The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-19 00:00:00

NAVAL AND MILITAR' INTELLIGENCE.

The steam transport Prince Albert, 1,345 tons,
Capt. Waters, arrived at Spithead on Saturday
from Bombay. She put in short of coals. She left
Bombay on the 27th of Jan., arrived at Mauritius
ou the 10th of Feb., sailed on the 15th, arrived at
the Cape of. Good Hope on the Ist of March, sailed
on the 6th, arrived at St. Vincent's the 28th of
March, and left on the 3d inst. The Tweedside, for
- India, with troops; sailed from St. Vincent's on the
Ist of April ; left at St. Vincent's the steam-trans-
port Lady Jocelyn from India, for London. The
Modway, West India mail steamer, sailed from St.
Vincent's on the same day as the Prince Albert,
which had a death from smallpox shortly after
leaving the Mauritius, and which caused her to be
put in quarantine whilst at the Cape, so that all
communication with that colony was prevented,
and no news has consequently been brought thence
by her. We are informed the Prince Albert made
the shortest passage from Spithead to Bombay yet
noted. She sailed on the 22d of October with a
Tortion of the Royal Horse Artillery from Wool-
y/lA, and embarked here part of her Majesty's 72d
Highinders, and made the passage to Bombay in
56 steaming days, exclusive of 11 days' detention
at the different ports. Her homeward passage has
been longer, as speed was not of such urgent neces-
sity as in the transit of troops from England to
India. She has a full cargo--wool, seeds, gum, &c.
and the following passengers :—Col. and Mrs.
Maughan, from the Bombay PresidencyiCol
.and
Mrs. Fleming, of the 36th Bombay N.I. ; "neut.
UrlnstOn,, ASSIS' ant-Commissapt. ionerJones of the
42d Pu
Bnj emab,
C.
wife; and three children ;
bay N.I. ; Lieut. Lockhart, 7th Bombay N.I. ;
her Majesty'
Capt. Kidd; Paymaster of
giment ; Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Graham, from the
Mauritius ; Mr,. and Mrs. Wainwright, two chil-
and female servant ; Mrs. Beyts, and Dr.
dren
Mulfinger.,From St. Vincent's—Mr. M‘Lcod. The
Prince Albert left England under the command of
Capt. Watts, who died suddenlyat Bombay of disease
of the heart a few days before shesailed for England.
He was a man who possessed groat experience in
the command of screw steamers, and was held in
high estimation by all who knew hifn. After coal-
ing the Prince Albert proceeded for the Thames.
The authorities at the Horse Guards have de-
cided on forming a camp on Chatham lines for a
portion of the troops belonging to the East Indian
corps now at that garrison. The camp will. be
• formed early in the approaching summer, and it is
proposed that about 1,000 troops shall be encamped
as soon as thenecessary arrangements shall becem-
pleted. The officers and men who will be put under
canvass will be selected in the first instance from
tie troops of the line at Chatham. A large supply
of tents to form the camp have arrived at the Gun-
wharf, and the Royal Sappers and Miners have
been employ( d, under the direction of the Com-
manding Royal Engineer at Chatham, in examining
the wells for supplying the camp with water and
making other requisite preparations.
The Commander in-Chief having directed addi-
tional huts to be erected at Brompton Barracks,
Chatham, for the accommodation of the large num-
ber of troops quartered at that garrison, the ground
on which the huts will be erected has been laid out
and levelled for that purpose. The new huts will
be erected inside Piince Henry's Bastion, near
those at present occupied by the troops, and will
provide accommodation to several hundred addi-
tional non-commissioned officers and troops of the
line.
Recruiting in the manufacturing districts is pro-
ceeding satisfactorily. During the last seven weeks
there have been passed at Manchester 44, 49, 92,
66, 58, 51, and 58 men respectively in each week.
Tnese are exclusive of the recruits who have been
obtained by the militia and the pensioners, both of
which forces are actively engaged in the recruiting
service. The favourite regiment appears to be the
68th.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.---4pril 15.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Their Lordships sat this morning for the purpose
of delivering judgment in the following writs of
error :

Lord Cranwortb, who sat as Deputy Speaker in
the absence of the Lord Chancellor, Lord. Wens,let-
dale, and the Bishop of Ripon were present.

CROFT V. LUMLEY.
This was a writ of error brought from a decision
of the Court of Exchequer Chamber, partly con-
firming and partly reversing a judgment of the
Court of Queen's Bench, given upon a special case
made for their consideration.
The case was argued before their Lordships and
nine of the learned judges in June last.
The counsel who argued the cause were the then
Attorney-General (now Chief Justice of the. Com-
mon Pleas), Mr. H. Hill and Mr. Unthank, on be-
half of the plaintiff in error Sir F. Kelly (now
Attorney-General) and Mr. Maud, for the defend-
ant in error, Lumley ; and Sir P. Thesiger (now
Lord Chelmsford, the present Lord Chancellor)
and Mr. SeLjeant Wells for the other defendants in
error.

