The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-05 00:00:00

make a man condemn himself out of his own mouth.
We are going further in the same way, ourselves.
'he party may not be interrogated in the -name of
but be 1)?

tionar

a' by a policeman pretending to be a prisoner,
and duly handcuffed to keep up the cha-
racter. There are detectives ready for any work,
however dirty or sneaking. If a man, bit by
the green-eyed monster, conceives a jealousy of
his innocent wife, he can have her watched night
and day, and her most secret proceedings chronicled.
A husband may also lie watched—if he is in trade,
a record kept by the so-called protection societies of
all his acts. These things are defended ; but, as we
have already stated, they are opposed to every Bri-
tish pm ciple I.lld British feeling. We should deter-
mine to act in the con,titutional spirit exhibited by
the venerable judges of the land, and in every in-
stance that occurs repudiate the "spy system" in
whatever form it may be brought under our notice.
On Tuesday, a man named RICHARD RASALEIGH
was tried at Bodmin, the chief evidence against him
being that of a policeman, who got himself hand-
cuffed and placed in the same cell in order to worm
out his secret, or, as he himself declared, "to find
out if there was any other party connected with the
prisoner." Baron WATSON commented with just
indignation on this extraordinary proceeding,
wbere a man went under false pretences to
a prisoner. A magistrate should caution a pri-
soner, but a policeman led him, and might pos-
sibly be inclined to strengthen the unfavourable
points. Policemen have, generally speaking, a quick,
lively, and technical sense of guilt. They reverse the
sound axiom of the British law, and are disposed to
consider " every man guilty until his innocence is
established." They seek to communicate their own
suspicions to the jury, and too often look upon the
conviction of an innocent prisoner as a triumph of
their art.

It is true that all the fallacies that have been ut-
tered on this subject should be disregarded. Men
should not be unnecessarily tempted into crime, traps
should not be laid for their reception, nor should there
be a perpettol watch kept in order to ascertain whether
some error or wrongful act may be discovered. Let
Englishmen act in a becoming manner, and get rid
of the entire tribe, whose business it is to create mis-
chief and litigation. If they benefit by information
thus unfairly obtained, they may rest assured that
they themselves will be victimised in turn. Al-
though conscious of perfect innocence, they will
not like to have all their private habits ferretted out
and duly recorded to satisfy the curiosity of neigh-
bours. We may wonder at the gimlet:holes bored in
the doors and wainscoates of Continental Hotels ;
but can we say that the bearer has been fully with-
drawn from our own eyes—that we are not equally
guilty so long as we encourage the objectionable system

Ills Excellency the Mini4ter for the Netherlands
has returned to town, from visiting the Marquis and Mar-
chioness of Westminster at Eaton Hall, Cheshire.

His Excellency the Bavarian Minister has left
town, on a visit to Mr. H. T. Hope, at Decpdene, near
Dorking, Surrey.

The Duke of Cleveland leaves town early in the
ensuing week for his shooting quarters in the north. The
Duchess and Lady Augusta Poulett go to Brighton for a
few weeks befote repairing to Baby Castle for the autumn.
The Duke and Duchess of ManchcAer left town
vster lay for Hit,chingbroke, near Huntingdon, on a visit to
the Ear► and Countess of Sandwich.

The Duchcs:s of Buccleuch and Lord Chas. Scott
are staying in town. The Duke and Ladies Scott are at
Beaulieu, near Southampton..

The Duchess (Dowager) of Norfolk has arrived
on a visit to the Marquis and Marchioness of Westminster,
at Eaton Hall, near Chester.

The Marquis of Hartington, M.P., left town on
Toes 'ay to join the Duke of Devonshire at Milnethorp e,
Lancasidt e.

FATAL RAILWAY ACCIDENT.—An inquest was
held on Monday evening, by Mr. Rutter, coucty coroner,•
on the body of John Dooley, aged -21, a dyer, living in
Rowhill-,quare, wild was killed whilst attmoting to
cross the railway at the Ordsal-lane Station, Manchester,
on Sunday morning. The principal witness was John
Hart, one of the gatekeepers at the adsall-lane Station,
avii?re there is a level crossing. He stated that he was on
night clnty on Saturday night, and that about seven minutes
alter one o'clock on Sunday morning lie saw the de-
ceased running at a rapid pace down Ordsal lane towards
the crossing. At that moment witness saw the mail train,
which leaves the Victoria Station at one o'clock, approach-
ing, and he waved his lamp towards the deceased, at the
SHIT time shouting to him to stop. He continued, how-
ever, to run forwards, and as the train had arrived almost
close to the station, witness held out his artns to keep him '
back. Upon this he left the footpath upon which he had
been running, and proceeded on the roadway towards the
rails, from which he was distant then only a few yards.
Al er hesitating for a moment he attempled to cross the
line, but the buffers of Ihe train struck him, throwing him,
forward, and the fire-box coming in contact with his body,
it was badly mutilated. Tne engine-driver and the fire-
man, when close to the station, saw the deceased on the
rails, and did their best to save his life by sounc:,'isig the
danger whistle and stopping the train, but be appeared to
im
mediately
shut no notice, and although the steam was
shut off and the brakes applied, the train could not be
stopped until it had passed over him and partly entered
the station. When taken up the deceased's body smelt
strongly of beer, and it was ascertained from his wife that
he came home intoxicated at 11 o'clock on Saturday night,
that be afterwards drank more beer, and that about one
o'clock on Sunday morning he left Lis house with the
intention of going to his sister-in-law, in Regent-road, to
invite her to dinner on that day. It was agile on his way
to her house that the accident occurred by which he lust his
life. During the inquiry, it was stated that during the day
four gatektepers are stationed at the Ordsdnl-lane crossing,
and tAal at night. The gates un each side leading from the
cart road are nasally left open, but they are not used by foot
passengers. On this occasion the deceased left the footpath,
and rpti thr,aigh the large gaie used for carts, which was
then open. The gateman ou the opposite side witnessed the
accident, and corroborated the evidence of Hart as to his
having ti-ed every effirt to prevent the deceased front en ss-
ing. The jury returned a verdict of accidental death, but
animadverted very strongly upon the dangerous condition
of this crossing, and requested the coroner to lay the matter
before the railway department of the Board of Trade, with
a suggestion that a new road, to supersede the level crossing
over the line, should be carried underneath the railway.—
Manchester Guardian.

