The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-09 00:00:00

COUNT C4VOU.R.

A Turin correspondent of th, Paris Presse gives
the following lively picture of ount Cavour :
Count Cavour is, beyond dismte, one of the three
great statesmen of Europe ; lord Palmerston and
the Emperor Napoleon 111. beng the others. The
loss of this man, in the precut circumstances,
would be for ',ltaly irreparabe. Count Cavour's
strength does not lie in his prnciples ; indeed, he
has no inexorably fixed princhles ; but he has an
aim, a clear and definite ain, the greatness of
which would have turned the head of any other
man ten years ago—to make Italy one and inde-
pendent. The men, the means, the circumstances
have been and aio indifferent to him. He has
marched straight, always arm, always alone,
sacrificing his friends, his sympathies, sometimes
his renown, and sometimes his heart. Nothing
has stood in his way. Thy suppleness of his
mind is astonishing. He divines every-
thing, and is seldom mistaken—not as to
the truth, but as to the success of a matter.
He unites the solid, calculating English tempera-
ment with the cold, unscrupulous, often ungener-
ous, political genius of the Italian character.
Count Cavour is a mir.ture of Sir Robert Peel and
Machiavelli. He has something Byzantine about
him—the stratagem, the subtle logic, whose conclu-
sions are sound, paradoxical as they may some
times appear. Read his diplomatic notes ; it is
impossible to be right, lr even wrong in a more
brilliant, solid, and convincing fashion, One is
struck and dazzled eqen when one is not convinced.

Count Cavour, who ,Infortunately has not always
the art of understanding men, has always the art
of understanding a situation; and it is this mar-
-a-- " onntributea tho
Italy of to-day. As the Minister of a power of the
fourth rank he could not create situations like the
Emperor Napoleon, or reckon on the strength of a
great nation, like Lord Palmerston. Count Cavour
had to find a crevice in the policy of Europe slip
in, spring a mine, and cause an explosion. It is
thus that he has conquered Austria and secured
the aid of France and England. Count Cavour
threw himself head foremost, after baying mea-
sured the depth and calculated the advantages of
the fall. The Crimean expedition, his attitude at
the Congress of Paris, the cession of Nice, the in-
vasion of the Papal States last autumn have been
the consequence of this vigorous temper of mind.
As the man of foreign affairs, he is strong, he is on
a level with the situation, with the men of his
time, and with the time itself.

The man of home affairs is less complete, less
finished. Count Cavour has a' general knowledge
of these affairs ; he has enlarged ideas, clear and
liberal ideas, but he wants the practical ability to
set them off to the best advantage. Besides, he is
often unfortunate in choosing men. Witness thae
series of agents he sent into Southern Italy—Nigra
excepted. Count Cavour feels himself above detail,
which, however, is important in administration ;
this is the vulnerable side of his policy, for in foreign
affairs no one disputes his superiority.
There is yet another point which sometimes
startles one in Count Cavour's conduct, and that is
his self-esteem. Count Cavour knows himself, and
knows those about him ; he esteems them little, and
he makes the mistake of letting them see it. He
does not tolerate equals, not having been accus-
tomed to find many. Every one who is brought
into contact with him must bow, and resign him-
self to be moulded by that strong hand. The King
himself feels his magnetic influence. Now any one
that does not consent to be absorbed by Count
Cavour is classed, without further ado, among his
enemies, or rather among his adversaries. Add to
this his sharp and abrupt manner, careless of other
people's susceptibilities, the sarcastic smile crystal-
lized on his face, his habit of giving orders, his
bourgeois appearance, which does not give him even
a chance of success in his little politenesses and
flatteries towards those whom he wishes to wheedle,
his abrupt or embarrassed way of speaking, his
sharp and metallic voice, which makes a bad first
impression, and his petulant, jerky gestures, and
you complete the picture of a man who would at-
tract you little if you were not attached to him by
other bonds.
Count Cavour conducts himself in Parliament
absolutely as if the opposition had no existence, as
if he was in his arawing.rooin 11111011 g .1
-Az rricTiar—
especially when he is bored. He talks, he laughs,
I ha, iliumhie I.nnir !WI Ma cealonErleS, he lolls, he
yawns, twists about the velvet table-cover with his
paper-knife, and makes epigrams ! if he had Ame-
rican habits he would put his feet on the official
table. He sees no one there but the majority, that
is to say his faithful friends. . _ _

Count Cavour is not an orator in the French
sense of the word ; he is one, rather, in the Eng-
lish sense. He has a difficulty in speaking because
he does not wish to say a word too much, a word
which has not the exact force he wishes to give.
He does not speak for the Chamber, but for Europe.
He has a solid, connected, andlucid manner of rea-
soning; he always touches the heart of the question,
and if he is not always right, he at least never falls
into platitudes and commonplaces.
I sum up—the diplomatist is a giant; the admi•
nistrator is inferior to the diplomatist ; the man is
an antithesis. You can never rest in an undeter-
mined attitude towards him.. You must either obey
or rebel against him. He does not let himself be
led by' his friends ; he does nor count his enemies.
He is the intellect ,of Italy in her foreign relations;
he is her heart in her home affairs. He is the soul
of the cabinet, which is identified with him.