The case as presented by the counsel for the plain-
tiff in error in their arguments before their lordships
was that the proceedings had originated in an
action of ejectment brought by Faithful Croft, the
plaintiff in error, as the lessor, against Benjamin
Lumley, one of the defendants in error, as the lessee
of Her Majesty's Theatre, in the Haymarket, and
against the othertlefendants in error, who claimed
an interest in the theatre under Mr. Lumley, in
which he sought to recover possession of that build-
ing on the alleged forfeiture by Mr. Lumley of his
lease by reason of alleged breaches of covenant on
his part. The lease iu question, dated 10th July,
1845, was granted by Mr. Croft to Mr. Lumley,
and demised the Opera-house and other premises,
part for 66 years, and the remainder for 21 years
from its date. There were several covenants and
clauses for re-entry, and the queations before the
Rouse were--first, whetherunder the circumstances
the lease had been forfeited ; and, secondly, whe-
ther, if forfeited, there had not been a waiver of
that forfeiture by Mr. Croft, by an acceptance of
rent subsequently to the alleged breaches of cove-
' nant becoming known to him. The forfeiture was
claimed upon three different grounds-1. That Mr.
Lumley having covenanted that he would not con-
vet the Opera-house to any other use than for
acting and performing operas, plays, concerts, balls,
masquerades, assemblies, and such theatrical and
other public amusements or entertainments as had
usually been given therein, but that he would use
his utmost endeavours " to improve the same for
that use and purpose," had failed in the perform-
ance
of his covenant by shutting up the building
for a period of two years, extending from August,
1852, until Dec.' 1854, when the action was brought.
It was alleged that by so shutting up the theatre
Mr. Lumley had injured its reputation, and that
therefore he had not used his utmost endeavours
to improve it in accordance with his covenant. The
second alleged breach was that he had, contrary to
his covenant, let out certain boxes and stalls to cer-
tain persons for a longer period than one year. In
support of this part of his case Mr. Croft showed
that under a deed, dated December, 20, 1851, Mr.
Lumely had granted certain boxes therein named,
with others, for one year beginning the Ist of
February, 1852, to Messrs. Brandus and Co., and
that by another deed, dated August, 1852, he bad
granted the same boxes, with others, from the Ist
of February, 1853, for one year to other persons,
so that the same boxes would be let at the same
time, although to different persons, for a longer
period than one year. The third alleged breach
was that in violation of his covenant Mr. Lumley
had mortgaged or encumbered the theatre by
voluntarily giving warrants of attorney to confess
judgments or debts as collateral security for the
repayment of money borrowed. The Court of
Queen's Bench decided that the only breach of
covenant committed by Mr. Lumley was the third
breach alleged, with respect to his having encum-
bered the tbeatre by giving warrants of attorney,
but they gave judgment in his favour, on the
ground that there had been a waiver of the for-
feiture on the part of the plaintiff in error, by his
having received rent subsequently to the facts
complained of coming to his knowledge. The
Court of Exchequer Chamber had affirmed this
judgment so far as it was in favour of the defendant
in error, but were of opinion that the defendant in
error had not been guilty of any breach of covenant
with respect to the third alleged breach, and they
therefore did not go into the question of waiver of
the forfeiture. The latter decision was then brought
by writ of error before their lordships' house. The
pi incipal point relied on by the plaintiff in error was
the fact that Mr. Lumley had encumbered his in-

It is said to have been decided at the Horse
Guards that the 2d battalion of the 20th Regiment
shall be raised in Clonmel.
The 4th battalion of the Rifle Brigade will move
from Chichester this morning to Shorncliffe, and
their quarters at Chichester will be taken by the 2d
battalion of the 4th Foot, from Portsmouth and
Parkhurst.
Rear-Admiral Sir H. D. Chads, K.C.8., Com-
niander-in Chief on the Irish station, arrived at
Portsmouth on Saturday, in pursuance of Ad-
miralty instructions, and hoisted his flag (red at
the mizen) on board the Renown, 91, Capt. Forbes,
which saluted the Port-Admiral on the occasion,
and received an acknowledgment from the Illus-
trious. Admiral Chads will take the Renown, 91 ;
Diadem, 31, Capt. Moorsom, C. B. ; Curagoa, 31,
Captain Mason ; and the Racoon, 21, to Lisbon,
on " particular service," presumed to be mainly
connected with the approaching marriage of the
King of Portugal with the Princess Stephanie of
Hohenzollern. The squadron is expected to sail
to-morrow.
The painting of the Marlborough, 131, Captain
Lord F. H. Kerr, flag of Vice-Admiral A. Fan-
ahawo, C. 8., has commenced, and she looks remark-
ably handsome. She has about 630 of her crew of
1,100.
The Roscommon Militia, quartered in Ports-
mouth garrison, is now giving volunteers to the
line prior to being sent to their county head-quar-
ters for disembodiment.
The Vulcan, 6, troop frigate, Commander Sec-
combe, left Spithead after post time on Saturday
morning, with the Ist division of the 2d battalion
of the 3d Foot (Buffs). The remaining portion
will leave Shorncliffe for Portsmouth this morning,
to remain until ordered for embarkation.
The process of restowing the Atlantic cable is
proceeding simultaneously on board the United
States' screw steam frigate Niagara and her Ma-
jesty's screw steamship Agamemnon, bath in the
tidal basin. at Keyham. The Niagara is on the
western or Hamoaze side, some distance from the
store in the old powder magazine, from which the
wire is carried over wheels fi.ted to a framework,
floating on the basin. Alongside the frigate is the
hulk of the sloop Favourite, on the deck of which is
a steam engine for hauling. The after circle in
the Niagara (312 miles) is complete. Up to 4 o'clock
On Saturday morning 216 miles were stowed in the
forward circle. The men were at work all Friday
night. The quan.ity taken on board daily is un-
certain, as the engine gets out of order now and
then, and some delay is occasioned by the confined
position of the places of deposit. Last year, when
the work was done by hand, 75 miles were stowed
in 24 hours, the men working night and day. As
the Niagara will receive in all 1,500 miles, there
are about 900 more to come. The equipment and
appearance of this fine frigate, especially aloft, ex-
cite the admiration of numerous professional and
other visitors. The engine for hauling the wire on
board the Agamemnon is on her deck. About 40
miles•per day are now placed in the mainhold, which
has received 37 flakes or layers, consisting of 650
rounds ; as the circumference increases, and the
cone in the centre decreases, every successive flake
obtains an addition of two rounds or sheaves. Be-
tween 600 and 700 miles have been stowed in this
capacious place, and it will receive as many more.
100 miles of the coil forward have been stowed ; 40
more will make it complete. The men consider
that all the Agamemnon's wire can be on board in
a fortnight. Nothing is yet done to her rigging or
outfit. Thostaff of Mr. Whitehouse, the electrician,
is constantly occupied making experiments for im-
proving the apparatus, and for increasing the speed
in the transmission of messages through the full
length of the wire. During the last month they
have made some progress in the attainment of
these objects. Mr. Henley, the inventor of the
magneto-electric machine, is assisting in Keyham.
"Ber Majesty's screw steam sloop Nile, 91, Capt.
E. Chads, with the screw despatch boat Lapwing,
4, Commander M. F. O'Reilly, sailed from Ply-
mouth oa Saturday for Queenstown.
The steam frigate Valekous, 16, Capt. W. Ald-
ham, accompanied by the st am tug Zephyr, was
appointed to sail ft oin Plymouth yesterday for
Ferrol to take in tow the Turkish line-of-battle
ship winteited there, in order that she may be fitted
with screw machinery at Devonport.

