The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, AUGUST 17, 1861.

such remedial measures as the Government would then feel it
to be their duty to submit to Parliament. Remedies would
thus be the more likely to be appropriate, to be prompt,
and would be proposed with authority which might com-
mend them to notice and acceptance. Great injustice is
often caused by the delay in amending defective legislation;
and not less, perhaps, by leaving doubtful decisions of the
Courts with just enough of authority to enable them to
perplex or to mislead. The public may thus be long em-
barrassed by imperfect legislation or apocryphal decisions,
which usurp the rightful authority of plain, positive law•
Indeed, this opens a large question as to the reporting and
the revision of judicial decisions, when regarded not simply
as the adjustment of private controversy, but as they affect
the general law and the interests of the community. It is a
public necessity, I think, that the present system of irre-
sponsible reporting, and the reviewing of decisions which
from the time when they are published have the sanction
and force of positive law, should undergo a searching scru-
tiny. The clearance and consolidation of the statute law,
the digesting and arranging of the dogmatic and judicial
law, would naturally fall within the province, and come
under the supervision, of this department ; but it may be
considered, perhaps, as of more pressing importance to get
the current legislation into approved working order. The
Houses of Lords and Commons have provided by their
standing orders that, in certain cases, bills intended to be
referred to Parliament should, before they are introduced,
be submitted to certain public departments. These depart-
ments may therefore report their views and make their sug-
gestions, which may assist though not control the Legisla-
ture. It seems, indeed, so obviously reasonable to ask and
to accept advice from those who are peculiarly competent to
give it, that the plan adopted in these cases might be ex-
tended by making the Department of Justice a consultative
body to which a bill might at any time or any stage be re-
ferred, with a view to obtain the best advice. A settled use
of language and a system in the structure of enactments
would naturally result when the work of the draughtsman
selected would be submitted to a standing supervision. This
would facilitate construction, and would prepare for having
the whole body of the law cleared at last of absurdity and
confusion, and our jurisprudence might attain the consis-
tency and acquire the sanctions which, in this our day of
peace and privilege ought to characterise the laws of a wise
and understanding people. I feel myself justified, on the
present occasion in pressing on your attention the import-
ance of having such a department as I have suggested. On
the score of economy 1 would add that, if we calculate the
expense of commissions for the last 30 years, and contrast
this with what a department would have cost the country,
and then consider what would have been the probable
balance on the side of law amendment under a department
instead of these commissions, we might find another illus-
tration of the wise maxim, that the best security for a wise
economy is efficiency. It was with reference to Ireland that
the late Sir Robert Peel advised that the affairs of public
justice should be placed under an Imperial department. His
policy was sound. For this I maintain, that until there be
obtained for both countries the most complete community
of rights and laws that is compatible with whatever is in-
delibly peculiar to each, the Union cannot be said to have
realised its proper purpose. I have always advocated such
assimilation. When a commission was issued in 1859, with
a view to improve procedure in equity, under the sanction
of the late Lord Chancellor Campbell, I urged (but without
success) that Ireland should share in the benefit. Indeed, it
was the deliberate opinion of influential members of the late
Statute Law Commission that it was not practicable to have
even the same criminal law for Ireland as for England.
Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Justice Hayes, and myself thought
otherwise. We had bills prepared in conformity with our
view, and these were approved by the Cabinet in 1858 ;
they were taken up by the succeeding Cabinet, and to a
great extent, though not altogether, in the form which was
chosen by us, they have now become Imperial law, and so
far solved the problem of an assimilation which was sup-
posed to be impracticable. The question of procedure, how-
ever, is, I regret to say, still left open, even in the criminal
law, and yet it is the most urgent question. We have assi-
milated our criminal law ; we hope to assimilate our proce-
dure. Why should there be a difference in our laws of pro-
perty ? Why should there be any conflict of commercial
law ? 1 might lay bare many of the evils to be remedied
that not only are against policy, but work injustice which
they who suffer are left to deplore, but cannot (hope to re-
dress. A private member of Parliament may be instructed,
a law officer of the Crown may be spoken to ; the matter
ends in some official platitude from a Home Secretary or a
pie-crust promise to a deputation. Patching or cobbling
may in an extreme case be attempted, and the rent is made
worse. Look at what we call our marriage law. You may
search for it in the lumber-room among the rubbish of acts
of Parliament—lrish, English, and Imperial. Thoughtful
men ask themselves at last, Is marriage indeed to remain
an institution of God, or has it become the creature and
convention of human law? The relation of husband and
wife is constituted— completely and irrevocably constituted
by the free consent of parties competent to contract, and
intending by such consent to constitute the relation. It
has been said, but loosely said, by great authority, that so-
ciety is a party to the contract; it would ba more accurate
to say that society may have an interest in its completion.
In this day'of religious liberty parties competent to con-
tract and constitute a marriage ought tohave the free choice
of having that marriage solemnised by such religious sanc-
tion as they may think fit to select andsuperadd. Marriage
is publiei quid Divinijuris ; it is valid everywhere, if valid
anywhere. Where the State moulds the laws of property
for the convenience of the cornznunity, it may justly re
quire—as a matter of sound policy—that every marriage
which can claim to be recognised fur proprietary or
other civil privileges shall have had such sanctions
superaddel and publicly recorded in such form as the
interest of society may demand for its common con-
venience. Nothing more than this should be required.
But this, be it observed, would be a part of the law of pro-
perty; it leaves the law of marriage as God has left it—
sacred and universal. In bringing reason and experience
to bear upon the amendment of the law, the work of expur-
gaticn must be considerable. We have to get rid of restric-
tions which ought never to have been imposed, and which
have aggravated the evils that they were intended to
remove. Of this class are those which have professed to
secure trustworthy evidence, and to prevent frauds and per-
juries, by excluding interested witnesses, and requiring, in
certain cases, documentary evidence, executed with a pre-
scribed formality. Ought oral testimeny to be excludel in
any case where it is the best that at the time of the inquiry
can be produced ? Man indeed is both frail and fallible ;
he may deceive and be deceived, but still it is a law of our
nature to act on testimony which may be depreciated but
not destroyed by out liability to deception. This considera-
tion has led to the removal of some arbitrary restrictions, '
which have been taken away by the statutes which were
passed at the instance and with the aid of your noble presi-
dent. Although in both countries the parties in a civil suit
are now competent and compellable to give evidence in that
suit, in neither country can an accused man be examined
as a witness on his own behalf in a criminal proceeding.
He is indeed permitted to make a statement, but he cannot
sustain it by his oath, nor submit it to the test of a cross-
examination, so that if it be true its value is unjustly de-
preciated. There is no case, lam confident, in which an
innocent man is put on his trial in which ho does not feel
the injustice of the existing law. There are cases in which
no one but the accused could expose the falsity of the ac-
cusation, and there are cases also in which the accusation
would not have been made, perhaps not even contemplated,
but for the very rule which may screen it from exposure.
The spirit of our constitution strives to protect the innocent
rather than to clear the guilty. Such should be the effect
of our law. I have glanced at the Statute of Frauds, under
which oral testimony is excluded in cases where its admis •
sion, as the best evidence at the time available, might help
the search for truth. But observe how inconsistent, if not
impolitic, are the provisions of this statute. Why should
oral evidence of all the particulars be sufficient where the
subject of the contract is of small value, or even where a
sixpence has been paid to bind the bargain, or a fragment
of the bulk has been accepted as a part of the whole ?
by should an admission of the fact of such part pay-
ment, or part acceptance, be provable by oral testi-
mony ? Why should oral evidence be admissible when
the written contract has been lost, though this may
have occurred by mere negligence? Why should the re-
scinding of the contract be provable by oral testimony ? Or
why should part performance make oral evidence sufficient

