The Sun.
London, England, 1870-01-25 00:00:00

NOTHING IMPOSSIBLE.

GUA. AMARELLA restores the Human Hair
to its pristine hue, no matter at what age.
JNO. GOSNELL and CO. h%ve at length, with the aid
of one of the roost eminent Chemists, succeeded in perfect-
ing this wonairfal liquid. It is now offered to the public
a more concentrated form, and at a lower price.
Sold in bottled, 3s. each ; also 55., 78. 6d., and 15s. each.
Including brush.
Red Bull Wharf, Angel passsage, 93, Upper Thames-
street London.

GUILDHALL, 13th January, 1870.—The
Committeo for LETTING the CITY LANDS will
MEET at GUILDHALL, on WEDNESDAY, the 26th
day of .January inst., at Half-past One o'clock precisely,
to receive PROPOSALS fcr a LEASE of a HOUSE, No.
222, Tottenham-court-road, in ihe county•of Middlesex.
Also to reo-ivo Proposals for a Building Lease for Eighty
years, of the site of the premises, No. 4s, London-wol4.in
the City of London.
Plans of tbo prop9rty ntay Le seen, and further particu-
lars and forme of t,nder &Alt ned, upon application at the
Architect'6 Olken,
FERDD. BRAND, enmptroller.
THE

UNIIED

LAND COWAN Y

(LIMITED).

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That a GENERAL
MEETING of the COMPANY will be held at the Offices,
No. 33, Norfolk-street, Strand, London, at Two of the
Clock p.m., on WEDNESD A 1 , the 2d February, 1870, for
the purpose of receiving the Roport of the Directors, of
declaring a Dividend, and of transacting the ordinary busi-
ness of the Company.

By order of the Board.
CHARLES LEWIS GiIt:NE[SEN,
Secretary.

83, Norfolk-street, Strand,
London, )17.C., 17th January, 1870.

LONDON, TUESDAY, JAN. 25, 1870.

M. ROCHEFORT'S attempt to incite the population
of Paris to revolt, and his insults to the Imperial
family, have been lightly punished. The maximum
infliction for such, offences is five years'
imprisonment, a fine of £4OO, the de-
privation of civil and political rights, and the
suppression of the paper in which the obnoxious
article appeared. M. ROCHEFORT has been sentenced
to only six months' imprisonment and a fine of £l2O
—a sum which the heavy sale of the MarseiHaise
during the exciting days immediately after the
murder of VICTOR NOIR will much more than clear.
Judging by law and precedent the punishment is
decidedly inadequate. Nothing could be worse than
the journalistic excesses of which M. ROCHEFORT
had been guilty ; indeed, in the days
of the Lanterne, the lampooner was more
heavily mulcted for a less gross violation
of the press laws. And it would seem that after
making his prosecution a Cabinet question, after
forcing it in a manner on the Legislative Body, such
an infliction as this amounts menly to a bur-
lesque of justice. The prosecution was clearly
right, unless the principle be recognised
that anything is lawful in the way of
newspaper literature ; and a much heavier sentence
could have excited no surprise. But there were
divers considerations of much weight which induced
the Government to adopt the policy of mildness. On
the memcrable day of the funeral, M. ROCHEFORT'S
influence was exerted to prevent the mob from taking
the corpse of VICTOR Nom through the centre of
Paris instead of removing it to a neighbouring suburb.
The trial of Prince PIERRE BONAPARTE, too, has
yet to take place, and it would have been
an error of policy to inflict on the promoter of
s3dition a sentence which might prove heavier than
the punishment of the homicide. The two cases,
have, it is true, no judicial connection with
each other ; but there are times when the strict
measure of justice must be relaxed through public
necessity, and the extremely difficult crisis which
has beset the new Ministry is decidedly an instance in
point. But the most important influence in
mitigation of sentence was the sacrifice made by the
Chamber in consenting to forego the privilege of Par-
liament in order that this prosecution might take
place. The necessity was a most dissgreeable
one, for many deputies who voted with
the Government felt that the handing over of even
such a man as ROCHEFORT was a dangerous prece-
dent which might have disastrous consequences.
The result of the trial must be regarded as a
delicate assurance that these misgivings were
unfounded. The Government claim to uphold the
law ; but the infliction—for there is no doubt that
the judges were influenced in their decision
by the wishes of the Ministry—shews that they did
not desire ret,enze. nor the abuse of the great power
which Parliament gave them.

THE occurrence of another fatal panic in a crowded
building so soon after the deadly catastrophe at
Bristol prompts a feeling of despair. These events
defy criticism. It seems idle to propound princi-
ples which everybody admits in theory and
sets at nought in practice. It is quite
useless to urge that in nine cases out of ten an alarm
of fire, such as that which caused the rush on Sun-
day night, is a false alarm, for it sometimes happens
that it is not false, and it is impossible in practice to
ascertain the truth. It is equally vain to insist that
even in the case of a real fire the safer policy
is to go quietly, since rushing out is certain
to end in crushing some to death and choking up the
doorway for the rest. No one denies this theorem;
and yet when " Fire I" is called there is rarely the
slightest display of presence of mind. People act so
very differently as individuals and as atoms of
a mob, and, moreover, in a crowd, a
man's actions are not always under his own
control. It is clear that we can no more expect an
excited crowd to behave orderly in a church or a
theatre than we can expect a gang of rioters to face
fire like troops of the line. In the case of soldiers
special training is given—sometimes in vain—to
guard against the influence of panic ; but no means
present themselves of training citizens to resist the
cry of "Fire !" It is impossible to control the
actions of individuals. It is possible, however, to
exercise supervision over those who construct
edifices, and over those who use them. As
it must be admitted that panics will occur,
the only resource is to minimise their
effects. Builders may be, and must be, compelled
to supply ample means of escape. A church or a
theatre, with one or two doors half a
dozen feet broad, is nothing better than a man-
trap. To assemble several hundred people
in such a place is a crime. In the case of this
wretched Roman Catholic chapel at Liverpool, it
seems that two doors, a few feet broad, were the
only outlets to both the chapel and a school be-
low it. Such an arrangement is simply villainous,
and ought no more to be tolerated than a defective
railway, an ill-constructed vessel, or a badly-ventilated
mine. The Legislature interferes in all these cases;
why not prevent audiences from being shut up in
buildings from which they cannot quickly get out ? It is
probable that even with better means of egress acci-
dents would sometimes happen; but it is certain that
they would be less frequent and less fatal. This is
the only moral to be drawn from the Liverpool
accident. Ilow long will Parliament need to he told
of it ?

The vacancy in the Scotch Court of Session has
at length been filled up, Mr. Adam Gifford, Sheriff of Ork-
ney and Shetland, having accepted the appointment.
A rumour has prevailed very extensively in South
Warwickshire that M!. John Hardy, M.P., is going to resign
his seat. The Birminqham Gazette contradicts the report.
The miners of the Allerton Collieries, iu the West
aiding of Yorkshire, have a.greed to cease work on the
27th instant, in consequence of the refusal of their
employers, Messrs. Joshua Bowers and Sons, to make an
advance of per cent, in their w_aiges.,..:f±iP;