terest in the theatre by voluntarily giving warrants
of attorney under which judgment had been ob
tainectagain.st him. It was contended tbat be,
having done an act involving certain consequence,
must be considered to have done all that by law
was involved in that act. By his warrant of at-
torney he had placed certain persons in a position
to ob'ain a registered judgment, and thus they
hail gained an equitable charge upon the theatre,
contrary to the express covenant contained in the
lease. With respect to the question of waiver of
forfeiture by the plaintiff in error by the subse-
quent receipt of rent, it was contended that the
money had only been rec3ived as compensation for
the occupation of the premises, and not as rent, and
that such a taking of the money would not amount
to a waiver of the forfeiture. On behalf of the de-
fendants in error it was contended that there was
no pretence fel- considering the judgments obtained
against Mr. Lumley as mortgages or encumbrances
within the meaning of the words of the covenants.
It was clear that by giving warrants of attorney
upon which the judgments were obtained, Mr. Lum-
ley had created no charge, direct or indirect, upon
the estate, for the power of disposal vested in him
was not restricted until after the registered judg-
ments were obtained. The act of obtaining those
judgments was not Mr. Lumley's act, and there-
fore he had no hand in encumbering the estate.
Judgments were particularly distinguished from
mortgages, for no mortgage could be granted of
church property, and yet judgments might be ob-
tained under warrants of attorney, and a charge
thus created upon the land. With respect to the
boxes being let for more than one year at a time, it
was submitted that the mere fact of letting boxes
just before the end of the year 1852 for the ensuing
-season of 1853 to different persons from those who
held them for the season of 1852 could not be held
to be a breach of the covenants in the lease ; for it
would have been impossiblefor Mr. Lumley to have
carried ou the business of the Opera-house without
securing the lett;ng of his boxes for the ensuing
season. It was also submitted there had been no
substantial lease granted for more than a year, in-
asmuch as the contingencies upon which the leases
of the boxes had been granted—viz., the opening
of the theatre—had not happened at the time when
the action was brought. Under these c'rcumstances
it was contended that there had been no forfeiture
of the lease. With regard to the question of waiver
it was contended that the money was paid to the
agent of Mr. Croft as rent, and that, in accordance
with the rules of law, the creditor must apply money
paid by him to his debtor to the purpose named by
the latter at the time of paying it. At the conclu-
sion of the arguments the following questions were
submitted to the learned judges for their considera-
tion :--

"1. Whether the special cage disclosed a breach of the
covenant not to grant, let, or otherwise dispose of any
of the bolus or stalls of the theatre for any longer period
than one year, or one season.

"2. Whether the special case disclosed a breach of the
covenant not to charge or encumber the theatre, or any
part thereof.
" 3. Whether by reason of such breaches, if any, or
either of them, the plaintiff in error acquired a right of
re-entry on the theatre or any part thereof.

" 4. -Whether such right of re-entry, if any, was
waiv,-d by the plaintiff in error.-
On the 15th Feb. last the learned judges, who had
taken time to consider,dileliaivme:2.edantdheiEr,
rolep,iniaonnds
upon the question of law propounded to. them.
Justices Coleridge, Wl
Barons Bramwell, Watson, and (Manual answered
the first and second questions in the negative, and
the third and fourth in the affirmative. Mr. Jus-
tice \Vightman answered the first question in the
negative 2nd the rest in the affirmative ; Mr; Baton
Mariin answered the fir,t three ques ions in the
negative and the last in the affirmative ; and Mr.
Justice Crompton answered the first and fourth in
the negative and the secot.d and third in the affir-
mative; the majority thus being in favour of -the
decision of the Court below. .
li,rd Cranwolth, this morning, in giving his
judgment, af er gar,
through the facts of the
case, said that with reg,r ' . d to the first point urged
by the plailitiff
namely, that Mr.
Ll breach of his agreement
tnley had committed a
by
Lot keepingin error
the theatre open, their lordships
were unanimously of of iniou that 11 l.t was no
i
breach of his covenant, and they had therefore put
upon h A point.
no question to the learned judges ,
He did not consider that there had been any breach
of the covenant relating to the letting of boxes or
stalls for more than one year. As to the question
of whether there had been a forfeiture of the lease
by reason of Mr. Lumley having encumbered the
theatre by granting warrants of attorney, he con-
aidered that there had been no such forfeiture. It
was a most difficult question upon which to lay
down a geiferafrule oflaw, -bait appeared to him
that when warrants of attorney were given for the
purpose of preventing law costs, when pressed for a
bona fide debt, it could not be regarded as a breach
(.. of such a covenant as this. It was different alto