to establish and enforce the contract in a court of equity ?
How many honest contracts have been evaded by this arbi-
trary legislation ? It may be proper to protect, in certain
cases, the weak against the strong; but when the parties
deal on equal terms, why should they not have been left
free to make their bargains in such form, and with such
safeguards, as their own interests might require, or their
own prudence might suggest ? If this simple and sound
policy had been consistently adhered to, then the testimony
of the parties would have been available according to their
own free choice, according to its intrinsic value, and, what
is of greater consequence, also according to , the general
course of commercial law. If our tribunals are equal to the
duty of sifting testimony, detecting falsehood, and discover-
ing truth, the sources of evidence should be freely opened.
It is the prerogative of our moral nature, which it is no less
our duty than our interest to cultivate, to enable us to weigh
and to value testimony, subject (as it must ever be) to the
manifold influences of interest and corruption. Let us be
assured that our success depends, not on legislative restric-
tions, not on limited inquiry„ but on our metal culture, our
general intelligence, our improved experience, a deeper in-
sight into human nature, a more extended acquaintance
with social science. There are other subjects of interest on
which I do not dwell, for obvious reasons. The bankruptcy
law is still on crutches. I cannot be satisfied until 1 see an

Imperial law of bankruptcy for the United Kingdom. The

elaborate report which has been prepared by the committee
to whom the patent law was referred I will not anticipate,

nor shall 1 further refer to any topics on which I have en-

largui in the address of 18.58. Thrro is a subject of grave

importance which desezves a Bpecial netice—J. alimie to the

quesii ,n of legal and equitable jurisdiction. The tendency
of recent legislation hao been to remove the impediment
which had made the courts of law and equity rather anta-
gonistic than ancillary to each other. The early history of
our courts of equity shows that the courts of law had
limited their own jurisdiction by a narrow and technical pro-
cedure which was inadequate to afford the judicial remedies
that were required by the growing requirements of society.
Why, it may well be °Ad, should not the resources of

