The Sun.
London, England, 1856-11-21 00:00:00

SIR ALEXANDER COVKBORN.

( Prom the Times. )

The announcement of the elevatien of Sir Alexander
C ekburn to the Bench; in the place of..ihe late Chief
Justi.Je of the Common Pleas, wild be received with the
highest satisfaction by the profession and the public.
Step by i-tee, by honourable exertion, and .by the. most
undeniable ability and industry,' he has 'wail his way to
one of the highest posts which are open to the ambition
of a lawyer. Had Sir Alexander Cockburn, however,
been a mere lawyer we Should bare pas-ed over the ap-
pointment with a few words of decent mominendation ;
but he is something more. Had be never kept or
" eaten " his terms—had be never held a brief—he
would certainly have acquired distinction as an orator
and a politician. The two points which mainly arrest
attention when we look at the career of this gentleman
are, first, the union of abilities which qualify him equally
for service in the law courts and in the House of Com
axons ; and, secondly, that as a lawyer his mind never
seems to be singularly discharged of those technicalities
which, if they
have raised the practice of law into a
science, have degraded it into a curse to mankind. On
each point we will say a very few words. It is strange
dt first sight that so few lawyers, so few of the men
whose trade it is to speak in public asseiablies,
should have won the ear of the House of Commons.
The few that have so done—as Brougham and Denman,
for example—have achieved their Parliamentary reputa-
tion somewhat at the cost of the forum's esteem. Follett
was far more lawyer than statesman. That wonderful
old man, Lard Lyndhurst, is the only instance which
occure to us in our time of a man who has maintained a
firm footing on either arena. Even be has rather shown
himself as a statesman in what, if we were speaking of
another man, we should describe as the decline f life,
than while engaged in the contentions of the bar or
charged with the anxieties of the judgment-seat. In the
House of Commons he was a
no one who remembers those terrible summaries dills at
4. debater, and
the close of-a session will deny his tali-Ma-as a parirsan ;
but views of policy'so deeply impregnated with the ripe
Wisdom of a statesman ar those to which be has recently
given expression have been the triumph of the later and
unprofessional period of his remarkable career. There
are very few exceptions indeed to the ordinary rule that
the successful barrister is a failure in the House of Com-
mons. Many reasons have been assigned for this seem-
ing anomaly, some of them flattering to the vanity of
lawyers, others very much the reverse ; bet the chief
reason of all we take to be that a man must make public
affairs the business of his life if he wishes for success in
this career. It will not do, save in extraordinary cases,
to give to them a divided attention ; it will not do to
make a brilliant speeck upon public matters once and
again ; a man must make himself a politician, and no-
thing else, if he would earn favour and respect from the
House of Commons. Now, Sir Alexander Cockburn
has won the ear of that assembly, although fur many
years past he has been arduously engaged in the duties
of his profession. His remarkable oratorical talent would
not be sufficient to account for this result. We must
give him credit also for hearty and unfeigned earnestness
in the Liberal cause, for great breadth of view,
and for determined energy in maintaining what he be-
lieves to be right in the face of Parliament and of the
country. We have not among us so many statesmen,
or members of either House who give promise of be-
coming statesmen, that we can afford to lose the services
of such a man as Sir Alexander Cockburn. He will be
a great loss to the House of Commons; we trust shortly
to see him an honourable member of the House ()-
Peers.

There is a second reason why we should wish to
see Sir Alexander Cockburn in the Upper House. We
require in that assembly the presence of a competent
lawyer to take share in the legal business which, anoma-
lously enough, is cast upon it. Sir Alexander Cockburn
and Lord Wensleydale together would be a great addi-
tion to the legal strength of the house. This would, of
course, be but a palliative for a crying and acknowledged
evil, but, since we cannot at once secure the right re-
medy, we must endeavour to tide over the period of dis-
cussion with as little injury to suitors as possible. To
the establishment of an ultimate Court of Appeal, of a
Cour de fassation, removed altogether from the turbu-

lent atmosphere of politics, we must come at last.
Whether the change be effected next year or ten years
hence matters but little; it certainly will in the long
run be brought about. Meanwhile, so great is the reluc-
tance of the Queen's advisers to add unnecessarily to the
ranks of hereditary peerage—so determined the opposi-

sition of Peers to the creation of Peers for life or for a

term of years, that the question will probably stand for

some time in abeyance. What better can we hope to do
than to secure the service of two or three competent
lawyers until the moot point, shall receive
its final settlement ? The peculiar turn of
Sir Alexander Cockburn's mind would seem to indicate
him as a fitting counterpoise to Lord Wensleydale.
They are both what is called "good lawyers," but the
one is a man of general priabiples, the other of legal
technicalities. Combined they would be of the greatest
assistance to the Peers, considered as a Court of Appeal.
In all discussions, too, which may occur upon legal re•
form we should have considerable confidence in Sir
Alexander Cockburn, as a man of liberal opinions and of
sound judgment. The awkward side of the question is
that if the legal strength of the House of Lords be so far
reinforced, the Minister of the day may be apt to• tide
over a troublesome affair, and to adjourn for an indefi-
nite period the constitution of a proper Court of AF peal.
With the addition of a couple of vigorous lawyers, such
as Lord Wensleydale and Sir Alexander Cockburn, the •
present system might be maintained for a while. It
will, however, be maintained for a while at any rate, so
it is just as well to spare ourselves the inconvenience
that must result from an absolutely bare beach. We
can have no doubt that the Government will see