[Aovgarissmimr.-I—The difficulties and dangers of bringing
up Infants by hand or wet nurses have been entirely Over-
come by Du Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food, which
feeds, strengthens, and removes all those littlo pains and irre-
gularities infants are so subject to." The following letters
speak volumes :—" Grammar School, Stevenage, 16th Dec.,
1850. Gentlemen,—l think it but common justice to you to
'state that I have used Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica for the
:1.1.t. four months, during which time our infant has never had
disordered 'bowels, from which it bad suffered much during
the previous six months, whilst being nursed, though every
cats was taken Co prevent it. Had I known of your valuable
have Food sooner it would saved my infant much pain, and
lane also the heavy
2,74.ne se
~of a wet nurse.—l am, dtc.,Romax
Al[ntnhc•~ Mire I considyr you ablessing to society
at.large. 1. It is not to b4otdold all the benefit Do Barry's
Revaleata been to me, and
my little- boy• cries folaraianiz.laitnt.eheasr of it every morning.—
WAvrea .-KKArisui 2,
•.4 75, Queen's-road, -"baytowate'r,PlLendoFiiiveNaOonv':lk. 5220,.j.1:8015.5527321
Mr. Dampier will thank Messrs. Duneßavri.,?,
eat nf ta Arabica, ' it
d
him another canister of their
vnaloatnitat was 10 days
sgried so well with his infant. (This
t(hTehißes
obt'when.it commenced living
SuPported by testimonials from the following celetrabidcai)r—o.
femurs of Chemistry: Dr. A. Ure; Dr. Shorlaml; Drralel y
t;
Dr. Campbell ;" Dr. Gattiker ; Dr. Wuurifteelss.;
oDfcr,,.
is.tllnegsatraruvarner;•
Lord Stuart de Decks; the Dowager co
Thomas King, and many other respectable per-
Major Gen.
sons, whose health has been restored by it, after all other
means prelim bad failed. Suitably packed with full instruo-
Cons, In canisters, 11b. 2s, 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d.; 51b. 11s. ;
121 b. 225. The 121 b canisters are sent carriage free or, re.
ceipt of Post-office order. Barry Du Barry, and Co., 77,
Regent-street, London. Important Caution against the fear.
fal dangera of spurious imitations.—The Vice-Chancellor Sir
Bata
Page Wood granted an Injunction on the 19th March,
185 d, against Alfred Hooper Nevin. for imitating "Ds
Sarry'gßeiralenta Arabica Food.

gether from where a warrant of attorney was given
for the purpose of evading such a covenant and
creating a charge upon the estate contrary to the
terms of the lease. In the latter case it would cer-
tainly be a breach of the covenant • but in the pre-
sent case it appeared to him that Mr. Lumley had
no such intention in giving the warrants of attor-
ney, and therefore he considered that the decision
of the Court below was correct upon this point also.
i The case of " Doe v. Carter," Bth Term Reports,
page 300, supported the view he took of the ques-
tion. He should express no opinion upon the ques-
tion of waiver, but it appeared to him to be more a
question of fact than of law.

THE TRIAL OF BERNARD.

(From the Daily News.)

The verdict of the jury in the case of the Bishops
was a protest against the attempt of a domestic
bigot and despot to- wrest from Englishmen their
hereditary lib3rties. The verdicts of the juries in
the cases of Thelwall, Hardy, and Horne Tooke
were protests against the attempt of servile and
bigotted courtiers to arrest the English people in
their progress towards the attainment of extended
liberties. The verdict of the jury in the case of
Bernard is a protest against the attempt of a
foreign usurper and despot to intimidate a weak and
unprincipleZ English Cabinet (we speak of the late
Ministry) into a surrender of English liberty.

Lord Wensleydale having concurred,
The judgment of the Court below was affirmed,
with costs.

THE TACTICS OP THE OPPOSITION.

(From the Daily NM )

There is a certain class of politicians in every
great party with whom the present is everything,
and with whom the future and the past are noth-
ing. When out of power there is no weapon they
are not ready to use to regain it ; when in office
there is no principle they are not willing to sacri-
fice in the reckless resolve to keep it. The traditions
of party awaken no scruple in the minds of such
men ; and to talk to them of the eventual effect of
their greediness and rancour on the character and
influence of their party seems to their sordid sense
like the words of one that mocks. We fear that in
justice it must be said the existence of such mean-
ness is not peculiar to any political combination or
creed, and however reluctant we may be to confess
the fact, it is impossible to deny that in the ranks
of the present Opposition there are men who would
if they were permitted, sacrifice the permanent
honour and utility of the Liberal party in their sel-
fish impatience to oust their opponents from power.
If the suggestions of those to whom we allude be
attended to every measure ought to be opposed
which is propounded by the Derbyite Cabinet,
whether it be right or wrong. No matter what the
forthcoming Budget of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer may prove to be, Mr. Hungry and Mr.
Harping are prepared to give it the most uncom-
promising opposition ; and before the contemplated
resolutions on the government of India have seen
the light, ac ive steps have been taken to whip a
sufficient number of votes to prevent their being
even debated. A motion we are credibly informed
will be made by way of amendment—when Mr.
Disraeli proposes to go into Committee of the whale
house—that the Speaker do not leave the chair ;
the practical significance of which would be that
the majority of the present House of Commons is
determined not to consider or discuss any seri-
ous proposition unless it be propounded by the
man who, as a Cabinet, called it into being.
We shall be slow in believing that so old and
experieestAl a politician as Lord Palmerston
will lend himself to a project so disreputable
and so desperate. He had his chance in his
oen packed Parliament of legislating for India ;
and he threw it away. An overwhelming majority
voted him leave to introduce his plan. All the
leading Liberals whom he and his personal partisans
opposed at the last general election—Lord John
Russell, Mr. Bright, Mr. Roebuck, and Mr. Milner
Gibson—voted in the majority upon that occasion.
Since his suicidal loss of office, another Adminis-
tration has obtained permission to lay upon the
table another scheme, in the form likewise of a bill.
A third recommendation has proceeded from the
quarter best entitled beyond all question to atten-
tion and regard ; but—because its enunciation and
development would baulk the cupidity or rash
haste of certain hangers-on—who want to count
n(lns in a division, not to hear argument in a
debate—the course sanctioned by theylearest pre-
cedents and recommended by the ablest and best
men on both sides of the House is, we are told, to
be refued consideration, and a mere factious
amendment is to be proposed for that purpose in
the shape above mentioned. For his own sake, and
for the sake of the Liberal party—whose re-union
and consolidation on a firmer basis than any they
have recently had we fervently desire—we trust
that Lord Palmerston will not be betrayed into
lending himself to such a proceeding. It is one
conceived in a spirit of insult, and which can only
be perpetrated in a spirit of outrage. If Mr. Dia-
raelt's resolutions are good, there can be no harm
in affirming them ; if they are specifically bad there
ought to be no difficulty in rejecting them. If some
of them are sound and others seem to be the con-
trary, the plain duty of the House is to adopt those
that are right and to negative those that are wrong,
or to substitute for them others conceived iu a wiser
spirit. But to tell the country without disguise that
fur the selfish and scandalous purposei of faction, a
majority of the House of Commons bad made up
its mind beforehand to refisze,all consideration to a
course proposed by the man who is facile pranceps
the leader of the Pdrtyof ProgressintheLegislature
of this country, and which has been adopted by the
efficial leader of the Conservative party in the Lower
I House, would be in so many words to proclaim that
the present House of Commons has nut only been
packed for per: oval objects by the late Minister,
but that it is ut'erly regardless of those decent
semblances of patriotism by which bad Parliaments
ha‘ e sometimes contrived to prolong a m:s.chie-
vous existence.

