The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-06 00:00:00

THE SUN,

'iThrtltiltrO _tlitits

:LONDON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1851.

Never, perhaps, was the result of any investiga-
tion before the criminal tribunals of the country
awaited with more intense anxiety, than of that into
the conduct of GEORGE and THERESA SLOANE to-
wards the unfortunate and friendless orphan who was
entrusted to their fostering care and protection. The
public mind was wrought into the highest state of
indignant excitement. The narrative of the miser-
able victim detailed a series of cold-blooded cruelties,
of unutterable brutalities, that almost surpassed the
bounds of credibility. It was scarcely possible
that persons occupying a respectable position in
society—the husband a graduate of the University
of Cambridge, a member of an honourable profession,
could have been guilty of such revolting and heartless
atrocities as that revealed by poor JANE WILBRED.
There must have been great exaggeration on the part
of the girl, who certainly appeared to have
been very badly treated, but not to the extent stated
in her depositions before the magistrates. Besides, it
should he borne in mind, that the male prisoner could
have effected his escape when summoned to appear in
the first instance, or even when, after the first
hearing, he was liberated on bail, security
to the extent of 2004 only being required for
his future attendance at the appointed times.
If really guilty, he would, surely, have availed
himself of one or the other of these opportunities,
and not have come voluntarily forward to abide the
stringent and searching inquiries that would most un-
questionably be instituted. The Learned Gentleman
too, who appeared for him in the preliminary examina-
tions, had with great solemnity declared that a full
and sufficient answer would be given to the charge
on a fitting opportunity, and there was a living wit-
ness—Miss DEVAUX—whose testimony would be
available, and whose name was not included in the in-
dictment in order that every fair play might be shown
to the accused, and that they should not be de-
prived of the benefit of her evidence, the best
which the nature of the case admitted. Such were
the views and opinions of many well-intentioned per-
sons, who, up to the last moment, entertained a firm
conviction that the case would assume a very different
appearance when brought before an English judge
and an English jury, to be finally disposed of.
Well, the case has at length been brought forward.
Mr. and Mrs, SLOANE were yesterday called upon to
plead to the indictment which had been preferred
against them, and they did not venture to deny their
guilt, or to impeach in the slightest degree the
accuracy or perfect truth of their miserable
victim. It is true that they pleaded " not
guilty" as to the two first counts, but the
issue was joined on a question of law, not of
fact. The question to be decided was simply this—

whether a girl of nearly 17 years of age could be
considered as an infant of tender years, unable to
help herself ? On this point the Learned Judges
most justly decided in favour of the prisoners. It was
not pretended that they had supplied the poor girl
with a sufficiency of wholesome and nutritious food,
suited to her age and condition, or that they were nut
bound to do so in consequence of their relative condi-
tions, but merely that she was of such an age that
she might have claimed the protection of the law,
and that, consequently, their gross and unpardonable
" negligence"--for it was only as the omission of a ne-
cessary duty that the case could be dealt with—did
not constitute an indictable offence. Every horrible
and revolting circumstance deposed to by the poor
girl has been tacitly confessed by the prisoners. We
shall not pollute our columns by any recapitulation
of the disgusting details, suffice it to say, that they
are utterly unparalleled in the criminal records of
this or any other nation. Never, we believe, were
such inhuman and unnatural proceedings practised,
or even contemplated. Never was such fiendish
vengeance excited in a female mind for Bo trifling a
cause as the supposed loss of a favourite bird. Even
if the orphan child had actually frightened it to
death by taking a lighted candle through the room
in which its cage had been suspended, surely the
offence might be sufficiently expiated without con-
signing her to a lingering and horrible death. The
defect in the two first counts of the indictment which

