The Sun.
London, England, 1870-03-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 10, 1870.

PARLIAMENTARY AND MUNICIPAL
ELECTIONS.

The Select Committee on Parliamentary and Municipal
Elections has agreed to its report by a majority of but one.
It is to some extent based upon the Marquis of Harting-
ton's draft report of last year, but differs in many essen-
tial particulars. It states that corruption prevails at
municipal elections to a very great extent, both in the form
of bribery and treating. Many electors will not
vote unless they are paid. Serious riots are
frequent. In some cases the corrupt practices which are
at work in a municipal election are made use of with a
view of influencing the Parliamentary elections, which,
the case of the last general election, followed the
former almost immediately. In most cases, however,
p arty spirit on local questions appears sufficient
t cause an extensive use of corrupt practices..
Pun' shments by means of fine are provided
by law for bribory at municipal elections ; but it is rarely
indeed that an indictment is preferred. Nor are there
any means of testing the validity of a return, except by
quo scarranto in the Queen's Bench ; but this course has
never been resorted to ; and the trouble and difficulties
which beset such an appeal, render it unlikely that it will
ever be used. It has been suggested that some
more simple procedure for recovering penalties for bribery
should be provided. These penalties are, however, at
present recoverable in the County Courts, and the corn.
mittee can find no more simple tribunal. It has been
suggested that a special officer be appointed for prose-
cuting offences at municipal elections ; the committee cannot
endorse this suggestion, for they do not think that any of the
present difficulties in the way of collecting evidence, &c.,
would be thereby diminished. It has likewise been
re-
commended to the law relating to the evidence of muni-
cipal elections through corrupt practices be as-
similated to that relating to parliamentary elections.
This proposal the committee endorse, adding
" but it would probably be deemed unnecessary
that municipal petitions should be tried before
a Judge of the Superior Courts." Secret voting is also
recommended, and is dealt with under the head of parlia-
mentary elections.
With respect to these, the committee are of opinion
that in boroughs the intimidation of workmen by masters,
tenants by landlords, tradesmen by customers, and
working men by each other, does exist, though
not perhaps extensively. "It is certain, at
least, that, whether intimidation is extensively practised
or not, the fear of it widely prevails among that class of
voters who are liable to its influence. There exists during
the canvass in most boroughs a system of working upon
voters through private considerations, whether of interest,
hope, or fear, for political purposes, and this system en-
ables undue influence in a mcdified form to be constantly
practised."
County elections are in the main free from bribery.
The inquiry respecting intimidation in counties has not
been satisfactory. "It is certain, however, that an influ-
ence exceeding in a greater or less degree the legitimate
influence which a popular and respected landlord
must always exercise in his neighbourhood is often
brought to bear on tenant farmers and other
voters in agricultural districts. The agent frequently
holds language which the landlord would shrink from
using, but which the latter does not think it necessary to
disown." In England and Ireland the constituencies are
often extremely corrupt P but bribery is almost unknown
in Scotland. There is a higher standard of education in
the Northern province, and the constituencies are new.
In Ireland the influence of the landlord and the priest are
often opposed, and mobs are a recognised part of
electoral machinery. "We are convinced that, under
the present system of conducting elections there exists in
many boroughs and counties in Ireland no real freedom
of election."

