The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-04 00:00:00

2itlt

~;

LONDON, THURSDAY, APRIL 4, 1850.

We do not feel surprised at the indignation and
horror excited in the public mind by the escape of
the atrocious miscreants who tortured to death the
unfortunate child who had been entrusted to their
protection and care. We cannot be astonished that
some of our contemporaries, feeling that the majesty
of the law remained unvindicated while the perpetra-
tors, not of a single crime, but of a series of out-
rageous cruelties abhorrent to humanity, should be
dismissed from the bar of justice, unscathed and un-
punished, should have even censured the amiable and
accomplished Judge, who presided at the trial, for
his conduct on the occasion, apparently sheltering the
prisoners from the penalties due to their enormous
guilt. It was scarcely possible, when such heart-
rending and harrowing disclosures were published, to
enter into a calm and dispassionate consideration of
a case abounding with such revolting cir-
cumstances. Pity and sympathy for the in-
nocent and helpless victim were mingled with
horror at the crime, and hatred of the criminals,
and even with anger at all who stood between them
and the well-merited punishment of their crime. If
ever " Lynch-law" could be justified, it would be in
such a case. If ever arbitrary and despotic power
could be sanctioned, it would be that prompt and
speedy retribution should fall upon the heartless and
inhuman delinquents. But "bad cases make bad
precedents," and the greater the atrocity of the
crime, the more essential is it that all the forms of
law should be strictly observed—that nothing should
be strained or perverted. If the letter of the law
could be disregarded—if the rules of evidence could
be dispensed with, even in such a case as that of the
BIRDS, it would no longer be an act of justice, but of
sanguinary and vindictive vengeance—not a well-
merited punishment, cutting off the offenders from
among the people, but a judicial murder, a blood-
thirsty sacrifice.
None could regret more deeply than ourselves the
result of that trial, none could feel greater horror at
the frightful brutality exhibited towards the unresist-
ing child. We spoke out plainly and distinctly
on the subject in the language of honest indignation ;
but we did not venture to impeach or censure the
conduct of Judge TALrOURD : we saw that he bad
discharged his painful duty fairly and impartially;
that he had abstained from letting his passion over-
rule his judgment, from " doing evil that good might
come of it." The highest and most essential attribute
of a member of the judicial bench is perfect calmness
and impartiality ; be should exhibit a stoical indiffer-
ence to everything beyond the limits of his duty : he
is not the maker, but the sworn expounder and in-
terpreter of the law ; and never would the ermine be
more sullied than if the presiding judge should suffer
himself to become the evident partisan or impetuous
advocate of either side. He may regret his limited
power, he may feel the most lively sorrow for the
judgment he may be called upon to pronounce, but he
must not waver or hesitate—the path of duty lies
before him, and he must not allow himself to be
seduced or to deviate therefrom by any temptation
however potent.
Even while our passions were excited, while we
participated in the feelings of those' who, on hearing
the verdict of acquittal, shouted with indignant hor
ror--" 'What, are these persons to escape entirely
without punishment ?"—we rendered justice to the
presiding Judge; we saw that he had exhi-
bited the highest quality of his distinguished
office, that -he, had arrived at a' d cision which, we
have no hesitation in saving, would be in accordance
with the calM and deliberate judgment of every one
of his judicial brethren, and of all accustomed to the
practice'of the criminal tribunals of the country. We
saw, with regret, that others tack a different vie w• ;
but that we were not mistaken will, we think, appear
from the letter Of an eminent. barrister, present in
court during the investigation, which appears in an.
other part of this day's impression, but of which
the insertion was overlooked by a morning contem-

