The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-21 00:00:00

" GRATUITIES

" For such Officers as have not been ten years in the Company's
" employ, to be computed according to their rank and time of ser-
" vice, in proportion to the value of the pension granted to those
" who have served ten years. That the compensation be given to
" all Commanders and Officers who have been in actual employ in
" the service within the period of five years antecedent to the 28th
" August, 1833. That it be optional with the Company, in lieu
" of pensions, to pay to the Commanders and Officers the value of
" the same in money, and that the scale now proposed be submitted
" for confirmation to the Board of Control.

scale of compensa_
"3dli.---That, in addition to the foregoing
" tions to the Maritime Officers of the Company, this Court
" recommends that the Commanders and Officers of those ships
" whose contracts with the Company are unexpired, be reasonably
" compensated for the non-performance of the remaining voyages.
" And that it be recommended to the Court of Directors to make
" such additional allowance as may be deemed reasonable to the
" Commanders and Officers of their own ships, and to any other
" Commanders and Officers who may be considered specially en-
" titled thereto, and to submit the same to this Court."
The ballot was fixed to commence at 11 o'clock, and at that
hour Sir William Young, Bart., one of the Court of Directors
of the Company, took the chair, and opened the proceedings
of the day. The ballot was continued up to 'six o'clock in the
evening, when the glasses were closed, and on behalf of the
Maritime 01:cers, John Shore, Esq., and Thomas Weeding,
Esq., were appointed scrutineers ; and William Crawford and
Wm. Symonds, Esqrs., were nominated on behalf of the East
India Company. The scrutineers retired to make their
report, and at a quarter to seven o'clock returned into the
Court-room, and Mr. Weeding declared the result of the ballot
to John Cotton, Esq., one of, the Directors, who had pre-
viously taken his seat as Chairman.
The SECRETARY read the report of the scrutineers ; it stated
that there appeared on the ballot—
For the question
Against it 137
Majority in favour of Mr. Weeding's amendment---248
The CHAIRMAN then declared the question to be carried in
the affirmative.—( Cheers. )
The Court then adjourned.
Several ladies attended during the day, and voted in favour
of the plan for increasing the compensation to the Company's
Maritime Officers.

Since the opening of the tumulus at Gristhorpe the
human bones found with the coffin have been articulated by
two medical men in Scarborough, and now form a superb ske-
leton above since feet in height, and except two or three of the
smallest phalanges, perfect in all its parts. Near the entrance
into the museum, a suitable sarcophagus has been erected for
the protection of the rude coffin. Some of the substance
found in the coffin, resembling decomposed rushes, has been
macerated, and when expanded, presents the long lanceote
leaf of the mistletoe, which has doubtless been placed
there in observance of some religious custom. There is every
reason to suppose that the person was a hunting chieftain of
the powerful tribe of the Brigantes, before the invasion of the
Romans drove them from their peaceful mode of life.--17ork
Herald.

STEAM-CARRIAGE TO PADDINGTON. The
steam-carriage which ran between Pentonville and Finsbury-
square during part of last autumn has resumed its station on
the same road, and will now continue regularly to ply between
Moorfields and Paddington. The carriage is capable of
carrying ten or twelve passengers besides the persons required
in its management. It started from Moorfields on Monday
morning on its first trip, at a few minutes after ten, with a full
complement of passengers, and completed the journey to Pad-
dington (five miles) in half an hour, including stoppages.
The rate of travelling, exclusive of stoppages, was exactly
twelve milts an hour. At no period of the journey, except in
going up Pentonville hill, was the whole power of the steam
applied; and accordingly, at intervals, a considerable quantity
of extra steam was allowed to escape. The first trip was
attended with complete success. The carriage proceeded on
its route quietly and steadily. It appeared quite easy of
management, and was directed through a crowded thorough-
fare with neatness and precision. In the course of the journey
it was occasionally driven faster, occasionally slower, and
sometimes it was stopped altogether, with a quickness perfectly
wonderful. The general appearance of Mr. Hancock's car-
riage is pretty similar to that for which Mr. Squire and
Colonel M cerona have obtained a patent, in as far as the seats
for the passengers in both are in the same vehicle with the
machinery. '1 he arrangement of the machinery is, however,
essentially different. As far as compactness goes (and it is
undoubtedly a great point), Colonel Macerone's carriage has
undoubtedly a preference. It is not nearly so large nor so
heavy as Mr. Hancock's. Sir Charles Dance's steam-
carriage is essentially different from either. In it the engine
is in one vehicle, while the passengers and luggage are con-
veyed in another attached to it. There are advantages pecu-
liar to both plans, and it is not easy to say in which they pre-
ponderate. Great crowds were attracted to all parts of the
route which the steam-carriage took to witness its performances,
and great numbers went away disappointed at not being able to
obtain a seat in it.

