The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, J UNE 14, 1870.

CHARGE OF LIBELLING A CLERICAL
MAGISTRATE.
On Monday, in the Court of Queen's Bench, the Solicitor-
General applied for a rule for a criminal informa-
tion against the publisher of the Newcastle
Chronicle, for having made alleged libellous charges
against the Rev. Canon Greenwell, a Durham
county justice. The Solicitor-General read the comments
on Mr. Canon Greenwell, which appeared in the New-
castle Clime icle of May 23 and May 30. It appeared
that a man named Wran had been imprisoned in Durham
Gaol for fourteen days for running over a man in the
Market Place, Bishop Auckland, but on his becoming
very unruly and assaulting the officers of the prison, Mr.
Canon Greenwell, as a justice of the peace, was called in
by the governor of the gaol to determine upon the punish-
ment to be inflicted upon the prisoner. He was sentenced
by the rev. canon to twenty-four lashes. The Chronicle
stigmatised, in its issue of May 23, the treatment of the
prisoner as " brutal," and though they " granted that the
prisoner's conduct was violent and unruly, it was not to be
tolerated that he should be half -killedii nder the authority of a
secret tribunal composed of a single parson." It concluded
thus :—"Clerical magistrates were amongst the most
severe and merciless administrators of law, and as a class
they had shown themselves the least fit of any class for
the discharge of judicial functions." In the Chronicle of
May 30 it was stated that Wran was suffering from
delirium tremens when the punishment was inflicted upon
him, -that the sentence of Canon Greenwell was illegal,
inasmuch as the rev. gentlemen was not a visiting
justice, and further, that that must have been
known to the officials. The Solicitor-General read the
affidavits of Mr. Canon Greenwell, the governor of the
gaol, and other officials, and a newspaper reporter. From
these it appeared that the prisoner had acted most vio-
lently, and contrary to the rules of the prison • and that after
being repeatedly warned by the governor, 'he still conti-
nued his unruly course. The Rev. CanonGreenwell was
called upon by the governor of the gaol because of the
absence of visiting justices ; and he reluctantly officiated
upon the occasion. The learned counsel read the Prison
Discipline Act to shew that the rev. gentleman was
acting within his jurisdiction. He submitted that the
-*writer of these articles had exceeded fair comment ; and
he ought to be brought up to shew cause why a criminal
information should not be filed against him.
The Lord Chief Justice, in delivering the judgment of
the court, who had deliberated for some time, said :--We
think we ought to grant this rule, but it ought to be dis-
tinctly understood that it is- not on the assumption that
the severity of punishment inflicted through the order
either by a judge or a magistrate in similar circumstances
is not a matter that is not open to the fullest publicity and
discussion. But there are expressions used here which
certainly go beyond the limit of reasonable or fair discus-
sion. There is a reference to the man having been suffer-
ing from delirium tremens at the time sentence was passed
upon him; and there is a further statement, that
he was half killed. These are statements of fact which
ought not to be introduced unless the writer is clear
that what lie says is substantially correct. We think
that this article goes too far, and certainly affected not
only the magisterial, but personal character of the appli-
cant, charging him with having punished a prisoner under
sentence, and under such circumstances as those now under
discuision. We learn from the affidavits that the
man was not suffering from delirium tremens, and that
the effect of the sentence was not to leave the man half
killed, as alleged. There may be circumstances which
materially affect the character of the proceedings,
but we think under the circumstances we ought to grant
a rule. The rule was granted accordingly. The effect of
it will be to call the publisher of the Chronicle before the
Court of Queen's Bench to chew cause why a criminal
information should not be filed against him.

