The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-14 00:00:00

THE CRIMEAN COMMISSION.

Mr. LA.YARD postponed his motion from this day
week till that day fortnight. The motion he should sub-
mit to the house would be as follows :—" That this
house has observed with regret that those officers
whose conduct in their respective departments has been
shown by the report of the commission of inquiry into
the supplies of the British army in the Crimea to
have occasioned great and unnecessary sufferings and
losses in that army, have received honours and rewards,
or have been appointed to, add arc still holding, re-
sponsib!ei offices' in the public service."
COMMUNICATION WITH AUSTRALIA.
Mr. BAXTER. asked the Secretary of State for the
Colonial Department if her Majesty's Government were
taking steps to re-establish steam communication be-
tween this country and the Australian colonies ; and,
if !not, what were the obstacles which prevented them
doing so.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Government had
taken steps to place the communication on a satisfactory
basis. The plan would be found in the• Treasury minute
which had just been laid on the table. The Government
intended to put out tenders fora monthly communi-
cation—one-half of the expense to be borne by the Go•
vernment, and the other half by the colonies.

_ .
of some great men of their age, and then proceeded t)
state the plan he proposed for effecting the consolidatic a
of the statutes. Lord Bacon, about 250 years ago, com-
plained in much the same terms as they did at the pre-
sent day of the great evils and mischief resulting from the
confusion and uncertainty of the statutes. Often during
the interval the mischiefs of the statute-book had come
under the consideration of the Legislature, lawyers,
and statesmen, but, strange to say, that, from the days
of Lord Bacon to those of Lord Brougham, no attempt
had been made by any government or individual to con-
solidate the statute law of England. The hon. and
learned member then referred to the various discussions
that had taken place on this subject, and the commis-
sioners that had investigated it since the memorable
oration of Lord Brougham in that house on law re-
form. The Statute Law Commission was composed of
the most eminent lawyers of the day, and of others
who, though not lawyers, were familiar with the law of
the country, but they were, unfortunately, as might be
expected, divided in opinion on many questions. Some
of the members insisted that some general mode or codi-
fication of the statutes should take place. Others were
of opinion that a consolidation should take place, and Mr.
Anstey, under the direction of the commissioners was de-
aired to make an analysation of the laws with a view to
the consolidation or codification of the statute law, but
all those recommendations had failed.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said Mr. Anstey made
an analysis of the laws, but not for their consolidation.
Sir F. KELLY said that what he proposed to do
was, in the first place, to take one, two, or three of the
most important and familial. subjects within the whole
compass of the law, and were also the subject of several
Acts of Parliament, go through the whole 40 volumeA of
statutes,and extract every thing from them having reference
to or bearing on any particular statute, and to bring it
within one act of Parliament. It was necessary, however,
that he should ask the forbearance of hon. members for
Ireland, because in undertaking this consolidation of the
statute law it must, from its magnitude, be confounded
with English acts, but that, after that had been accom-
plished, he would renderievery assistance to fibiain a
similar consolidation of the laws of Ireland and Scot-
land.

[LEFT SPEAKING.]

RUNT v. HUNT-ADULTIi;AY.

