The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-12 00:00:00

_ .
It would be satisfactory to regard the recent
vote in the Prussian Chamber of Deputies on Baron
de Vincke's amendment to the address, as an au-
thentic expression of enlightened German opinion
on a great question of European policy, rather than
as an incidental ebullition of hostility to a particu-
lar Minister. Baron Schleinitz is not on the best
terms with the Chamber; and an opportunity of
taking him at a disadvantage was not likely to be
lost. An amendment drawn up in tolerably loose
and general terms, susceptible of a diversity of
interpretations, critical in form, negative in pur-
port, restraining rather than censuring, binding to
nothing, deciding nothing, was not unskilfully
devised to inflict a blow upon the Foreign Mini-
ster without committing the Opposition to any
definite responsibilities for the future. Baron
Schleinitz has not yet conciliated the support of the
feudal and Austrian party in the Chamber, though
on the question of Austrian domination in Italy he
can always count upon their votes to a man. On
the other hand, his mincing, tortuous, and timid
advances in the direction of a Royal rather than
national Liberalism make him an object of suspi-
cious importance to constitutional reformers who
desire to make Prussia all that Prussia is not.
Nor can the Deputies from Prussian Poland
be supposed to admire very ardently the logic of
Baron Schleinitz when he argues like a fanatical
nationalist against Denmark, and insists on the
people of Posen becoming Prussians in thought,
word, and deed. We are told that these
elements of the majority in favour of Baron de
Vincke's amendment must be taken into account
before we presume to build upon a casual vote a
fancy Prussia with a will of its own, and a policy
worthy of the head and heart of the German
people. We are reminded too that Baron de Vincke,
though undoubtedly the ablest, perhaps the only
real Parliamentary speaker in all Germany, is an
independent and isolated , politician : a chief of
partisans without a party, a brilliant leader without
a following. It is unfortunately too characteristic
of German politics that there should- be no states-
man's work for a man of equal ardour, and con-
sistency of principle and conduct, who from his
first entrance into public life has steadily pursued
the same generous and practical course ; in
1847, as a member of the Prussian Diet, in
1849, in the German National Assembly, at the
Erfurt Parliament in 1850, and now in the Cham-
ber of Deputies at Berlin ; always resisting the .
feudal and ultramonarchical reactionists, always
true to the cause of constitutional liberty. Still,
in these days of revivals, even courage and con-
sistency have their hour; and Baron de Vincke
deserves the congratulations of the whole liberal
party in Europe for having associated his name
with a message of goodwill from the people of
Germany to the people of Italy. For the sake of
Prussia, it is to be earnestly hoped that, though
King Villiam I. declines to part with his pre-
sent Ministers, he will advisedly listen to the
voice of his Parliament. , It was scarcely to be
expected, perhaps not altogether to be desired,
that Baron de Vincke's Amendment in favour
of Italy should be treated as a vote of want of con-
fidence. Baron Schleinitz, indeed, had opposed the
amendment, yet with so many reticences and re-
servations
that he seemed to deprecate it as a con-
structive restraint upon some eventual and unavo wed
tendencies of the Government, rather than as in
itself a proposition to which the Government could
not, at least conditionally, assent. The King of
Prussia must be considered as still in his infancy
as a constitutional sovereign, and the distinctio n
between a constitution granted by the Crown and
a constitution won and kept by the people is best
discerned when a Chamber of Deputies has a fancy
to make its presence and its power felt. If
the Liberal party in Germany will take note
of this, the defeat of the Ministry will have
more than one indirect result. But the acclama-
tions with which the vote of the Chamber has
been welcomed not only in Italy, but in England,
and wherever in Europe public opinion has a voice,
are the true triumph and reward of Baron de
Vincke's noble initiative. If the Prussian King is
not convinced, his Ministers can tell him what this
sudden explosion of sympathy for his people signi-
fies. At Turin it means the reciprocal acknow-
ledgment that between a free and united Germany
and a free and united Italy there can be no ground
for quarrel or distrust, and that only dynastic in-
trigues and jealousies can pretend to make enemies
of neighbouring nations whom all the common inte-
rests of both make-mutual friends. In England it
means a glad surprise at the appearance on the scene
of European politics of a Prussian people with which
the English nation can ally itself spontaneously,
without treason to its own cause, and without fear
of complicity with a cause it despises and detests.