NED WRIGHT TO TIIE "RESPECTABLE
CLASSES."
Mr. Wright, the "Ned Wright" of the thieves' suppers
in the New-cut, appeared on Sunday as special preacher
at one of a series of Sunday services for working men which
are being held week by week in the Agricultural Hall Con-
cert Room, Islington. The Daily News has an article on
his preaching. An immense congregation of between two
and three thousand persons assembled. They were to all
appearance not of the very poor or presumably irreligious
classes, which it is the aim of such services and such
preachers to attract. They were women, men, and chil-
dren, the former being two to three of the entire nunther,
who might from their more • than comfortable
appearance describe themselves as people repre-
senting the elite of the artisan. population,
or the humbler of middle-class shopkeepers. Mr. Wright's
influence amongst such hearers is probably not so great
as in the mission which lie has to a great extent made his
own amongst the thieves and rouglis of Lambeth. Mr.
Wright, we should fancy, felt that lie was not thoroughly
at home. True, this may have resulted from the illness
which he pleaded at the commencement of his discourse,
but there were few signs of the rapt attention of .spell-
bound listeners. Mr. Wright's preaching tells with
great power upon minds that do not possess the critical
faculty. Ordinary. church and. chapel-goers, are, though
perhaps involuntarily, more or less critical, and
we can easily believe that a considerable proportion
of the adult persons in the Concert-hall on Sunday would-,
listen more with the thought that they were doing a good
work by encouraging a deserving man, than receiving in-
struction or exhortation from him. Mr. Wright's honesty
and enthusiasm, however, are stronger than anything else,
and his single purpose may well outweigh the repeated
references to himself as " poor Ned Wright," and the
prominent manner in which he produces passages
from the blackest side of his own personal career.
It is doubtful whether his pointed allusion to his
own little girl upon the platform, whom he used
to " drag about by the hair of her head, and
then sling her into the garden," would be thought by the
particular class of congregation around him to be neces-
sary to prove that after his " conversion at Astl ey's,
seven years ago last Easter Sunday," he was a changed.
character. However, Mr. Wright is the least ob-
jectionable of the Revivalists who have from' time
to time been before the public. If he wore no collar
lie did not, as we have seen others do, osten-
tatiously remove his neckcloth, take off his coat,
and tuck up his shirt-sleeves previous to announcing
his text. Indeed, he had no text. He spoke for about
half an hour in simple, unpretending, vigorous, and un-
questionably earnest language, to each sex and age, but
from exactly the same point of view as when addressing
gatherings of disreputables at the New-cut. As on pre-
vious occasions, he referred to his experience when a man-
of-war's man and as a prizefighter, recalling the time
when he was under a challenge to fight Jack So-and-so,
of So-and-so, for so much a side. A characteristic of
the man and his singularly impressionable nature
appeared in a little incident he narrated. He was
afloat in the Channel when the fleet, of which his
ship was the despatch-boat, was scattered in a storm.
The little vessel was in such danger that the crew, de-
spairing of weathering it, began lashing themselves to the
rigging and spars. He observed the seamen taking their
desperate precautions, reflected, and said to himself, " No,
no ; you have made hell your home, Ned, and yo*
may as well go there now as later on." -Under this
singular conviction he remained unlashed until the gale
abated. The address closed with an earnest appeal to all
present. The service did not last an hour.

COMPENSATION FOR RAILWAY
ACCIDENTS.