To us it seems sufficiently palpable that, before
the Liberal party can again return to power, there
must be a grand and unreserved renunciation by
men of all sections composing it of the odious and
intolerable system of exclusiveness which has hither-
to been its blight and bane. We ought never again
to see a Liberal Cabinet formed out of one particu-
lar class either of society or opinions. The days
of monopoly are over iu creed and in trade ; we
must make an end of them now in administrative
rule. A Liberal Administration consisting only of
the least Liberal members of the party, and with a
personnel consisting of lords and lackies, . political
paellas and political eunuchs, is an imposture and a
cheat which we trust we shall never again behold.
Unless a Government of Progress can be forme
with a positive programme and a positive pledge
that its promises are not to be indefinitely post-
polled, we had rather remain as we arc. And if
an administration is not likely to be constituted
Tha.t shall be prepared manfully and from the out-
set to maintain the national dignity and indepen-
dence, to seek the alliance of free nations and to
sustain the character of English freedom abroad,
then we pray Heaven that we may be saved the
grief and shame of witnessing perpetual changes in
the confidential advisers of the Crown without any
change for the better iu our foreign policy. We
desire as earnestly as any can do to see the ascen-
dancy of liberal and national ideas. We believe
sincerely that the best hope of that ascendancy lies
in the occupancy of office by an administration in
which the people of this country may thoroughly
confide. But we hesitate not to say that no set of
men can constitute such an Administration,
unless they visibly and vigorously represent
the intellect, worth, independence, and courage
of the whole popular party. Neither ad-
vanced opinions, nor industrial pursuits, nor the
ve`o of aristocratic cliques or coteries, must be
li,tened to in future. We have had enough in all
conscience, of thesilken Cabinets of Stafford House,
and enough and more than enough of the Cam-
bridge House Cabal. When next the Sovereign
calls upon a Liberal statesman to undertake the
task of forming a Government, let us hope that she
will tell I:im that she expects one that will reflect
fairly and impartially all classes and opinions which
the constituencies of the empire have thought fit
to honour ; and we trust that the statesman to
whom she may confide the task will prove himself
prepared to ex( cute it without fear, favour, or
affection. It is but justice to Lord Derby to say
that, out of till comparatively narrow and limited
materials at his disposal, he evinced, when lately
called upon, a wiser dist.osition in this respect than
might perhaps have been expected. But the west
inveterately and offensivr-ly oltarch:c Government
that has been in England during the present cen-
tury was that of Lord Palmerston ; and, as the
tree is known by its fruits, we have witnessed such
a harvest of thorns and this les—acandals at home
and disgraces abroad—as the annals of England
have been seldom found to record, and as it is to
be hoped they will never again contain.

Tun CASE OF THE REV. S. SMITH.—In the course of
the week a memorial, having for its of j•ct to obtain a
mitigation of the severe sentence passel in this case, has
received the signatures of the high sheriff, several a the
magh•trates, a great number of the clergy, and respect-
able laity, and Las been forwarded to the Lord-Lieu•
tenant of GloucesterW,ire, Earl Ducie, for presentation,
together with others from Gloucester and Cuipping
Sodbury.
Tai CASE op Mn. BARBER.—On Saturday a deputa,
Lip, including L. rd Ebrington, M.P.. Mr. Collier,
AI. P., and Mr. Brady, M P., waited upon the Home
Secretary, to urge the claim of Mr. B.rber to compel:-
ea i,u from Government I, will be rememb red that
Mr. Barber, who was a-aolicitor in considerable practice,
was prosecuted in 1844 by the Bank, at the direction of
the spa cites c f the Treasury, for f-rgery, and trays
P°-
rt-d ; but afterwards his innoceuci was established,
and he was allowed to return. The Home Secretary ex-
pressed
an opinion that as this had not been strictly a
Government prosecution, the State ought not to be
liable. The Crown had done no wrong, neither had the
judge or jury done wrong. Mr. Barber was rightly con-
victed, though it suboequently turned out that there had
been a failure of justice by reason of the nen-production
been arnwed a separate
as to Mr. Barbers not having
He would speak
upon the matter
of other evideno-,.' He admitted, however, that the point
tehrebynasned the Government,
And s.e what could be done,
trial was a strong
to featureordin