either be made available to both? An appropriate proce-
dure and a sufficient staff of officers are needed to give effect
to equitable remedies, and it is by the amendment of the
law of procedure that the courts of law have been in some
degree enabled to deal with equitable questions ; but this is
left in an unfinished state; the difference in the manner
of relief has been overlooked by the Legislature. Every
court of justice, whether it be a court of law or of
equity, should be enabled to do complete justice
between the same parties in respect of the same subject
matter, either by the convenient interchange of powers and
duties each with the other, or by enabling the same court to
exercise the entire jurisdiction so far as is necessary, in the
pending suit for the administration of complete justice.
Our judicial system ought to be harmonious in itself. The
suitor should never be subjected to the unjust penalty still
imposed on a mere mistake of jurdisdiction, nor in the con-
tingency of an inquiry turning out abortive in consequence
of the inability of the court to give remedial effect to its own
decision. In one view this may be regarded as a question of
procedure and the convenient division of judicial labour, but
it involves the higher policy of restoring the unity ofjustice
itself. The restitution of conjugal rights between law and
equity may have a beneficial influence on legal education.
This is too often confined to a spacial training in the mere
fragment of a great profession, and the tendency of this pro-
fession to narrow the mind is almost proverbial. Limited
culture in any form must tend to narrow the mind. We
should not forget the " idols of the den." Clarendon has
spoken of this, as exemplified in what he observed of the
clerical profession; and Arnold, with his mild wisdom, has
urged on the student of theology the vital importance of
liberal and comprehensive study. Is it not worthy of social
science to give a greater efficiency to our judicial system, to
secure a greater reverence for the law itself, a higher posi-
tion for the legal profession? Public justice must have its
ministers, and public policy requires that these should be
men of refined feeling and cultivated minds. It is not enough
to have a supply of rough-and-ready justice. However use-
ful this lower currency may be, we must seek to maintain a
great and goodly system of jurisprudence,under which pub-
lic order, civil and religious freedom, protection of life and
property may be adequately secured—a system which will
nurture advocacy of the highest order, and encourage the
learning, the wisdom, and the love ofjustice which are not
less the ornament than the support of judicial authority.
To place the law of the land before the people, as a great
system of justice in which they have a real and abiding in-
terest, is worthy of our earnest and united efforts. Our juris-
prudence ought never to be separated from our social pro-
gress, nor from ourmoral advancement. " The human idea
of justice," says Dr. Whewell, " is susceptible of many and
large progressive steps, in the way of clearness, consistency,
and comprehensiveness. In the moral history of man, this
idea advances from the hard rigour of inflexible written law
to the equitable estimation of the real circumstances of each
case ; it advances also from the narrow law of a single com-
munity to a larger law, which includes and solves the con-
flict of such laws." But here I must halt. I have reached
the extreme limits of my own department. I cannot now
turn towards the venerable hall of justice where we assemble
without being reminded that there I learnt to reverence the
laws and the institutions of my country. I cannot forget
the many years of kindly intercourse which I had with my
brethren of the Bar, and with those venerable magistrates,
since gathered to their everlasting rest, who have enriched
our jurisprudence with the treasures of their sober wisdom,
their exact learning, and their chastened experience. Their
memorials have not perished with them ; they are bound
up with the moral order of the world, for the jurisprudence
of every ccuntry is connected with the great system of uni-
versal justice, whose seat is in the bosom of God.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—LIVERPOOL, AUG. 16.
CHARLTON V. PRESCOTT.
The plaintiff in this cause was Ellen Charlton, a
domestic servant, and the defendant was Peter
Prescott, the stationmaster at the Oakes station,
on the line between Turton and Bolton. The
action was brought to recover damages from the
defendant for a breach of promise to marry the
plaintiff.
Mr. Ernest Jones and Mr. Edwards appeared
for the plaintiff; and Mr. Sowler, Q.C., for the
defendant.
Mr. Jones, in opening the case, said that at the
time of the alleged breath of promise the plaintiff
was a handloom weaver, and the defendant was the
son of a farmer. At the time of the commence-
ment of the events which would be detailed to them
the defendant was also a handloom weaver, but
since then he had risen in the social scale, and he
was now a stationmaster. The plaintiff and the
defendant became acquainted about three months
before Christmas, 1851, and a regular courtship
commenced in the same year. They would see that,
