The Sun.
London, England, 1869-08-18 00:00:00

THEATRE-ROYAL, ADELPIII.

THIS EVENING, at 7, MY PRECIOUS BETSY: Mr Atkins and
Miss Johnstone. At 8, THE SERPENT ON THE HEARTH :
Mr R. Phillips, Mr E Atkins, Mr Stuart. Ilrs M. Eburne, Mrs L
Murray, &c. And DOMESTIC ECONOMY Mr Atkins and
Mrs Leigh Murray.

ROYAL STRAND THEATRE.
Sole Lessee and Manageress, Mrs. Swanboroneh.
This EVENING, at 7.30, AMONG THE BREAKERS: Mr
Clarke. THE TOODLES. JOAN OF ARC: Messrs. Thorne,
James, Fenton; !It esdames Goodall, Lydia Maitland. Bufton. To
em,elnde with THE CHOPS OF THE CHANNEL. Mr. D.
James,

ROYALTY THEATRE.
(hider the Management of Miss M Oliver.
'fees EVENING, at 7.30, A ROVING COM MISSION. After
which CHECKMATIC. Followed by THE MILI PART BILLY
TAYLOR. To conclude with IN FOR A HOLID A.Y Mr
Dewar, Mr. Danvers. Miss M. Oliver Miss Saunders, &c.

PRINCESS'S THEATRE.
Sole Lessee and Manager, Mr. Vininb.

MIS EVENING, at 7, PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE. After
which, AU I A\ D GAL AT EA : Herr Formes, Mr V. Rigby, Mr
M. smith, and Miss Blanche Core. To conclude with A QUIET
FAMILY.

PRINCE OF WALES'S ROYAL THEATRE.
Under the Management of Miss Marie Wilton

THISYVBNiNG, SCHOOL: Messrs. Hare, H. J. Montague,
Addison, Glover, and Bancroft; Mrs. Buckingham White, Miss
C. Addison, and Miss Marie Wilton. After which, A WINNING
HAZARD. And A LAME EXCUSE.

CHRISTY MINSTRELS, St. James's Hall, Every Night, at 8
Wednesdays and Saturdays, at 3 and 8 all the year round.

ROYAL ALHAMBRA PALACE. THREE BALLETS
Promenade Concert. Band of 60. Begin at 8. ls. Box-office
o pen from 11 to 4.

ZOOLOGICAL QARDENS, Regent's-park, OPEN daily (ex-
cept Sundays). Admission, is.; on Mondays, 6d. Children
under twelve, Rd.

- r
-
nUtltt 4i5-4;"*""A .111,11 t
in • No '
'l** • • '; •

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUS7 18, 1869.