the necessity of adding to tae legal- strength of the
House of Lords by the elevation of Sir Alexander
Cockburn to the Peerage, and just as little that the late
A_ttorney.General or the present Chief Justice of the
Common Pleas will cheerfully accept the honour. In
such a case the cry of "Non volt episcopari" is com-
monly raised by the frieeds of the future Peer, but, no
doubt, the Premier and the public will estimate this just

at its proper value. The fact is that, according to
modern practice, Sir Alexander Cockburn has fairly
earned his Peerage, and, we presume, will be very glad
to receive so honourable a mark of distinction. He has
deserved it, and it will be for the public advantage that
he should receive it—:-there is nothing more to be said
about the matter. In conclusion, we may add that we
still have reason to believe tbat Mr. Stuart Wortley
will be the new Solicitor-General. It would have been
difficult to make a better appointment. Mr. Stuart
Wortley is not only a sound lawyer, but an English gen-
tleman in the largest acceptation of the term. We
sometimes wish that our forensic friends would consider
how highly this character is estimated by the great body
of their fellow-subjects.

ANOTHER FRAUD ON THE GREAT
NORTHERN RAILWAY.

Yesterday the Clerkenwell Police Court was crowded
to excess by parties anxious to hear the charges against
Mr. Wm. Snell, late the chief clerk in the accountant's
office of the Great Northern Railway. Prisoner, a very
respectably-dressed man, aged 27, residing at Nightin-
gale-place, Hornsey, was brought up in the custody of
Mr. Williams, the inspector of the line, charged with de-
frauding the company of about 1,0001. He appeared to
treat the matter very lightly.

Mr. Leech, of the firm 'of Johnson, Farquhar, and
Leech, the solicitors of the company, appeared for the
prosecution. The prisoner was undefended.
Mr. Leech stated the case at some length, aed said
that as ho was not prepared on that occasion to complete
the case be should only produce evidence sufficient to
justify a remand. He then called
Mr. Thomas Reynold, who stated—l am the chief ac-
countant of the Great Northern Railway Company. Snell
has been for some time my chief and confidential clerk.
He has been in the employment of the company since
1811. He had the care of the cheques drawn by the
directors, and in the course of business they came into
my office, and I then transferred them into the prisoner's
custody until it was necessary to pay them away. I
produce a cheque for 5001. drawn by the directors in
favour of the Provident Fund. It is dated 11th of July
last. That cheque was passed to the prisoner in the
ordinary way. I instructed the prisoner to ascertain
from the secretary how ib was to be disposed of. The
secretary, as I was informed, said it bad better wait, as
the rate of interest was low. I told the prisoner to put
it with the other cheques in the cash-box, of which he
had the key. I went out of town, and returned on the
21st of September, at which time, asfaraslif know,
paid,the
cheque remained in his custody. The cheque
ought to have been paid in alone. I recollect giving
directions to the prisoner to pay the cheque into
the ordinary account. The cheque was not paid in.
On the 9th of October the prisoner came to me and said
he bad received a cheque in the City, on his own account,
for 5021. 10g., which, desiring to split up, and it being
late in the day, he bad paid into the ordinary account of
the company. He then asked me to sign two cheques
which be had drawn, one for 4601., and the other for
phaensyhould pay
he regretted it
's cheque
b42010.k1.03.1
eTxphreeysswederemtyakdenispoluetaosufrtehethcaottu
Company. He
smaoidnetyhaitnthoe ti,haespyrievraytesoarcrcyotunatudofthtabto
very much, and would never do the like again. Before
signing the cheques, I satisfied myself as far as I could
that the money was paid in.. All cheques on the com-
pany's drawing account are signed by me. I signed this
cheque on the faith of the prisoner':+ statement that the
money had been paid in on the previous day. A few
days since I gave directions to Snell to proceed as
rapidly as possible in making up the drawing account,
and bringing it as clear up as possible. He said he
would have it done by Tuesday night. On Wednesday
morning, finding that it was not done, I called Snell
into my private office, and complained that the work
had not been done. He came towards me, and then
turned back, and shut the door. He then said, "There
is something wrong—l am a defaulter." I expressed
my regret, and said, "To what extent ?" He said, "A
little under 1,0001." I asked him if the 5001, was his
own money, when .he said, "No ; the 500/. 'was the