The King'sAttorney-General then demanded that the tri-
bunal should withdraw to its council-chamber to deliberate on
the ground of his opposition to those witnesses being heard, but
the President, without consulting the tribunal, declared, al-
though• wholly in contravention of the laws, that those wit-
nesses should be heard, and that he should reserve to himself
the right of examining them. The Attorney-General de-
manded that this declaration of the President should be in-
scribed in the court, but the President with anger refused his
assent to this demand. The Attorney-General then found him-
self under the necessity of declaring formally that he should
regard as void and of no avail all the depositions of the wit-
nesses for the acquittal.

The conduct of the President, how strange soever it might
have been on this occasion, would not have attracted attention,
if he had not throughout the whole of the discussion exhibited
a direct, continual, and violent opposition to the Public Mi-
nister, qnd if he had not, more than once, forgotten the im-
portant and sacred duties which his functions imposed on him.
It was thus that, despising the requisitions of the Public
Minister, and disdaining even to take into consideration the
observations of the other Judges, he arrogated to himself the
right of pronouncing alone, not on the questions of order and
court police merely, but even on the facts appertaining to the
grounds of the affair, and constantly refused to give act of such
decisions to the Attorney-General, who appealed from them
to the justice of the tribunal.
The hearing of the witnesses for the acquittal aggravated
yet more the suspicions to which the conduct of the President
from the commencement of the trial had given rise, and con-
firmed the anticipations of all the persons who had followed the
proceedings with attention.
In reality, the witnesses for the defence, instead of confin-
ing themselves to refute the depositions of the witnesses for
the accusation, and of proving by facts that there were con-
tradictions in their testimony, abandoned altogether the affair
in question, and launched into a series of assertions without
foundation, and full of calumnies against the former witnesses.
The President, instead of cutting short this scandal, and
paying. attention to the requisitions of the Attorney-General,
who wished to prevent this licentiousness—this continual and
bitter course of calumny—directed against the witnesses for
the accusation, and even against persons not implicated in the
question—the President, not concealing his partiality for the
accused, sought throughout his examination to obtain—
through suggestive questions—answers which would be favour-
able towards doing away those which might be injurious to
their cause.

the Public Minister wished to speak, it was as if by favour
that he gave him the permission. If the counsel for the defence
asked to make any observations, they were authorized and in-
vited by the President.
The depositions of those witnesses did not, however, in the
smallest manner destroy any of the serious charges advanced
in the accusation against the persons at the bar; the two sole
witnesses (the Secretaries of Bouckoura) whose depositions
bore in any measure on the ground of the affair were found to
be on the same fact in evident contradiction, the one having
declared that on the day stated by one of the witnesses for the
prosecution as having been that on which there was a secret
assembly in Bouckoura's house there was nobody there, while
the other affirmed that many people had come.
The hearing of those witnesses for the defence produced but
one important result—that was, to engage many persons ca-
lumniated by them to lodge complaints with the registrar of
the tribunal, so as to have them prosecuted for calumny.
Thus was the hearing of those witnesses carried on between
the calumnies which they scattered on all sides, and the evi-
dent, clear, and manifest partiality of the President towards
the accused.
Twenty-five days passed over before the pleadings began.
The King's Attorney-General in an improviso speech of five
hours, with seriousness, force, and impartiality, reproduced all
the charges accumulated by the prosecution against the ac.
cused ; he proved that there had always existed intimate re-
lations between them and the leaders of the bands which had
lately been roving through the Peloponnesus ; that those
men had not taken up arms but at their instigation ; he exhi-
bited with force the feebleness of the testimony for the de-
fence, and he branded with infamy some of those witnesses
who, through years of impunity, have been habituated to pour
forth, as it were from pleasure, calumnies and outrages.
The answers of the advocates for the accused, far from
being like the demand of the Attorney-General, suited to
the Importance of the case, were nothing more than a re-
production of the declarations of their witnesses, and instead
of throwing any new light on the subject, formed merely a
heaping together of new injuries and outrages, with the calum-
nies which had already scandalized the auditory.
The President, instead, as his duty required, of calling them
to order, gave them by his silence new support in this unusual
liberty of defence. The code of regulation established in
1829, which yet subsists in vigour, says positively that the At-
torney.. General has the right either to reply or not to reply,
and that the accused or their counsel have the right to speak
last. The Attorney-General, profiting of those terms of the
law, and believing the subject to be sufficiently discussed, since
the declarations of the witnesses for the prosecution had in no
wise been destroyed by the opposite witnesses, and since his
requisition had not been refuted by the replies of the opposite
advocates, renounced his right to speak, in order that the
counsel for the accused might not have a further opportunity
of new scandal, by attacking still more violently persons alto-
gether foreign to the affair.
The Public Minister then declared that he would not speak,
and demanded that the tribunal should declare the pleadings
closed. The President instantly, without taking the opinion
of the other Judges, declared that the Attorney-General had
the liberty of renouncing his right to reply, but that the advo-
cates for the defence were authorized to speak. The Attor-
ney-General then, in the strongest manner, opposed this false
interpretation of the law, and demanded that the tribunal
should, in its council-chamber, decide on this important point.
The other Judges declared themselves of the opinion of the
Attorney-General against the President. The proceedings
were interrupted, and the Court adjourned to the following day.
In the mean time, on the report of the Attorney-General, a
Royal rescript was issued, which was communicated to the
tribunal, to the effect that, on every question relating to the
ground of the cause, it was the right of the tribunal, and not
of the President alone, to pronounce a decision, and that all