The committee then proceed to discuss the various
remedies which have been proposed for improving the
conduct of elections. The following is the passage of the
report which contains these final conclusions and recom-
mendations :—" The question of the abolition of the pre;
sent system of nominations and declarations cannot, in
our opinion, be treated as one. It appears to us that the
declaration of the poll might be made as well in some
other way, but as regards public nominations, there is
much to be said in favour both of the retention and
discontinuance of the practice. At some places
of election, both in counties and in boroughs,
the addresses which are delivered are rendered
inaudible by noise, tumult, and wilful interruptions ; and
occasionally serious disturbances begun on the nomination
day are continued throughout the election. On the other
hand, the abolition of the present system would, as it seems
to us, tend to fetter the free choice of the electors, and
would deprive a candidate of an opportunity of setting
himself right with a constituency in the event of misstate-
ments as to his opinions or his character, and it would
make it extremely difficult to prevent the putting forward
of persons as candidates for mere purposes of annoyance,
or the fraudulent withdrawal of others who were in favour
with the electors. Again, it must not be forgotten that in
the majority of cases proceedings at nominations are
conducted in an orderly manner and without any attend-
ant evils, and that in the case of an uncontested election
the whole proceedings are concluded and the return is
made on the day of nomination. The evidence of the
majority of witnesses that have come before us is no
doubt in favour of a change, but no practicable substi-
tute has been proposed by any of tnem, nor has any
suggested itself to ourselves, which, while removing,
existing causes of complaint, would preserve those advan-
tages of the present system to which we have referred.
We do not think that it would be possible to prohibit
absolutely the employment of paid agents for the purpose
of an election, and there would be much difficulty in
enforcing the prohibition of the use of paid canvassers.
Although the employment of paid agency is sometimes
carried on to an unreasonable and improper extent, so as
in some cases to assume a corrupt character, an election
cannot always be conducted without paid agents of some
kind. We are of opinion that the use of rooms in public-
houses for committee-rooms for the purpose of an
election is a fruitful source of expense and of corrup-
tion, and should be forbidden by law. The
closing of public-houses on the days of nomination,
if it is to be conduct-el on the present system, and on the
polling-day during the hours when the poll is opened woud
tend to the tranquillity and purity of election. The wit-
nesses whom we have examined have naturally looked
upon the question almost entirely from this point of view,
but we fear that the inconvenience to the public gene,-
rally of such a measure would be so great as to outweigh
its advantages. We consider that at present the law re-
lating to the recovery of compensation for damage done by
riotous mobs to propertyis not in a satisfactory state, and that
it is desirable to improve it, so as to enlist, as far as pos-
sible, the inhabitants of the district in the support of law
and order. We have received evidence to show that the
present provision of the law which requires a return of
the expenses of candidates is insufficient for its purpose,
and fails in many cases to secure a full statement of such
expenses ; and we think that any payment made by a
candidate or his agent, on account of the election, and not
included in the return of his election expenses, should be
declared to be a corrupt payment, within the meaning
of the Corrupt Practices Act. Ant such re-
turn should include all expenses incurred by him oft
his agent on account of the election, from the date
at which he or his agent had publicly announced his in-
tention to become a candidate. A few witnesses have
recommended the system of voting papers. Their chief
recommendation is that the risk of riot on the polling-day
would be diminished. In our opinion, they would tend to
aggravate some of the evils of the present system, by the
facilities which they would give for bribery, for fraud,
and for certain forms of intimidation. The multiplica-
tion of polling places in counties has been suggested
as a means of promoting the convenience of voters, of
increasing the tranquillity and diminishing the cost
of elections. And with a view to putting all electors,
so far as circumstances admit, on an equality, we recom-
mend a considerable increase ; this would tend to obviate
the necessity of providing conveyances for voters. Much
evidence has been given by witnesses not exclusively con-
fined to any political party, to shew that the discontinu-
ance of open voting, and the substitution for it of secret
' voting, or vote by Ballot, would be of great advantage in
Parliamentary and municipal elections. We have
endeavoured to extend our inquiry beyond the
theoretical arguments which are usually employed by the
advocates and opponents of the Ballot, and to ascertain
how it has worked in the British colonies, and in foreign
States where it has been adopted. With this view, we
have examined witnesses from Victoria, New South
Wales. South Australia, Tasmania, and have also re-
ceived evidence as to the systems in use in France, Italy,
and Greece. The effect of this evidence has been to
prove that in these countries, under a system of ballot,
the poll is taken without intimidation, riot, or disorder,
while in Australia bribery and treating have been greatly
reduced, and personal canvassing discouraged. It
remains to be considered whether it is desirable that
the ballot should be adopted in this country. The princi-
pal objections which have been anvanced against the
ballot as applied to our own elections are—that the act of
voting is a public duty, and should involve a public
responsibility ; that it would lead to hypocrisy and decep-
tion • that it would do little to restrain the practice of
treating ; that it would increase bribery, by making it
more difficult to detect ; that it would be wholly inopera-
tive in the case of spiritual intimidation such as
that which is alleged to exist so extensively in
Ireland ; that it would afford facilities for personation.
While we admit that there is force in many of these
objections, we are on the whole of opinion that the Ballot
possesses many great advantages, and that the weight of
evidence leads to the conclusion that this change in the
modd of voting would not only promote the tranquillity
both of municipal and parliamentary elections, but will also
protect voters from undue influence and intimidation, and
introduce into elections a greater degree of freedom and
purity than is secured under the present system. But in
recommending the adoption of the Ballot, we desire to ex-
press our opinion that, in order to secure the benefits we
anticipate from its introduction into this country, it is
necessary that the secrecy of the vote should be inviolable,
except in the case of any voter who is found guilty of
bribery, or whose vote in. due course of law, has been
adjudged invalid. • We have referred above to the
extensive employment of troops at Irish elections.
It could not be safely discontinued under the
present system ; but we must express our con-
viction that no freedom of election can exist where so
large a part in the proceedings is taken by a military force.
In our opinion, the ballot offers the only means by which
the practice might effectually be put an end to ; but under
any circumstances .we are of opinion that the employment
of the civil and military forces of the country should be
confined to keeping order and preserving the public peace,
and that care should be taken that neither the constabu-
lary nor the military should be employed in escorting
voters other than those who willingly place themselves
under their protection."