The result of the trial of Dr. Bernard is the
natural and necessary consequence of the adoption
of
trial
a by
jury in political cases. A jury when
tryingquestionof debt not paid, or of obligation
not will respect the declaration of the
presiding fulfilled,
judge,
that the law has laid down such
or such_a rule, that they have nothing to do with
the abstract equity of the case, and that they have
only to declare whether the law has or has not
been obeyed. A jury, when trying a question of
assault and battery, or of slander, will equally con-
form its verdict t i the technical requisitions of the
law. But when a political question is submitted
to a jury, the jurors feel instinctively that they
have a higher duty to perform than merely to de-
clare whether the letter of the written or consue-
tudinary law has been violated. They feel that
they are called upon to discharge a duty to society
at large which may bring their convictions into
conflict with the mere formal prescripts of the law;
that they must weigh izt an impartial balance the
merits and demerits of all the parties to the case ;
that in arriving at their decision they must remem-
ber the existence of a law of higher and holier
origin, of a wider mob, sad of more muLiverod
comprehensiveness than that which is inscribed in
tho Statute Book, or is the records of the Judgments
of our Courts. Juries in political cases have to
decide questions of • eonstitutional policy as well as
of mere law. They who are disposed to quarrel
with the verdict of the jury in Bernard's case
would have quarreled, had they lived in those
times, with the verdicts of the juries in the cases of
the Bishop., of Hardy, Thel wall, and Horne Tooke.
It is of the essence of trial by jury in political cases,
that the jurors, in framing their verdict should
allow weight to moral and political in addition to
mere legal considerations ; and whoever objects to
this piactice ought logically to object altogether to
trial by jury in political cases. The object of em-
panelling a jury in such cases is to take them out
of the Jurisdiction of the more technical lawyer,
with a view to assert the liberties of the citizen, if
need be, cven against the formalities and techni-
calities of the Law itself.
In saying this it is not our meaning to concede
that the verdict of the jury in Bernard's case was
contrary to, er unwarranted by, the testimony ad-
duced. There were broken links in the chain of
evidemee- The Belgian witnesses expressed strong
doubts of the identity of the grenade produced with
any of those which they had seen and handled.
The letters produced were addressed to Bernard,
not written by him ; and the interpretation pat
upon their words with a view to infer the expres-
sion of a guilty intention on the part of the writers
was pa' pably forced and strained. The position of
one of the principal witnesses—the wife of
Rudio—in the uncertainty of his fate, was
sufficient to discredit her testimony. The evi-
dence of the railway clerk—the friendly infor-
mant of the French Embassy—that Bernard had
expressed a confident expectation of the speedy
return of the Emperor to this country, was irrre-
eencileable with the idea that Bernard contem-
plated the assassination of the Emperor. The evi-
dence of Orsini's housekeeper as to Bernard's
incredulity when he first heard of the attempt in
the Rue Lepelletier, and of his unequivocal aston-
ishment when doubt was no longer possible, con-
firms in the strongest manner the inference to which
the evidence of the railway clerk necessarily leads.
With these considerations pressing upon them, we
do not see what other verdict could possibly have
been returned, even though the jurors had fettered
themselves by a strict regard to the purely technical
requisitions of the Law.
But we will not affect to believe that the verdict
was motived by such considerations alone. There
can ba tee doubt that the moral sense of the jurors
revoltedagainst the essential falsehood of the indict-
ment. They saw clelrly that Bernard was prose-
cuted not because he was believed to be accessory
to the deaths of the individuals who received fatal
wounds in the Rue Leplletier, but because he was
believed to have, conspaarectto asaassinate the- Em-
peror of the French. Their honest, John Bull
indignation was roused by the attempt to make
them accessories to the falsehood of a judicial
juggle. Agate, their sympathies were touched by
the peculiar position of the prisoner. They saw
before them a man, poor as regards worldly wealth,
alone and unsupported save by a few private indi-
viduals who were personally strangers to him. They
saw th two most powerful G.ereraments in Europe
persevering fir mon thi in a large expenditure, avail-
ing themselves of theiudefatigable exertions of two
completely organised wed not over-scrupulous bodies
of police, to ensure the destruction of this poor and
almost friendless mall. In such circumstances it ,
was not in human nature, to escape a certain bias
in f evour of the weaker party. Yet again, the per-
tinacity with which the presiding Judge again and
again obtruded upon them the declaration that in
the event of a verdict of guilty being returned the
law of the caso would be discussed by the fifteen
Judges, showed the Jurors that it was intended by
a legal quihb!e to remove the case of Bernard from
their jurisdict'on, and to have it virtually decided
by the Judges, unaided or unchecked by ajury. It
is the established right of an English jury to decide
both on the law and the. facts of the cases sub-
mitted to them. The Judge, it is true, expounds
the law to.them ; but when he has done so, it is
their duty and their eight not only to decide what
facts have been proved, but iu what manner the
law as expounded from the Bench bears upon them.
Lord Campbell anxiously and pertinaciously endea-
voured to impress upon the minds of the jury that
they ought to confine themselves to questions of
evidence alone, and to leave the application of the
law to the Judges in the Court of Criminal Appeal.
Had the jury conformed to Lord Campbell's in-
junctions, they would have done what in them lay
to render trial by jury, in political cases, a nullity
in all time coming. They are to be honoured for
having sturdily resisted such an encroachment on
the political privileges and safeguards of English-
men. They who matured and confirmed our sys-
tem of trial by jury in political cases did so with
their eyes open. They knew that twelve unpro-
fes,ional men, taken by hazard from the ranks
of their fellow citizens, could not be fettered
by mere formal and technical considerations
of law. They preferred the verdict of such
men in political cases to the verdict of mere law-
yers, because the decision of the former would
be arrived at upon wider considerations than those
of the law alone. The verdict of the jury in
Bernard's case is exactly such a verdict as the en-
lightened asserters of Trial by Jury in political
cases wished to ensure.

That the jury have spoken the universal sense of
Englishmen in this matter is obvious. The rap-
turous cheers with which the verdict was received
in. Court, the readinsse with which this applause
was caught up and re-echoed by the crowds waiting
without, the reciprocal congratulations with which
the news of it was received iu private societies
during the evening, the sympathetic response
which is already
coming back to us from the pro-
vinces—all these things show that the universal
nation sanctions the verdict of the twelve honest
and intelligent jurymen in the Central Criminal
Court. Surely this unanimous expression of the
nat'onal eonvietion and will ought to read an in-
structive lesson to all th I Governments in Europe
—our own inclusive. So long as trial by jury in
political cases exists in England, similar verdicts
will be the result of all similar prcsecutions. Even
though more stringent statutes could be impetrated
from the Le gislatZte, the result would be the
same. Under the new law, as under the old,
juries would refuse
to convict. Before decisions
of a different character can be looked for, trial by
jury must be abolished; and where should we find
the' English Government that would be daring
enough to attempt, the English Parliament that
would be weak and venal enough to beco4:to an
accoa.plice in, its abolition.
From one or two quarters we hear puling whis-
p .r 4 about the effect this vr rdict may product upon
the minds of Foreign Goveinments. To these
there is on'y sate reply : England. confidently be-
lieve 4 that the Governments ensled' to havaseuse
Eni,ugh to acquiesce in the inevitable ; and if they
have not, Eng'ancl does not care.

