The Sun.
London, England, 1867-04-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY rEVE.XING, APRIL 25, 1867,

. ,
This arrangement will enable the troops to reach
India as early in the season as under the old ar-
rangement of despatching them from England, by
sailing vessels, in the months of June and July.
Two of the transports will be employed in the con-
veyance of the troops from Suez to the Indian ports,
and there will be engaged in conveying them from
the English porta to Alexandria. _ _

Staff-Surg. Morphew, of the 4th battalion, has
been appointed acting principal medical officer to the
troops at Colchester, until the arrival of Surg. Far-
long, 6th Dragoons. Three officers, two sergeants,
two corporals, and six rank and file of the 4th and
Bth depot battalions are under similar orders to pro-
ceed to the Hythe School of Musketry on the Ist of
May. Staff-Assist.-Surg. Jay has been posted to
the 4th depot battalion for temporary duty. Capt.
Anatruther and Lieut. Jones, 94th Regiment, are
under orders to join the depot of their regiment ;
Capt. Godwin, Ensigns Rivett and Paterson, Ist
battalion 16th Foot, and one drummer, 65 rank and
file, one sergeant, and three privates, 100th Regi-
ment, are held in readiness to join the service com-
panies of the corps in Canada.
The following appointments have been made at
the Admiralty : —Commander E. C. Symonds, to
the Castor (drill ship of the Royal Naval Reserve),
vice Jackson, whose period of service has expired ;
Lieutenant Frederick C. W. Liardet, to the Im-
placable ; Lieut. Charles J. H. Bliss, to the Royal
Adelaide ; Lieut. Robert Ross, additional, to the
Cumberland, for service in reserve ; Lieut. Arthur
Williams, to the Indus ; and Clarence E. H. Mes-
sum, nominated a naval cadet.

Sir W. Mansfield on the Sti ength of the
English Army in India.

[F7 om the Homeward 3fail,j

The following is a full report of the remarks
made by H. E. Sir William Mansfield in the
Governor-General's Council after the delivery of
Mr. Massey's findncial statement on March 9 :