although the commencement of that courtship dated
back to so very long a period, it did not terminate
until a comparatively recent day. It appeared that
they were publicly recognised among all the ac-
quaintances of their respective families as affianced.
and as intending to become husband and wife ; and
the defendant was on terms of such intimacy with
the plaintiff's family as he could not have been if
it were not for that intention. In fact, everything
was done which would prove that such intended
marriage was expected between the two. The de-
fendant gave the plaintiff his likeness; he sent her
a lock of his hair; he actually reached the flights
of symbol and of poetry, inasmuch as he presented
the plaintiff with a bed quilt on which were em-
broidered the words " Ellen and Peter Prescott."
He took some of her money—not at all in an un-
handsome manner, but she, having £2 upon her on
one occasion when they were courting, asked him
to take care of it for her. She forgot to ask him for
it back, and he put it in the bank in his own
name. He had been liberal in his presents to
her; he was not at all a stingy individual to wards
the plaintiff. He actually used to send her three-
penny pieces in letters, until they amounted to the
number of 24, informing her that those pieces were
to accumulate, and that she was not to part with
them on any account until a sufficient sum was thus
collected to buy the wedding ring. The learned
counsel said he had already told them that the
courtship commenced at Christmas, 1851, and they
would find that it did not end until August, 1858,
so that it was a long courtship, and it had not
ripened into matrimony. As though he had a sort
of presentiment of this on his mind, the defendant
had actually made the plaintiff a present of a book
entitled " Unripe Fruit"--a very suitable present
from a person whose matrimonial love was so long
in ripening as that of Peter Prescott. The learned
counsel said he should be able to call several wit-
nesses to prove that. the defendant had made the
plaintiff repeated offers of marriage. He had told
a person named Mrs. Guest that he was the plain-
tiff's accepted suitor, and he asked that lady to cook
the wedding dinner for them ; but, said the learned
counsel, the wedding dinner for those two had yet
to be conked. He told a Mrs. Grundy that he was
going to marry her friend Ellen Charlton, and some
little dispute took place between them as to when it
should be. He was not in the position of being com-
pelled to resort to an implied promise for he would
prove to them a positive promise, and show them
from a number of letters that that promise was
iterated, reiterated, and re-reiterated in the most
enthusiastic language. So much was the matter
agreed to be settled among the plaintiff's relatives
that her father sold to the defendant for £5 an old
watch which had been in the possession of the
family for agreat number of years, and which was
worth £9, but it was understood that the defendant
would never let it go out of the family. The learned
counsel then read a number of letters from the de-
fendant to the plaintiff breathing the strongest
affection. They were written its the style of an
illiterate man and were full of religious allusions.
One of these letters is sufficient as a sample :
"You May Read this Letter hopeing that the Letter you
are Readine, was Writ in the spirrit,and ails with simplicity,
hopeing that the Lore Jesus Christ may bless your soule.
My Love if What I send you in this Envelope is
Worth a Kiss Please to give me one the Next tim I corn
over Livering this to You.
"Together Let us sweetly Live
"Together Let us die
"And each a stary Crown revive
"And rain above the skyes
" Let Love inspire the whole
Let peace Lova and Mercy join()
"Let your Hart be filled with Love
"Let Mercy and Love fill my Hart
"Let Jesus inspire Your Breast
"Jesus is a quiet Mind, Jesus is a gentle Mind, Jesus is
a pataant Mind, Jesus is a Noble mind.
"Yours truly PETER PRESCOTT.
" Yours Mercifull Love
"PETER PRESCOTT My Love.
"Miss Ellen Charlton, Astley."
On the 15th of August,;lBs7, the defendant had
married a young lady 22 years of age, named Alice
Fairclough. The learned counsel urged that the
plaintiff was greatly affected by the defendant's
conduct towards her; she became very ill, and con-
tinued so for six months, after which she left her
previous employment and became housekeeper to an
old gentleman. In consequence of her straitened
circumstances she had been unable to bring the
action sooner, but her hien& had now enabled her
to do so.
The plaintiff's father, mother, and several other
witnesses were called, but as Mr. Sowler stated,
in reply to his lordship, that after the letters which
had been read he should admit the promise, they
were only examined as
and its effect upon the plaintiff, as stated by the
learned counsel. to the breach of the promise
Mr. Sowler then addressed the court on behalf
of the defendant, urging
that it was a matter of
regret tkat, cne of I-ler Maj;t9t•y's 3 tidges, the jury-
inf 13, actl ()I139", 8h e'7l:l i~iii7lJ t:o time occu-
pied with such a trivial and paltry case. The
remark of the learned counsel on the other side
about Peter having grown rich, reminded him of
Peter Stock, in Loan of a Lover, and the song of
Gertrude :