led to th• aquittal of the prisoners—on legal, not on
moral grounds—so far as these counts were concerned,
had no practical effect, for the Learned JUDG➢
who presided, most properly sentenced the culprits
to the highest punishment—two years' imprisonment
—which the law allowed. He could not have in-
flicted a more stringent penalty had they been con-
victed of the entire charge; and it was, indeed, for-
tunate that such was not the case, for had it been so,
and had they been sentenced on all the counts, the
insufficiency of the two first would, according to the
decision of the House of Lords in O'CoisNELL's case,
have vitiated the entire j udgment, and they might
have escaped from the penal consequences of
their fearful atrocities without legal punish-
ment. There might have been a failure of
justice—as in the case of the BlRDS—the only per-
sons who appear worthy of being placed in the same
category with the SLOANES, although the outrage
upon society and upon human nature, of which the
Devonshire farmer and his wife were guilty, in-
volved far less moral turpitude than that of the
special pleader and his amiable spouse.

From the judgment which the Learned Judges
justly and properly delivered—the only one indeed
at which they eeuld have arrived as impartial and in-
, different adminiutrators of the law as it is,
not as it ,aught to be —we may learn
what would have been the result if the
victim bad actually died, as she would in-
evitably have done had it not been for the laudable
and philanthropic conduct of Messrs. PnILLIMORE
and Far, and of Drs. MARSDEN and ROBERTS. As
it was, she was reduced to the very threshold of the
grave; her life hung trembling in the balance for
several weeks, and it was only by the most unceasing
care and attention—by the most judicious treatment
on the part of the above-mentioned medical
gentlemen, whose exemplary condbuyct
a will, we
,trust, be fully recompensed
gene-
rous public to the admirable i
natitution, the
ItoyalFree Hospital, with which they are coon octed—
that the fleeting spark was retained in her exha.'uteu
frame. Had she shared the fate of the BIRDS' victl'.ult
Mr. and Mrs. SLOANE would probably have been'
tried for, but they could not have been convicted of;
the murder-; and they might possibly have escaped
scatheless, after protracted discussions respecting
the nature and character of their unprecedented and
unparalleled offen ces.

We may vow congratulate the community on the
result. The majesty of the law has been vin-
dicated ; the? :punishment, although most in-
adequate to the crime, is still a severe one.
The arrest of ,34z rs, SLoAtiz—for which we may take

some degree of credit to ourselves, being the first to
stimulate the board of guardians to the performance
of the duty that devolved upon them—prevented a
failure of justice. Her apprehension, shortly after
the officers heard herself and her husband planning
the best mode of effecting their escape, not knowing
that their dialogue, which was carried on in the
French language, was overboard and folly un-
derstood by those who were tracking their foot-
steps at the very moment, completely over-
turned the plans that had previously been formed.
We trust, then, that the case of the SLOANES
may henceforward and for ever act as a salutary
warning to all who are entrusted with the care of
orphan children how they violate the confidence
reposed in them, and may serve as a proof that an
avenging Nemesis will pursue the guilty parties and
eventually bring them to well-merited punishment,
and cause their names to become a by-word and re-
proach among their fellow-subjects.

