The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-05 00:00:00

//
'SEW AP jE R
Ci
'
_ _ _
446,
sit
.44
zi
TINS .D_41".3 111,4RA'X'
:71 .
11" - •
CO----4-----VENT GARDEN.
tat 7,
4 ,•-•
mod
~ »re ,t •
k 6411 o.‘ 00
kt..4t4,1116‘ .s.gars- 14/4
v 4; <„, • %4
anmlld md,eatthheers,hotwheofsufpnipl
/%///''',i,,Ajig'" • on' iafe 16,41 1111"‘
Aro. ROIT. CIS , • 4;14
." so, • ha°vewilibeentexttehn

(./
cj,
•
1 7

27~~L2

"//~-~--~-w~

time of year. Generally speakng, a steady business is
doing, as follows :

PRICE '4D• STAMPED, SD.

FRUIT.
s. 4. s. d.l s. d. s. d
Pine apples, per lb 5 0 to 8 01 Cherries, per lb.. 0 0 to 0 0
Colonial do., each 0 0 to 0 0 Filberts, per lb .. 0 6 to 0 9
Grapes, per lb 5 • 0 to 10 0 Cobnuts, per lb 0 10 to 1 0
Foreign do 2 0 to 3 0 Almonds, per bus 0 0 to 0 0
Melons, each
Peaches, perdoz 0 0 to 0 0 Firs, per doz 0 0 to 0 0
Nectarines, per dz 0 0 to 0 0. Strawberries, prpto 0 to 0 0
I
Apples, per bush. 2 0 to 5 0 Gooseberries, i sv. 0 0 to 0 0
Pears, per d0z.... 1 0 to 6 0 Currants, per do. 0 0 to 0 0
Oranges, per 100...3 6 to 10 0 Plums, per do.
Lemons, per 100.. 3 6 to 7 0 Greengages, pr do. 0 0 to 0 0
Apricots, per doz 0 0 to 0 0, liaspberries,prptlo 0 to 0 0

living with him four/months she was compelled to
leave him owing to his ill-usage, and about a month
ago she heard that he had a wife living. Informa-
tion was given to the police, and he was taken into
custody.
Mr. Burcham asked her what position she was in
when she married the prisoner ?
She replied that she was a domestic servant, and
had saved a few pounds, which she handed to the
prisoner, and he soon spent it all.
Mr. Burcham remanded the prisoner.

VEGETABLES.
Greens, dz bunch 2 G to 3 61 Shallots, per lb 0 0 to 0 0
Cabbages, pr do. 0 10 to 1 3 Horseradish, pbu 1 0 to 3 0
Savoy do.. pr do 0 10 to 1 3 Parsley, per ditto 0 2 to 0 4
Cauliflowers, p dz 2 0 to 4 0 Celery, per ditto 0 9 to 1 6
Brocoli, per bli. lO to 1 3 Beet, per doz. .. 1 6 to 2 0
Old potatoes,p tonal 0 to 110 0 Parsnips, per do. 0 0 to 0 0
New ditto, per punt 0 to 1 3 Small salad, p. pn, 0 2 to 0 3
Peas, per sieve 0 0 to 0 0 Mushrooms,ppotl 0 9 to 1
Turnips, dz bunch 2 0 to 3 0 Artichokes, pr dz 4 0 to 6
•
Carrots, pr do 4 0 to 5 0 Cabbage letts,psc 0 0 to 0
Cucumbers -
11
Garlic, per lb 0 0 to 0 0 Radishes, dz buds 1 0 to 2 0
Sorrel, per sieve 0 G to 0 0 Tomatoes, pr h av 0 0 to 0 0
Spinach, hf.-sv 0 8 to 1 0 Walnuts, per 100 0 0 to 0 0
Itrus. sprouts,h.s 1 6 to 1 9 Chillies, per ditto 0 0 to 0 a
Old onions, dz bun 0 0 to 0 0 Capsicums, per do 0 0 to 0 0
New do., per bun 0 0 to 0 0 Rhubarb, per bun 0 6 to 1 U
Prviich beans, h.c. 0 0 to 0 0 Asparagus, pr do. 3 6 to 7 0
Leeks, per bunch 0 2 to 0 3 Sea kail, per pun. 0 9 to 1 I

LAMBETH.—Mary Ann Adams, a woman ap•
parently about 40 years of age, and servant in the
family of a gentleman residing at Dulwich, was
charged with concealing the birth of her illegiti-
mate offspring, and cutting up the body into small
pieces.

The prisoner, who declined offering anything in
defence, or saying a word in reply to the charge,
was remanded.

THE FINE ARTS.