" I've no money, so you see
" Peter never thinks of me."
Peter seemed to have been remarkably simple

; throughout the whole transaction. Peter had not
kept copies of his love letters, so he did not, like his
learned friend, enjoy the great privilege of being
able to quote the absurd " poetry" and the letters ;
but his learned friend, as his ingenuity and evident
taste in matters of that kind had suggested to him,
had favoured them with the most appropriate quo-
; tations. He urged that the case looked amazingly
like a speculative action, brought for the purpose of
pocketing a certain amount of costs, and in conclu•
sion said he should be doing wrong if he took up
any more of their time with the case, for he felt
that he had already occupied them too long with it.
The learned Judge, in submitting the case to the
jury, said he could not at all agree with the obser-
vation that hearing of the case was a waste of time—
either of his time or the jury's. The young woman
who brought the action was, no doubt, in a very
humble class of life, but she was as much entitled
to have compensation for a wrong done to her as
any one of them, and his lordship thought it was a
very ungracious observation made on the part of
the man who had injured her to say that it was a
loss of time to estimate calmly and dispassionately
the loss he had inflicted upon her. His lordship
would be very sorry indeed if the day should
ever come when people of the class to which the
plaintiff belonged should be less fairly, less tempe-
rately, and less patiently dealt with when they
brought a case into the courts of justice than any
other individual in the kingdom. Now, he was sure
he should have concurrence in that observation. It
had also been said that the case was amusing. Well,
they would not quarrel with that. They sat there
and heard a great many dull things, and it was
not often that they had such an opportunity of
having their labours lightened with a little amuse-
ment to make the time pass more pleasantly. Well,
they had had their amusement, and the time had
passed lightly in consequence; but having done
that, let them forget the amusement and proceed to
business. His lordship remarked that the loveletters,
though they might appear ludicrous to them, un-
doubtedly portrayed that at the time they were
written there was a very strong feeling of attach-
ment between the parties. The question therefore
for the jury to consider was, whether the plaintiff
had done anything to forfeit the affection of the
defendant, and they had had no evidence of any-
thing of the kind. As far as they could see, there
was not outward cause operating that would justify
or excuse the defendant or mitigate his conduct.
The learned counsel for the defendant had asked,
was it not very hard that he should be put about
now that he had made for himself a comfortable
home and had a wife and child ? Why, that was
the home which the plaintiff had lost ; that home
had been made at the plaintiff's expense; it was
that very home of which the plaintiff had been
robbed. His lordship did not wish to say anything
to induce them to give intemperate damages, but
he made these observations because it had been sug-
gested that it was a trumpery case, and a case
brought for costs; but it was for them to consider
whether that was the case or not. They had heard
the explanation which had been given by the other
side foi? not bringing the action sooner—namely,
that the poor girl was in a very humble position of
life, and really had not the means at hand to com-
mence at once the action against the defendant.
The jury, after a short consultation, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, £5O.

WIfITTAKER, ADMINISTRATRIX V. LEES AND

OTIIEUS.

This was an action for negligence to recover com-
pensation under the late Lord Campbell's Act for
the death of the plaintiff's husband.
Mr. Sergeant Wheeler and Mr. Torr were for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Monk, Q.C., and Mr, Spinks'for
the defendant.

It appeared that the defendant was a coalpit
owner near Oldham, and plaintiff's husband a work-
man who had been engaged to repair a waggon
which was lying broken at the bottom of the
colliery tramway. It appeared that the coal
waggons were let down an incline by a rope
attached to a fixed engine, and it was
alleged the rope ought properly to run over
five pulleys, and that a breaksman should ac-
company the waggons in order to stop them.
The negligence alleged was that no breaksman was
provided, and only one pulley, the others having
been broken. On the 4th of April last, the plain-
tiff's husband, while on his way down the incline,
was suddenly knocked down by the lashing of the
rope which was thrown to one side by the sudden
checking of the waggons by the fixed engine, the
engineman stopping their velocity instead of a
breaksman. The blow of the rope caused his death,
and the plaintiff now sought compensation in da-
mages. The defence was that the plaintiff's hus-
band contributed by his own negligence to the ac-
cident, as he had disobeyed an express rule of the
colliery, which prohibited workmen from being on
the tramway while the tope was in motion. It was
also objected that there was no evidence that five
pulley wheels were necessary for the safe working
of the tramway, as alleged by the plaintiff in her
declaration, or that the defendants knew anything
about the matter.

His Lordship, being of this • opinion, nonsuited
the plaintiff. _ _ _

In the Criminal Court a trial of a charge of rape
occupied the morning. A number of small cases of
an unimportant nature occupied the day.

A _DISPUTED WILL.