(From Melimes.)

Not since the Irish Rebellion of 1848 h:s there
been any State trial approaching in importance the
case of Simon I.3,:rnar d, who was acqui•ted ok Sa-
turday la ,t of complici,y in the murderous attempt
of the 14th of January un the Emperor Napo-
leon. Indee:l, the trial which is just over itas a
h alarmed Europe, aud,the
general and international interest which is wailing
to the inquiries respecting domestic treason or-redt-
trot]. It was preceded by discussions the heat and
vehemence of which base
Ministers of a great foreign Potentate wereled
away by the circumstances which produced it to
use and permit others to use a language which may

be disregarded or may be forgiven, but which can-
not be forgotten. It is also not to be denied that
the Emperor of the French as well as our own Go- [The following appeared iu a portion of our impression of
vernment looked forward to a successful prosecu- Saturday.]
tion as a means of smoothing away difficulties. To
the Derby Cabinet, which had ousted its opponents
for bringing in the Conspiracy Bill, a verdict of
" Guilty" would have given the opportunity either
of proving that no legislation was necessary, or of
legislating under the sanction of a judicial decision.
The French Government, or rather its sagacious
chief, has also notoriously desired such a proof of the
goodwill of England as would, in the eyes of con-
tinentals, be involved iu the punishment of a Re-
publican conspirator. Such a conclusion of the
long disputes between the two countries would have
been gratifying to the self-esteem of the French
Government, se severely wounded by the events of
the last three months ; and we may say, without
arrogance or assumption, that the spectacle of an
English Court passing sentence on an accomplice
of Orsini would have given a moral strength to the
Imperial throne.

THE TRIAL OF BERNARD.

But the calculations of Sovereigns and statesmen
and lawyers were destined to be baffled. After a
long and wearisome trial of six days Simon Ber-
nard has been acquitted. The jury remained
in deliberation only an hour and 20 minutes ; so
that we must believe that their feeling in favour of
the prisoner was almost unanimous from the first.
Indeed, two or three days before, it might have
been anticipated that the jury would acquit the
prisoner if they shared the opinions or passions
which prevailed among the audience at the trial.
The Republican refugee seems to have had, rightly
or wrongly, all the sympathies of those who heard
the case, and the extraordinary scene which suc-
ceeded the verdict is a proof to what a pitch the
feelings of all present had been raised. That the
political and national instincts of the jury had some-
thing to do with the decision it wou!d beaffectation
to deny ; but we think that their verdict was only
what was to have been expected, and what may be
expected in any similar case. Every one who re-
members the !strong democratic bias of the class
from which the London petty juries are taken will
be prepared to learn that they feel a strong
sympathy with any one whom they conceive to be •
prosecuted at the instigation of a despotic Ceurt,
and that they will give the prisoner the benefit of
the slightest doubt that arises on the evidence. In
this lease there was a link wanting in the chain
which connected the ptisoner's purchase of the
chymical materials with the actual attempt on the
life of the French Emperor. Bernard was a Repub-
lican, a conspirator, an organizer of revolutionary
movements, a suborner of revolutionary agents ;
he bought mercury and alcohol and compounded
them, he bought grenades and despatched them,
and lie induced a needy Italian to enter into
his schemes, whatever they wore. His own
account was that he conspired always and every-
where ; that he was engaged in a plot for the
independence of Italy ; and that the grenades
and the revolvers and the services of Rudio were
intended to effect this object. Orsini, and Pierri,
and Rudio wept to Paris to further revolutionary
movements in general, and not attack the Em-
peror's life ; but while there they formed the design
of assassination and carried it out without the sanc-
tion or knowledge of Bernard. This, in fact, was
the whole defence of the prisoner, and it certainly
is not absolutely inconsistent with the evidence.
It might possibly be that men so violent and fena-
tical'as these Italians should be seized with a sud-
den impulse to take the Emperor's life, and thus to
remove what they considered the great obstacle to
the accomplishment of their plans. The deadly
machines which Bernard had helped to furnish were
in their possession, and they,might use them for a
purpose which he hid never contemplated. None
of the four convicts in France had criminated him.
Gomez and Rudio are alive, but they were no',
brought to give evidence against the prisoner. In
short, though it was proved that Bernard was en-
gaged in some scheme requiring instruments of
death, and though the act of Orsini affords pre-
sumptive proof that the assassination of the Em-
peror was the scheme in question, yet the con-
nexion between the two was not proved to abso-
lute demonstration, and a jury, ready to give the
prisoner any loophole of escape, took advantage of
the defect in the evidence to return a verdict of
" Not Guilty."
We have said that, in our opinion, such a ver-
dict was to be expected in such a case. Indeed,
whatever may be the recommendations of judges,
and their exposition of the strict letter of the law,
juries will not restrain themselves from looking at
State prosecutions in a political light. In the pre-
sent case Simon Bernard was formally charged with
the murder of Nicholas Battie, under a statute
framed originally for the punishment of murders
by Englishmen on foreign ground, such as the
murder of one sailor by another in some South
American port, the murder of a set of unfortunate
negroes on the West Coast of Africa, or the more
gentlemanly murder of one duellist by another
at Boulogne or Ostend. When this Act of Parlia-
ment was evoked for the prosecu ion of a refugee
for a plot against the life of a despotic Sovereign,
and when, moreover, it was plain that the prosecu-
tion was the result f a diplomatic tempest and a
Ministerial change, we may well conceive that a
jury would consider that the law was being strained
to effect a political purpose, and that their duty
was to defeat the attempt. Indeed, as long as we
have had a political history, juries have always as-
serted their right to look at all the bearings of a
case, and not to confine themselves to the narrow
issue which the judge has set before them. It was
thus that they have come to be the judges of the
malicious intention of acts and of the libelous cha-
racter of writings. They have not been content
with merely saying whether a man struck a blow,
but they pronounce whether he is guilty of murder
or manslaughter. They decide for themselves what
is treason, what is sedition, what is libel. So in
this case the jury seems to have been more than
willing to declare that the prosecution of Simon
Bernard, under the statute of George IV., for
what was really tlt e political offence of high trea-
son against his own Sovereign, was a perversion„of
the principles of the English middle class, they,
like the audience in court, steadily refused to look
on Bernard as a mere murderer, like Barthelemy
or Laui. They saw in him, even if the evidence
were complete, only a conspirator against a despotic
ruler, who had himself seized a throne by craft and
violence, and against whom craft and violence, if
Rot justifiable, were at least not to be classed with
the guilt of the common murderer. If Nicholas
Battie and Eugene Riquier perished in an attack
on the Imperial person, it was by accident, and
the cause of their deaths must be subordinated to
the political offence, and not erected into an
individual and distinct crime. 1n a country like
France, where every existing power has been
established in blood, things must not be mea-
sured by the English standard. Plotting and vio-
lence are there as much a matter of course as a
bill with its three readings is in our country.
W'e talk of our Catholic Emancipation, our Reform
Act, our Free Trade Act, our abolition of! the Ec-
clesiastical Courts ; the French have their three
days of July, their three days of February, their
2d of December. Why, then, should Bernard,
even if guilty, he judged by the severe rules of
English morality ? Let the French settle these
things among themselves. The Republic was in
'ewer, and it was overthrown by force ; the Em-
pire has succeeded, and the Empire is sought to be
overthrown. Why should we pervert our laws and
stain our courts with blood in order to protect one
unscrupulous faction from another
Something like this is, we cannot doubt, the
reasoning of the class from which the jury was
taken, and we can easily imagine that when the
audience was so much roused, the jurors would
have their share of the impulse. All the circum-
stances of the trial show how much political feeling
has been mixed up with the question which the
jury had to try. The experience of Mr. Edwin
James induced him to turn his defence of the pri-
soner into a tirade against the Empire, its chief,
and i-s principles, and the conclusion of this
harangue was received with cheering and clapping
of bands. The result of all these influences was
that the jury took al vanla_:e of it defvet iu
evidence to return a verdict consonant with their
political feelings, and to express their dislike of
the very principle of the prosecution. On their
judgment we are not called to pronounce an
opin on ; we only think that it was to be expected,
and that any further proceedings against the pri-
soner way as well be abandoned. Napoleon 111.
may remember that his companions, Vaudrey and
Lailty, were acquitted in 1836, though seized with
arms in their hands ; the v, edict of the Old B:iley
jery is, therefore, not without a precedent even in
his own history. The fact is, that men are made
up of passions as well as judgment, and that after
such a bitter coritrover,y as his marked the be-
ginning of the present year we mmy well expect
juries to lo ik beyond t e evidence to tlte coese-
quencee of their verdict, and spectators to shout
their sympathy with a conspirator, although they
may detest assassination.