The Parliamentary Committee which has been ap.
pointed to inquire into this important subject, held their
first meeting on Monday, Mr. Headlam in the chair.
There was a large attendance of gentlemen connected
with the railway interest. The first witness was Mr. J.
Blenkinsopp, of the London and North Western Company,
who stated that he was honorary solicitor to the railway
association, and was well acquainted with the state of the
law before the passing of Lord Campbell's, Act. His ex-
perience was that juries had given very excessive
damages, being led away by their feelings which had often
been wrought upon by the injured passengers being
brought into court, and a sensational scene
created. There was also a class of attornies who
devoted themselves to getting up such cases, and charged
their clients according to the result of the case, so that
in a ,great many cases all the compensation awarded did
not go into the pockets of the person injured or his repre-
sentatives. The greatest difficulty which the railways
had to meet was the allegation of nervous shock,"which
it was impossible to refute, and he mentioned two cases,
one in which one person got £3,900 on that allegation, and
another to whom the jury first awarded £2,000, but which
was afterwards reduced to £1,500 by the judges; but
about twelve months afterwards he came again on a re-
currence of the symptoms, and got £1,500. A
elms of cases which were frequent was that
of letter sorting clerks, who had to stand
up in the railway train, andwereliable to be thrown down.
In one case in which there was a clerk who had a salary
of £256, the jury awarded him £5,000, thus giving him
sufficient to buy a fee simple at the same value as his
salary. In another case there was a sum of £1,600
awarded to a man who was actually quite recovered in the
space of three months. In another case actual fraud was
discovered just as he was on the point of giving him
£l,OOO. In that case he prosecuted the claimant, and got
a conviction ; but in many cases, although the companies
knew they were being defrauded, they could not
bring it home to the person, and were obliged
to pay. As a general rule they admitted their
liability, except in some cases where the cause
of the accident was wholly beyond their control. They
had been held liable for a person stumbling over a barrow
on a platform. When an accident occurred they were held
liable for personal injury, and there was no general rule
laid down as to the amount of the damages. The judges
always charged the jury simply to weigh all the probabi-
lities of the injured person recovering his health, and
award reasonable damages. It often happened that a
certain class of attorneys communicated with the injured
persons or their friends, and offered to undertake
the case on condition of getting a portion of
the damages. Lord Campbell's Act affected
all damages to the person, and was not
confined to railways. If a gentleman's carriage
ran over a person in the street, the owner would
be liable to damages, but practically speaking the jury in
such case gave very moderate damages. In the case of
omnibus accidents larger damages are given, because the
company principle comes in. Scarcely any actions are
brought against shipowners for accidents occurring on
board shipi, or for loss of life at sea ; but there had been
such where it had been found that something has been
neglected which ought to have been done. In the case of
a railway company they were bound to carry all
the passengers who came, and there was scarcely
a single case in which the risk of carrying
them was not different. If a man was in
a certain position of life it might be so valuable that they
would have to pay £lO,OOO. For carrying that person
they would receive perhaps 30s. ; the life of another pas-
senger might not be worth more than £l,OOO yet they
would receive the same amount of fare. What they com-
plained of was that the risk was not equal, and he thought
that some system of assurance should be established,
limited to £, first class, £2,000 second, and £l,OOO
but there was some difficulty about railway company be-
coming assurers. To shew the injustice of the present
system, he would mention that in one case a railway com-
pany had to pay £3,000 compensation where the fare was
in reality less than a penny.
Mr. Headlam : Yet; but if a person was entering a
station to go by train, and in consequence of the fault of
the company he met with an accident, the company
would have to pay him compensation, although he had
taken ont his ticket.
The witness said it would entirely depend on the
cause of the accident. The Carriers Act admitted the
principle that valuable articles should be insured, and
there was a limitation in case of horses, cattle, and
sheep. In regard to workmens trains, recent enactments
in the Metropolitan Private Acts had limited the lia-
bility to £lOO. The London, Chatham, and Dover Com-
pany volunteered to run cheap trains on that condition,
and in the case of the other metropolitan lines an arrange,
ment was made by which, in consideration of running
cheap workmen's trains, the liability should be thus
limited. The Royal Commission of 1866-67 recommended
that while railway companies should be held liable for all
accidents except those occasioned by their own negligence,
there should be a limitation In respect to the maximum
fares, and a compulsory assurance giving power to them
to increase their assurance up to the maximum in what-
ever class they might be. With regard to the liability of
the company they would like to have a fixed minimum
amount of compensation, say first class £5OO, secor
£3OO, and third £2OO, with a compul4ory assurance, so
that first class passenger could assure for £l,OOO for 2d.,
£2,000 for 6d, and £3,000 for 9d. They did not wish
to become liable for a larger sum than £3,000, though the
subject of allowing a passenger to ensure up to £5,000, at
3d. per £l,OOO, had been discussed.
After hearing some further evidence from this witness,
the committee adjourned.