Many matters of deep and vital importance to the
welfare and prosperity of the nation will be sub-
mitted, during the present session, to the considera-
tion of the distinguished body who on Tuesday met for
the dispatch of public business within the Palace at
Westminster. The subjects are, indeed, of a varied
character, and all requiring prompt attention from
the chosen representatives of the people. Many are
remanets from last year, which, after having received
more or less discussion, were postponed to more con-
venient season, in consequence of the pressure of
public business. The measures thus standing over
are unquestionably entitled to priority. They have
been long before the House and country, and it would
reflect indelible disgrace on the Legislature if any
undue procrastination should be evinced in matters
in which the Fabian policy had already prevailed, or
that they should be disposed of during the present
year on any grounds unconnected with their
respective merits. We may briefly mention,
among the measures of this description that must
receive immediate attention, the measures for the
regulation of the savings' banks, for the abolition of
the Irish Lord-Lieutenancy, for " securities for ad•
vances" in Ireland, and for various sanitary and legal
reforms that have already been indicated.
The Marriages Affinity Bill, although not introduced
by or on behalf of the Government, possesses no ordi-
nary claims to the legislatorial attention. It is its third
appearance in Parliament. During the two last ses-
sions it has been subjected to the most stringent
ordeals. Numerous divisions have been taken, but
the principle of the measure, and indeed its details,
have been on every occasion affirmed, by large and
decisive majorities. In 1849 it went to its third
reading in the House of Commons, and was then
withdrawn, simply because the late period of the ses-
sion prevented the possibility of its passing into a
law before the prorogation. Again, in 1850, it was
introduced at the very commencement of business—
but the same vexatious and factious opposition was
offered at many stages of its progress. There was no
stratagem known in Parliamentary strategics which
was not resorted to, in order to delay that which
could not ultimately be prevented. All direct at-
tacks were invariably frustrated. The opponents of
civil and religious liberty—those, who would rule
over the consciences of their fellow-men with a rod
of iron—who would tolerate no right of private
judgment, even in the most important matters that
could effect the personal happiness and social condi-
tion of the individual—gave full scope to their
Puaeyite and Tractarian predilections. They carried
on a guerilla warfare which, although it could not
affect th • ultimate result, might yet serve to annoy the
claimants for justice, and might possibly delay the relief
that should sooner or later be afforded. Once more
the discreditable attempt was but too successful.
Ministers—who should strenuously discourage all
such paltry and disgraceful tactics, which eventually
lead to an enormous waste of public time—were but
too happy to seise the opportunity of pressing forward
their own measures. A single day given up in the
early part of the session of 1849 would have prevented
the consumption of many valuable hours in 1450, and
a further and irresistible demand on the attention of
Parliament in 1861. It might, indeed, be termed a
" minute-wise-and-hour-foolish" policy, for they
may be well assured that any measure based on equity
and justice, and having large claims upon the
popular attention, cannot be " shelved " or got rid
of by such petty expedients as "counting out' the
House," or adjourning debates over and over again,
in order that the House may be disgusted with the
repetition of pompous platitudes and feeble and oft-
refuted arguments that have already been repeated
usque ad nauseam, until the ear sickens at the
nauseous reiterations. The measure must be
disposed of on its merits during the present session,
and as—

"'Twere well it were don• quickly,"

the more rapidly it be pressed forward the better,
and great will be the saving of time resulting from
such a course. There is also another and a higher
motive that should lead to the adoption of such a
course. The many religious and moral families
who are deeply interested in the question, and who
have already sufficiently suffered under the
" Hope deferred which maketh sick the heart,"
have a right to have the period of their sufferings
abridged, to have the question at once and for ever
set at rest, and the unjust and impolitic law erased
from the public statute-book, to which it is a stain
and disgrace as one of the remaining memorials of
religious intolerance. _

In addition to those questions there are others of
peculiar urgency that must also be disposed
of, and that speedily. The Papal aggres-
sion demands immediate attention. The in-
dependence of the Crown and people of this
country from every foreign yoke must be vindicated.
Let not our Roman Catholic brethren suppose that
in asserting this inalienable right of the Unglish
nation, this unquestionable prerogative of our SOVE-
REIGN, we would for a moment consent to any
return to the old system of persecution, of which
we are proud and happy to say we were ever among
the most strenuous and consistent opponents ; we are
still, as we trust we ever shall be, arrayed under
the spotless banner of " civil and religious liberty."
We will act not as sectarians, anxious to inflict " a
heavy blow and great discouragement" on the pro-
fessors of any creed—each man's faith is a matter be-
tween himself and his CREATOR ; he must not be in-
terfered with in any degree, however trifling, in the
exercise of that sacred right--but we act as did our Ro-
man Catholic ancestors in the days of Catholic England,
in asserting the temporal and spiritual independence
of this mighty empire, and we will not yield our
assent to any measure that would not have re-
ceived the sanction of the Barons, who at Runny-
mede vindicated the national liberties and adopted the
inspiring motto—

" Nolumus leges Anbliis mutari."