This suit, which was heard in the Arches Court yes-
terday, was one instituted by Mr. William Yate Hunt,
of Bell Broughton, in the county of Worcester, against
Mrs. Catherine Mary Hunt, for a divorce, on the ground
of adultery. On the part of Mr. Hunt a libel had been
given in, pleading the marriage of the parties in the
month of January, 1845, at the church of St. John Bed-
wardine, in the county of Worcester ; that his wife, then
Miss Farley, was at the time of their marriage a minor,
and that he was several years her senior. The libel then
pleaded cohabitation:and consummation of the marriage ;
that in July, 1850, the husband formed an acquaintance
with the Hon. Maurice Berkeley Portman, at that time a
youth of 17 years of age, which connection ripened into
a very intimate acquaintance ; that in the summer of
1852, Mr. Portman, accompanied by Mrs. Hunt and a
female friend, went to the Foley Arms, Malvern, where
Mr. Portman entered their names as follows :—" The
Hon. Maurice Berkeley Portman and Mrs. Portman and
Miss Fraser," and that on the 22d'of July, in the same
year, Mr. Portman once more visited the Foley Arms,
with Mrs. Hunt in her carriage. It alleged that on this
occasion the parties were alone, and a waiter having oc-
casion to enter the apartment found the door bolted or
locked and the window-blinds drawn down, and subse-
quently, when the bell rang, he found the sofa removed
from its place and in a state of disorder. It further
asserted that Mr. Portman gave the waiter half-a-crown
and said, "Mum's the word, waiter." It alleged that
Mr. Portman, being a pupil of the Rev. Mr. Denning,
the head master of the Worcester Collegiate School, had
lodgings in Edgar-street, in Worcester, where he was
occasionally visited by Mrs. Hunt, sometimes alone and
sometimes in company with others ; and that on such
occasions the blinds were perceived by the neighbours
to be drawn down, sometimes by the lady herself. It.
was pleaded that the parties on one occasion visited the
Talbot Inn, where, after being locked in a room toge-
ther, the apartment was found to be in much disorder
and a button of a coat and a hair-pin were afterwards
picked up. It alleged that Mr. Hunt at length remon-
strated with his wife upon her too great familiarity with
Mr. Portman, and it was egreed upon her suggestion
that a temporary separation should take place. The hus-
band and wife thereupon parted on 22d February, 1853,
but it was pleaded that shortly afterwards Mr. Hunt was
induced by the rumours abroad to place the matter in
the hands of his legal adviser for investigation, and that
the result was an action for trim. con. It asserted, in
conclusion that the case having come on for trial in the
Court of Exchequer at Westminster, on the 4th June,
1854, the jury awarded 501. damages, On the part of
the wife a responsive allegation had been given in, in
which she denied that any adulterous intercourse what-
ever had taken place between Mr. Portman and Mrs.
Hunt, and alleged, that although she lived with her hus-
band from and after their marriage, Mr. Hunt never
consummated the marriage, ands. certificate was pleaded
of Doctors Frere and Farre as a proof that she was still
a virgo infanta. It further alleged that Mr. Hunt was
constantly and habitually away from home, engaged in
hunting and other amusements, and whilst at home was
careless and negligent of the conduct of hia wife, and
allowed her to drive and remain out at inns and other
places in the neighbouood of his own house, with,
and to visit, at his -house or lodging, the Hon.
Mr. Portman; and it denied that Mr. Hunt
ever cautioned her against her intimacy with that
gentleman ; that Mr. Hunt always encouraged
such intimacy ; and on one occasion, having been
spoken to upon the subject of his wife's riding out
with Mr. Portman, he replied, "I have spoken to Mrs.
Hunt, and told her that if they want to drive out, they
should do it in the country, or in the lanes, and not up
and down Worcester,"or to that effect. And on another
occasion he remarked, when his attention was called to
the subject, " Oh, let them go on ; I will get a divorce."
It pleaded that when the parties were at the Foley Arms,
in the summer of the year 1852, as asserted in the libel,
Mr. Hunt was present at the time, and was aware that
Mr. Portman had made the entry in question, and never
objected to it ; and further set forth that the subsequent
visits of Mr. Portman to Mrs. Hunt were well known
to, and allowed, by her husband. It is also alleged that
Mr. Hunt, from a period commencing about two years
subsequently to the marriage, and throughout the seve-
ral following years, down to the separation in February,
1853, was in the habit of occasionally absenting himself
from home till a late hour, and at times for the whole
eight and for several days together, and that during
such periods he carried on adulterous intercourse with
different females at Birmingham, Worcester, London,
and other places, and that hu had confessed as much to
several persons. In conclusion it pleaded that no evidence
was taken in the action by Mr. Hunt, in the Exchequer
of Pleas, against Mr. Portman, as alleged in the libel,
and that the verdict therein referred to was for 501.
nominal damages ; that at such time Mr. Purtmnan
%%as in Mexico, and had been, as stated by his coun-
sel iu court when the verdict was given; sent abroad
by his relations before the action was brought, and
that the verdict was given by consent of that gentle-
man's relations, and he was wholly unaware of the ver-
dict having been consented to. .