"Parties about to furnish" will be glad to learn
on the authority of the Birmingham commercirl reports,
that a general reduction has taken place in the price of
carpets. Brussels carpets are 4d. per yard lower, and in
less costly fabrics the reduction is still greater.
The consignment of Australian produce to the
Indian market has been a successful venture. Messrs.
GillariddrS, Arbuthnot, and Co. have reported to the
Australian CoMmittee' the Sale of the Whole invoice of
wheat to the commissariat at favourable prices.'
PRINCE ALFRED'S LETTER.—Prince Alfred's
letter to the Viceroy forms a fitting termination to his
India tour. So far as the people arid the chiefs of India,
are concerned it is a political manifesto—as much a mes-
sage of grace and good will from the Queen herself as of
gratitude from her son. No one is forgotten. All is in
excellent taste. Every paragraph is most natural and not
the least that which refers to field-sports. The costly
hOspitality. of Lord IVrayb is delicately hinted at. The
splendour of "the great Indian princes and chiefs"" is not
allowed to overshadow the " entertainments" of " British
and Native gentlemen" and the labours of the railway
officials. Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras all receive their
due, as well as the cities of Hindostan ; the compliment
to Madras is especially graceful. The civil and military
officials, "of whose friendship I am 'proud," are not for-
' gotten. • Above' all the people, those who are only too
truly described ai "'the poorer classes" are not over-
looked, )* are the efforts of those Who care for them un-
pc4noWTedged.—Th Friend of I.2.3:cdia 114,3112..
. .

THE LAW RELATING TO PAWNBROKERS

The select committee upon the subject of the law re-
lating to pawnbrokers met on Monday afternoon for the
first time—the Right Hon. Mr. Ayr ton in the
chair. A considerable number of pawnbrokers were
in attendance. Mr. Haraker, a gentleman connected
with the business for upwards of 24 years, and who
is the Chairman of this association, said that he was
acquainted with the Acts relating to the regulation of this
business. The 39th and 40th Geo. contained the reffula-
tion as to charges. By that Act the rate of profit which
the pawnbrokers were allowed to charge was a halfpenny
for every half-crown per month, and for all
pledges over £2 and under £lO, they were allowed
to charge at the rate of 3d. in the pound. At the
time of the passing of that Act the usury laws were in
force, and it was a privilege to them to be allowed to
charge so high. Ile did not believe those charges were
ever exceeded, but he complained that under the other
clauses of the Act regulating the charge for sums
lent between £2 and £lO pro rata did not
work out to any definite coinage, but always to
some fractional parts. Thus for 40s. they would be charged
61 and 16-20ths per month ; for £2 4s. it would be 61 and
8-20ths ; for £2 55., 8, for £2 95., 7,1- and a fraction, for
£2105., 7 per cent. He should propose that there should
be a simple charge of a halfpenny per month. He would,
for instance, recommend a halfpenny per month for every
2s. lent up to £2. He also suggested that the days of grace
should be extended, and that where the article remained
in pawn, say for a month and ten or twelve days, two
months' interest should be charged. He was ready to
give seven days extra at the beginning of every month,
making it fourteen days; and then, if not redeemed in
that time, the two months' interest should be charged.
The present rate was not understood by the customer. It
was not compulsory on them to take things of an incon-
venient size. In the country the act was constantly
evaded. In Liverpool it was frequently evaded. He was
not aware that the police took any steps. He had him-
self evaded it in self-defence. In the country the prac-
tice was to charge two months' interest after a month or
seven days. The 3rd clause of the Act gave them
power to subdivide the interest according to
the sum lent. The evasion he spoke of was with respect to
the charge of a farthing interest. In Ireland three days'
grace was allowed, and no more. A publication known
as " The Scale of Pawnbrokers' Charges " was recognised
by the trade, and in that scale the interest on 10s. was
2d. per month. According to Clause 3, any intermediate
sum between 2s. 6d. and 40s. was to be charged at the rate
of 4d. per 20s. There was no objection to an amendment
of the law by which the pawnbroker should enter the
name and address of the pledger in a book, but at the
same time it was a very common practice for persons who
came to pawn things to give a wrong name and
address, not because the articles proposed to be pawned
were improperly come by, but because many were very
reluctant that the pawnbrowker himself should know
their right name. After some other evidence the com-
mittee adjourned.