(From Times)
Lord Lyndhurst hasthe
a better right to be heard
on the subject of the Fine Arts generally, and of
lang
artists,
art of painting in particular, than most of our
it
public
is men. He hi
; life wasmsef spentis themo son of
agreat
artist and
he has ever been united with the body of artists by
many ties offriendship and cordial feeling. There
have not been wanting competent witnesses to
al
assert that, had not the Forum and the Senate
possessed superior attractions for that strong and
vigorous mind, the name of Copley might have
figured a second time among our English artists.
Be this as it may, there is a certain propriety in
Lord Lyndhurst's advocacy of a profession from
which he may be said to have sprung. The painters
have given a Lord Chancellor to England in the person
of that aged man, whose strongest claim to respect
does not rest even upon his undoubted eminence in
his profession. In the decline of life, and when
most other men would have been content to repose
upon the laurels which he had so fairly won, Lord
Lyndhurst has taken a great place among English
statesmen. He did this by a leap so easy, by an
effort to all appearance so slight, that no one
would suppose his life had been assiduously -de-
voted to the practice of a profession which cramps
and narrows even while it strengthens the intel-
lectual faculties. It is not, however, of Lord Lynd-
hurst, but of the Royal Academy, we would speak,
It is sufficiently notorious that for some time past
negotiations have been going on with the object of
transferring the residence of the Royal Academy
from Trafalgar-square to Burlington-house. The
country has recently paid no less a sum than
£140,000 as the purchase-money for the entire site
of Burlington-house, and the idea seems to be that
this site shall be devoted to the accommodation of
certain bodies connected with science, literature, and
the fine arts. Among these the first place is assigned
by common consent to the Royal Academy. It is
clear that the Academy can be no longer left where
it is, now that we have arrived at the settled con-
clusion that the National Gallery is to remain in
Trafalgar-square. Either the trustees of the
National Gallery or the Royal Academicians must
give way. One building of such proportions cant
not contain them both. The rooms assigned to the
collection of works by the old. Masters are ridicua
lously insufficient for the purpose. The formation
of a collection upon a truly grand and national
scale is quite out of the question, unless sufficient
space is procured for the'exhibition of the pictures
with all necessary advantages of light and position.
The Royal Academy, on the other hand, as far as its
annual exhibition of modern pictures is concerned, is
equally cramped with the older and permanent Gal-
lery on the other side of the building. We believe
that half of the complaints which are now made
against the management of the Academy would at
once disappear if they had sufficient room to place
the works of artists not being Academicians in
situations and under lights equally advantageous
with those which assist the works of the more
favoured Academicians into public notice. It is
clear that not even under the most popular system
can every artist be an Academician, but at least
every one should have the opportunity of displaying
the results of his genius and industry without pre-
judice or drawback of any kind.
The question under discussion before the Peers

last night was as to the terms upon which the
Royal Academy was to be removed from Trafalgar-
square to Burlington-house. The position of affairs
would seem briefly to be as follows :—The Govern-
ment are prepared to hand over a very large section
of the Burlington-house site to the Royal Academy,
upon two conditions. In the first place, the Acade-
micians must take only as much space as they really
and bona fide require ; secondly, upon the site
assigned to them they must erect at their own
proper costs a building appropriate to the purposes
of the Academy, as for exhibition halls, schools,
&c. The Academy ask for half the frontage of
the present building facing Piccadilly, and for a
large portion of One of its 'sidei—these to be made
over to themselves and their successors in perpe-
tuity. They ask, in fact, for half the site, which
half represents in money value £70,000. As Lord
Lyndhurst explained the matter last night, the
Academicians are prepared to erect buildings upon
this site to the value of £40,000 or £50,000.
This they consider to be an equivalent ; but, of
course, as a mere question of figures, it is not so.
It is, however, perfectly clear that the matter must

not be looked at in that way. Is the space really
sufficient ? There can be no reason for driving the
Academicians to an unnecessary expenditure; still
less would it be politic, while we are laying the
foundations of a system which is to endure for cen-
turies, to haggle about a little ground more or less.
If, upon due consideration of the whole matter, it
is judged right to make a present to the Royal
Academy of a site suitable for their purposes, let it
be a suitable one. Do not let our children and
grandchildren be called upon to settle and resettle
this question. It is no slight responsibility which
the Academy undertakes—nothing less, in short,
than the training up of the successive generations
of English artists. If such a work can be best
carried out by the instrumentality of the Academy,
we ought to deal with its representatives in a way
which shall preclude the possibility of laying the
blame on the shoulders of the nation in the case of
failure. The objection which presses on the other
side is that there are many societies which are rival
claimants with the Academy for the Burli*on•
house site ; but surely it would be better to find
some other location for the geologists, the astrono-
mers, the botanists, and so forth, than to cramp in
any way so noble a design as that of placing our
English Academy of Painting upon the best pos-
sible footing.
If we are sure that the Royal Academy is the
best instrument for this purpose, by all means,.let
the thing be done ; if not, not. The Academicians
are now asking for two things. They are asking
the nation for the free gift of Vi 0,000. They are
asking, in the next place, that the artistic educa-
tion of the country,—that paramount influence in
all matters of art,—should be handed over to them
and their successors for all time. We do not say
this will not be for the best, but it is a grave ques-
tion indeed when we come to take into considera-
tion the present close constitution of the academic
body. What is the general opinion of artists upon
the subject ? They are the persons whose voices
should be heard in such a matter. As long as the
Academy took no help from the public purse
beyond the accommodation granted to them h
hetmey in
aye
or that particular building,—as long as
instruction from their own funds, and expended the
£7,000 per annum of their own earning in such
manner as might seem to them most fitting —the
public had no great right to interfere in their ,affairs
even by a comment. The whole history of their
connection with the Crown, and of the various con-
cessions made to them from time to time in the
way of accommodation, may be read in a most
pleasing and concise form in our Parliamentary
Report of this day. No man living could tell
this story better than Lord Lyndhurst, who in
his early life had attended the lectures of Sir
Joshua Reynolds and Barry, and who dined
with the Royal Academy last year. If he
have made out a case for his friends and clients,
there can be no doubt as to what our course should
be. Let the Academicians have all they ask, and
let us banish from our minds all niggardliness and
parsimony while laying the foundation of the school
of English painting. On the other hand, before
we give over at once so important a trust to the
charge of any body of individuals, no matter how
able, how honest, how eminent they may be, are
we not justified in asking some guarantee that the
direction of English art shall not be intrusted,
without possibility of recall or reconsideration, to a
small self-elected body ? Is this the best arrangement
we can make for all time. It is not 170,000 we
are about to give the Academicians, but absolute
and despotic power over English art. Is this for
the best ?