Dr. Addams appeared for Mr. Hunt. He was obliged
to admit his client had been guilty of the charge of adul-
tery ; but he contended that Mrs. Hunt, by her course
of conduct, was alone responsible for her husband bay-
ing fallen into evil courses. The testimony of the me-
dical men was too inconclusive to offer an answer to the
proved facts of the case, and he (Dr. Addams) therefore
submitted the Court would pronounce for a sentence o
separation.
Dr. Curtis appeared on the same side.
_ _

The Queen's..A.dvocate and Dr. Deane appeared for
Mrs. Hunt, and contended that the direct testimony of the
physicians must overweigh the unsatisfactory evidence
which had been offered by the waiters and other parties
who had come forward on behalf of the husband. Mr.
Hunt had himself adMitted that he never consummated
his marriage; and, under all the circumstances, the C.iui t
could not safely come to the concluSion that Mrs. Hunt
had committed adultery.
Tile learned Judge said, that the adultery of Mr. Hunt
being admitted, the only question was whether Mrs.
Hunt had been guilty of any acts that would bar her
from obtaining a separation. The evidence detailed acts
of very strong presumption of suspicion, but they were
not conclusive to the satisfaction .of the Court. The
Court never accepted the verdict of a jury as proof of
adultery; such verdicts were only pleads d in proof that
the husband had acted bona fide. Even if the evidence
were of a stronger character it would be overruled by the
certificate of the doctors, and, therefore, under all the
circumstances, although the Court might think the eon-
duct of,the wife to have been somewhat reprehensible
and imprudent, yet it was bound to come to the conclu•
eion that she had not been guilty of adultery.
The Court pronounced for the separation. •

VIE OMONDOW, TIII7II4DAIe EVINTING., ritBRITART 14
,1656,

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.

and that stun is included in the estimated
From the 30th June, 1853, to the 30th June, 1855, there
had been an increase of 75 in the number of clerks em-
ployed, of 13 in the guards, 37 policemen, and 158 por-
ters. Of this increase 31 clerks, 7 guards, 16 policemen,
and 44 porters were required at Paddington. The addi-
tional charge upon revenue since 1853 on that account
amounts to 21,0001., of which the increase at Padding-
ton is about, 9,0001. The main cause of the increase in the
expense is owing to the extension of lines and increase an
the number of stations. Since tke 30th of June, 1853,
5212 miles of railway worked by the company and 28 sta-
tions have been opened for traffic—namely, 5 miles from
Grange-court to ilopebrook, lltb of July, 1853 ;
mi:'es to Wycombe, Ist of August, 1854 ; 121 miles, Bir-
mingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley, Nov. 14, 1854;
8 miles to Radstock, same day ' • and 171 miles, let of
June, 1855, Hereford, Ross, and Gloucester Railway.
Theso additions made to the establishment could not
have nbaen dispensed with. After adverting to the
means adopted by the company to secure efficient clerks
and servants, and a recommendation that Mr. Brunel'e
allowance of 3,600/. for engineering service3be continued
for another year, they state they have much pleasure iu
recording their opinion of the able, efficient, and zealous
manner in which the company has been served by its
officers, and, regarding them as a body, that it is impos-
sible to speak tuo highly of them. The committee ad-
vert to the satisfactory increase in the traffic during the
past three years, and think it but reasonable to expect
that the time has coma when the goods and mineral
traffic will be greatly increased, and by salutary arrange-
ments the whole of it will be developed with advantage
to the proprietors. The goods. traffic is at present
goa,naged by Mr. Newcombe in the north, Mr. Forbes in
the west, and Mr. Dre.we in the south. The committee
propose that in .future Mr. Newcombe should be the
head of the goods department, and that a thoroughly
ohnipetent person under him be placed in the north.
Pith regard to the development of the coal trade, the
co,ettnittee make various suggestions, and show from the
incr ease of traffic on the Shrewsbury lines that loss on
the &-uarautee to those companies will soon be reduced
to aye ry small amount. Since 1850 the increased re-
ceipts 00 the line between London and Bristol amount
to 200,00 0/. a-year, some portion of which is attributed
to the new' lines.

IRELAND.

DUBLIN, WEDNESDAY MORNING.
THE IRISH JUDICIAL BENCH.

