The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-27 00:00:00

" Civis" are based upon one hypothetical phan-
tasy, and the facts of history—a history, too, so
recent and consequently so ungarbled as that of the
administration of Lord ITARDIrGE—are his oppo-
nents. To speak plainly the more admi-
rable the system of battle introduced among '
the Seikhs by the French officers, the
more decidedly " Civis" may divulge the skill,
and the unanimity, and the confidence infused into
the very nature of the Asiatic soldier by the prac-
tised veterans of the Consulate and the Empire—the
more admirable and the more decisive in operation
does he prove the discipline introduced among the
Sepoys of Hindostan by English officers to be. For the
latter have again and again shown themselves vic-
torious over the former, and that, be it remembered,
under the most inauspicious and appalling circum-
stances, when surprised by a long-prepared and wary
adversary, when obliged to preface the actual encoun-
ter by forced marches such as are unknown in more
genial latitudes, and when assailed by a startling pre-
ponderance of guns and a terrible dissimilarity of
numbers. The question, indeed, no longer admits of
discussion. History has resolved it by her records;
and she has declared, by a succession of glorious ex-
ploits, the efficacy of our military plans as applied to
the Sepoy regiments—she has already narrated
how those plats have enabled our forces to conquer
where (to many) destruction appeared inevitable, to
pass the lines of Loodianah, to dash back the war-
riors of Lahore into the current of the Sutlej, to
extend our boundaries to the banks of the Beeas, and
so to rout those Seikh armies, that it is scarely
probable they will ever again dare to flout their
standards south of the Hyphasis.
Instead, therefore, of indulging in depreciatory
allusions to our system of tactics among the native
population of Hindostan—(much less of advocating
the connivatice of our Government in the hideous
sacrifices and devilish hecatombs of G lomsoor)
" Civis" might more happily employ the knowledge
he has acquired and the shrewdness which he possesses
in indicating the most favourable course to be
adopted in the improvement of our warlike practice,
and the impulsion of our political designs. It is
scarcely in speaking of the progress made by Bri-
tish arms in the Indian empire that the language of
invidious comparison can be employed with any de-
cency. Those arms have vanquished, almost without
any intermission, from the time when the Raja of
BUURTPORE excited an insurrection—a terrible and
destructive epoch !—when our battalions were deci-
mated by casualties in Irrawaddy, and by pestilence
in Arracan. Neither 1,000,000 in Sinde, nor the
3,500,000, who once obeyed the sceptre of RUNJEET
SINGU have been able to withstand the impetuosity
of our troops, the discipline of our Sepoys, or the
sagacity of our captains, and the Seikhs, be it
borne in recollection, added to the prestige of
their national character the exotic talent which fled
to them from the plains of Waterlob. In one quarter
this impetuosity, this discipline, and this sagacity
have conducted us to the limits of Cutch Gundava,
in another they have enabled us to progress to the
cities of Bawulpoor and to the acclivities of Koolloo.
Such is the system now described as unquestion-
ably fallacious and dangerous !

A case which was heard in the Bail Court on
Tuesday, before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN, and which
was reported in The Sun of the same evening, strongly
illustrates the state of the law with respect to the
possession and custody of illegitimate children. We
need scarcely inform our readers that the Court of
Chancery is the tribunal by which everything relating
to the protection and guardianship of the persons and
properties of minors, whether legitimate or other-
wise, is controlled and regulated. It possesses ample
authority to remove any infant from the care of its
natural guardians, if they conduct themselves
in such a manner as may prove prejudicial to
the morals or prospects of the child, and to
appoint others to act towards it in loco pa-
rentum. The delays and the expenses of that
court have, however, become proverbial, and it is very
rarely indeed that it is appealed to, unless the
minor should be entitled to some fortune in posses-
sion, or expectancy, sufficient to defray the necessary
costs of the proceedings. Many persons of unim-
peachable character and conduct might be willing to
undertake the care of a child, to bring it up in a
respectable and proper manner, and to afford it the
advantages of a sound moral and religious education,
who would be unwilling to become responsible for the
costs of a Chancery suit; and the most serious injury
may be inflicted on an infant, to which the misery
and wretchedness of its future life may be owing,
from the want of some tribunal of competent juris-
diction to decide in a cheap and expeditious
manner the question of who shall be entitled
to its guardianship. The law is tolerably
well defined with respect to children born in
wedlock. The father is entitled to their custody
during his life, and he is empowered to appoint testa-
mentary guardians, who shall become his representa-
tives, and have the care and management of his off-
spring after his decease Should he neglect to do so,
the mother has similar rights—and should both
parents be dead, there are other relations of various
degrees of consanguinity whose rights with respect to
the children are recognised. But an illegitimate
child is differently circumstanced; the putative father
has no authority unless some demand is made on him
for its support. The mother, who is primarily re-
sponsible fur its maintenance, has also the principal,
indeed, we may say the only, voice as to its disposal.
The very circumstances of its birth would
render it probable that she might not
be a fit person to entrust with such a
privilege, and it is therefore more essential that
there should be a mode of obtaining the speedy in-
terference of the law, in placing it under proper care,
if any person against whom no charge could be pre-
ferred should be so far interested in its welfare as to
be willing to undertake the duty of bringing it up
without making any demand on the parents, or
either of them. It would be impossible to make
any general rule. Every case should be decided ac-
cording to its particular merits, and the widest dis-
cretion should be allowed to the presiding judge,
subject, of course, to an appeal to the Court of Chan-
cery, which should in such instances dispense with
the usual formalities, and allow, as a matter of course,
an immediate reference to the Master to decide on a
fit and proper person to act as guardian to the child,
and the expenses of such a proceeding should
be rendered as moderate as possible.
At present the only mode to be adopted—unless
the child is to be made a regular ward of Chancery—
is to obtain a habeas corpus to bring up the body of
the infant, in order that it may be remanded to the
custody of the person who may appear lawfully enti-
tled thereto. But, although the Court may refuse to
interfere or to grant its assistance, as in the case on
Tuesday, unless substantial justice would be thereby
promoted, it might be unable to afford its aid,
although such might be in the highest degree desi-
rable. For instance, it might refuse to assist the
mother or the parties with whom she desired to
place it, in order to remove the child from
these who had protected and maintained it
from its earliest infancy, but it could not have inter-
posed on their behalf to restore it to their care, and
to remove it from the custody or influence of its
mother if it had been lawfully in her possession.
The facts of the case to which we have referred
were very simple. In the winter of 1839 the mother
had applied to Mr. and Mrs. BROWNE for shelter and
protection for herself and the infant, then only three
weeks old, stating that she was the wife of the brother of
Mrs. BROWNE. Her request was acceded to, although
it was subsequently discovered that she was not mar-
ried. Some time afterwards she proceeded to London
with the child. But Mr. BROWNE, who had become
greatly interested on its behalf, having discovered
that the only means by which the mother was enabled
to obtain their support was by singing in the street,
offered to adopt and bring up the child as his own.
This proposition was gladly acceded to, aed the child,
accordingly remained with Mr. and Mrs. BROWNE
up to March last, when, owing to a temporary dispute
between them, he was induced to take away the child
which Mrs. BROWNE had for seven years treated with
the affection of a parent, and to place it with a sister
ef its mother, with whom it remained until Novem-
ber, when Mrs. BROWNE again obtained possession of
it. An application for a habeas corpus was subse-
quently made by the mother, in order LiiaL die child
might be restored to her sister, with the view, it is
said, of haring it brought up to the stage. The