The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-09 00:00:00

AUSTRIA.

Baron Von Wessemberg has sent the following
circular to all the Austrian Ambassadors at the
German Courts :
" The late events at Vienna have in Germany been
partly viewed in a wrong light. In order to form a
more correct judgment on the subject, attention ought
to be directed to the following points :
The military operations which at the present mo-
ment take place under the walls of Vienna have but
one object—namely, the suppression of anarchy and
the re-establishment of legal order. It has never
entered the thoughts of the Emperor or of his
Government to retract the guaranteed liberties,
or to realise the chimera put forward under
the name of reaction by the anarchical
party, much less to conquer for one of the
Austrian nationalities supremacy over the rest.
There is no strife of nationalities—no change
of the monarchy into a Sclavonian Austria, as the
German press believes or pretends to believe, but a
combat of order against anarchy, of legal authority,
without which no Government can exist, against ter-
rorism, of preservation against destruction. We
cannot but denominate it a confusion of ideas, a mis-
conception of facts, if another meaning be given to
this combat.
" The revolution has put on a German dress. The
German colours have become the colours of the
anarchical party. The liberty, the greatness, and the
welfare of Germany, the protection of which the
Emperor of Austria considers his special duty, are
not to be opposed by force of arms, but the measures
of his Majesty's Government and army are solely
directed against that faction which uses those colours
and those objects for its own pernicious designs.
" His Majesty the Emperor and his Government
are firmly resolved to carry on this combat with all
the means at their disposal. These means have been
more accurately designated by the manifestoes of the
16th and 19th inst. The military measures have
already been carried into execution. An army of
nearly 60,000 men, commanded by Prince Windisch-
gratz, who has taken his head-quarters Hetzendorf, is
blockading the capital, and I have reason to entertain
the hope that the more immediate object of those
operations will be shortly attained.
" At the same time his Majesty has thought fit to
transfer the. Diet from Vienna, and to convoke it to
meet at Kremtsier on the 15th of November.

" Baron VON WESSEMBERG.
" 011mutz, Oct. 26, 1848."

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN.

PROTEST OF THE DANISH COMMISSARY.

The undersigned, his Danish Majesty's Commis-
sary, in consideration of the 7th Art. of the Conven-
tion, for an armistice of the 26th August last, in
which it is said that the legislative power in the
Duchies Schleswig and Holstein shall be suspended
during the armistice, and of the Art. 11 of the said
convention, from which it follows that the condition
of a...final peace shall in no ways be prejudiced; in
consideration further of the proclamation of the 22d,
last issued by the joint administration on the day of
their installation, concerning the laws, regu-
lations, and ordinances enacted since the 17th
of March last, feels called upon, in the
name of his Majesty the King of Denmark,
to intimate that, consistent with the spirit of a
conscientious observation of the above convention, he
considers it his duty expressly and solemnly to pro-
test against the illegality of the maintenance of any 1
and every law or regulation prejudicial to the further
settlement of the questions at issue, which have
obtained rigour by the above proclamation; and as
such he especially considers the following, viz.—
1. The regulation of the Provisional Government
of the 18th of April last, concerning the elections to
the German National Assembly, in as far as this
regulation might in future be applied to Schleswig.
2. The publication of the Provisional Government
of the 23d. September last, concerning theinadmis-
sible use of Danish flags and cockades.
3. The publication of the Provisional Government
of the 30th September concerning the protection of
the vessels and crews in foreign countries during the
armistice.

4. The decision of the 21st .of October concerning
the flags to be used by the merchant vessels.
The fundamental law, published on the 15th of
September; is also subject to the same protest, parti-
cularly in regard to the validity of the stipulations
concerning the public law and relations, and especially
as contained in Articles 1,3, 55, and 120.
On the other hand, it is not the intention of the
commissary of his Majesty the King of Denmark to
oppose any obstacle to the principles of the said fun.
damentallaw respecting the civil liberty, in as far as
they are consistent with acquired rights, nor to such
regulations of the joint administration for the duchies
ns are conducive to the welfare of the country and the
inhabitants, or to the maintenance of .public order.
(Signed), REEDZ r, Royal Commissary.
To the Joint Administration of the Duchies of
Holstein and Schleswig, at Schleswig.

The undersigned declare hereby that after the re-
quest having been made to them, they are willing to
take upon themselves the joint administration of the
duchies of Schleswig and Holstein, as stipulated by
the armistice concluded on the 26th of August last,
between his Majesty the King of Denmark and his
M.lje,ty the King of Prussia.