A disputed will case that has excited much
curiosity and interest in the west of Scotland was
last week disposed of after a trial of seven days by
the Jury Ccurt at Edinburgh. The Lord Justice
Clerk presided. The action was instituted by the
relatives of the late Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander
Maclean against Major-General Maclean and others,
his trustees and executors, for the purpose of reduc-
ing his will, on the ground that the testator was in
a weak and facile state of mind, if not altogether
unsound, at the date of its execution. The principal
deed was executed in 1856, with codicils in 1858
and 1859, and the effect of the will if valid was to
convey his whole estate, amounting to about £20,000,
invested in Three per Cent. Consols, to trustees for
the purpose of educating "poor and deserving" boys
of tne name of Maclean. The relatives of the
deceased were entirely passed over ; but there was
a bequest of £5O per annum to his housekeeper, Mrs.
Janet Macdonald or Crawford. Lieutenant-Colonel
Maclean died in 1859, aged 80, at' Millport, Island
of Cambrae, Firth of Clyde, where he had resided
for the last years of his life. He was the son of a
sheep farmer in the Island of Mull, and was the
second of a family of 14, most of whom grew up.
Ile entered on military service as a Volunteer in
1801, and soon afterwards joined the army, from
which he sold out in 1847, having attained the rank
of lieutenant-colonel in the 3d West India Regiment.
Of his 43 years service 33 were spent in the East
and West Indies and in Africa. The pursuers
alleged that for some years prior to 1856 the deceased
was insane or weak and facile in mind, his mental
malady exhibiting itself in bodily illness, in delu-
sions, and in hatred of his relatives, to whom he
had formerly shown warm affection, this hatred
being fostered by his housekeeper, with whom they
said he cohabited. The evidence, of which we give
a brief abstract, presented some curious points.
Mrs. Mary Macdonald, sister of pursuer, resid-
ing in Glasgow, deposed that the deceased in early
lite was very kind to his relatives, and con-
tinued so till his return from Africa in 1843. His
mind and temper by that time had become so
much changed that " for all his money" witness
could not put up with him. On his return from the
West Indies, in 1848, his temper was quite wild
when he got into a rage, so that he could scarcely
speak, and witness was very glad when he left
Glasgow. He abused his relatives and said every-
thing but what was good about them. He told
people a story about his being fed by an eagle when
a child, in which there was no truth. He was
always scolding about money, and to every one he
gave money to it was always the same way. He
often spoke abusively of his sister, Mrs. Morrison,
and her sons. He promised them many thousands,
and put them away with nothing. Witness's son
John was now dead. He married a Roman Catholic
but there are some Roman Catholics "as good as
us." (Laughter.)
Mary Glass, innkeeper, Millport, thought there
was a weakness in the mind of deceased. He used
veryunbecoming language in the presence of women.
He was much in the practice of speaking to chil-
dren, but not indecently. Children did not treat
him respectfully; he was always a laughing stock
to them ; they ran after him and made fun of him.
By most people he was considered peculiar. He
sometimes bawled and sometimes spoke low, shifted
the subject of conversation rapidly, and began
another story before he finished the first. His con-
versation was sometimes sensible, but " when not
sensible he spoke nonsense." He told witness re-
peatedly about being carried away by an eagle
when three years old, and fed in the eagle's nest.
He was often dirty in his talk—very dirty. His
conduct was much spoken of by the girls, and he
was like a laughing stock to them.
Cross•examined—He was a sober-living man,
taking no drink of any kind. He always went
against the ministers, and sent them to the bad
place. Never knew of his being in church except
one
.forenoon. Ile spoke against religion. He did
not native in Heaven.
The Lord ja-3tiec eicrk-- -Nor the other place, I
suppose. (Latightcp)
(LM Y
rughter.)
d la. oung—oh yea ; he sent the ministers there.
ou
David Goldie (gardener to the Dowager Countess
of Glasgow)—Often met Colonel Maclean while at
Millport. He was a little peculiar in his speaking
—swearing. He often talked to the children and
the girls in the street, making fin of them. He