The Evening ,Fost has the following remarks
apropos to tho mo tion of Sir J. Shelley in reference
to the state of the Irish judicial bench. Referring
to the case of the venerable Baron Pennefather,
whose great mental faculties are as unimpaired and
vigorous as they wei 13 a quarter of a century ago,
the Post maintains th,Nt his defective vision—espe-
cially as regards the trial of criminal cases—is a
disqualification so posilVve that it cannot be got
over :

"As au illustrative case, we may refer to a remark-
able circumstance on the tri'al of Kirwan for the murder
of his wife at Ireland's-eye. The Jury, after they had
been some time in deliberatiot returned into court and
sought an explabation of a pas; rage in the evidence. Mr.
Justice Crampton, one of the presiding judges, told
them he had left his notes at born e, but, as he had a per-
fect recollection of the matter, he '
would state it from
memory. And the learned judge did so. The memo-
rial on behalf of Kirwan referred to
this proceeding on
the part of the judge, which was str engly objected to,
ea the ground that his notes were
pro-
duced, and the irregularity was relied u,aon as the chief
whose
point in favour of the criminal, 'entence
TansportatNot actually
subse-
quently was commuted from death to t ion
for life. It is clear that Baron Pennef, ether, from
the loss of sight, could take no notes in
a criminal
or any other case, and, as such a duty
xiuld not
be delegated, blindnesS necessarily involves eonaplete
disqualification for the discharge of judicial fui
‘ctions,
no matter how elear, and vigorous may be the fa
in other respects. It is a singular coincidence tha t the
two oldest judges in Ireland or any other part of the gl "'bet
Baron Pennefather-and•Mr. Justice Torrene, are to be
the judges of assize at the approaching North-West Ci.
cuit—the former being in his 85th, and the latter in his
84th year. Chief Justice Lefroy is the junior of both,
being in his 82d year. Mr. Justice Crampton is younger,
but only by a very few years, as he was, we believe, a
Fellow of Trinity College when the foundation-stone off'
Nelson's Pillar v.as laid, and the Bank of Ireland was
opened in College-green. We need scarcely say that we
have no desire to ntter a word reflecting in the least
ds-
gree on any one of those learned judges. Some time since,
as we have already mentioned, when strictures of the
same kind were uttered by a portion of the press, we de-
precated such conduct, urging that functionaries like
Baron Pennefather, who had spent a long life most use-
fully in the public service, were entitled to forbearance,
even when they somewhat exceeded all reasonable limits
in their accustomed vocation. -We cannot, however,
help admitting that, since we addressed that remon-
strance to our contemporaries, time has been running his
source, and we are no longer in a position to assert
that men who have axoeeded by 20 years the grand cli-
macteric are competent to discharge the onerous, deli-
cate, and deeply responsible duties of judges, not alone
affecting the property, but the liberties and the lives of
the Queen's subjects.

AME.

DMENT SoCi:e2;Y::

( F.ioan, the Time.)

