The Sun.
London, England, 1867-02-11 00:00:00

VEWSPATER
TAik
•t.,
r=.< ,_:.
Legality of Demonatrationi; /41T4
Ps,
The legality of meetings hel > fo
pose of discussion, but to intimidate *he fithibU
tion of numbers, is a question upon which much may
be said, and it will be worth investigation hereafter.
At present we desire to direct attention to another
question of more immediate interest connected with
these displays of physical force. The inhabitants
of the streets obstructed by these processions, and,
indeed, all who have occasion to pass through them
for business or pleasure, justly complain of the
complete stoppage of traffic for carriages and foot
passengers by persons who come from distant parts
of the metropolis for no other purpose than to ea
hibit nitrnbers, and they ask if there can be a legal
right to do diis. Clearly, iF a bloekade of th
streets by the Ref,uln League is lawful, it is equally
lawful for any other society at its own pleasure
and if en one day, every day. If Mr. Potter may
legally march his assembled trades' unions
through Regent-street, so might every indivi-
dual union, every friendly society, and
even a perpetually perambulating procession by.
way of advertisement—say the subscribers to a
penny paper, each holding a copy in his band. Let
us see if such a right exists. A street is a highway,
over which all her Majesty's subjects have an equal.
right of free passage. To obstruct this highway in the
smallest degree is not only an indictable offence at
common law, but is subject to a penalty under the
Highways Act, to be summarily imposed by jus-
tices. It has been held that even the erection of a
telegraph pole by the roadside is an indictable ob-
struction, although in fact it stands in nobody's
way, the right of the subject being to traverse
every part of the highway if he pleases. A high-
way may be either a footway, a bridleway, or a
carriage way, or all of them, user being the evidence
of the nature of the way. In the streets a a town
there is commonly both a footway and a carriage
way; whatever impedes the free pftssa.ge of either
for the purposes to which it is dedicatel is
an obstruction. A carriage has no right to
go upon the footway to the impediment
of foot passengers ; a foot passsenger has
has no right to traverse a carriage way in such a
manner as to obstruct the free passage of horses and
carriages. Such is the law of highways in general.
True, the metropolis is under two special laws, which
to some extent regulate its streets—viz., the Metro-
police Police Act, and the Metropolitan Local Ma-
nagement Act. But these acts do not repeal or
supersede the general law of highways, their enact-
ments are supplementary. They make special pro-
vision for certain kinds of obstructions likely to
occur in the streets of a great city ; but those specia
enactments do not affect or restrict the general law
of highways, save where they are inconsistent with
it. Thus, in the case under consideration, the high.
ways law punishing obstructions in general is not
restricted or repealed because the local laws have
not provided for this among the obstructions against
which they legislate. There can be no question
that the
.demonstrations past and threatened are
obstructions of the highway, and of the carriage=
way and footway, both. The procession certainly
has no right to march upon the carriage-way so as
to obstruct carriages and horses ; it is questionable
whether it can legally take possession of the foot-
way to the ousting of other walkers. But to this it
may be answered that, although the whole body is
an obstruction, each individual member of it has a
lawful right to traverse the streets, and that right
is not lost because a multitude of other persons
chance to exercise their similar right at the same
time and place. The information must be against
each of them individually, and the answer would
be, "I, the defendant, caused no obstruction to any
carriage by walking on the roadway." Probably it
might be replied to this that, being a foot passenger,
you had no right to walk along the carriage road ;
you may cross it, but you may not use it as your
footway. We merely suggest this ; it is no part of
the present argu neat. Bat the obstruction caused
by these demonstrations is not the consequence of
the accidental exercise of a common right by many
persons at thesame moment ; itis a deliberate design.
They meet in concert, by previous arrangement, for
the purpose of going together to do the combined
act that causes the obstruction. We cannot doubt
that the offence is thus complete ; that each is re-
sponsible for the act of all, done in pursuance of
the common design, and that each would be liable
to the penalty for obstructing the highway, and to
indictment. Further, we have no doubt than any
three or more of them might be indicted for a con-
spiracy to obstruct a highway. The object in the
present case is not punishment, but to ascertain-
whether the law allows demonstrations to impede,
at their own pleasure the traffic of the streets of the
metropolis, to the serious injury; of their inhabit-
ants, and to the inconvenience of the public. If it
may be lawfully done by the Reform League it may
be done, and we may be sure will be done, by other
associations, social as well as political. We, there-
fore, recommend the annoyed inhabitants to try the
question by laying an information against two or
three members of the committee before one of the
police magistrates, and thence a case may be taken
upon it to the Queen's Bench. It would be de-
sirable for all parties, and for the peace and safety
of the metropolis, that the question of the right of
processions to obstruct the public thoroughfares
should be determined by authority, and that we
have suggested is a simple and inexpensive means
of bringing it to an issue, and for raising which not
even the Reform League itself could find cause for
agitation or complaint.—Lau' Times.