" Sir W. Mansfield said that whilst he maintained
that the Sanatory Commission had overstated their
case, they had been the means of awakening the
public conscience to a great duty, for the perform-
ance of which the military and medical officers in
this country had long been asking, but which had
been set aside on financial considerations. He held
in his hand a return which had been prepared in
accordance with an idea suggested to him by the
report of the Sanatory Commission ; it was a return
showing the health of every station in the army
during each quarter. There was nothing that gave
a commander-in-chief more trouble than being met
by statements as to the unhealthiness of this or that
station, which it was, of course, absolutely neces-
sary that somebody should remain to garrison.
Whereas, if reports came up from the commanders
of regiments, from medical officers, and from
generals in command of divisions, representing the
necessity of removing a regiment from a particular
station, it put the commander-in-chief and the
Government to great embarrassment and difficulty.
Peshawur had had the credit of being one of the
worst stations in India. His Excellency had
ventured to contest that opinion, though at the same
time he had great authorities against him. When
he was serving in that station he was himself in the
field continually from October to July. There were
troops always in the field throughout the cold
weather, the hot months which followed, and a
portion of the rains. In a country verging on the
tropics, whose climate was so subject to malarious
influences, no men could stand with such exposure.
Much of the sickness declared inherent in Peshawur
might therefore be properly ascribed to constant
active service in the field, to which troops serving
in that station were more liable than any others.
He had the satisfaction to say that during the
past year, 1866, Peshawur, instead of standing low
in the list of stations placed according to health,
stood well both as regarded casualties and men in
hospital. It stood nineteenth on the list out of fifty
stations, and below it were such stations as Chin-
surab, Shajihanpore, Roy Bareilly, and so on. He
did not wish to ascribe more importance to that
circumstance than it deserved ; but he thought it
showed that Peshawur, besi les having the natural
influences of climate to contend against, was also a
station where the troops were necessarily liable to
more active service and exposure than in any other
station. It also showed how much might be done
by attention to sanatory measures, and where the
power to amend sanatory conditions necessarily
ceased. It further proved that there might be an
explanation of the bare facts, as shown by returns
of sickness and deaths, which constantly escaped
the notice of the public, and even of scientific au-
thorities, unless attention was speedily directed to it.
During the last three years an order had been in
force, declaring that the area allotted to each soldier
in barracks should be 90 feet ; that was in accord-
ance with a recommendation of the Sanatory Com-
mission. Although no such order had been previously
in existence, still, in a great majority of barracks,
there was not a much less area given to each soldier,
at all events during the hot season. It was a fact,
as shown by medical officers, that if we would insure
the health of our troops, we must look not only to
avoiding malarious influences, but also to over-
crowding.:ine,) :no
except
axo,
nnenwedoephwtioec
abohr
tdemehet
nnhra
deaesi
vntrsedeoprri eenmorigtis
issued
cupheTeddhefbor officersye
aeewnv auesrlcould
benevolentn ohnyno one
edG
eeopovGanero Thisdrt
Government,
fromtruleemironennm,
con-
duced to health as that to which he had referred.
He recollected when Fort William was a Golgotha,
when the amount of sickness in that fort caused it
to be dreaded by the troops worse than Sierra Leone.
Now there was hardly a station which exceeded it in
d
os af sanatorya
tcaot
odni ta o nc.
onser
Muchvan
et
yh ea
ns admd
re a
in
a mightge d
ebf ee
as
taei
the malarious influences of the climate, and the result
justified the expenditure which had been incurred in
giving them effect by the Government of India.
He had observed it stated in England that opinions
had been ascribed to him as if he had recommended
a large diminution of the European force in this
ceoilutnhtar.
tynnlat would berlytwo
y in the
years ago, recollection
o,atthai.n of the un-
vitation ofco the
Government,he considered the question of reduction,
and with due regard to what he believed compatible
with security he did prepare a scheme for the reduc-
tion of the number of the rank and file of British
troops, and to this perhaps allusion had been made.
That reduction had been commenced upon last year,
and had not yet been entirely completed, but he be-
lieved it would be so in the course of this year.
Since 1865 he had made no farther proposals for
the reduction of British troops, but had only, in the
execution of his office, carried out the final resolu-
tion of Government. He had made no recommenda-
tion beyond the conclusions stated by him in 1865
with respect to the three arms, nor was he prepared
to make any; on the contrary, he held very decided
opinions that we could not safely make any further
reduction in the British forces ; in short, we had
reached the proper limits of the establishment. We
beard a great deal at home of what was called the
large European army in India. It was believed by
many people in England, and perhaps by some in
this, country, that we had a European force not
much less than that which was here at the close of
the mutinies. The facts were as follows:—In April,
1861, there were 82,000 men in this country; at the
present date the actual number of British troops was
under 61,000. If we compared that number with
the army that existed at other dates, we found that,
in the year 1856-57, the year before the mutiny
broke out, the strength amounted to 45,000 men ;
so that the difference between the present year and
the year before the mutiny was only 16,000 men.
He ventured to think that, after the experience of
1856-57, and the great lesson of native character
which they had learned in those days, the present
strength of British troops was not too much to ask to
insure the security of our empire in India. He made
these remarks because he heard complaints adopted
in England, and in some instances by men of autho-
rity, to the effect that we had greatly too large an
European force for this country; that, because there
had been an improvement in firearms, that was a
reason for the reduction of the force ; and, again,
because there were difficulties at home in the way
of recruiting that was a reason for reduction ; and
lastly, that because, according to the Sanatory Com-
missioners' report, there were great sickness and

mortality amongst the British troops in India, which
he ventured to say from the facts he had laidbefore
the council was not actually the case, and was not
attributable solely to the climate, that that was a
reason why we should not expose British troops to
such danger in this country. But in his opinion all
those reasons were absolutely illusory. With regard
to improved arms, every one knew that the arms at
present in the hands of the British troops in India
were far superior to any that they would have to
contend against, and he could, therefore, see no ab-
solute necessity for giving breech-loading arms to
the troops in India under present circumstances,
except the imperial and very sufficient reason that
uniformity of arms should prevail among all the
troops composing the British army, wherever they
might be stationed. Again, with regard to the
difficulty of recruiting, we had nothing to do with
that ; we must ask for the necessary garrison, as
the great interests of India, and therefore of Eng-
land, could not be imperilled. We surely should
not forget the lessons of_ the past, and the dangers
and loss we had incurred by inattention to such prin-
ciples in the occupation of a vast country possessing
an almost countless population. It took us two
years to overcome the mutinies, and it was owing to
the mercies of Providence that the struggle did not
extend to ten years instead of two. We did not
impose on the population of the United Kingdom a
greater drain for troops than it could afford, and
that was but a very small demand with regard to the
enormous importance of the interests confided to the
British garrison in India. In short, we could not
afford to tamper with that garrison, the mainte-
nance of which was an Imperial and by no means
a mere local necessity. To do so would be as if the
Government were to remove all bullion reserve,
and trust to the paper currency by itself ; that was
the argument with which we should meet all those
who asked us to reduce the number of British troops
in India below that figure which experience and ob-
servation had proved to be indispensably necessary."