HEALTH OF LONDON DURING THE WEEK.

(From the Registrar-General's Weekly Return.)
The deaths in London registered in the week that
endad on Saturday were more than have been shown
in any previous return since the first week in March.
They rose to 1,261. The average number derived
from the returns of corresponding weeks in ten
previous years, 1851 60, and corrected for increase
of population, is 1,220. The number of persons
who died last week therefore exceeds the estimated
mortality by 41.
The births in the week exceeded the deaths in
the same period by- 747.
The increase in the mortality is due chiefly to
whooping-cough, which carried off 124 children,
two-thirds of whom had not completed their second
year. Thirteen also died from croup. In April
whooping-cough was fatal on an average in 84
cases weekly. It was most fatal last week in the
districts on the south side of the river, in which 47
out of the 124 deaths occurred. No less than 9
were recorded in the sub-district of Leather-market,
Bermondsey, 4; in that of London-road; 7 in
Westminster; 5 in the sub-district of St. James,
Clerken well.

Eight deaths from small-pox were returned, -30
from measles, 25 from scarlatina, 8 from diphtheria.
There were 166 from phthisis, the corrected average
of corresponding weeks being 166; and 124 from
bronchitis. thp average being 107.
The deaths of two certenarians were registered.
A female died on the 27th ult. at Windmill-hill,
Hampstead, at the age of 100 years ; and the widow
of a labourer on the 29th, at 3, Fort-street, Old
Artillery-ground, at the age of 102 years. The age
of the latter seems to be well ascertained, and her
daughter is now living at the age of 81 years. A
gasfitter died from "apoplexy following lead palsy."
Last week the births of 951 boys and 1,057 girls,
in all 2,008 children, were registered in London.
In the ten corresponding weeks of the years 1851-
60, the average number was 1,717.
At the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, the mean
height of the barometer in the week was 30.026 in.
The barometer rose to 30.16 in. OR Tuesday, and
fell to 29.83 in. on Friday. The mean temperature
of the air in the week was 46.3 deg., which is 3.7
deg. below the average of the same week in 43 years
(as determined by Mr. Glaisher). The mean daily
temperature was below the average on every day
Satur-
dayexcept
it was about 8 deg. below the average. The
wind generally
blew from the north and north-
west ; on the forenoon of Wednesday it was W.S.W.
Wednesday,
and on Sunday and A
thermometer in the shade fell to the lowest
point in the week, 29.1 deg. on Sunday, and
rose to the highest, 64 deg., on Thursday. The
weekly range was, therefore, 34.9 deg. The mean
daily range was 21.2 deg. The difference between
the mean dew-point temperature and air tempera.
ture was 7 8 deg. The mean degree of humidity of
the air was 74, complete saturation being repre-
sented by 100. Though Saturday was cold, the
greatest heat in the sun's rays was 109 deg. Not
more rain than 0.13 in. fell in the week, neatly all
of which fell on the last tvo days. There was hoar
frost on the .morning of Sunday, and sleet and hail
fell on that of Saturday.

Well-informed Americans are confident that on
the arrival of the Great Easton. at New York, the Northern
States will offer to buy her. The agents of the company
will probably feel themselves justified in making a provi-
sional sale upon adequate terms, which could subsequently
be referred here for confirmation,

