The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-24 00:00:00

THE AMERICAN PRESS.

The New York Herald is severe on Congress. It
holds the national representatives responsible for
the impending " ruin" of the country. Thus
"At the commencement of the present session of
Congress our future was full of promise. Every
one looked forward to an immediate revival of that
commercial activity. in virtue of which we had
grown so great in the years before the war. We
had come through the tremendous contest with a
strength that astonished the world, and we seemed
determined to show to the world that we were fresh
enough to fight it over again if it had been neces-
sary, and that the many requirements of the con-
test, and the burdens it had put upon us, could not
dampen the energy and ardour of our career. We
were also in a fair way to give the lie to those bad
prophets who had said the States will never be one
again. Reconstruction had already made the
happiest progress. Our Executive had treated the
conquered foe with a moderation that all statesmen
of past times had commended for such an occa-
sion, though none had ever put it in practice. We
saw already the good effects of that magnanimous
policy ; for the Southern people, under its
influence, had accepted the, result of the struggle
in a spirit as generous as our own, and were
doing their all to become good citizens once more.
Our merchants saw, with the ready perception of

acute traders, that this great section of the country
was coming into relation with our markets once
more, and an immense spring business was counted
upon. Labour started well in the South, and
the North, counting on the cotton crops, gave a new
activity to its mills and its ships. We were going
into the business of peace with all that enthusiasm
with which, four years previously, we had gone into
the business of war. Where are all these fair pro-
spects now ? Crushed under the ruthless heel of the
Radical majority in Congress. As Peace rose from
her four years of prostration, the Radicals forced
her down again, spurned and trampled upon her,
and yelled with frantic fury for the war to be kept
up ; for the continuation of a cowardly war against
a people who had laid down their arms ; for a war
of legislation against a people who stood at our
mercy. As its first consequence this murderous
course destroyed the confidence that capital every-
where felt in the early restoration of the country to
its natural condition. It demoralised Southern
society more completely than the way had done. It
deprived the Southern farmer of the very incentive
to toil, and it paralysed all that activity in our busi-
ness that in any way had relation to the South. An
immense business that counted on the revival of the
nation everywhere will be without its customers by
the direct consequence of the acts of Congress.
Merchants will fail, factories will stop, hands will
be idle, and wages will go down—all as the conse-
quence of the crazy nigger-worshipping acts of
Congress. Mr. Lincoln feared that when the war
was over the South might refuse to send represen-
tatives to Congress—might practically dissolve
the Union by refusing to take part in the Go:-
vernment ; and he judged it so important for
Southern members to be in Congress that he
was willing to adopt some measures to force

their attendance. How different was that idea of
our Government from the Radical idea that will
not admit the members when sent ! All the Radical

fighting with the President is to keep out of Con-
gress men that Mr. Lincoln thought we ought to
force into Congress, and for this object they are
willing to ruin the country, to keep it in a state of
anarchy, to render it impossible for labour to flourish
and trade to find its natural channels. They are
destroying business, and breaking down the finances
of the nation to secure the success of their party
schemes, and they must be held responsible for it
before the country.
The New York Tribune defends the action of

Congress and opposes the President. Our New
York contemporary says that a great majority of
the members of Congress were elected during the

war for the Union—elected as unqualified, uncom

promising foes of the rebellion. Others were chosen
as Democrats, but their case is not now in point.
These war Unionists find, when they assemble in
Congress, that the rebellion has collapsed, and, that
quite a number of the conspicuous military and
civil magnates are now claimants of seats in this
very body—are proffered as pillars of that very
national edifice which they so recently shed rivers
of blood to subvert and destroy. Is it surprising—
is it not perfectly natural—that those who have been
fighting for the Union—many of them still smart-
ing from wounds inflicted by rebel bullets and
mourning their brothers and their sons slain by
rebel shells and bayonets—should pause and in-
quire before admitting these red-handed foes of yes-
terday to the inner sanctuary of the national life ?
It is not yet six years since men sat in Congress,
plotting day by day, in conjunction with Cabinet
Ministers, Foreign Ambassadors, and Governors of
States, the disruption and downfall of the Ameri-
can Union ; some of these, with their humbler co-
conspirators, now demand admission as a right to
seats in either House. Is it not reasonable that
Congress should pause and inquire in what spirit,
with what feelings and purpose they come ?