Theuitdersigned, although well aware of the diffi-
culties of this task, and. the weight of the respon-
sibility it involves, have, however, thought it a duty
to comply with this request, trusting to that acknow-
ledgment and. assistance on the side, as well of the
duchies And -their -inhabitants; as of the interested
powers, which are an absolutely necessary condition
for their acceptance of- the offer, -and for their sue-
cessful conduct of an administration under such forms
as required by the present relations of the duchies.
(Signed)
BOYSEN, HEINTZE, Au. MOLTKE,
PREUSSEE, TH. REVENTLOW.
Kiel, Oct. 9, 1848.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OP QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 8.
BILL I'RANSACTiONB.--4C(YTT FERRIS.
This case was tried at Bristol at the last assizes before
Mr. Justice Coleridge, and a verdict was found for the
plaintiff, a nephew of Sir Walter Scott, and a lieutenant
in the 19th-Lancers. It was an action to recover tho
possession of bills Of exchange for 1,0001. It appeared
that a person-named Martin, finding that the plaintiff
required some money, offered, to aid in procuring him
sorre on the security of bills. He accordingly accepted
two bills for 5001., and endorsed them to Martin, for the
purpose of getting them discounted. He never, however,
procured any consideration for them. Some time after
a pt.rson named Haslett wrote to the plaintiff and stated
that his bills were in bad hands, and ordered him to en-
deavour to procure possession of them without delay, as
it was not- unlikely if they remained longer unsatisfied
that an action would be brought upon them, and that
half a dozen persons would not unlikely come
forward and swear that consideration bad been
given for them: Acting upon this advice the
plaintiff came to London and obtained an interview
with the defendant, to -whom he had traced the bills.
He said he had given Martin 400/. for them and an
I 0 U for 200/. more. He however agreed to give them
up on the payment of 1001. in money, and a warrant of
attorney for 300/. Subsequently, finding that fraud had
been committed, be applied to Mr. Baron Alderson to
quash the warrant of attorney; tbat,Learned Baron de-
clined to do so; but directed a special issue for the trial
of the case.

Mr. Sergeant BILES now moved for a rule calling
upon the plaintiff to shoW cause why the verdict should
not be set aside, and a new trial had, on the ground that
several letters were read at the trial which were not
matters of evidence, since no proof was given in sup-
port of them.
The COURT considered that the letters ought not to
have been read unless the counsel for the plaintiff was
in a condition to prove them, and granted a rule upon
that point; but reserved its decision upon some other
points raised until the proper time.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. s.
RITCHIE V. SMITH.
This action was tried at the last n sitti gs at West-
minster, when a verdict was found for thedefendant
upon the third issue, which was the material one, anafor ,
the plaintiff upon the others.
Mr. BoviLL applied to the Court to set aside the ver-
dict upon the third issue, and to enter a verdict for the
plaintiff for 132/. 17s. 3d., or for arrest of judgment, or
for a new trial. The plaintiff is the proprietor of Fen--
dell's Hotel, Westminster, and Ihe let out the " tap"
attached to the hotel. to a person of the name of
Newman, for 41 a week, and the defendant was surety
for the payment of the rent. Newman made default in
his payments; and this action was brought against the
defendant, to • recover the amount. The main defence
at the trial was that the plaintiff, by the agreement
which he made with Newman, enabled the latter to carry
on the business without a license, which was contrary
to law, and that, therefore, his claim could not be sus-
tained against the defendant. A number of authorities
were cited by the Learned Counsel with the view of ex-
culpating him from the illegality of the proceeding.
The CHIEF Jusricn was of opinion that the applica-
tion could not be granted upon any of the points raised,
and that the jury could come to no other conclusion upon
the evidence produced before them than in finding a ver-
dict in substance for the defendant. It was clearly
proved that the express object and intent of the plaintiff
in making the agreement with Newman for the occupa-
tion of the premises for the sale of excisable liquors was
to enable him to evade the law by selling such spirits
without being duly licensed according to the statute.
The amount or reward which the plaintiff was to receive
from Newman was therefore partly compounded
of compensation for so enabling him to con-
duct the business, and as the restrictions im-
posed upon persons retailing sp. irituous:liquors, in making
it necessary for them to obtain the sanction of the ma-
gistrates for the county and the Excise were required,
for the protection of the public morals and the public
safety, he was of opinion that the agreement entered into
was illegal, and that there was sufficient matter disclosed
at the. trial to show that the plaintiff had no locus standi
in a court of law, and could not enforce the demand.
He was, therefore,opinion,
of that the application of the 1
Learned Counsel
couldnotbe allowed.
•

~.k--

.~~_~,`

A