England desires nothing better than the friendship
and alliance of a free, strong, self-ruling German '
people. The Prussia upon whose alliance Baron
Schleinitz ingenuously supposes that England
may not be inclined to set a high value, is a
Prussia with the weakest frontiers and the loosest
forces in Europe, blustering and crouching by
turns; sometimes Russian and sometime Austrian,
but always dynastic in its ends and aims ; national
only in the sense in which a Royal appanage
may be called a nation. With Prussian feudalist
and bigot, ultra-royalist, and leagued with every
big and little despotism, England desires as
little intimacy as convenient. But with the Prussia
of Baron de Vincke constitutional England can be
one in heart and in will. How much of the aspe-
rity and ill-humour towards Prussia which Baron
de Vincke has observed with more regret than sur-
prise in the English press springs perhaps from
disappointed and disgusted affection.
We wish we could discover in the speech of
Baron Schleinitz some slight indication of a
straightforward policy. The Minister's method of
accepting while opposing the amendment would be
amusing if it were not: painful. The Minister is
most hurt at the imputation that his Government
has any decided tendencies whatever. He speaks
with some preciseness and clearness, for a moment
only, when he magnifies the uncertainty of all
things around as an excuse for persevering in a
policy of pure expectancy and indecision. He
repels, as almost an insult, the attempt to nail
him to any one fixed principle of conduct or course
of action • whether it be non-intervention, active
support of Austria in Italy, the rights of nation-
alities, alliance with Austria, or alliance with
England. On one point alone is Baron Schleinitz
unhappily and perversely categorical in statement,
and in that he is contradicted by all authoritative
testimony and all recorded experience. He insists
that the Austrian occupation of Venetia is of
great strategical and political importance to
Austria and, indirectly, to Germany. Prussian
strategists says so ; and in the opinion of Baron
Schleinitz, Prussian military theorists are better
judges of the worth of the Quadrilateral to Austria
and Germany than the Austrian Archduke
Charles, the famous soldier and strategist of the
great Napoleonic wars, who wrote precisely the
reverse, and who recorded his deliberate
opinion that in the case of a struggle with such a
Power as France in the valley of the Danube,
Austria must, in self-defence, evacuate Italy alto-
gether. The doctrine of natural frontiers was con-
sidered a dangerous one when France "reclaimed"
Savoy. But what would Baron Schleinitz consider
"natural frontiers," if he and his strategists con-
sider the Alps such a frontier to Germany as re-
quires a further unnatural line of elaborately
fortified outposts ? According to these Prussian
military theorists, "Austria and Germany" had no
" natural frontiers" at all until 1797. But it seems
that Austria and Germany want the Quadrilateral
as an intrepot for " Austrian and German" com-
merce. This is a light in which the Austrians
resident in Venetia have probably never con-
templated the Quadrilateral. It is a theory
of commerce which will' amuse the citi-
zens of Ancona and the merchants of Trieste.
These are theories, however. What remains of fact
is that Prussia is resolved to remain in the expec-
tant, and to accept no engagements. Sympathy
with Italy, alliance with Austria and England, a
true regard for the letter of treaties, encourage-
ment of " national tendencies," all things in season
but nothing now. If this is statesmanship, Baron
de Vincke and Herr Duncker must be dangerous
visionaries to suggest that what Piedmont is to
Italy Prussia is to Germany, and that a united
Italy will be better qualified to contribute to the
preservation of the balance of power in Europe than
an Italy always begging for the arms of France
against Austria; or even than an Austria and
a
Prussia ever begging the aid of 11115SifiOr of Eng-
land, and agreeing to hide each others j's eal_ousy in
Daily
their common fear and hatred of France.