On 'Wednesday Alajor7General T,ysons, C. 8., com-
manding the Ist Infantry Brigade at Aldershot, re-
ceived orders to hold the head quarter, and the re-
mainder of the 2d battalion 23d Royal Welsh Fusi-
liers in readiness to proceed to Ch4t''aill on the 24th
instant.

COUNT BISMARCK ON CAPITAL
PUNISHMENT.

Count Bismarck spoke in the debate in the Reich-
stag o❑ capital punishment, supporting the majority
of the Federal Council, who, after mature delibera-

tion, decided on retaining the death penalty. The
Count considers its opponents exaggerate the value
of life, and attach too great importance to death.
People might Le influenced, by their belief or non-
belief in the iininor• laity of the soul ; but in either
opinion his proposition holds good. In the lattei
case he would envy the man who attaches so great
a value to the enjo\ meat of this life, and the satis-
faction lie must derive front the work in which he is
engaged if, while believing his personal cxistence to
end with the death of the body, he still thinks it
worth his while to live on. He who is convinced
that no other life follows would not advocate for the
criminal what a man of science has called the phos-
phoriz:ng of his brain within a prison cell, robbed
of all that makes life dear. Count Bisinarek's next
argument is that the opponents of capital punish-
ment entertain a moruid inclination to treat the
criminal with greater consideration than his victim.
It may be when death was more usually inflicted iu
the Middle Ages, crimes were more common, but the
decrease may be the result of the stern justice then
dealt out. Civilization and knowledge undoubtedly
have exercised an active influence, but they have
been accompanied with the death penalty,while abo-
lition of capital punishment has only the experience
for short periods of small districts in its favour. He
would not feel justified in exposing peaceful citi-
zens to the dangers of such an experiment, nor is
there need for haste ; for capital punishment
can be abolished after accepting the criminal node,
whenever the majority in that House and in
the Federal Council, think it desirable. Even
those who advocated its abolition think it advis-
able to retain the punishment in particular cases,
such as in a state of siege,and in the army and navy ;
indeed where necessary to secure quiet, order, and
unquestioning obedience to the law. Then, if it
be the more effective, if it affords only one hair's
breadth more protection for the peaceable citizen,
the law is bound to give him that additionsl secu-
rity against robbers and murderers. Again, it ap-
peared to Bismarck inconsistent to deny the autho-
rities the right of taking away life to repress, yet
granting it to prevent ; the reverse of what is advo-
cated in legislating for the press. The authorities
are not denied the right of taking life in their de-
fence, or in protecting the property of individual
citizens, or to prevent a crime; yet there are cases
of merely possible criminality, whereas the other is
with convicts whose crimes have been proved. In a
riot, men attacking a baker's shop may be shot
down, yet who can tell whether those who are
killed are guilty or had any intention of commit-
ting murder. The lives of human beings are surely
of not less importance than the protection of pro-
perty, and to be consistent, the authorities should be
deprived of the right of taking lifealtogether,or allow
it to be employed for purposes of rep ession, other-
wise the protection of property is placed, at least it,
theory, higher than that of life. After noticing that
the age was by no means so tender of life as this sen-
timentality might indicate, for men were recklessly
exposed in mines and in the manufacture of poisonous
gases, or in the producing whatever might add to
comfort, the Chancellor turned to the origin of the
agitation I seek some explanation of this in
the remarkable fact, already frequently noticed in
the course of yesterday's debate, that the oppo-
nents of capital punishment are chiefly lawyers,
and the whole movement originated in that profes-
sion. It may be, a judge is naturally inclined to
feel that it is impossible for any human being to be
perfectly just, that it is _impossible for any man
equitably to apportion the amount of punishment,
to the heinousness of the crime and the circum-
stances which diminish its atrocity, that it is im-
possible so fully to realise the condition of the man
before him as to be able to answer this question :
if, after the same education, I had been exposed to
the same temptations might not 1 have been guilty
of the same crimes? He may frequently be mo-
dest enough to answer in the affirmative ; if so,
I hope he will be just enough to add—and in that
case I should have nothing to urge against my exe-
cution. But the chief reason why judges and
juries are opposed to capital punishment seems to
ine to be somewhat different. It is one of the
diseases of our age, a dread of responsibility—a
dread of the responsibility of sentencing a man to
death, in accordance with one's own conviction of
his guilt, and on the part of juries the dread of
returning a verdict in accordance with their con-
victions, when the law justifies them in supposing
it will lead to the execution of the criminal. This
di ead of responsibility is a d'sease which pervades
the whole of our period, and extends e,eu to the
highest summits of human society. Even the So-
vereign feels the responsibility of wielding the
sword of justice a heavy and painful burden, and
how much more must it weigh on the judges, who
are less accustomed to deal with interests of such
moment as the erasure of one of their fellow-men
from the number of the living. I can therefore
easily understand why judges are desirous of freeing
themselves front this responsibility by means of the
paragraph you need no longer condemn any
one to death,' particularly in an age like ours, when
every one is ready to criticise, but, on the whole, so
few are willing to undertake an office with heavy
responsibilities. And yet this, which I cannot but
consider a weakni ss in our high, honourable, and
noble bench of judges, this weakly disinclination to
exercise the fullest powers of the office, really arises
from a misunderstanding. For am I not just as
accountable if I imprison a man for life ?—Nay, I
sill go further—is not my moral respon-ibility just
as great if I unjustly imprison a man for eight days,
as if I condemn him to death ? I cannot tell what
influence eight days' unjust punishment may have
on him whom I sentence to it; his whole life may
be perverted into a bitter contest with the law, he
may be driven on into crime. And so I would say
to our men of law Do not shrink from the high
task Providence has placed before you.' Do not fear
to perform the most extreme duties of your office.
Do not cast away the sword of justice."—Anglo-
American Times.