HISTORY OF RAMSAY AND LAKE OF JAMAICA.--
.11r. Gordon D. Ramsay, the provost marshal, against
whom charges of murder are pending in Jamaica, was em-
ployed as clerk in a merchant's office in Birmingham in
in the year 1819. Pecuniary embarrassment compelled
him to leave the town, and he enlisted in the 17th Lancers,
with which regiment ho served in the Crimea. lie was in,
the Balaklava charge, and was wounded in the leg. He
went with his regiment to India and served in the Indian
mutiny. He afterwards got his discharge, and returned to
Birmingham:where he remained for a short time, and then
went to Jamaica, where his relations resided. He there
got into the police force. In Birmingham he was remark-
able for a superabundance of animal spirits, but those who
know him say that there was nothing cruel in his disposi-
tion. Lake, the newspaper reporter, was in the same
office with Ramsay in Birmingham. He is the son of a
Jamaica merchant—hence his leaving England for that
country. He was for some time at the Wesleyan College
in Sheffield. He has some coloured blood in his veins.
A REFORM BILL SUPPORTED BY ALL PARTIES.—
Reform, Financial reform, is a policy unanimously
supported in our house, and it is a policy whicn has always
been attended with the Most satisfactory results--results
which, inasmuch as they add to the stability of our estab-
lisments, are similar to those anticipated by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer for the bill now under the consideration
of Parliament. Our Reform Bill contains but one clause.
We lower our rates, whenever the state of the markets
will permit a reduction, and we can confidently rely on the
loyalty of our vastly augmented constituency, because the
members of our house are obliged to occupy themselves
with measures calculated to insure universal approval.—
E. MOSES and SoN, Ready-made and Bespoke Tailors,
Hatters, Hosiers, Drapers, Bootmakers, and General Out-
fitters, Minories and Aldgate, New Oxford-street, Totten-
ham-court-road. Country Branch—Bradford, Yorkshire.

THE REFORM BILL, says the Law Times of to-
day,is to be contested in all its stages. On the second read-
ing Earl Grosvenor, a Liberal, will move an amendment,
to the effect that it is not expedient to entertain a mea-
sure of electoral reform that does not deal with the entire
subject. This amendment will be supported by the whole
Conservative party, and it is expected, by a considerable
body of the Liberals. It is thought to be very doubtful
whether the Government will be able to secure a majority.
Should it fail, the Ministry will resign, Lord Derby will
be " sent for, and a mixed Ministry of the Conservative
Liberals and Liberal Conservatives will be attomptec.
With what success remains to be seen. On this point opi-
nions are divided ; but office is a marvellous solvent. of
small differences, and in principle, as in policy,
groundsaties are as one. Personal claims can only be the
fal
for dissension. At all events the Whigs r
otiOetrh the are
eadi-
more nearly allied to the Conservatives than

cals.
YANKEES IN NEW ORLEANS. letter from
New Orleans in the New York, Herald says that
men from the North and West in large num-
bers, many of them lately generals, colonels,
captains, lieutenants, and privates in the national
army, have settled in that city and entered into
business of all kinds, and under their energy, per-
severance, and industiy the old creole metropolis
is fast losing its former French and Spanish charac-
teristics, notwithstanding efforts of the a ncien regime
to taboo the Northmen in trade as well as social
matters. Yankee enterprise is too much for these
latter gentry, and, regardless of their opposition,
is pushing its way rapidly, ready to supply a hand
wherever a hand is needed, and is fast developing
sources of thrift and wealth which, under the old
order of things, were allowed to lie dormant and
unnoticed.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE-Thi D,

VICTORIA CLUB BETTING—This DAY.

CHESTER CUP.
12 to 1 agst Saladin (taken)
16 to 1 agst Gong (taken)
20 to 1 agst Harry Brailsford (taken)
20 to 1 agst Dalby (taken and offered)
20 to 1 agst Surney (taken)
20 to 1 agst Baragah (offered)
22 to 1 agst Sandal (taken)
25 to 1 agst Redcap (taken)
30 to 1 agst Treasure Trove (taken)
66 to 1 agst Mail Train (offered)
TWO THOLT:UNI).
6 to 4 agst Lord Lyon (taken freely)
8 to 1 agst Janitor (taken)
100 to 8 agst Student (offered)
DERBY.
6to 1 aglat Lord Lyon (taken)
6to 1 agst Rustic (offered)
33 to 1 agst Student (offered)
40 to 1 agst Stratliconan (taken and offered)

Th) Charge of Forging the Countess of
Bellew's Will.

Mrs. Anne Casse, a lady of property, residing at
Winterton House, St. John's-wood, again appeared
to answer the charge of forging the will of the latc:
Catherine Countess Bellew, and further, to uttering
the same with intent to defraud.