LAW INTELLIGENCE-April 24.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
COOPER V. WELLS.

This was an action by Miss Cooper, a governess,
against a surgeon, in practice at the West-end, and
having a residence at Hampstead, to recover damages
for wrongful dismissal from his service, and also to
recover possession of certain anonymous letters
which had been addressed to her. The trial, which
extended over two days, took place at Guild-
hall before the Lord Chief Baron, when the jury
found a verdict for the plaintiff, with £5 damages
for the wrongful dismissal, and also a verdict for the
plaintiff in the count in trover, with £lOO damages,
to be reduced to is. in the event of the letters being
returned.

Mr. Serjeant O'Brien, on the part of the defend-
ant, now moved for a new trial on the ground that
the verdict was against the evidence, and also, by
leave reserved, to enter a verdict for the defendant
on the second count, on the ground that the plaintiff
had no property in the anonymous letters. The
principal question was whether the plaintiff was the
writer of those letters. It was a singular case, sur-
rounded by that kind of interest which generally
belonged to an undiscovered mystery, but he con-
fidently believed that when the letters were closely
examined they would themselves yield up the secret
and point to the real author. He ventured to say
that the evidence in the case fell little short of de-
monstration that the plaintiff herself was the writer.
The Lord Chief Baron—Yon must first deal with
the preliminary question whether, even supposing
the letters were in the plaintiff's handwriting, they
are not still her property, so as to entitle her to a
verdict on the trover count.

Mr. Serjeant O'Brien said that Miss Cooper en-
tered the service of the defendant as governess to
his children in February or March, 1865, and ap-
peared to have conducted herself with great pro-
priety until she left. She and the servants and
two children lived in a cottage at Hampstead,
while Mr. and Mrs. Wells resided at their
house in town. In December, 1865, two or
three anonymous letters, addressed to Miss Cooper,
were delivered at the house, and she handed
them to Mrs. Wells. Singularly enough the writer
complained of Miss Cooper's conduct to the children,
and said that when she went out she met and walked
with gentlemen, and neglected the children. Mrs.
no attention to anonymous
pay
yd
not herself, and took the first
letters,lV ellstoalddd
negr tosh e
letter shown to her and threw it in the fire. She
also told her if any more letters in the same hand-
writing came, she was not to open them but to hand
them to her. In March, 1866, another letter of the
most fearful obscenity came. It was addressed to
Miss Cooper, and contained the foulest imputations
both upon her and Mrs. C. Wells. Miss Cooper
handed it unopened to Mrs. Wells, who kept it for
the purpose of discovering the writer. A second,
a third, and a fourth of the same character were re-
ceived, and Mrs. Wells made it known among the
servants, who consisted of a nurse, a general servant,
a gardener, and a charwoman, that she would give
£lO reward for the discovery of the author. She
also dismissed one of the servants. This, however,
did not stop the letters. One addressed to Miss
Cooper referred to an incident which occurred in
the house two days before it was written. Oue of
the servants had the toothache, and Mrs. Wells gave
her some chloroform, and the writer said that Mrs.
Wells bad nearly slept a servant to death. This
affair could only have been known to the servants
in the house and this young woman, or to some one
to whom it might have been communicated. In
another letter it was said that Miss Cooper would
have to take charge of all the children, and that
while she would have all the trouble the nurse would
have all the credit. In November, Mrs. Wells sus-
pected her of being the writer, and ultimately it was
arranged that she should leave at Christmas, the
state of her health being one of the reasons given
by Mrs. Wells. A day or two afterwards another
letter was received, in which this circumstance was
mentioned.

The Lord Chief Baron—Your case is that no one
knew of the circumstance except Miss Cooper and
Mrs. Wells.