" GOUGn V. LEES."—Having recently mentioned
the current report, which had appeared in various news-
papers, that in the recent trial of Gough v. Lees the counsel
for the latter had consented to the verdict without the
authority of his client, we have been requested, in justice to
the barrister referred to, to publish the fuilowing letter ad-
dressed by him to a resident of Manchester, in answer to
one of inquiry as to t hefact :—" Midland Circuit, Derby, 27tb
July. Sir,—l had heard, but not seen in print, that Dr. Lees
bee stated that the course taken by me on his behalf oa the
trial of the action by Mr. Gough, was without hip authority.
Inasmuch as be was in court, sitting under me, and I took
the course I did after repeated communications with him,
and ultimately with his assent (without which I could have
done nothing.), I did not regard the reports I heard of
what others had read in newspapers, which I did not see,
as of any moment. I have had no communication from
Dr. Lees, or any person en his behalf, since the trial. Tae
imputation that I acted otherwise than out of a simple
regard to the infereOs of Dr. Lees, or with any uneer-
standing with Mr. braes inconsistent with my duty to my
client, is one which I do not think it worth my while to
combat, and which I am sure would not be attempted to
be put upon me in the presence of any to whom I am
known. The mete fact is, that, in common with two emi-
nent members of the bar, who were associated with tne lie
Dr. Lee's defence, I was of opinion that to persist in
endeavouring to justify, with the evidence we bad, the
libels complained tf, would have resulted in a verdict for
an amount of damages which would have been absolutely
dis-strous to Dr. Lees ; and I urged upon him most
strongly the propriety of withdrawing from the case in the
manner adopted—unless, indeed, the persons who seemed
to he aiding him in the matter were prepared to pay for
him any amount of damages, with costs, that the jury
might award. Otherwise, if Dr. Lees were not in a condition
to protect himself, by payment out of his own resources, front
the consequence of au adverse verdict, his only resort would
be the Insolvent Court, where he would infallibly incur a
lengthened term of imprisonment before he could be dis-
charged from a debt so incurred. These considerations were
fll.stshdouutldy have t had a
tdakn
es
strongly urged by me upon Dr. Lees, and ellitnately his
consent was given that I should withdraw from the further
defence of the case. If I had failed in inducing Dr. Lees
advice,Lnsylould not, by overcredu-
writing In very
inexperience
y be betrayed into his
of the
probable
:fel could,
lt s n choiceeislsh conformui
chances thhoi himself
ps
ownetruhloffacettaeomdct 3rar'is
aeycl,bi I ealnttt andlaw,. b
givenyou substantially
belly
great haste ;
pecuniary ruin.
sir, very obediently,
the inftrmatiett you require.—l am,i
P.S.—Understand that I had and
KENNETH MACAULAY.
Gough was or was not liable
have no opirlon whether Mr. Go
but abinelleaveyolulmiavaye perceive,
but the ground of rn
to the charges made by Dr. Lees;with
an
_y
er. d
advice ti De. Lees was, that he was not provided. i _
d wick, Manchester."—
Manchester P. Williams, 1, Selby-street, Ar ef his defence. Mr.
thir wit ciliate proti for the purprse.
Manchester Guardian.

THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE AND THE YORK CON-
VOCATION.—A. valued corresp,mdeut recalls ear attention
to the letter of the Rev. Writ. D.,dd, of Lindisfarne, to the
(o3pied in the Record of July 214), in which Mr.
I) dd attempts to controvert the statements of the Bishop
t.f Ca.] s'e with regard to the Yolk Convocation. It is
justly observed that the case which Mr. Dodd makes out is
'hat of the toernhe;s of Convocation expressing tl eir confi-
dence in Convocation, a thing which in itself proves jus'
no:hing. Again, Mt.. Dodd says that four out of five cf the
reprisent wives of the clerey in Carlisle diocese lad signed
the petition to the Queen, but an examination of the list
shows that (deducting the dignitaries) there are not five re-
presentatives in that diocese.

The Dean of Christchurch and Dr. Acland arrived
at Osborne on Saturday on a visit to the Queen.
THE OPEN-AIR SERVICES IN ST. PACE'S, BEE-
MONDsET.—These well-attended and highly-appreciated
services were brought to a close on Sunday evening, whin
th' ibentnbent, the Rev. W. D. Long, preached tor the
•;r, veilth time. His subject wa4 the " Cities of Refuge."
(Na :.. xxxv. H.) The total numberi of tracts distributed has
been 4,500.