PRESENTS AT PARKINS AND GOTTO'S.--Photo-
graphic Albums, a choice of 3,000; despatch-boxes, writ-
ing-cases, dressing-cases, travelling-bags, envelope-cases,
blotting-books, ink-stands, desks, book-slides, work-boxes,
tea-caddies, hand-bags, and reticules, card-cases, purses,
stationery-cabinets, scent-bottles, albums for postage
stamps, crests, &c. ; cigar-cases, card-baskets, pocket-
books, electro-gilt and elegantly-mounted articles. Bibles,
Prayer-books, and Church Services, in every type. Par-
kins and Gotto, 25, Oxford-street. The public supplied
at wholesale prices from the largest stock in London.
THE GUARDS.—We understand that it is in con-.
templation by the War-office authorities to make some alte-
ration in the uniform of the regiments of 'oot Guards, with
the view to assimilating it more closely to that of Lino
regiments. Such a measure cannot be otherwise than dis-
tasteful to all military mon, and the trifling saving that
would be effected by the change would be a poor compen-
sation for the disappointment of the flower of the British
army, and the discontent that it would occasion among the
officers and men.—United Service Gazette.

METEOROLOGICAL OFFICE.—This office has now
been placed under the direction of a committee of
the Royal Society. Tho new director who has been ap-
pointed is Mr. Robert H. Scott, for several years hou. sec-
re of the Royal Geological Society of Ireland. Mr
Scott is a younger brother of the present Head Master of
Westminster, and was educated at Rugby and Trinity
College, Dublin, where ho obtained in 1855 the first gold
medal in Experimental Physics, with the honour of a
special notice in the Calendar. Ile afterwards studi)d
chemistry and physics on the Continent under Liebig,
Rose, Magnus, and Dove, at whose request ho prepared and
published, in 1862, a translation of the second edition of
his "Law of Storms," the cost of which was in part borne
by the Board of Admiralty. Mr. Scott is also author of a
"Manual of Vo'metrical Analysis," and of various minor
papers upon scientific subjects.

EXTRAORDINARY CHARGE.—At the Shire-hall,
Nottingham, on Saturday, the Rev. Charles Forth,
of Buford, near that town, was charged with the follow-
ing extraordinary offence. A suit is pending between Mr.
Forth and his wife in the Divorce Court, and a fortnight
since one of his servants went to London to give some evi-
dence as to the matter. When she came back the rev.
defendant forced her into a chair and asked her what her
evidence was. She made no reply, whereupon be sai3,
" I suppose yon have been to say that you saw me strike
your mistress." The girl replied, " Yes," and the defen-
dant then rushed away to get a piece of paper, on which he
wrote words in effect affirmed that the statement she
had made was false. He then seized the girl and forced a
pen into her hand, at the same time compelling her to
sign the document, the young woman being too frightened
to refuse. The magistrates treated the matter as a common
assault, and fined Mr. Forth 4:1;.
LADVERTISEMENT.]-11ollowny's Pills. For all Ages.—
Such testimony to the merits of this medicine as that con-
tained in a letter lately received from a lady by Professor
found very great benefit
Holloway should.be impressed on all aged sufferers. "What
perincipally to apply to you was that my mother,
inducedwo is
gfhytYouyreraersmoedf remedies." The value of such dis-
ifnrotemretsitleeol me
elesre
oievidence is enhanced by the consideration that
medicine usually fails to give any relief at such an ad-
vanced period of life. • Holloway's Pills are both safe and
certain in their action on the stomach, liver, kidneys,
bowels, and skin. They act without violence and do,not
irritate the nerves or shock the system.