The interest in this case this morning was intense,
from a desire, no doubt, to hear the summing up of the
Lord Chief Justice ; but we need scarcely say how many
hundreds were disappointed from being unable to gain
admission, and how much greater disappointed were
those within the building, from the inaudible tone of
voice usually adopted by his lordship in summing up
important cases. The interest was farther heightened
from the desire to hear the verdict delivered by
the jury, and the impression generally, but erro-
neou•dy, entertained that the prisoner, if found
guilty, would be sentenced before leaving the dock. The
arrangements made by the Under Sheriffs throughout
have been excellent. Nothing has occurred to cause the
least confusion, notwithstanding the number of applica-
tions for admission and the crowded state of the court
on each day.

[ADVERTISEMENT ]—Ho loway's Pills an af-tonisl ing
Dewedy for Giddivess in the Head.—Mr. Newton,
druggist, Hull, states, in a letter to Pr.feasur Holloway,
that Mr. John Ware, residing in S.ubb's-buildings,
West-street, Hull, bad been afflicted with giddiness in
the head oil and on for the last 20 years, and though he
tried many things during that long period, yet be found
little or no relief from them. At la,t he was induced to
try Holloway's Pills, from bearing so many encaniuccs
passed on their virtues, and, wonderful as it may appear,
he is perfectly cured, and now I 'joys better health than
ever he did before, thanks to Holloway's Pills.—Sold
by all vendors of medicine; and at Pi ofe:or Holloways
establishment, 244, Strand, London,

Long before 9 o'clock a number of ladies and gentle-
men had taken their seats in the galleries and body of
the court, and by 10 o'clock the court was crowded.
A few minutes after 10 o'clock the learned judges en-
tered the court, and took their seats on the bench, and
the prisoner was placed at the bar.
Mr. John Simon for the prisoner, before his lordship
commenced summing up, said, that he believed by the
Act of Par lament the points intended to be reset ved
should be handed in and explained at the time of the
trial. He had, however, made application to the At-
torney-General to be allowed to hand in, withi❑ a rea-
sonable period, any further points the prisoner's counsel
might wish to urge on his behalf, to which that learned
counsel had aseuted.

Lord C =Oen said—lt did not rest with the A ttorney-
General to assent or dissent to such an application. The
learned judges Lad it in their power to reserve to them-
selves any point of law during a trial though it might
not be raised by the counsel on either side, and of
bringing it before the Court of Crirnivai Appeal. Their
lordships, however, would receive any other points that
might be wished by the prisoner's counsel for argument
in an appeil before the Court of Criminal Appeal.