Mr. Serjeant O'Brien—Precisely. The letter was
as follows :—" Now, Miss Cooper, you see that
what I told you has come to pass. Mrs. Wells is
going to send you away, and pretends it is your
health. She knows very well it is nothing of the
kind. Nurse knows all about it, and glad enough
is she—so she said herself." The nurse had lived
with the family eleven or twelve years, and was
living with them still. "She hates you ; she is
always finding some fault with yuu to Mrs. Wells,
and Mrs. Wells believes her far before she does
you. She is a dreadful lying wretch is that nurse.
She will be found out listening at the doors before
long. She is jealous of you, that is the whole of it.
She does not like the children thinking so much of
you. Do not seek to stop after Christmas." The
day before this was written Mrs. Wells had a con-
versation with her, when it was arranged she should
leave at Christmas. " They will only laugh at you
when they see the last of you. She is a nasty in-
terfering creature, nurse—she must have a word to
say upon everything. Why I wrote these letters
to you was for you to give Mrs. Wells warning, in-
stead of her sending you away. Emma (the nurse)
listened at the door, and knew all about it before."
Afterwards Mrs. Wells accidentally found some of
Miss Cooper's undoubted handwriting, and on it
being shown to Mr. Netherclift, the expert, he pro-
nounced it to be Cie same hand as bad written the
anonymous letters. Without communicating her
suspicions, Mrs. Wells told Miss Cooper that she
wished to see her father on the subject of the letters,
upon which she seemed greatlay dviesrtyrespsaesds,ionaantde
reason,begged htehratnoht
etromgoothtoerhwerashome, alleging, as a
woman. She, however, gave Mrs. Wells her
father's address it the Borough. This was on the
evening of the 23th November, between five and
six, and afterwards Mrs. Wells went to• town.
About nine the sme evening, when Mrs. Wells
returned, she win shown a letter addressed to
herself, which lid been found in the letter-
box attached to :he gate of the house. It was
anonymous, and in the same handwriting as the
other letters, anc, moreover, was enclosed in an
envelope which corresponded exactly with a packet

of envelopes found in the desk belonging to one of
Mrs. Wells's children, to which Miss Cooper could
have access. The writer of it appeared to have
known what had taken place that very day.
Mr. Baron Bramwell—Had it any postmark ?
Mr. Serjeant O'Brien—lt bore no postmark. The
letter was in these terms :—" My intention when I
first wrote these letters was to try and get your
nurse out of her place ; but as I could not do that
I tried to annoy you by setting you against Miss
Cooper, and sending her away to your inconvenience;
but finding I could not do that I have tried to an-
noy you ; but I now solemnly take my oath that
Miss Cooper has had the last letter she will ever
have, and you shall never have another. May God
forgive me for ever writing such letters. Once I
should have liked to have seen nurse sent away, for
I hated her. The writer of these letters has lived
with you. You know her as well as you do nurse.
I know you and nurse quite well ; but I know very
little of Miss Cooper. Once more I take my oath
that this is the last letter you shall ever have. I
did not live as long with you as nurse did, but I know
you as well. I confess all I have said is untrue. I
am a liar, or I never could have said what I have.
I never, by all that is sacred, will write to you again
—either of you."
Mr. Baron Bramwell—That rather seems to be
the letter of a person living in the family, because
instead of using " the" before nurse, the writer
speaks familiarly of " nurse." The learned Baron
also remarked that he did not see how these letters
could be worth £lOO to the plaintiff unless she was
the author of them.

Mr. Serjeant O'Brien—That is exactly the way
in which I put the matter.

The Lord Chief Baron—lt is impossible not to
feel that the jury might have been influenced by
the consideration that if they found this young per-
son to be the author of these letters it would be
her immediate and lasting destruction in this
world. They found that there was not sufficient
evidence to justify them in saying that she was the
writer—not that she was not the writer.

Mr. Sergeant O'Brien was insensible to the con-
siderations which might govern the jury in that
respect, because he was satisfied that throughout
greater kindness could not have been shown by any
human being to Miss Cooper than had been shown
by Mr. and Mrs. Wells.
The Lord Chief Baron—The folly of Mr. and
Mrs. Wells was that, having reason to suspect Miss
Cooper as the writer, they did not give her back
her letters and send her about her business.

Mr. Sergeant O'Brien,submitted that they would
have acted wrongly if they , had done any such
thing, as the letters contained foul libels upon mem-
bers of the family. Although Miss Cooper left at
the end of November Mr. Wells paid her salary up
to the Ist of February following, but she claimed
the cost of board and lodging during that time.
The learned counsel then referred to the evidence of
the experts, and said that although the suggestion
was that the letters might have been written by one
of the domestic servants, there was no false spelling,
and that a scientific word, which an illiterate person
might he supposed not to be able to spell, had been
correctly spelt.
The Lord Chief Baron said he should have been
glad at the trial, and would be so still, if a stet
processus could be entered.
Mr. Sergeant O'Brien—l should have no ob-
jection to a stet processus as regards the whole
proceedings.
The Lord Chief Baron—But before a suggestion
for that purpose can be made you must show you
are entitled to a rule.