porary.
Mr. BALL'S vindication of Mr. Justice TALFOURD
is so complete and satisfactory, and so fully bears out
the opinions to which we gave expression in The Sun
of the 26th ultimo, that it may appear an act of su-
pererogation to (ffer any additional. observations on
the point. Ile, a gentleman of long standing and
great experience in his profession, declares that "lie
heard the material part of the statement of the mother
of the poor girl, and from thence the whole of the
case, to the close of the evidence of Mr. TURNER, the
surgeon, and he then left the court with a deep im-
pression on his mind, without hearing the defence or
the observations of the Learned Judge, that the case
on the part of the prosecution had wholly failed in
bringing home to the prisoners the infliction of the
blow which was the cause of death, and he stated his
opinion to one or two friends near him at the time."
Such testimony is, indeed, conclusive. It must fully
and completely exonerate the Learned Judge who
presided from every suspicion of having been actuated
by any " maudlin sympathy" with the offenders, or
any weak and timid departure from the stern path of
duty. To add anything thereto may appear an attempt
"To gild refined gold, to paint the lily, or cast a perfume
on the violet,"
We cannot, however, refrain from adding a few con-
siderations on the legal part of the case.
It must be borne in mind that the very foundation
and basis of trial by jury—the palladium of British
liberty—is, that it is not sufficient that the jury
should be convinced of the guilt of the prisoner, hut
that that guilt should be established by clear and
unquestionable testimony adduced at the trial. The
" twelve peers," whose unanimous decision is essential
before any man can be considered guilty in the sight
of the law, are sworn " a true verdict to give accord-
ing to the evidence." The party may be guilty, as
in the case of the BIRDS ; no doubt may exist in the
mind of any unprejudiced person ; but if that guilt
be not proved in due force of law, according to the
principles of evidence long established and fully rt-

cognised by all our tribunals, he must be acquitted.
No alternative remains. The judge must charge the
jury, and they are bound to receive his inter-
pretation and exposition of the law. Other
criminals hare, in like manner, escaped justice through
some defect in the chain of evidence, some link that
was wanting, but the judge could not be censured or
condemned on that account.

We know that it may be asserted, that
in many cases depending altogether on circum-

stantial evidence, convictions have been ob-

;ained, although no living eyewitness could depose
;o the !'acts, and that such decisions have been con-

sidered perfectly satisfactory, and in strict accordance
with the principles of the law. Granted; but yet the
testimony must be such as to lead to the irresistible
inference-Ist, that the crime had bean committed,

and 2ndly, that it was perpetrated by the party or
parties in the dock. Now, in the present case, there
was a failure on both points. Mr. TURNER proved

`at the external injuries of the head were the cause

of death, but " he could 7iot form an opinion how that

violence had been inflicted." It was perfectly possible
that the fatal blow might not have been struck by

he prisoners, or either of them ; their innocence cf

.hat, the consunimation of their guilt, was

perfectly consistent with his testimony, and

Mr. EDGE, the other medical witne!s, proved
" that a fall agaii ist a fender might have produced the

wounds on the head." It was asserted, on the part

of the prisoners, and with much apparent probability,

that such a fall had taken place, and it must be re •
membered the,' , according to the benign principles of
the British lamr, they could not be required " to prove
their innoce-ace." Sufficient for them, if the guilt

could not be established by evidence, beyond the

doubt. Was not Mr. Justice

TALFOURD then justified in saying, "that there was
no proof of the cause of death." Even if it proceeded
from a blaw, "there was no proof of who it was that
gave that blow." It was very true that they might
suspect that it was given by one or other of the pri-
soners, but, in the absence of all proof, he could not
direct them that there was evidence to fix it upon one
or the other. What alternative then remained for
Mr. Justice TALiouun ? how could he, as Mr.
BALL fairly inquires, "as an honest and impartial
judge, have acted otherwise ?"

That he did not sympathise with the crimi-
nals, or rejoice,.., at their escape from justice,
may be gathered from thi., that he said,
" the case was one which presented consi•
derations which, he confes:ed, made him regret that he
was not in a condition to place it (i. e. the cause of
death) before them, and he GREATLY DEPLORED that
the case was of necessity left in that imperfect state
that he could not direct them that there was evidence of
either prisoner having inflicted the blow." Surely a
stronger or more explicit condemnation of the con-
duct of the prisoners could not have proceeded from
the bench of justice, and would not be in accordance
with the calm, dignified, and temperate language that
should ever fall from a judge cf the land. It must
completely remove any erroneous impression that
might have been created by the, perhaps, unfortunate
expression, "chastisement of which he did not ap-
prove." A judge, however, could not before convic-
tion make use of the strong and energetic terms
that might be becoming on the part of an advocate.