generally turned into obscene conversation when he
had an opportunity. He was always a little of
what we call " crackit." Had heard him swearing
and damning somebody's eyes when there were no
eyes to damn, unless he saw witness through the
paling. (Laughter.) Once waited on him to ask
him for a subscription for a church purpose. He
gave them whisky and a song, but no subscription.
(Laughter.) He said that all the parsons were
rogues and vagabonds.
Duncan M'Vean, gamekeeper, Cumbrae -ferry,
thought deceased of a very peculiar turn of mind.
He mumbled away about a good many things, and
witness often could make no sense of them. He had
seen him surrounded with children, making a noise
and pulling at his coat-tails, while he " skelped"
with his stick. Children would not so behave to a
man in his senses. Always considered him " what
we call crackit." Never knew him associate with
the better classes in the island.
Mrs. Simpson, formerly of Millport, said the boys
treated the Colonel as a " daft" man. He generally
went about speaking to himself, often in a loud and
angry tone. Mrs. Crawford seemed to have the
power of the purse, and to act as his wife.
Colin Campbell, smith at Millport, said deceased
spoke very loud to himself, and walked very quick.
He told him, with apparent seriousness, that he had
no relations living.
Archibald Campbell, joiner,deposed that deceased
was known as the " daft major;" that he went
about mumbling to himself, and talked improper
language to little girls. Miss Macdonald (now
Mrs. Crawford) lived with him, and appeared to
have complete command of him.
Several former servants in the house were called
to depose to statements made by the housekeeper to
the affect that the relatives were to get none of the
Colonel's money, and to speak to the control Mrs.
Crawford exercised over him.
Captain Maon, 9th Lancers, and formerly in the
86th with Colonel Maclean, spoke to various eccen-
tricities exhibited by the latter, and to his being
considered as " cracked" by the officers.
John Abercromby Maclean and John Maclean,
nephews of deceased, described his demeanour to-
wards his relatives, of whom they said he spoke
very abusively. The latter said that every time
he saw him he had a rhyme against him. He told
witness that his father used to go to an eagle's
nest, and sew up a certain part of the young eagles,
so that they could not eat nor perform other neces-
sary functions. (Loud laughter.) The old eagles
would then bring muir-fowl to the nest, and as the
young eagles could not eat them, he would take
away these fowls, and undo what he had done.
(Renewed laughter.) He said also that one of the
eagles brought a child from Colonsay, but it was
picked up by some men. It was called Son of the
Eagle. He seemed quite serious when he told this
story about the eagles. He said nothing about
himself being in an eagle's nest.
Dr. Macgowan, Millport, was examined at great
length as to the state of health of the deceased
for some years prior to his death. He attributed
his impaired health to softening of the brain. The
old man's talk was very obscene. He abused his
nephew Ralph on one occasion, and said he had
given him thousands of pounds which he had spent
in debauchery. When he was in a great rage he
could scarcely speak ; the effort was too violent.
On one occasion he said doctors were a -- set of
impostors, who made people worse than they were.
Dr. Bucknill, F.R.C. P., London, Dr. Skae, Royal
Edinburgh Asylum, and Dr. John Brown were
called in, and great part of the previous evidence
read to them. They were then examined hypo-
thetically as to the sanity or insanity of the
deceased. Taking all the facts together, they bad
no hesitation in pronouncing him insane from about
1853, if not from a prior date.
The following evidence was then called for the
defenders :
Major-General Lowth served with deceased from
1832 to 1840, and considered him as sound-minded
a man as ever lived. He was what he would call
a rough diamond—not a polished man. He was
very passionate, and quickly roused, and was in the
habit of muttering to himself. He discharged his
duties ably and well.
Major-General Maclean knew the late Colonel
Maclean from 1840 till his death. He thought him
a man of vigorous intellect, and had no reason to
doubt his sanity. He had a great deal of anecdote,
though sometimes not the most refined. He had
heard him speak of a story about an eagle's nest,
and he had heard others do so. It was common in
Mull to harry eagle's nests, and people used to tie
up certain parts of the young eagles with a twofold
object, one of which was to make them so heavy that
they could not fly, and the other to prevent them
from eating so much, so as to secure the food
brought for their use by the eagle. Any of the old
people in Mull must know that this was a common
practice. Had heard him speak of Ralph and
Donald Maclean, his nephews, and say that they
had ill-requited him for what he had done for them.
He got into a passion when any one mentioned his
nephew Morrison, who had raised a lawsuit against
him. Colonel Maclean always behaved like a gen•
tleman when visiting witness, and was as coherent
in his conversation the last time he saw him as in
1840. He had seen no appearance of familiarity
between the Colonel and his housekeeper. He never
heard him indulge in o'Jscene conversation. He
liked a joke, and it was not always of the most re-
fined kind.
Archibald Donald Maclean, a retired Deputy-
Assistant Commissary-General, deponed that he
knew Colonel Maclean, and considered him a shrewd,
intelligent man, who was fond of telling Highland
stories, and told them distinctly, though with a little
colouring. He thought him perfectly able to man-
age his own affairs, and he was told by the Colonel
in 1843 or 1844 that none of his relatives would be
benefited by his means, as he had been disappointed
in them.
Rev. Alex. Marshall, minister of the parish of
Cumbraes, deponed that he had often talked with
Col. Maclean on the street, and he thought him of
sound mind; that he had visited him when he was
ill, and prayed with him at his own request ; that
he was intelligent in his conversations, except when
he spoke against parsons. (Laughter.)
Wm. Thomson, advocate, deponed that he had
been in the habit of living at Millport during the
summer from 1814 to 1856, and he thought Colonel
11/aclean to be peculiar and eccentric, but certainly
not imbecile or insane. The Colonel spoke vehe-
mently, and told stories in a rather racy way, but
used to finish them.