There was a debate in the House of Representa-
tives on the 22d February on the abuse of a privilege by
Mr. Mungen, who published a speech is the Globe which
had not been read in the House, reflecting on Senator
Sumner. Mr. Dawes moved that it be expunged from the
Globe, and that Mr. Mungen be censured by the House.
The feeling of the House on both sides was against the
practice of publishing in the Congressional Glcbe speeches
not delivered in that House, and this case furnishes the
members with a good instance of the abuse of the cus-
tom. Mr. Mungen spoke vehemently in his own de
fence, or rather in abuse of Senator Sumner, to whom
he did not allude as a Senator, but as a public lec-
turer. It his remarks could be applied by the Sena-
tor to himself, he was not.responsible ; nor that he
should wear them if they fitted. Mr. Mungen was ut-
tering a common report reflecting on the Senator, when
be restrained himself, and suddenly observed he would
not finish what he was about to say, as he might be called
to order. Then referring to former scenes in the House,
he asked if lie was to be gagged in discussing the doc-
trines of an impertinent lecturer to show their absurdity,
and how illogical and injurious they were. That pre-
sumptuous lecturer set himself up as a god His
lecture on caste bad been exposed by him in his speech,
and for this, he (Mungen) had been charged with violat-
ing the rules of the House. The gentlemen from Massa-
chusetts had indulged in abuse of President Johnson, but
he was forbidden to criticise the sayings of a man who
was eternally thrusting himself in the face of every one
with his impudence. Mr. Schenck then drew a clever
picture of the style of debate coming into fashion in tha
House. Mr. Jones of one State was represented in his
room nibb!ng his pen, scratching his head, and writing an
essay ; while Mr. Smith, of another State, was cudgelling
his b ains on another subject, and both essays were printed,
and passed in the country for debate. He doubted whe-
ther words thus published could be called in question by
that House.

---
Jo URNA LISM.-- Frank Leslie, Feb. 26, says- -Amon g
the newspapers published in London for transmi,s!on
abroad, and designed to convey such information as
other countries and tho colonies aro chiefly intere,t3d
in, the best aro the Anglo-American Times and the Eu-
ropehn Mail. The first is more distinctly American,
as its name implies, but both give much .useful infor-
mation on all subjects, and are, iu every sense, valuable.
AI r. Parke Godw,n, formerly managing editor of the N
York Evening Post, a gentleman of tried literary ability,
has taken the editorship of Putnam's Magazine.—Why
should Horace Greeley wax so wrath that the restaurant-
keeper Windust saved him from the fury of the mob in
the celebrated July riots, by hiding him under a table ? The
Warld, aware, we presume, of his weakness on this point,
though we cannot imagine why, even if t •ue, though
known to be untrue, root-educed the story when telling how
Windust scaled perishing in a snowstorm. Immediately
the Tribune boiled over with utterable indignation, for it
is evident from the following that language failed to give
it express'on:—" The author of the above assertion that
wo have planed in italics is a liar—a graceless, shameless,
villainous, detestable liar."