It has been asserted that there was some analogy
between the present case and that of the MANNING%,
who justly expiated their guilt upon the scaffold.
This is, however, a grave mistake. PATRICK
O'CONNOR was murdered under circumstances that
clearly indicated a guilty knowledge on the part of
both the prisoners, and a predetermination to deprive
their victim of life. The grave was dug beforehand
to receive his lifeless body. One had purchased, the
other had paid for the instrument with which the earth
was dug up, and with which the ekull of the deceased
was battered in. Everything showed pre-arrange-
ment and concert between the guilty pair ; but was
such the case in the present instance ? Both had
chastised, cruelly and brutally chastised, the unfor-
tunate child, but it‘did not appear that the floggings
that were brought home to the prisoners, collectively
or individually, were the cause of death. The fatal
blow " might have been occasioned by a fall upon the
fender," or it might have been inflicted by one, in the
absence and without the knowledge or consent of the
other. We fearlessly assert, that it is an undoubted
principle of law, that if it be clearly shown that one or
the other of two persons are guilty of a crime, and it
cannot be established by evidence which is the delin-
quent, both must be acquitted. Were it otherwise the
principle of the law, that ."
it is better that ninety-
nine guilty persons should escape than that an inno-
cent man should be unjustly convicted," should be
reversed, and juries should be directed, if they enter-
tain any doubt, to give the benefit thereof to the
Crown, and against the prisoner.
One point alone remains which it may be desirable
to notice. It is said that it was proved that " the
death was concealed by the prisoners for some time
after it occurred, and that such suppression and con-
cealment afforded Strong presumptive evidence of
their guilt." Admitting, for the sake of argument,
the premises, we deny the consequence; the deduction
is by no means decisive. It is possible that even
innocent persons might hesitate to reveal the death of
a person where a strong suspicion to their prejudice
must necessarily be excited. The concealment might
form an additional circumstance corroboratory of
their guilt ; but taken per se, and unless the cause of
death was clearly established, that it was, in fact,
shown that a murder had been actually committed, it
could have no effect on the verdict of the jury.
The monsters are not, however, to escape altogether
with impunity. They are, it appears, to be prose-
cuted fur the assaults that were clearly brought home
to both, and, as the skin wes broken by formidable
weapons, the intent to commit grievous bodily injury
may bieestablished. They will thus, in all human
probability, ultimately suffer severe, although most
inadequate punishtnent,esufficient to deter others,
who may be entrusted with the care of helpless
orphans, from indulging their fiendish passions and
inhuman cruelties. And, for this result, the public
are probably indebted to the, amiable and Learned
Judge, whoie conduct has been so unfairly and un-
generously misrepresented.