1 .
The House of Commons has been engaged, we
fear without any definite or practical result, in in-
vestigating a plan for the amendment of our legis-
lation and the consolidation of our statute law. In
the meanwhile a body of far humbler pretensions,
but, as repeated experience has demonstrated, of a
very useful and practical turn of mind, has ad-
dressed itself to the, same subject, and, as far as we
are able to observe, not without a very considerable
portion of success. A Committee of the Law
li Amendment Society, appointed to consider the
statute law, has reported a fulness, a vigour, and
a perspicuity on the weighty subject intrusted to
it, which makes us wish that some of those who
prepared this document had a more authoritative
I voice in carrying out the reforms they advocate.
The report consists of two portions ; the first, a
review of the steps which have already been taken
with the view of consolidating our statute law, and
the second, the propositions of the committee
themselves on this subject. The plans of the pre-
sent Lord Chancellor for obtaining this object are
commented on with some justice and much aspe-
rity. A rapid summary of events may not be
uninstructive. On the 17th of March, 1853, the
Chancellor announced his plan for reforming our
statutes. First, he was to expunge obselete or
expired acts ; secondly, to classify those which re-
mained according to their subjects ; thirdly, to
consolidate these classes into single acts ; and,
fourthly, to provide a corrective for the errors of
future legislation. For this purpose a Commis-
sioner and four Sub-Commissioners were provided.
The Sub-COmmissioners were set to nibble at a vast
number of subjects, the result of which was that
they seem to have brought none to maturity. The
arrangement of duties was utterly unmethodical, and
a great deal of time seems to have been absorbed
in composing three enormously voluminous reports,
containing no less than 634 pages, no slight deduc-
tion from the very small amount of force embarked
lin this gigantic undertaking. These and many
' other mistakes, enumerated by the Committee
with painful exactness, satisfy them, and may serve
to satisfy us, that the Commissioners did not set
about the work intrusted to them with any clearly
defined ideas, and that they did not folio w out
their labours to any very definite results. These
Commissioners, however, were in August, 1854,
reinforced by a Royal Commission, issued to ex-
Chancellors, Judges, Attorney and Solicitor Gene-
rals, and other grave and learned persons, but their
avocations do not seem to have permitted them to
give any great attention to the object for the sake
of which they were instituted. They too have re-
ported, but they also, as far as we can learn, have
done little or nothing, and are now engaged in an
investigation from which we may expect, if we are
sanguine enough, some profitable result as to the
propriety of establishing a Minister of Justice, who
shall he able to do that which the Lord Chancellor
arid all his coadjutors have hitherto so signally
failed to accomplish.
We now come to consider the recommendations
of the Law Amendment Society. Setting out by
proposing the appointment of a Minister of Justice,
or, if efforts to obtain the creation of such a func-
tionary be unsuccessful, then of three commissioners
to execute the work of consolidating the statutes,
they lay down the course to be pursued so clearly
and methodically that it is worth while to give it,
were it only as a specimen of the very advanced
stage to which opinion on the subject has arrived,
and the necessity which lies upon Government to
bestir itself, if it would overtake in action the
views already prevalent among the best informed
members of the community over which it pre-
sides. Their first step towards a consolidation of
' the statute law would be the publication of a revised
and authorised edition of the public acts, exclud-
ing all private, local, and personal acts, and all
a ors or parts of acts which have become obsolete,
ex
Tyired, or been repealed • to omit the enacting
paii-
froni the preamble of every act and from
ever
,section ; to refer in the margin of every act
to any
y
Later act by which it has been modified ; to
divide
,qie acts in the contemplated edition into
four art:'.'—first, those relating to England, Eng-
landp and iTreland, England and Scotland, or the
United Kin %.[loni ; second, those relating to Scot-
land ; third, those relating to Ireland ; fourth,
those relating to India, the colonies, or the other
f the Crown. It is then proposed
dependencies o
that three draui•chtsmen should perform each the
whole of the work". ; beginning from the last volume
of the statutes an, i working backwards, and that
the work of these three draughtsmen should be
compared together I:tv way of correction. Lists
must be made by tharn of obselete laws, of laws
th• repeal of which is doubtful, and laws respect-
ing the revival of which' doubts may be entertained.
Parliament should then be invited to pass an act
resolving these doubts, ,and declaring that, except
the acts contained in this edition, none other shall
have any force or Act, an'd saving all things done
under the acts which may be repealed. Such an
authorised edition of the statutes would, it is com-
puted, cost 101. or 121. if left in the hands of a
bookseller, or about 50s. if printed like other Par-
liamentary papers ; its bulk would be diminished
from 40 quarto to 12 octavo volumes, and it would
be, from the perfection of its arrsnaemeut, and the
comparative brevity of its contents; easy of refer-
ence and perfectly accessible.
Now, we ask those from whom we Lave a right
to expect the accomplishment of gveat works
of public utility, whether there be anything in
what is here proposed which is not perfectly
practicable if set about iu an earnest spirit
and with a thorough resolution to conquer all dif-
ficulties? The labour is by no means so great as
hundreds of men are daily encountering, for the
sake of the most insignificant private interests,
while the result in this case would be to the public
interests incalculably beneficial. For the first
time we shouldlnow what the statute law of Eng-
land really is ; for the first time we should be able
to grasp it, and contemplate it as a whole, free
from the rubbish of accumulated ages by which it
is buried and overwhelmed ; but the utility of the
measure would not stop here—we should have
gained a vantage ground, from which we should
be able to carry system and order, as yet unknown,
into the anarchy and confusion of our legislation.
Once possessed Of a hook which contained neither
more nor less than the existing law of England,
we could analyse its contents, divide those con-
tents into groups, consolidate the law relating to
each group, and digest it into a code. Such is the
plan of the Law Amendment Society, which seems
to lead us on, step by step, from our present mi-
serable state of darkness and confusion to the most
perfect order, method, and symmetry. All that is
wanted is the selection of men competent to the
task, a libezal remuneration of their exertions, and
a clear view of the end to which these exertions
aro to be directed. Never was so easy an oppor-
tunity offered to a Government of obtaining
boundless popularity at the present moment, and
undying reputation in the times to come, as by
appointing a Minister or commission to complete
the work thus ably and clearly sketched out.