There is one other question—the last, but not tha
least, of those to which we shall allude on the present
occasion. The property and income-tax expires early
in the present year. It must be revived in some
shape, but not in its present unjust, unequal, and op-
pressive form. The absurdity of taxing the transitory
and precarious earnings of professional men or trades-
men as highly as the dividends of the fundholder or the
ground-rents of the landowner, is now too palpable to
be longer tolerated. There must be an equitable ad-
justment of the impost, which, if placed on a proper
foundation, would be the best and most judicious
system of national taxation, but is, in its present
form, the worst, because the most unjust, that could
be devised.

MISS KELLY'S BENEFIT.—We are gratified to learn
that the amateur performances previously announced to take
place on Tuesday next, the 11th instant, at the Royal Soho
Theatre, with the above object (namely, for the benefit of
Miss Kelly) have already enlisted the sympathies of his
Itoyal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, his Grace the Duke
of Devonshire, and several other distinguished members of
the aristocracy. Communications, we understand, may; till
be addressed to the treasurer, W. C. Kent, Esq , 112,
Strand.

CHESTER Cur.—We are informed by Mr.
Topham that Heart of Oak, 3 yrs, sst, w•as included by
mistake in the list of horses atruck out; the acceptances,
therefore, amount to 82.

_Think it no part of your business curiously to
search into other men's lives, but narrowly inspect your own
errors.-
-.Eliza Cook's Journal.
ExjIIBITION or 1851.—1 t may perhaps save some
of our readers trouble if we remind them that Monday was
day in which public admission could be obtained to
see
e the
building. We believe we are correct in saying, that
ii:tvitations for the Members of both Houses have been issued
avAilable to Thursday ; after which day no person, under
any circumstances whatever, will be admitted by the
Execeive Committee, besides those employed in arranging
the goods, pita Gila let of slay

THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.

It will be remembered that for some years past
the frequenters of the Parisian salons have been alter-
nately scandalizd and amused by the differences
which have arisen between the Prince DE LA. MOSKOWA
and his lady, who was the daughter of the banker
LAFITTE. The Prince had, it seems, squandered the
greater portion of his wife's fortune, and sho sued him
in the courts of law for a separation, which the Court
awarded to her. The Prince is one of the entourage of
the Elyie, and brother of M. EDMOND NET, the Aide-
de-Camp to the PRESIDENT. Having premised thus
much, we proceed to give the report of an incident which
occurred in the Assembly.
The PRESIDENT announced that he had received a
letter from M. RAMON DE LA CROISETTE, solicitor. and

colonel of the 4th legion of the National Guard of Paris.
M. DE LA CRoIsETTE explained that he was the solicitor
of Madame DE LA MOSKOWA, and, as such, he had oh-
obtained from the Civil Court of Paris her separation
from her husband, M. DE LA MOSSOWA, representative
of the people. On the 27th ult., at ten o'clock P.m , he
was conversing with some friends in the salon of the
PRESIDENT of the Republic, when M. DE LA MOSKOWA,
who was standing at a short distance, having perceived
him, advanced towards him and, treading on
his foot, said, " That is for you ; you know
what it means." In the course of the evening M.
DE LA MOSKOWA again accosted him, and in presence

of several personS, among whop were a public
functionary, and a representative of the people he should
not name, said to him, "You have poisoned my whule
life. I will kick you wherever I meet you. Begone,
and never set your foot again in the Palace of the
Ely: Gt." M. DE LA CROISETTE, in conclusion, observed
that it was evident M. DE LA MOSKOWA had thus grossly
and publicly insulted and menaced him on account of
the accomplishment of his official functions, and he ac-

cordingly requested the Assembly to authorise him to
take proceedings before the Court of Correctional Police
against M. DE LA MOSILOWA.
" Every day," exclaimed M. GRESLAN, " we have some
new scandal to record."