LAW .111, TELLIGENCE.—May 8,

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE,
(Before Sir C. Cresswell.)
DRUMMOND, COMMONLY CALLED VISCOUNTESS
FORTH, V. DRUMMOND, COMMONLY CALLED VIS-
COUNT FORTH. •
This was the petition of the wife for a dissolution
of marriage on the ground of the cruelty and adul-
tery of her husband, who is son of the Earl of Perth,
and the respondent entered no appearance.
The ease came before the Judge Ordinary on the
17th ult., but previously some circumstances came
to the knowledge of the Queen's proctor, which
satisfied him that there was collusion between the
parties in order to obtain the divorce originally ap-
plied for, and according to the provisions of the
statute of last year relating to this court, he, 'with
the consent of the learned judge, pleaded that col-
lusion as a bar to the relief for which the petitioner
prayed. On the day of the hearing, counsel for the
petitioner stated that his client could not fully
establish the allegation of adultery against the re-
spondent. She abandoned her prayer for a disso-
lution of marriage, and limited her application to a
judicial separation. The case was proceeded with,
and conclusive evidence was adduced to establish
the cruelty, but in the course of the cross-examina-
tion of the mother of the petitioner it was proved
that the latter had committed adultery with a gen-
tleman named Deering subsequent to the filing of
the petition, and that she was living at present in
a state of adultery. The legal question involved
was, whether under these circumstances the peti-
tioner was entitled to a judicial separation, from
which she would be debarred had she adhered to
her original application for aissolution of marriage,
and the case stood over for argument on this point.
Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., and Mr. Markham appeared
for the petitioner, and the Attorney-General, Mr.
Sergeant Pigott, and Dr. Spinks in support of the
plea of collusion.
Mr. Macaulay opened the case this morning,
and having recapitulated the leading facts, and
repeated the arguments he had used at the
hearing showed that the Queen's Proctor was
not entitled to intervene to prove collusion when
the petitioner applied merely for a judicial
separation. In conducting the case he had most
carefully avoided offering proof tending to establish
the charge of adultery against the respondent,
which had been abandoned, and therefore the peti-
tion was really for a judicial separation on the
ground of cruelty 'which had been proved. The
reason why the prayer for dissolution of marriage
was abandoned was, not that any collusion could be
shown between: the parties, but in order to prevent
the disclosure of the circumstance that his client
had eloped with a gentleman, with whom she was
living in adultery. However, the fact was elicited
in a cross-examination of one of the witnesses, and,
as the object of its concealment had not been effected,
Lady Forth wished to give the proof which she
would have adduced if she proceeded with her peti-
tion for a dissolution of marriage. That evidence
would show such odious conduct on the part of
LOrd Forth as would entirely expunge any suspi-
cion from the mind of the Court that there were
grounds for believing the collusion pleaded by the
Queen's proctor. He understood that the Court
was now to be asked to refuse the application of the
petitioner in consequence of the conclusive evidence
of her adultery, and if that were so he contended
that she should be at liberty, before the case pro-
ceeded further, to show the whole merits of her
case and the demerits of the case of her husband.
He was satisfied that if she were granted that per-
mission she would establish such a case against her
husband as should entitle her to the consideration
of the Court and exemption from being compelled
to live with him again. His formal application to
the Court was, that Lady Forth might be permitted
to produce additional evidence.
The Attorney-General said that this was in reality
a petition for dissolution of marriage by the woman,
and she confessed, or rather was clearly proved,
guilty of adultery pending these proceedings, nay,
that she was at present living in adultery. Under
these circumstances his application was that the
petition should be dismissed out of the court.
Mr. Macaulay contended that it was competent
for parties to ask for leave to amend their petition,
and ask for a decree different to that originally
prayed for.
Sir C. Cresswell said the learned counsel's argu-
ment was fallacious in respect to this case. Roman
Catholics, according to their religion, could not ob-
tain a dissolution of marriage, and therefore might
limit their application to a judicial separation. But
in this instance the petition was filed for a dissolu-
tion of marriage, and therefore the Attorney-Gene-
ral was entitled to intervene.
Mr. Macaulay denied that the Attorney-General
had any materials for proving the collusion pleaded,
Lord Forth not having come forward to plead
against his wife was a redeeming streak in his cha-
racter, and was not to be interpreted as collusion
on his part. alic. 411. n referred to
different legal authorities whose dicta were' in
favour of the arguments.
The Attorney-General said his first difficulty was
to understand what his learned friend desired. Did
he want to give evidence to prove that his client
was not guilty of adultery ?
Mr. Macaulay said that was not his intention.
The Attorney-General said the question then
arose simply what the Court was to do, the adultery
of the petitioner having been proved. He should
have been very glad to have been spared the neces-
sity of coming to the court if his learned friend had
accepted the alternative of withdrawing the peti-
tion for dissolution of marriage and applying
merely for judicial separation. But the petition
before the Court was for a dissolution of marriage
on the ground of adultery and cruelty, and yet at
the same time the petitioner was proved to have
been herself guilty of adultery. He denied that
there were no grounds for believing that there was
collusion between the parties. He had not those
proofs at present, but if they came into his possession
he would feel it his duty to indict the parties at the
Central Criminal Court. He contended that accord-
ing to the settled principle of the old Ecclesiastical
Court, which regulated that of the present court, and
according to the ecclesiastical law of all Christian
countries, applications for divorce a niensa et thoro,
when the petitioner was found guilty of adultery he
was driven froin the court. In this case the wife com-
mitted adultery, and she proves excessive cruelty,
which she alleges drove her to that act. Having
cited the decision of Dr. Phillimore, in the case
of " Dillon v. Dillon," in the Consistorial Court, in
support of his argument, he contended that the
Court could not, consistently with the interests of
religion and morality, grant the petitioner relief,
and called on the learned judge to dismiss the peti-
tion.
Mr. Macaulay replied, and quoted a judgment of
Lord Stowell to prove that that eminent jurist was
in favour of the view he advocated.
Sir C. Cresswell said that, in the case of "Hope
v. Hope." when the parties had the means of ap-
pealing to the House of Lords, he took the liberty
of differing from Lord Stowell, who, he considered,
pushed his doctrine to an extent not warranted by
authorities.
Mr. Macaulay then proceeded to argue the ques-
tion at length.
Sir C. Cresswell said that the application for
permission to go into a new case, on the part of the
petitioner, could not be allowed. With reference
to the other application, as this was the first case
of the kind that had come before the Court, he
should take time to consider his decision.
The case was accordingly ordered to stand over
for judgment.