News.
'hite•

The "Gentle Sex" at 60 look vvith complacency on wi 'ned
tresses, but to youth it is a calamity ; remediable, however,
by Herring's Magnetic Brushes, itc., of which Dr. Ilassall
reports—" I regard them as the most perfect brushes hitherto
made, as respects their mechanical construction and their
niagnetical action." They are the remedy for grey hair,
neuralgia, rhetunktism, &a N.B.—Counterfeits are being
made, offtes, 32, IMO Lugliall-Atreet, London,

MANSION-HOUSE.—Mr. Robert Fraser North,
34 years of age, of the firm of Messrs. Nickell and
North, Russia brokers, at 27, Bishopsgate-street-
within, was brought up on remand from Tuesday
last, before the Lord Mayor and Mr. Alderman
Rose, charged with stealing, otherwise obtaining
by trick, the delivery orders for 343 casks of tallow,
of the value of £8,780 odd, belonging to Messrs. J.
Hubbard and Co.', Russiamerchants, of 19, Birchin-
lane, Cornhil.l. A new charge was also preferred
against the prisoner yesterday, of defrauding Mr.
Gorge Goss, a Russia broker, at 80, Old Broad-
street, of £1,496 odd, under similar circumstances.
At the conclusion of the previous hearing, Mr.
Metcalfe, the prisoner's counsel, applied to have
him liberated on bail, upon which Mr. Alderman
Rose agreed to take the recognisance of two
sureties, each in £4,000, for his reappearance ; but
failing to give bail to the requisite amount, the
prisoner was sent to the prison of Newgate, where
he has since been confined.
Mr. Muller was recalled yesterday and further
examined by Mr. Giffard. He said, on the 29th of
January he received a request from Nickoll and
North in the prisoner's handwriting to make out
the delivery orders for the 343 casks of tallow, in
two lots of 113 and 230 casks. That request was ac-
companied by a cheque for £8,781 Bs. 9d., drawn
by Nicholl and North on the Bank of London in
favour of Messrs. Hubbard, and payable to order.
Witness identified the two delivery orders in ques-
tion given by him on receipt of the cheque.
Cross-examined by Mr. Metcalfe—Messrs. Hub-
bard had had transactions with Messrs. Nickoll and
North for five or six years, but not to a great ex-
tent until last year,when hebelieved their detain gs
were represented by £BO,OOO or £90,000. He be
lieved Nickoll and North had transactions with
other firms, but as brokers only, and not as actual
purchasers of tallow. He was not aware that they
bought without principals. Mr. North's father
before him was a tallow-broker untillBs4. Witness
attended the Baltic Coffeehouse, where. Baltic busi-
ness ;was mainly transacted. Nickoll and North
were also members. He (witness) had delivered
them goods, understanding that they would make,
not that they had made, provision at their bankers'
for the payment of them. He did not suppose a
cheque would be given unless provision were made
for its payment. He meant that funds would be
placed at the bankers' to meet such' cheques at the
time of giving them. Such cheques were payable
immediately they were in his (witness's) hands and
he expected that at the time the one in question
was given provision had been made for its payment.
He did.not imagine that Mr. North had £9,000 at
his bankers' at the time witness gave him the de-
livery orders in question. He believed Mr. North
would provide for the payment of the cheque when
he gave him it by raising money on those very
orders with respect to that particular tallow.
The prisoner had' told him days before that he
would provide the money for it. It was a usual
and customary thing to do that at the Baltic
Coffeehouse. Witness thought the market had
been a little down when the orders were deli-
vered, but that circumstance had nothing to do
with his asking Mr. North to complete the con•
tract. Witness did not wish to keep the contract
open, and he requested Mr. North to close it, but
did not press him to do so. It was at Mr. North's
own request that it bad been kept open. He was
sure he did not tell Mr. North that unless he took
up the contract directly he would not be allowed to
remain in the Baltic trade, nor anything to that
effect. Mr. North had experienced much kindness
from him, but witness had not great confidence in
him. He did not know at that time that Mr.