The President and the Judges were therefore instantly con-
voked in the council-chamber. The Minister himself, accom-
panied by a councillor and two secretaries of his Majesty, went
thither, and demanded of the President and of M. Tertzetti,
if it were true that two of the judges had withdrawn from the
tribunal before they had signed the judgment ? The President
replied that all the members had quitted the court at tb, .ame
moment. The Minister then explained them the illegality
of their conduct, and told them that it was unknown in the
annals of justice th,t the minority should refuse to sign the
judgment ut the majority. He stated that the articles 90 and
91 of the Code of Instruction were precise on the subject, as
follows :—" Judgment is pronounced by the majority of votes,
without which it is null and of no avail. The minority can
neither insert its opinion in the proces verbal nor publish it.
The judges re-enter the court, and the president, in a public
audience, reads the sentence signed by all the judges, to the
accused." * * " The law," he continued, " being
so clear, so precise, how could you refuse your signature,
and then, by publishing your individual opinion, thus be-
tray the secret of the council ? In the name of the law
I require of you to sign the judgment pronounced by the ma-
jority—that is to say, by the very tribunal itself, and also to
assist at its being publicly read." The President replied that
they would never do so. After a short pause, the Secretary
of State for the Department of Justice asked, for the last
time, if they continued to persist in their refusal ? and the
President, Mr. Polyzoides, and M. Tertzetti having replied
in the affirmative, he informed them that at least they were
bound to take their seats in the tribunal during the publication
of the judgment, with which if they did not comply he should
be obliged to have them compelled by force. The two judges
replied again, that they "would not yield except to force, and
that they were satisfied to endure all that for justice's sake ;"
and obstinately persisted in refusing to enter the court to be
present, according to the depositions of the law, at the publi-
cation of the sentence pronounced by the majority of votes.
It was not until then that this Minister, after having ex-
hausted every means of persuasion, and every admonition
which could be drawn from the most sacred interests of pub-
lic order, and the: sanctity of the duties of the magistracy,
yielded to a necessity, then inevitable, of having recourse to
means of coercion, in order to put a term to the seditious op-
position of the President and of the Judge Tertzetti, and to
procure the publication of the sentence as legally pronounced.
He gave an order to the mirarch (major) of the gendarmerie
to conduct those gentlemen to their seats in the court. This
order was executed, but it was not until after repeated exhor-
tations on the part of the Attorney-General and of the mirarch,
who conjured the President and the Judge Tertzetti to yield,
and to spare their doing what was totally against their wishes.
The Minister of Justice then, in the name of the law, or-
dered that the sentence, as pronounced by the majority of
votes, should be published. When the Judges had taken their
places, the doors of the court were thrown open, and the
crowd, eager to know the fate of the accused, entered. The
President and the Judge Tertzetti, then made a final attempt
to interrupt the publication of the sentence by exclamations
tending to excite scandal, but the oldest of the Judges, M.
Demetrius Soutzo, obliged them to keep silence, by calling
them to order in the name of the law, and the registrar read
the judgment of condemnation.

The Minister of Justice on the following day suspended
MM. Polyzoides and Tertzetti from their functions, and the
Attorney-General has commenced proceedings against them,
founded on the application of articles 453 and 480 of the
Penal Code, which they are accused of having violated, by re-
vealing the secret of the deliberation of the council, and by re-
fusing to fulfil the duties of their functions. The tribunal will,
within a short time, give judgment on this accusation.
The act of accusation laid before the tribunal against Co-
locotroni and Coliopulos by the Public Minister, and bearing
date March 19, 1834, as well as the judgment pronounced by
the tribunal, by the majority of votes, will be found annexed
hereunto.

The, Royal Government, in its clemency, has commuted the
penalty of death into an imprisonment for 20 years, from hav-
ing taken into consideration the services which the condemned
had rendered anteriorly to their coun.ry.
I have to require you, Sir, to give to the Government to
which you are accredited the most exact statement of the con-
tents of this despatch, and on all occasions where necessity
may demand, to enlighten the public opinion on the true his-
tory of the trial of Colocotroni and Coliopulos.
I embrace this opportuntty of repeating to you the assur-
ances of my distinguished consideration.

J. RIZO.