The Assembly decided that the demand of M. RA.mori
DE LA CROISETTE should be referred to the bureaux.
The following are the nominations for the monthly
Bureaux of the Assembly:—
Presidents.
1. Baroche.
2. De Crouseilhes.
3. General Changarnier.
4. Manuel.
5. Leon de Malleville.
6. General St. Priest.
7. De Panat.
8. De Belzac.
9. Baze.
10. Berryer.

11. 1)e ilornay.
12. Lepelletier-d'Aulnay.

13. ThOmine Desmazures.

14. Odilon Barrot.

15. De Laussat.
Ten of the above-named
secretaries belong to the coi
Beauve's amendment,,as wil
list :

Secretaries.

Evain.
Rouille.
Monet.
Riche.
Melun (du Nord).
Noel (de Cherbourg).
IDelessert.
Faultrier.
Do Fouelane.
De Bryas.
Poujoulat.
Cordier.
Collas.
Gavini.
Cunin-Gridaine.

presidents and nine of the
alition in favour of M. St,
11 be seen by the following

PRESIDENTS.—GeneraI Changarnier, Leon de Malle-
!Julie, General St.-Priest, De Panat, De Balzac, Bane,
Berryer, De Mornay, Thotnine-Desmarlre, De Laussat.
SECRETARIES.— MM. Drab:, Monet, Melun (du
Nord),•Da Bryas, Poujoulat, Cordier, Collas, Cunin-
Gridaine.

A t the sitting of the Assembly on Tuesday the discus-
sion opened on the application of M. Cheron for leave
to arrest M. Mauguin, his debtor.
M. Anthony Thouret observed, that the Committee
to which the demand was referred had been unani-
mously of opinion to grant the demand. On the 21st
of January last the Assembly had adopted a law
against which he had voted, because it sanctioned
the retrospective principle, and appeared to him
to have encroached on the sovereignty of the
National Assembly, which was omnipotent, and cur-
tailed its power, so audaciously attacked abroad, and, he
regretted to say, so feebly defended in that hall. He
then referred to the Parliamentary conduct of M. Mau-
guin, which had been highly honourable during the last
twenty years, and had induced the electors of
the department of the Cote d'Or to return him
so often to the Legislature. M. Thouret then
said that he held in his hand a document, which, he
was certain, would decide the Assembly not to adopt the
resolution of its Committee. That document was as
follows :—" Devoted to the Republic.and to the Constitu-
tion, and not wishing to serve as an instrument to bad pas-
sions, which do not lear.to attack the national sovereignty,
represented by.the Assembly, I withdraw my application
for leave to arrest M. Mauguin. (Signed) Amadis
Cheron."—(Laughter.) M. Anthony Thouret then
handed the letter to the President, and left the tribune.
M. Moulin, the reporter, did not contest the authenti-
city of the document, but asked that it be sent to the
Committee.

M. Anthony Thouret contended that it was authentic;
that it was written on stamped paper, and had been
handed to him in the morning by M. Cheron himself.
The Assembly being consulted referred the document
to the Committee.

M. Moulin shortly afterwards ascended the tribune,
and said that the Committee to which the demand of
M. Cheron for leave to arrest M. Mauguin had been re-
ferred had assembled immediately to examine the letter
produced by 113. Anthony Thouret, which it found per-
fectly authentic. He had no objection to make to the
sentiments expressed by M. Cheron. He could not,
however, help regretting that he did not express them
sooner.—(Laughter.) The Committee accordingly pro-
posed the order of the day, which was adopted by the
Assembly.
The Moniteur du Soir of Tuesday has the following:
"The question of the Frais de Representation of the Pre-
sident of the Republic will come to-morrow before the
bureaux. At a political meeting which was held yesterday,
at the house of a member of the majority, and at which
MM. Thiers, de Broglie, Mold, and Berryer were present, it
was resolved to demand an adjournment, and M. Molt was
designated to snake the demand. It is hoped in this way to
force the President to dismiss his Ministry, and form a
Cabinet from the majority."
The Evinement states that the adjournment was pro-
posed by M. DE BROGLIE and M. THIERS in the inte-
rest of the Elys6?, but that those gentlemen have aban-
doned the intention.