North was pressed by other parties to take up
contracts. ' It had been said that he was in diffi-
culties about the 31st December, but witness had
not heard so at that time. Mr. North had stated
that the money for the tallow was ready whenever
witness required it. On Thursday or Friday wit-
ness requested payment ; Mr. North fixed the fol-
lowing Tuesday to pay, and witness agreed to that.
If the cheque had been paid at the Bank of London
witness would have assumed that the transaction
was all right. He should not have given Mr.
North the warrants unless he had received the
money, or snmething equivalent to it—that is, or
his cheque. Bank-notes would have been preferable.
Mr. Mack, Is clerk in the Bank of London.
proved that on Tuesday, the 29th ult., at the time
the cheque for £8,781 Bs. 9d. was presented, there
was only £8 14s. 2d. to the credit of Nickoll and
North in the bank. In cross-examination, he added
that the largest sum in the bank to their credit at
any time during that day was £357 odd, but he was
not sure that th debits and credits had all been
posted at that particular time. The day before their
balance was £llB 10s. ld.
Mr. T. Scartnan, clerk to Messrs. Colchester and
Woolner, Russia brokers, South Sea-house, deposed
that on Tuesday, the 29th of January, he met Mr.
North outside the Baltic Coffeehouse, which forms
part of the South Sea-house, and handed him the
cheque produced, drawn by witness's employers in
favour of Nickoll and North, for £2,400, upon the
London Joint Stock Bank, Prince's-street, receiving
from Mr. North at the same time the delivery order
for 113 casks of tallow, which he gave to Mr.
Woolner, one of the firm.
Mr. Robert Martin, a partner in the banking
firm of Martin and Co., 68, Lombard-street, was
called, and proved that Mr. Dalton of Bucklersbury
kept an account with them. Witness was asked a
question in reference to it, which he excused him-
self from answering, for the reason that he had
received a letter from Mr. Dalton requesting that
he would give no information to any one about his
account. He was shown by Mr. Giffard what pur-
ported to be Messrs. Colchester and Woolner's
cheque for £2,400, and asked if it had been paid in
to Mr. Dalton's private account. He replied that
at that moment he did not know whether it had or
not. The cheque was crossed to their bank, and he
believed the endorsement on it was in Mr. Dalton's
handwriting, though he should not say positively
that it was. He (witness) had never seen that
cheque before. He had no objection to show any
book in the bank which might throw light on the
cheque, but he did not understand that he had been
asked to bring books or he should have donCso.
He added that Mr. Dalton is a solicitor.
On that state of circumstances, Mr. Giffard asked
the court to commit the prisoner for trial.
The Lord Mayor inquired if Mr. Metcalfe had
anything to urge in his defence, stating at the same
time it was his intention to commit him for trial.
Mr. Metcalfe said, after that intimation, he should
rather leave the prisoner's defence to another occa-
sion.
The prisoner, on receiving the usual caution, said
he would leave the matter entirely in the hands of
his counsel, adding that he had nothing to urge in
his behalf, except the statement that at the time
delivery orders were given there was not the
slightest evidence of any felonious intention on his
part.
The Lord Mayor committed him for trial, and
refused to entertain an application made by his
counsel to be allowed to give bail for his appearance
until then.
Another charge was then brought against the
prisoner at the instance of Mr. George Goss, of the
firm of Goss and Co., Russian brokers, at 80, Old
Broad-street, who accuse him of defrauding them
of the amount of £1,497 ; but, as the facts were
but slightly elicited in evidence, and as the
prisoner will be again brought up to-day (Tues-
day), to answer the accusation, we reserve our re-
port.