TUE WICKLOW PEERAGE CASE.
HOUSE OF LORDS, FRIDAY.
This case was resumed before the Committee of Pri-
vileges, Lord Redesdale in the chair.
The counsel for the claimant were the Solicitor-General
(Sir J. D. Coleridge), Mr. Albert Smith, and Mr. Charles
Clarke. For the present earl—Sir Roundell Palmer,
Q.C., Sir J. Karslake, Q.C., Dr. Ball, Q.C., and Mr.
Fox Bristowe, Q.C. For the Crown—the Attorney-
General (Sir R. Collier). and Mr. Archibald.
Sir It. Palmer addressed their lordships upon the ne
evidence, which had been adduced, and called particular
attention to the circumstances, under which the alibi had
been brought forward, and the position of the case before
that evidence was called. It was bieught f6rward in con-
sequence of a petition presented to their lordship's house.
at the beginning of the session by Mrs. Howard, who as-
serted that the evidence adduced was untrue, and that
she had been taken by surprise. The whole case, how-
ever, went to shew that she must have been fully ac-
quainted with the subject, and he contended that it was
usnsense to say Mrs. Howard was unprepared. They had
evidence as to -Mrs. Howard's visit to Dr. Baker growli
on several occasions,•and these books had been the subject
of pointed attention by Mrs. Howard, and before anything
came to Dr. Brown's knowledge he was visited in order
that more information as to dates might be
obtained. Dr. Price spoke of visits from Mrs.
Howard on the 27th, 29th, and 30th of June 1864, and on
the sth July, which was a most important date in this
case, she was there, and on the Sth, another important day
in tire present inquiry, they had evidence of visits
both to Price and Brown. The only question
hero was, then, whether the evidence of these
two gentlemen had been in any way discredited,
and he argued that it had not. He believed the
best course he could adopt would be to treat with the
statements as to date. He then proceeded_ to review the
evidence of Mr. Butterfield, Mrs. Howard's father-in-law,
and that of the other witnesses, with the view of testing
the value of what he termed this supplementary alibi
evidence. He then proceeded to observe that the state-
ment of Mary Best now was that she took out of the work-
house and treated as her own a child that was not her own.
If ho previously had had any information of this
fact he should have presented it ; but, as their lordship:
would remember, it.came out only in cross-examination at
the bar of the House. He should be very wrong if he did
not at once say, with regard to a case presented in that
remarkable manner—he should be wrong if ho did
not at once say, that it appeared to him
that, the credit of a witness' statement might
be submitted to a very severe test when it was not
brought out in its integrity, and in all its parts at the be-
ginning. He should endeavour in dealing with it to shew
as far as he could how the case really stood, and
should in no way attempt to . make the least of
it. He would place before their lordships the reason
they would have to weigh as to the suppression of the
facts and circumstances disclosed by Mary Best yesterday.
In the first place they had it that the Matthews's were
people who would not have let the subject go over without
inquiry had Mary Best left the workhouse without' a
child. There was a reason which would induce her to
seek for another child after having parted with her own.
Then they had it that she was fretting for the loss of her
child, and that another woman named Sarah Hayes was
disappointed that her child was not selected instead
of Mary Best's, clearly shewing that she wee
anxious to get rid of her child. Could it
for a moment be supposed that the whole
story was a fabrication? With regard to the workhouse
officials, they must of necessity be perfectly independent.
Was it likely they would form a conspiracy and come there
determined to commit perjury at all hazards? The only
thing they could have done was to have been
mistaken as to Mrs. Howard's identity, but that
was a theory which he would not argue upon.
It was certain they would not come there for
the purpose of ruining and doing a lasting wrong to
a perfect stranger without any reasonable motive, and no
attempt had been made to say that anyone had used
corrupt means to induce them to give the evi-
deuce they had done. Further than that, Mary
Best in her first evidence did not say anything which was
not perfectly consistent with her statements made yester-
day. They indeed in some particulars corroborated each
other. She first of all said that after giving up her own
child she never saw it again. She said so now. She first
said she never saw the lady who took her child
again ; she repeated that statement now. In her first
evidence she declared she never received any money for
the child, and that she still maintained. There was not
one point of contradiction between her two statements ;
and the same might be said of -the evidence of
Mrs. Higginson, Mrs. Stuart, and Eliza O'Hare.
There was not a single point of contradiction
in the evidence they gave yesterday with what had
preciously been taken, it fact it could hardly be
said their evidence had been supplemented at all, because