Mr. Piffard appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr. Lewis for the defence.

Henry De Leros, North-Western-terrace, Coal-
road, Camden-town, interpreter—ln 1859 I was in
Mr. Casse's service, and saw Simmonds frequently
♦write, about 1862. I took receipts from het.
(Looking at the will). I believe that handwriting
is in the writing of Simmonds.

In cross-examination nothing was elicited except
that Simmonds signed the tradesmen's receipts for
sums like ss. Gd.

By the magistrate—She usually signed " E.
Simmonds." (Looking at letters), the witness
would not swear to the writing.

George Regden Mummery—l reside at Henley-
on-Thames, a currier. I knew Esther Simmonds
from 1827 until about 1848. She resided in Henley.
Mrs. Simmonds kept the books at her husband's, a
pastrycooks. I very frequently saw her write, and
have had her receipts to bills. She generally wrote
with a quill-pen ;" E. Simmonds" was her signa-
ture. (Looking at the will) I see no reason to doubt
but that is the genuine handwriting of Esther
Simmonds.
In cross-examination he swore to two signatures
to letters, one signed " Hester Simmonds," both
written by Simmonds. Never saw her write since •
1848, but believed, as an honest man, that it was
her writing. • I saw a signature of -" E. Simmonds"
before I saw the will signature at 'Mr. Jennings. ,"
Emma Britton-4 am not married: My husband •
is a sailor, at sea. I nev6r lived with a man named
Britton. (Much laughter.) lam the daughter of
Esther and Robert Simmonds. Igo by the name
of Britton, but am not married. It is nearly eight
years ago since I saw my mother. I frequently -
saw her write—with a quill pen. I believe that to
be my mother's writing. (Looking at the-will.)
Re-examined—l came up yesterday, having first
seen a photograph of "E. Simmonds" on the will.
Mr. Jennings, the proctor, showed me the signa-
ture in a book. Except that and the will I saw no-
thing else at Doctor's Commons. lam 73 years of
age, and may have made a mistake when I said I
saw three signatures.
Cross-examined—Two letters shown to me are
one in my mother's handwriting, and the other, I
think, is not. The witness here contradicted her-
self respecting one of the signatures.
Mr. Lewis said he had no more witnesses at pre-
, sent.

Mr. Piffard said he had further witnesses to call,
and further wished to say that he could prove Miss
Bellew did spend the money WOO) she won at
Hamburg on the poor, and did not keep it, as had
been said by the defence.
Mr. John Hancock, of Haylebury, Somersetshire,
a clergyman and relation of the Countess-4 am a
disinterested party. I don't believe the signature
is the Countess's. lam certain it is not the sort of
will she would write. She and Miss Frances fre-
quently quarrelled, but were dear friends after-
wards. I last saw her in 1860. My opinion is
that Caroline cared more about Francis than:
anybody else. There are clear mismakes _in.'the
will. (Mistakes explained.)
Mr. Lewis ojected tbat.the evidence was not ad-
missible.

Mr. Arnold told Mr. Lewis he had made the evi-
dence admissible by calling evidence respecting the
children of Henry Bellew, and robbery of notes.
The witness was allowed to give a lot of opinia-
tary evidence.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lewis—She usually
signed C. 13.41ew in ordinary documents, rarely
Carolixe. I wont swear whether it is her hand-
writing or not. I believe it is on the whole (look-
at a letter. The witness first said he thought it
was, and then he thought it was not, the c was
not like hers, and at last he thought it was.)

(Looking at another signature). Some think it is,
hers ; it may be Caroline's written with a finer pen
than usual. (Looking at another signature.)
did not think that was hers. (All the counter-
signatures.) Looking at a letter he bad seen before:
and said was not her handwriting—he persisted in
it ; the letter was written by the Countess to Miss
King. Never heard Miss Bellew say the aunt's
will was a forgery. I first remembered Caroline
when she was 11 and I was 7. In the year 1860 -
she showed me her handwriting. They did'nt then
quarrel in the streets. From 1860 to 1865 I never
saw the Countess or them together. I never had
letters from her since 1860. I constantly saw her
write. (Looking at a letter.) I don't believe it is
her writing. (Again.) I don't believe it is ; the
writing is that of the Countess.
Miss Emily Shee was called by Mr. Lewis to prove
that what this witness swore, for and against those
signatures shown him, was a mistake ; and some of
the letters he swore to as being the Countess's were
actually written by Miss Shee herself, and contra-
dicted him in several points.
The case was proceeding when we went to press;