The Journal des Debats strongly urges on its friends
the importance of supporting the demand of the PRE-
SIDENT for an increase of dotation. It says—
" We believe that the refusal of the dotation demanded
for the ?resident would be regarded by the country as a
meanness, and a very paltry vengeance unworthy of its re •
presentatives. As to the use, or, if you will have it so. the
abuse, that might be made of this money, we must not allow
our country and our time to be calumniated by admitting an
exaggeration of Its danger. A people is not to be pur-
chased in this way. What a miserable idea must be enter-
tained of a country which could be purchased with a couple
of millions; and any form of government that could be at
the mercy of 1,800,000 francs would not be worth being
defended."

The Legitinsatist journals, on the other hand, are
unanimous in urging their party to oppose the Dotation
Bill by every means in their power.
An important discovery is said to have been
made of asouspiracy which may involve very unplea-
sant consequences for General LAHITTE, and may ex-
pose the motives and designs of the reactionary leaders
in the British Parliament, who last spring laboured so
assiduously to oust Lord PALNERSTON from office, and
to sacrifice British honour and British interests to Aus-
tria and Russia. It has been discovered, so says the report
that General LAHITTE, during the whole time he was in
office, was carrying on a treasonable correspondence with
the Duke of BOURDEAUX and with the Northern Courts;
that during his term of power ha filled up every office
of importance that was in his gift with Legitimatist agents
nominated by the Duke of BOURDEAUX, and that
throughout the Greek affair ho acted solely and entirely
by the direction of the Northern Powers, with a view of
facilitating a return of the Duke of BoURhEAux and the
destruction of the Republic, by endeavouring to involve
England in a war with Franca and the Absolutist
Courts.

Yesterday the representatives met in their bureaux to
discuss the Dotatio❑ Bill, and elect a special committee
to examine it. The Commissioners returned were—
Messrs. Salvat, Piscatory, Grevy, Druet Desvaux, Cro-
ton, Chambolle, Benjamin Belessen, Bac, Bole, Dufour,
de Mornay, Cbambarel de Leyvel, Desmares, Quentin
Bauchart, and Pidoux.

•
Three of the Commissioners belong to the Mountain:
—Messrs. Salvat, Grevy, and Bac; two only are favour-
able to the Bill—Messrs. Dufour and Quentin Bauchart,
and the others are members of the Coalition, and conse-
quently opposed to the Dotation.
The Bourse was agitated, and considerable fluctua-
tions took place i❑ the price of public securities. The
Five per Cents. opened at 97f, rose to 97f. 202., and fell
subsequently to 96f. 85c., at which price they closed.
The Three per Cents. closed at 58f. 30c.; Orleans
Railroad Shares, 880 f.; Rouen, 675 E; Havre, 277 f. 50c.;
Great Northern, 481 f. 25c.; Avignon, 197 f. 50c.; Vier-
zon, 410 F.; Basle, 165 f.; Bordeaux, 401 f. 25c.; Paris
and Strasburg, 368 f. 75c.; Tours and Nantes, 252 f. 50c.

BUSINESS DUNE IN FOREIGN RAILWAYS AT TUE

LONDONSiOCK EXCHANGE, FEZ 5.
Boulogne and Amiens, 9%—East Indian, 12%—Namur
and Liege, 81/s—Northern of France, 15—Orleans and
Bordeaux, 414 —Paris and Strasbourg, 9%—Rouen and
Havre, 1114—Tours and Nantes, sq.
,