The Report of the Metropolitan Board of Works
just issued, pursuant to the Act of Parliament, 18th
and 19th Victoria, c. 120, s. 200, comes to us as a
welcome reminder that London is now rapidly under-
going a magnificent transformation without the costly
luxury of a M. HausaraNN. The changes already
effected have no doubt involved an enormous expendi-
ture. The changes now actually being carried out
will entail yet larger disbursements. The changes
immediately projected, but not yet commenced, will in-
crease the total outlay, as a matter of course, still more
considerably. But for all that there is prudence
clearly discernible, from first to last, in the application
of capital to the improvement of the metropolis,
whether in regard to purposes of utility, or of simple
beautification. Many of these improvements have
been, or are being carried out upon an imperial
scale, but they are one and all there recognizable in
themselves as admirable investments. There can be
no question whatever that more has been done within
these last ten years to render London worthy of its
position as the capital of the greatest empire in the
world, than had been done in the previous
twenty years of her MAJESTY'S reign, or than had
been done, for that matter, in all the four preceding
reigns put together. The Main Drainage of the
Metropolis is one of the most imperial of all our
Metropolitan Improvements. The Thames Embank-
ment is another, more visible to the eye, and, there-
fore, more readily appreciable. But, without the
Main Drainage preparing the way for it, the Thames
Embankment would, in itself, have been a very ques•
rionable improvement. The former, by purifying the
current of the Silent Highway, has rendered it
sightly and salubrious for the inhabitants of London
to make the banks of that Silent Highway the most
conspicuous of all their promenades. The back en-
trance toLondon is thereby being rapidly transformed
into its noblest approach. When the Southern and
the Northern Embankments confront each other,
when they are planted with trees and adorned with
appropriate statuary, the river flowing through the
capital of England, a river spanned already by the
noblest bridges in the world, will present the metro-
polis to view under its very finest aspect. Apart from
the Embankment, apart from the Main Drainage
constructions of a subterranean character, apart from
the wonderful additions made to our magnificent
series of bridges such as the splendid structures
it Blackfriars and at 'Westminster—there are im-
provements already effected or in course of being
effected in all parts of the metropolis, improvements
many of them of vast and regal magnitude, the full
catalogue of which it would be difficult within any-
thing like moderate dimensions to enumerate. The
Elolborn Valley Viaduct is, among all those,
one of the most important, and it is one that
is now happily and rapidly approaching its comple-
tion. The removal of Middle-row is one of not the
least of what may be called our negative improve-
ments. Meaning the sweeping out of the way of what
had been, hitherto, at once an eyesore and an impedi-
ment. Another of these negative improvements very
urgently required is beyond any doubt whatever,
that still worse Middle-row, as it might be called, of
the Strand, the notorious Holy well-street, a foul and
lilapidated locality that must be cleared,
•
sooner or later, to its foundation, as no less
moral than a material abomination. The
shifting out of the way of Temple Bar—the removal
of it from its present site, obstructively, right in the
centre of the main line of thoroughfares from the
city of London to the city of Westminster, and its
re-erection far mere suitable as an entrance gate to
the Temple on the south side of Fleet-street,
immediately opposite, the perspective of Chan-
cery-lane, is yet another of those negative im-
provements which by all reasonable Londoners
would bo very heartily welcomed and appreci-
ted. A positive improvement of a very conspicuous
character, which is also eagerly looked forward to, is
the reconstruction of the National Gallery, on what
Sir ROBERT PEEL called the finest site in Europe.
Comparatively few, we conjecture, are as yet aware
of the noble facade which is now all but completed
for the new Royal Academy building, at the back of
Burlington House, the facade in Burlington Gardens
,vith its array of standing and seated statues
of the great men of the various countries,
associated not with art alone but with
science also, with literature and with phi-
losophy. Though among these why MILTON
should be there and not SIIAKSPERE altogether passes
our comprehension ! New streets, new markets, new
churches, new theatres, new art galleries, such as the
Albert Hall, opposite the Hyde Park Testimonial to
,he PRINCE CONSORT—these and the reconstruction
)f various old buil:lingo, and the widening and gene-
ral improvement in numerous ways of many of the
old thoroughfares of our capital, are conspicuous
anong the changes for the better now passing rapidly
ver the metropolis. The Lon lon of the GEORGES,
ti effect, is already hardly recognizable.

WHILST the enemies of the Second Empire seem
to increase in number and strength, its old supporters
lie off rapidly and none arise to take their places.
Within a short time a great gap has been made in
the ranks of the EarnEnon's most devoted servants.
DE MORN; the friend, counsellor, statesman, and
diplomatist ; DJ OUSTIER, the well-meaning, but
unfortunate, Foreign Minister, whose dismissal
;s said to have killed him; TROPLONG,
the devoted President of the Senate; and
WALEWSKI, the accomplished statesman who pre-
sided over the Conference of 1856, have all passed