Mr. Metcalfe complained that his client, a pri-
soner under remand, had been treated in the gaol
at Newgate as if he were a convict. He had been
obliged to make his own bed, clean his own cell,
and submit to other inconveniences, which !,,acti
already affected his health. He (Mr. 1%1 e
submitted that those were circumstances iisitofor Facu
the
it would be desirable, in the public intaetre ll events,
Court to institute inquiry ; d t be innocent
a prisoner, whom the law prcsurt
ca, a
and t heo
not to be treated
until he was proved guilty, oug
as if he were a convict.
BOW-STREET--A"--An Indian,nametl Mahommed
Ali Khan, was charge
d before Mr. Henry with
• • b
attempting to cora.mit suicide g his throat
the
in Whitehall, during agepas of the Royal pro-
cession on the occasion of her Majesty going to
Westminster to open Parliament, on Tuesday, the
sth inst.
Mr. Wm. Travers, the house surgeon at Charing-
cross Hospital, said that when brought there the
prisoner had a superficial wound, two inches long,
in the throat. It was not dangerous. It might
have been inflicted by the knife produced, which
would not have made a deep cut. The wound was
dressed and the prisoner remained in the hospital,
chiefly under his care, till that morning He spoke
a few words of English. He did not seem to be
insane.
Lieut.-Col. Robert Marsh Hughes, honorary
secretary to the Strangers' Home for Orientals, at
Limehouse, deposed-7-The prisoner is a native of
Joonaghur, in the province of Kattywar, in the
Bombay Presidency. I have known him five Tear's.

LAMBETH.—THE DELICATE INVESTIGATION
CASE.—Yesterday having been appointed ,for the
further investigation of the charge of assault pre-
ferred by Mr. Charles Perceval against Samuel
Copping, late a sergeant, and Adam Saunders, for-
merly a constable of police, the court was crowded in
every part ; and since the examination of Young-
man for the Walworth murder, there has not been
so many persons present. In addition! to the charge
of assault, committed under somewhat peculiar cir-
cumstances, there was a second complaint made
against the defendants of conspiring to commit a
breach of the peace by breaking and entering into
a tenement in the occupation of the complainant in
a riotous and forcible manner; and in this charge
Mr. S. J. Clark, a respectable retired tradesman,
was included. .
Mr. Hutchinson attended for the prosecution ;
and Mr, Sleigh, instructed by Mr. John Hubbard,
from the office of Mr. Merriman, of Austin-friars,
for the defendants. Mr. Pearce, the barrister, was
also present to watch the ee on behalf of Mrs.
Clark, whose name is mixedlilsp in the proceedings.
Mr. Hutchinson, in opening the case, observed
that from what transpired on the former day his
worship was aware of the facts as related to the
defendants Copping and Saunders, and as regarded
the third defendant, Mr. Clark, he was in a
position, if his instructions were correct, to show
that he not only incited the other two men
to commit the assault, but had given them
£5 to break into the house for the purpose of
obtaining evidence in a matter to which it was not
necessary to advert, and it was quite clear, there-
fore, that he had made himself a party to the con-
spiracy to commit a breach of the peace. He (Mr.
Hutchinson) should further be able to show that
Mr. Clark had offered to pay the landlord of the
house £2 for the damage the other defendants had
done, and had mixed himself up with them in such
a way as to make himself equally amenable to the
1 charge of conspiracy. It was not to be borne with,
that Mr. Clark should take upon himself to do that
which the judges of the country would not sanction,
and could not authorise, having a couple of men to
commit without the slightest colour of authority,
one of the grossest outrages that could be well con-
ceived ; and if he did so he must take the conse-
quence. After laying all the facts before his worship,
he should feel it tobe his duty to call for the com-
mitment of the defendants Copping and Saunders,
on the double charge of assault and forcible entry,
and the third defendant for the conspiracy.