Ultimately the Court granted a rule nisi to enter
a verdict for the defendant on the count for trover.

MIDDLESEX ,SESSIONS.-April 24.

(Before Mr. Bodkin, Assistant-Judge.)

A man, who refused to give his name, was in-
dicted f, ,r stealing a watch, value £7, the property
of Charles Cook, from the person of Charles Bur-
chett Cook.

The prosecutor is a watchmker and jeweller, car-
rying on business at No. 72, Oxford-street, and on
the 29th of March, at about eight o'clock, the pri-
soner went into the shop, and after looking at some
watches, snatched one from the hands of Mr. C. B.
Cook, and ran off with it. He was overtaken, and
brought back, when he threw the watch to the back
of the shop, from which it sustained considerable
injury.

The jury found the prisoner guilty.
The Assistant Judge sentenced him to be im-
prisoned and kept to hard labour for nine months.
William Smith, 19, was indicted for stealing a
purse, 35., and other moneys, the property of Maria
Oakley, from her person.
The prosecutrix said she lived at 21, Douglas-
road North, and about three o'clock in the afternoon
of the 6th inst. she was in the Aboyne-road when
the prisoner approached her, seized her by her
wrists, wrenched her purse out of her hand and ran
away with it.

The jury found the prisoner guilty, and a former
conviction was proved against him. It was also
stated that he was a trainer of young thieves.
The Assistant Judge sentenced him to be kept in
penal servitude for five years.
Thomas Goddard, 23, was indicted for stealing a
watch and chain, the property of George Patrick,
from his person.

The prosecutor is an assistant to a draper in
Whitechapel, and on the night of the 9th inst., be-
tween 10 and 11 o'clock, he was proceeding honae
down the Whitechapel-road. As he was passing the
end of a court the prisoner rushed out, snatched his
watch and chain, and ran away with them. He was
followed, however, and given into custody.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty.
The Assistant Judge sentenced the prisoner, who
had been previously convicted, to be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for two years.
(Before Mr. Payne.)
Charles Wilson, 27, a stonemason, was indicted
for a robbery of jewellery, consisting of watch
chains, pins, rings, &c., to the value of about £4O,
the property of James Silvester, from the person of
Sophia Cleave.

Mr. Daly prosecuted ; the prisoner was not de-
fended by counsel.

Sophia Cleave, living at 58, London-street, said,
On March 6 she had some jewellery to sell, and the
prisoner, whom she knew, offered to dispose of some
of it for her. After speaking to her for a minute,
he snatched the basket from her arm, and made off
with it. This took place at her house, and she did
not see the prisoner again until April 1, when he
was taken into custody.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the po-
lice, who described him as one of the most successful
and expert carriage thieves at the West-end, proved
former convictions (one of penal servitude) against
him.

Mr. Payne sentenced him to be kept in penal ser-
vitude for seven years.
George Hales, 24, a coalporter, was indicted for
stealing the sum of 165., the property of J. Keek,
from his dwelling house.
Mr. Harris prosecuted, and Mr. Wood defended
the prisoner.
The prosecutor keeps the Oxford and Cambridge
public house, Chalk Farm-road, and on April 4 the
barmaid, Mary Ann Casselden, found the prisoner
making off over the counter with the silver in his
hand. She seized him, and, in spite of some savage
blows and kicks he dealt her, detained him until he
had been secured.

The prisoner pleaded guilty.
Mr. Payne sentenced him to be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for 12 calendar months, and
ordered the young woman to receive a sovereign as
a reward for her conduct.

IADVERTISEMENT.I—HoIIoway's Pills.—Weary of Life.
—Derangement of the liver is one of the most efficient
causes of dangerous diseases, and the most prolific of those
melancholy forebodings which are worse than death itself.
A few doses of these noted Pills act magically in dispelling
low spirits, and repelling the covert attack made on the
nerves by excessive heat, impure atmospheres, over indul-
gence, or exhausting excitement. The Non shattered
coubtitutions may derive benefit from Holloway's Pills,
which will regulate disordered action, brace the nerves,
increase the energy of the intellectual faculties, and revive
he failing memory. By attentively studying the instruc-
tions tor taking these Pills, and especially putting them in
practice, the most despondent will soon feel confident of a
perfect recovery.