away. And now another great disaster has been
sustained. On Friday evening Marshal NIEL, French
Minister of War, died at the age of 67. No error is
more common than to exaggerate the importance of
such losses ; for one generation is generally as pro-
ductive of great minds as another, and rarely
indeed does a vacancy happen which no one can be
found to fill. But it is not too much to say that the
removal of the first soldier of France is a misfortune
which will sorely trouble NAPOLEON 111. Marshal
NIEL was a commander, a diplomatist, and an
administrator in one. He could win a battle and
perform the duties of an ambassador afterwards; he
could reorganise the army and support the details of
his measure in debate against the powerful orators
of the Corps L4gislatif. His services as a French
General date back through a period of twenty
years. In 1836, after spending some quiet
years as lieutenant and captain of Engi-
neers, he embarked for Algeria, where, like
many other officers of the Empire, he rose to
distinction. In 1849 he became General of Brigade,
and was selected as the head of the engineering
staff connected with the French force which was
sent to rescue Rome from the revolutionists. To him
fell the honour of presenting to Pio NONO the keys of
the recovered city. In 1853 he became General of
Division, and soon found employment in the cam-
paign against Russia, aiding the capture of Bomar-
sund, and afterwards proceeding to Sebastopol as the
EMPERon's aide-de-camp. Soon he was given the chief
engineering command in the East, and it was under
his direction that the siege operations were pushed
on with special vigour against the Malakoff, until
that famous stronghold fell. But it was in Italy
that the General's greatest triumphs were gained.
His was the Corps (the Fourth) which struck the
decisive blow at Magenta, and which at Solferino
saved the French and the Italians from what in all
probability would have been a great disaster. It was
owing to his skill that, whilst the Austrians were
making alarming progress on the Italian State, the
Fourth Corps was enabled to hold a superior force
at bay until the victory was safe. He was rewarded
on the field with a Marshal's baton.

It did not fall to the gallant officer's lot to'appear on a
field of battle as Marshal of France ; but his services
in time of peace have been scarcely less valuable, if
they were less congenial, than in war. For four
years he has governed the army as War Minister,
and though his doings in that capacity are by no
means wholly laudable, there can be no doubt of
their utility to the EMPEROR. The departed
Minister was animated by one leading idea—to keep up
the army, and this he most effectually did. Kingdoms
might arise and fall, but political changes mattered
little to the War Minister so long as the
French army was ready to fight. When
Ministries went out, he stayed in ; for his
work of keeping up the war material was
essential, or was thought so, under all circumstances.
Once only was he caught napping—when the war
of 1866 brought out in alarming relief the military
greatness of Prussia. But this surprise was in no
great space of time overcome. The Marshal would
have his own way, and after due time for elaboration,
a bill for the reorganisation of the army, by which
all the able-bodied youths of France were compelled
to serve either as regular soldiers, reserve, or
national guard, was submitted to the country. The
measure was passed—all Imperial measures were by
the old Parliament—in spite of the grave discontent
which it excited amongst a people who, though war-
like, had no wish to become a nation of soldiers. The
War Minister's abilities were never more urgently
needed than in the case of this great change. The Im-
perialists could not refuse to obey their master's wishes,
but even they were alarmed at the discontent excited
in the rural districts. But the Marshal was master
of the details ; he spoke with eloquence, earnestness,
and good sense ; and despite the vehement assaults
of the gifted men who sat on the Left, the majority
voted the bill. France then got an army of
some 1,300,000 soldiers ; and her land
forces are once more the first in the world.
Add to these military and administrative services the
not insignificant diplomatic achievements of the
deceased General, and the value of his multifarious
labours may be realised. It is far from impro-
b:ible that his departure will be, to some extent, a
gain to the French nation; for he was the most
uncompromising advocate of the necessity for a
great force; and it is likely that the abandonment
of the armed-peace system will be more easy now
that he is gone. But that his loss must be griev-
ously felt by the EMPEROR his life sufficiently
testifies.