The complainant, Charles Perceval, was here
called, and was about to be examined by his attor-
ney viva voce, when the magistrate suggested that
his evidence on a former day should be read over to
him, and this was adopted. He was further exa-
milled, and stated that after the former examination
on Wednesday, the 30th ult., he returned to his
\
lodgings and found the defendant, Mr. Clark, in.
the shop of Mr. Hogswood, his landlord, and heard
the former say, " I have sent those men, and I must
pay for it," and tendered two sovereigns for the
damage they had done. The landlord refused the
money, saying that they had gone too far, and he
should have nothing to do with it, The witness then
stepped forward and told Mr. Hogswood to be
careful of what he said to defendant, as he would
, swear anything, upon which Mr. Clark said that if
lie was 20 years younger, he should punch his head
for him. (Laughter.)
In cross examination by Mr. Sleigh the witness
said that on the night previous to the attack he
slept in the back room of the first floor, and that
neither on that night or on the following morning
was there 'a lady iu his room. Mrs. Clark occu-
pied the second room en the same floor, and in her
room the only bed was an ottoman, There was a
door in a cupboard which formed a communication
with both bedrooms, but Mrs. Clark kept the key,
and she alone could unlock the door. (Laughter.)
Mr. Hogswood—That door, your worship, is for
the convenience of the lodgers. (Loud laughter.)
Mr. Perceval, in continuation, said there was a
bedroom upstairs which he had occupied, but not
on the night in question.
Mr. Sleigh was closely pursuing this line of deli-
cate investigation, when it was objected to by Mr.
Hutchinson, who observed that it was evidently
with the view of getting evidence for another
Court.
Mr. Elliott—lf persons suppose that, to get up
evidence for another Court, they arejustified, with-
out the slightest authority, to break into persons'
houses, they will find themselves very much de-
ceived. (Loud cheers and clapping of hands.)
Mr. George Hogswood, was the next witness,
and his evidence given on the former oaf's
she
was
read over. He further stated that on
which the former examination took
p,- laancd having
p thee
they de-
fendant (Mr. Clark) came to his
min sthooriettle the little
stated his name, said he Was ___e
affair, and put down two 6 igens to pay for the
ZiTeer; but he refused to
injury that had been
:se had gone too far. Mr.
d Mr. Clark and he had
ae
Percevalep t it,
thensaying
cs thatm e i
nt
,h the case
an altercation.,
clerk to the defendant's attorney,
the questions of
and in reply to
Mr. Hutchinson, he denied..
all knowledge of the
defendant: Mr. Clark, giving Copping and Saunders
wasM rn'exHtucharlert
ten sovereigns, and said he had not heard Saunders
complain of Copping having kept L 3 10s, out of
the £5 they had received.
Mr. John Clark, the son of the defendant, I‘lr
Clark, and the husband of the lady whose name
has been mixed up with this inquiry, was next
called, and denied having any communication with
his father on
mr.Hutchitnhsoe subject.ns
aid this
w
as his case, and lie
tthheats tAaitresm.
cetni
at r haditchhaatd lleft
tgone
r
wfoirsthhedittomaigdhdtthapatpeinar
husband and home without any cause, but this, he
could assure the Court, Was not the fact, as she had
had ample grounds, as would be shown hereafter.
Mr. Sleigh submitted that there was not a tittle
of evidence to prove the charge against Mr. Clark,
an opinion in -which the magistrate at once
acquiesced, and discharged the summons against,
that. gentleman.
Mr. Sleigh next, urged the magistrate to Ilse
the whole of the case into his own hands, and at
once deal with it, observing that a pecuniary fine
would meet the justice of the case.
Mr. Elliott said that it was not to be tolerated
that persons without the slightest authority should
break into persons' houses, and the case must
therefore be sent to the sessions.
His worship's decision was hailed with loud
cheers, and Mr. Hutchinson requested that it might
be understood that he meant to indict for the form•
ble entrance as well as the assault.
Copping and Sa
d to bacommitted
il. to
the Surrey Sessionundes, butrs
were admitte
theil