their statements simply were that they did not know
anything of the circumstances which had been disclosed. The
evidenee was that some woman who Mary Best did not know
nut tha'second child to her, and the inference he drew was that
the child remained very much as her own from that time.
If that wee the case, however, it ought to have been
leneam to Higginson or Stuart, and as Mary Best went out
without even knowing the name of the child's mother,
that part of the case was rather difficult to deal with.
in answer to it, however, they had evidence that the cir-
cumstances could easily have been brought about .by an
arrangement between the two women, and without its
beinar known to the officials of the workhouse. If
Sarah Hayes was willing to part with her child,
and Mary Best was anxious to have it, there was
frothing to
Bono
a
out of the workhouse on the same day, and then it might
otehhionugi
dtoapccroeinvepnitisthhtehtiisvo wish.mak 'Theych
have been done without creating the least suspicion. He
such
nghtar h
thought Mary Best had put the case to their lord-
ships in a manner which would force them tothe belief that she was speaking the truth, and that on
lier part it was a perfectly complete and truthful
disclosure. He thought their lordships would be
impressed with the general truthfulness of the case
attempt had been made to divert attention from Sto ensley,
No
where Mary Best was known, or to prevent the fullest
inquiry being made of her through her friends and
family. He believed the Liverpool and Stokesley wit-
nesses to be perfectly honest and upright, and he had no
disposition to suggest any idea unfavourable of what
they had said. They then were told that
the child which was wanted by the lady was
to have a fair complexion and light eyes, and
the evidence of Mrs. Higginson, was that the real child
of Mary Best was " a very fair child, with light blue eyes
and an excellent fair skin." They also had it
that the child Mary Best took from the work-
house with her was not so fair—that it had
dark blue or hazel eyes and light brown hair.
It might be urged that the books of the workhouse ought
to contain an entry of the visit of Mrs. Howard if she
went there, and also the name of the person she called to
See. But, however, strict the officials might be, anyone
going on such an errand would not be very likely
to be very ready to give their name or the
name of the person they wanted to see. He therefore
thought that too much weight ought not to be given to
that matter, as the absence of anything definite upon the
matter might very easily be accounted for. Having dis-
posed of that part of the case, he would again revert to Mrs.
Howard. It would be remembered that she left her husband
in Ireland on the 20th October, 1863, and nine months
from that time would bring them to the 20th July, 1864.
She also was with her husband at the Grosvenor
Hotel, on the 30th November, 1863, and nine
months from that date would bring them to
the 30th August 1864. It was, therefore, perfectly
possible that after a short period a child born about that
time would do for the purpose of passing off. For in-
stance a child born on the 16th of August
might reasonably pass after a short time for one born at tbe
end of July. Having dealt at some length with
the alibi, evidence as to the month of August. The learned
counsel puoceeded to the third and last part of his obser-
vations, namely, with reference to the general light which,
had been thrown upon Mrs. Howard's case by the evi-
dence which had now been adduced. He concluded by
saying he thought he had proved to their satisfaction that
the child which was now claiming to be the Earl was taken
from Liverpool as the Liverpool witnesses had said.
The Solicitor-General said he was not about to disguise
from their lordships, because he could not disguise from
himself or from anyone who had heard or had studied the
care, the extreme disadvantage at which Mrs. Howard had
placed herself before their lordships. Neither would he
disguise from them that they were bound, if he might
presume to say so, to look at this case and do justice on
two grounds. Firstly, because he could not disguise that
Mrs. Howard had mimed herself up with a person against
whom he would prefer not to say anything—he would
rather leave him to the judgment of high-minded men like
their lordships—and, secondly, because Mrs. Howard had
declined to present herself for examination at
their lordships' bar. Therefore, he repeated, she had
placed herself at a great disadvantage by her own conduct,
aud all he asked or expected was justice at their lordships'
Bands, remembering it was not Mrs. Howard's case, but
the case of an infant child, who, if he is Mrs. Howard's
child, is fairly entitled to succeed to this great
earldom of Wicklow. It was not because
ho was the child of a mother who had miscondueted her-
pelf in a manner to which he would rather net further
allude, that justice should be withheld from him ; and he
knew that in their lordships' hands his case was sure to
receive the deep and earnest attention they were so well
able to give it.
The Solieitor-General commencedtthen to take a view
of the facts of the trial, and the case was adjourned until.
Thursday next.