Cross examined by Mr. Young—The Colonel's
stories were rather broad and coarse, but never
" blue." He swore very hard. I think he was per-
fectly able to make a will.
Numerous other witnesses were called to prove
Colonel Maclean's rational conversation, his regular
habits, his jocular disposition, and even his thrft,
Wm. Templeton, butcher, deponing that the Colonel
made all his marketing, and never gkve thirteen-
pence for a shilling's worth.
Rowland Hill Macdonald, Glasgow Post•office,
deponed that the story told by Colonel Maclean
about. a m'an harrying an eagle's nest by operating
on the young birds was quite current and generally
believed in Skye, and, being surprised that a man
should be held to be mad for telling a story of that
kind, he had written to the Lord Advocate offering
to come forward as a witness. There was a tradi-
tion of a child having been carried from Skye to
Mull by an eagle.
Mr. Janet Macdonald, or Crawford, housekeeper
to deceased, deposed that she had been in his service
since 1852, and that the colonel was very regular
and methodical in his ways. She never spoke to
him about making a will, for she " durstna'."
Witness was 17 when she entered his service. She
was married to Donald Crawford in 1854. Her
salary was £4O a year, but she got £2OO from him
when she left in 1854 to go to Hamilton with her
husband. She returned to him in the spring of
1855. She some time afterwards left him in conse-
quence of a quarrel, taking her husband with her,
but she went back after he had written several
times for her, saying that things were going to the
duce. The colonel once told her he was to leave her
£5O a-year, as he wished to keep her off the parish.
He said that for the ingratitude of his relatives he
would leave them nothing. Ralph Maclean and
Morrison proposed to her to make out that the
colonel was insane, and put him into an asylum and
then divide the money. Witness never thought the
colonel mad, though she may have called him
" daft," that being a common word of hers.
Several professional witnesses, who had conducted
affairs for the deceased, were called to prove that
they never imagined him to be insane ; and Dr.
Douglas Maclagan, President of the Royal College
of Surgeons, Edinburgh, Dr. W. T. Gairdner, and
Dr. Lowe, Saughton Asylum, gave their decided
opinion that insanity was not proved by the evi-
dence, that all the symptoms relied on might exist
without implying insanity, and nothing more than

eccentricity had been made out.
A lengthened correspondence was put in with the
view of proving that Colonel Maclean was di▪
ssatis-
fied and disappointed with the conduct of hi▪ s rela-
tions, and had formed the design of disinheriting
them. As early as 1826, distressed by the conduct
of his brothers, he writes—". If I had anything, I
have no one worthy to leave it to, fer it would only
give them the means of increasing the degrading
,
he continued to
sng
indulgence I want to prevent ;" and subsequent
letters seem to indicate that, while he continued to
remonstrate
oonustt
rtaot
e brothersan d
nephews,
d
threaten; and in 1844 he warns
the latter that they would be again taken on
y
for another year only. In 1839 he sa s—
,, i
fair g
ame, having been a ranch cow andam
fool all my
life, that there is only mention and pay."
Mr Young, advocate, addressedthe

pursuers, and was followed by the Lord-Advocate
for the defenders. _ _ .

The Lord Justice-Clerk summed up, his charge
being highly favourable to the defenders' case.
The jury, amid mingled cheers and hisses, re-
turned a verdict for the pursuers.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

WAKEFIELD—Auo. 16.

The demand for wheat was again dull. A few choice
simples met a fair sale at prices generally lower than last
week. Beans steady. Barley quiet. Oats and shelling
were at late rates.

LOUGHBOROUGH—AUG. 15.
At this market to-day there was a fair average show of
wheat; trade flat, at is reduction on recent prices to effect
sales—white, 60s to 645; red, 505 to 58s per 36 stone.
Barley quite as high as in the week previous, malting
selling at 37s to 41s per qr., grinding 28s to 30s per 30 st.
Oats a steady sale, and late values obtained. Beans were
steady, at last week's rates.

EXETER—AuG. 1G:
Wheat, white.. 7s Od to7s 6d I Barley. 4s Od to 5s Od
Ditto new .7s Od to Os Od Oats 3s Oa to 3s 6d
Flour, fine, 46s is —s; seconds, 42s to —s per sack.

CATTLE.
Fat beef,p score," lls to 12s0d Ewes, per lb 6), dto —d
Pork carcases,do lls 6d to 12s Wethers, 7d to —d
Lambs, per lb 8d to —d. Fat calves, do 6id to 0 .

Rough fat,

.31d per lb.

DERBY SMITHFIELD—AuG. 14.
A great number of fat beasts to-day, but the demand
was flat. Sheep and lambs were both rather more plentiful,
and both in request. The show of fat pigs was large, and
the demand was slack, with a heavy sale. A poor supplY
of calves.
Beet bid to 7d Veal 6d to Gil
Mutton .... 7d to 71d Pork 9d to 6ct
Lamb Bd to —d Rough fat, 4s 3d per stone•
Hides, 3d to 4id ; calf skins, 5d to 6d.

BRISTOL SUGAR—AUG. 16.
The market for raw sugars is-tolerably steady. Refined
goods are not quite so free of sale, but prices are much the
same. There have been a few sales of rum, with no altera-
tion to notice in price,

COAL MARI
Mims of Coal per Ton al
d.

ET—Aua. 16.
the olose of the market

Walls End.

s. d.
Acorn Close ..17 0
Byron — .17 0
South Kelloe
Cassop l7 9
Brsddyll's Hetton 17 6
Hetton ........18 9
Eden 17 0
Heugh Hall 17 0
Haswell lB 9
Tunstall
Be11.
Keiper Grange.... ..17 3
Whitworth ....15 6
Ships at market, 67 sold, 43.