A SOMEWHAT curious compensation case which
has just
,been decided at the Croydon Assizes seems
to afford some hope that juries are beginning to adopt
a more logical and more consistent policy in dealing
with railway companies. The practice of deciding
claims for damages rather through sympathy with
the sufferings caused by railway disasters than on
the legal merits of the case is so general that
an instance of a decision given in favour
of a company on a doubtful point of
evidence deserves notice. The plaintiff in this
case, an attorney, was proceeding from Colchester
on the Great Eastern Railway, when the motion of
the carriage became very unsteady. After travel-
ling a little way the unsteadiness developed into a
violent jolting, and finally the carriage ran off the
line and broke up, the plaintiff receiving severe
injuries on the ribs and back. A lengthy
retirement from business, and material loss,
was the ground on which a claim for
£1,500 was based. The question as to the liability
of the company turned on a conflict of evidence as
to the cause of the accident. The LORD CHIEF
BARON laid down the principle that damages ought
not to be awarded unless it could be proved that the
carriage ran off the line through neglect. This the
judge seemed to think had not been made out. The
evidence on one side pointed to the conclusion that
the cars had not been properly coupled. It was
admitted that carriages might get off the line from
this cause, and that the bumping over the sleepers
would produce the jolting which the plaintiff first
experienced. On the side of the defence, however,
it was held that the accident arose through the
breaking of a tire, and it was true if there was
nothing in the appearance of the iron to indicate a
flaw, the company could not be held responsible.
More than this, the defence endeavoured to ebew
that the tire could not be broken through the car-
riage going off the line ; it must, therefore, have
been fractured through a latent flaw. There. was no
doubt that the tire had been broken,and the Govern-
ment inspector thought that it did contain a defect
which was not at first observable. The doubt was
somewhat in favour of the company, and the jury
accordingly gave them the verdict.
This decision appears to have been in accordance
with the spirit of the judge's summing up; but it is
very different from the ordinary style of verdict in
these cases. The true cause of the accident was
involved in much doubt; it was not at all clear
whether the injury inflicted upon the passengers
was owing to the negligence of the company's servants;
and in such a case it was for the plaintiff to make
out a clear proof. This he failed to do. But juries
have not, as a rule, felt themselves restricted by the
version of law laid down by the judge, and rarely,
indeed, have they acted on the principle of
giving the doubt in favour of the defendants.
The fact is that railway companies have been
very harshlyftreated in this matter of compensation.
No doubt it is much more natural to sym-
pathise with injured individuals than with an
untangible body of shareholders ; but the law does
not provide for expressions of sympathy. There can
be no question that in many instances justice has been
flagrantly violated through pity for the sufferings of
individuals. The case in which £1,500 damages
were awarded to a lady who had been tripped
up by a hole in the carpet of a waiting-room
is one example. Some little time ago a railway
company's horse, feeding out of a nosebag, shook its
head about as horses do, and knocked down a man.
This ixtdiNiidual instituteda suit and obtained damages !

On what principle are such verdicts given? The Lori)
CHIEF
BARON lays down the rule that companies are
answerable only for accidents which are owing to
causes within their control. Is this theory to be
stretched so far that railway proprietors are to pay
for the consequences of a carpet rent, or for any
other flaw in their property which may have nothing
to do with the actual business of railway
travelling ? Or is the omnipotence of companies to be
so complete that they must keep their horses' noses
under control ? Such verdicts would never be given
against individual defendants. In case of a suit be-
tween one person and another, juries are well
aware that the compensation which they award
to the plaintiff may be an irreparable loss,
may be ruin to the defendant, and they
act with caution accordingly. But a company is
• supposed to be rich and able to bear losses, though
in most cases railway shareholders could tell a diffe-
rent tale. The penalty incurred in damages is dis-
tributed over an indefinite number of purses,
and nobody in particular feels it; whilst
the individual plaintiff has amends made for
injuries which may be very serious, though
beyond the control of the company. This mode
of reasoning is not unnatural; but it is not just, and
it is mischievous. In the first place, railway pro-

prietors must recoup themselves for these heavy
fines by increased charges on the public. Still
worse, this endless " milking" of shareholders has a
direct influence in inducing directors to disregard
those claims which are just but doubtful at law, thus
leading to litigation, and, in some cases, to a failure
of justice, on behalf of the really aggrieved
plaintiffs. It is in every respect to be desired that
railway companies should be answerable for the mis-
deeds of their servants. It is only by rigidly
enforcing compensation for all injuries caused by
neglect that the danger of travelling can be reduced
to a minimum. But extortion only defeats this just
aim. Verdicts against defendants in defiance of law lead
to verdicts against plaintiffs in opposition to justice.
Everyone must deplore the loss sustained by the
plaintiff in case of such an accident as this ; but
sympathy, we repeat, ought not to load to perversion
of the law. It is much to be wished, in the interests
of the public, that a consistent mode of dealing with
railway accidents be laid down, and that juries should
strictly abide by it.

,TY '544 T
-*/
1,10, UIEr,
611'Y 1111 t

HER MAJESTY.

,i

OSBORNE, August 17.

The Queen, accompanied by her Royal High-
ness Princess Beatrice, drove out yesterday after-
noon.

Her Majesty, accompanied by Princess Louise
walked in the grounds this morning.
The other members of the Royal Family also
went out.

LATEST INTELL LGENCE

(REUTER'S TELEGRAMS.)