The carrving out of Mr. Walpole's Factory Act
will, it is said, cause the discharge of 160 girls at Dowlais.
Mr. W. 11. Dixon, better known es " The Druid,"
the author of " The ost and the Paddock," " Scott and
St:bright," "Silk and Scarlet," and other works, died 'on
Wednesday.
THE LATE INSUBORDINATION AT -WOOLWICH.—
All the men enraged in the late military fracas at the
Woolwich garrison were on Thursday released from the
Royal Artillery Barracks, and informed that orders had
been received from the War Office that they were to be
discharged from the service at once.

The Free Trade party in the United States nro
making vigorous efforts to promulgate their views. An-
other organ has- been started in New York, devoted
exclusively to the advocacy of Free Trade opinions. We
gather from it that advanced views on the tariff question
ere rapidly gaining ground in all parts of the United
;gates.
A. Pnouric Ting.—A correspondent in the
Builder. signing himself " Prodigious,' and having evi-
dently the old aphorism in his eye, "Jack of all trades,
muster of none,"complains that a firm advertises in a local
aper as architects and surveyors, auctioneers, dealers in
bricks, slates, chimney pots, gravel, garden mould, paints,
oils and colours, bakers confeetionerS, corn merchants,
and dealers in chaff. "Prodigious," who, it is so beipre-
sumed,.is an architect pure and simple, askk—Z What je.
the raciewma
wming tor.

