number to which it has been able to give a clear and
precise answer, pointing out as the object of future in-
vestigations, those questions to which the want of posi-
tive observations has prevented a solution being given.
" In order to complete this laborious task, the Com-
mission thought proper to give a summary of the prin-
cipal applications of the scientific results it has come to.
The Commission only gave advice and expressed desires;
Government alone has the right to decide over them,
and bring them to execution.
" The sanitory measures which are to insure security
to France may be reduced to five heads, viz.:—
" 1. The indication of the countries from which we
may fear importation of the plague.
" 2. The precautions to be taken on board of ships
sailing for France from suspected countries.
" 3. The rules to be observed during the voyage.
"4. The precautions to be taken on reaching a
French port
" 5. The measures to be adopted should the plague
break out in a French town.
" If we did not want space we would lay before our
readers the regulations made by the authorities of Mar-
seilles.
" These regulations having been dictated under the
influence of exaggerated fear, and a total ignorance of
the limits of the danger, are stamped in several points
with a character of barbarism which, as well as the re-
mainder of them, demand an early reform.
" The fundamental idea which prevails through the
regulations proposed by the Commission, consists in
comprehending in the quarantine the time of the
voyage, and imposing such measures as may offer the
necessary security to the health of the persons on board
during all the time elapsed since the moment of the
ship's sailing.
"But if any persons suffering with the plague are
received in the lazarettoes, how are they to be treated?
Are they to be, according to the present regulations,
shut up in a solitary room, examined at a distance of
six feet through bars, turned about with hooks, or their
tisanes to be conveyed to them on the extremity of a
long board ? Is it necessary, when a bubo requires
opening, that the surgeon should use long-heeled instru-
ments, or is a knife only to be thrown to him in order
that he may operate on himself ?
"Persons infected by this distemper have a right to
all the assistance that civilisation, science, and art can
offer ; once admitted in the French lazarettoes, they arc
to receive all the relief and attendance that are given to
common palients in the best-established hospitals.
" The buildings in which they are to be received must
be so disposed as to offer the patients and those that are
to attend on them the best possible hygiene conditions,
and above all an easy and complete ventilation.
" Other regulations that cannot fail to create indigna •
tion, are those prescribed in case the plague should break
out in a French town or only in a few houses. They
consist in enclosing the population within acertain space,
and by thus doing expose them to the general epidemic
causes when they exist, and at all events laying them
open to the influence of pestilential infection, to the crea-
tion of which they cannot fail concurring.
" The Commission proposes a line of conduct entirely
opposed to the measures now taken : they are to be re-
placed by means simple and of easy execution, which
have already received the sanction of experience.
" If the plague should break out in a house, the pa-
tient is to be removed to some distant and well-ventilated
place, where he may receive all necessary attendance.
All the inhabitants of the house must repair to some