DISASTROUS _ COLLISION IN THE/

CHANNEL.
GREAT LOSS OF LIFE.

Puller particulars are to hand of the collision between
the Normanby and the, Mary in the English ChanneL
The Normandy, a fine paddle steamer of 252 tons, and
425 full tonnage, with engines of 238-horse power, left
Southampton docks at midnight on Wednesday,
under the command of Captain H. B. Harvey.
well known as one of the senior and among
the bravest of the South-Western Company's commanders,
bound for the Channel Islands, and carrying altogether,
it is believed, about 35 passengers-26 of whom arrived by
the night mail train—and about 30 crew all told. About
half-past three o'clock on Thursday morning, during thick
weather, the large screw steamer Marv, of Grimsby, Cap-
tain Strannock, bound from the Danube to London, laden
with 3,000 quarters of maize, ran stem on to the Nor-
mandy, cutting her down just abaft lier midship section,
and carrying away her lifeboat and davits. She imme-
diately began to fill, and Captain Harvey having verified
her condition, gave orders to man the two remaining
boats, and called to the captain of the Mary to stand by
him and man his boats so as to save the lives of his
passengers and crew. The orders to his own men he
accompanied with strict injunctions that the ladies were
to be placed in the boats and saved first. The two
boats were accordingly manned by five seamen and one
fireman, (who are saved), and contained eleven lady
and seven gentlemen passengers, who were placed
on board the Mary, but upon the boats pulling
back again to the scene of the wreck, the Normandy
had sunk, as it was but too evident when they left her she
would do very soon, her forepart being just •out of the
water and her stern fast settling down. When the boats
left,Capt. Harvey was standing on the bridge giving orders
to the men at the engines to keep the Normandy's head to
sea, so as to keep her afloat as long as possible, but the
water was then all over her decks aft, and one of the
saved passengers informs
.us that but for this at least one
more lady might have been saved, as he begged her to wade
across the midship-section, but she seemed afraid to do so,
and remained on the forepart, which was then high out of
water.

The chief mate, Mr. Ockleford, several of the crew
and passengers, Mr. Cox, the chief engineer, the other
engineers and firemen—one only of the latter, indeed,
being all of the engine room staff saved, all went down
with the captain. The commander of the Mary thought
his own vessel was sinking, and ordered out the lifeboats,
but the exceeding short time which elapsed between the
collision and the sinking of the Normandy rendered any
assistance to that vessel exceedingly difficult, if not im-
possible. The Normandy foundered in ten minutes after
the accident. The Mary, whose cutwater is badly
damaged, with both her bows stove in, remained about
the spot for two or three hours, and then steamed slowly
to Southampton, the nearest port where any substantial
assistance could be afforded her in her crippled condition,
and reached there about 4 p.m. The rescued passengers,
who included a little child, were at once landed in
the docks and conveyed to an hotel where every attention
was paid to them by direction of Mr. E. K. Corke, the
South-Western Company's superintendent. The ladies
were in a pitiful plight indeed ; most of them were without
shoes, some without stockings, and three or four were
wrapped in blankets, supplied by the crew of the Mary.
One of the ladies saved brought back a favourite dog
which was thrown to her, we are told, by her brother, who,
poor fellow, was lost. Another lady is saved whose
mother has perished in the ill-fated vessel, and a third
whose husband and two children perished.
- The following is a list of those lost :—Captain Harvey,
commander of the Normandy ; Mr. Ockleford, chief mate ;
Mr. Richardson, carpenter; Mr. Cox, chief engineer. ; Mr.
Marsham, second engineer;, seven firemen, three sailors,
and the ship's boy ,• three gentlemen in the after cabin—
viz., Advocate Westaway, General Grantham, and Mr.
Kinlock—lar or five passengers in the fore cabin, inclu-
ding two ladies, also ten deck passengers. The exact
number could not readily be ascertained, but this number
—3l—is believed to be correct.