Do the fanatics really wish to render religion
repulsive, and that golden day of the week, Sunday,
n object of scorn and abomination ? If such Is their
detestable aspiration they are pushing on in a fair
way, and a foul way too, to realise their wishes, and
to make their efforts successful. B(f)re these Wretched
men proceed further in their unholy and demorali-
zing work, we would comment very briefly upon
some of their most recent proceeding?. Our columns
of this evening are disgraced by certain reports of
the latest doings of the Scottish Sabbatarians, which
we are nevertheless reluctantly compelled to republish
with a view to their more general eiposure. From these
accounts, already commented upon in terms of just
indignation by sundry cf our provincial and metro-
politan contemporaries, it will be observed that the
saints have made another most futile and abortive
effort to cram their disgusting dogmas down the
throats of an unwilling population. A line already
notorious for its association with the cause of this
glaring and stilted hypocrisy was again brought under
the consideration of the public as affording about the
best opportunities fur transformation into a sort of iron
tram-way to heaven ? Need we say that this line was
the Caledonian Railway ! Need we reiterate the
particulars of cant and humbug which have been
preserved for perusal by the pencil of the reporter ?
heaven forfend. They may be found elsewhere labo-
riously specified. It may there be perceived, that
some of these abominable Sabbatarians dared to take
upon themselves an exclusive and intimate acquaint-
ance with the Divine Economy—standing forward, to
our thinking, in a somewhat more impious
attitude than that assumed by those pert quibblers
upOn ethics who are sometimes prosecuted as
blasphemers—telling
us(as if they had been rapt up
to a celestialconference
in the thunderclouds of
Sinai) that the potatoe disease and its consequent
famine were the results of Sunday travelling. Were
the quondam Member for Oldham now living, or the
former browbeater of the Lord Chancellor ELLEN-
nortouGn, and were either of those sagacious and
plain-spoken men commenting upon this occur-
rence, they would designate Mr. MEIKLEDAM
the person who thus dared to express him-
self, by the blunt epithet of a blasphemer
against PROVIDENCE. Why, as our contemporary the
Examiner very pertinently remarks-4' Last harvest
was one of blessed abundance, even though people
sought fresh air and cheerful scenes, or visited the
sick, or distant friends and relatives, on Sunday !"
But this is only one out of the many miserable argu-
ments brought forward with such an air of unendur-
able dogmatism by the canting directors of the Cale-
donian Railway,. the advocates and apostles
of Sabbatarianism. Mr. MEIRLEHAM bolsters
up his sanctimonious proposition by the
;
pretence of a sort of a divine revelation but Mr.
M4MrcRING, travestied the proverbial shrewdness Of
his countrymen in matters mercantile by blending
his appeal to piety with an appeal to the pocket. He
tries to reduce•morality to a sum of subtraction,
taking no dogmas as his dividend, and no virtues as
his quotient, but expounding to us the ordinances of
the Evangel as if they were subordinated
to the rules of arithmetic. Then, again, Mr.
Musa undertakes to demonstrate that the
annual amount of collisions and other kinds

of railway accidents might be materially
reduced through the suppression of the trains
hitherto employed by way of conveyance en the
Sunday. While an enormous amount c,f odium is
endeavoured to be cast upon the English multitude
for the demoralising example set to their northern
neighbours by the continued running of Sunday
trains along divers trunk lines and branch railways
south of the river Tweed. So the sin is ours—the
sin is, England's—the sin of maintaining a means
of communication throughout this island as
well on Sunday as on Mondays, Tuesdays,
Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays
We wonder how many Scotch people have availed
themselves oF the Sunday trains of England—not for
the purpose of visiting the beds of death or of sick-
ness, for the performance of one or other of the

corporal works of mercy, but pour passer le temps,
and (more memorable still l) to better their fortunes,
to multiply the amount of cish at their banker's, to
clothe themselves with stouter broal c'oth, and to line
their system with the unholy beef and the
ungodly puddings of the British man of Baal!
Oh, not any of course. Scotchmen no more dream
of travelling southwards on any occasion on Sundays,
than they ever dream of thriving upon the abundance
of England. Never was heard such a thing.
Beseech you think not so slighting of the men of the
Highlands and of the Lowlands, even though they
happen to be directors of the Caledonian Railway.
Yet, yet—with all timidity and trepidation we
say it of course—we entertain so reverential a regard
fur the wisdom of the saints of Sabbatarianistn—
yet—we would scarcely see these saints of Edinburgh
or Perth, or any other part of Scotland predominate.
No. Such is our ungodliness. We cannot so easily
forget the treatment received at their hands by the
Duchess of SUTHERLAND. Besides which, there are
some old nursery proverbs jangling in our memory
in a manner most importunate. "In for a penny, in
for a pound ;" " Give an inch, take an ell," and so
forth. We have had a taste of Sabbatarian humanity
already—so nauseous to our palate, that we want no
more of it. Besides, we have no guarantee that
these folks would not, if allowed the chance, run into
all sorts of extravagances. See what lengths they
have gone to across the Atlantic:—
" Captain Marryatt informs us," says a little book
worthy a perusal,* " that in Connecticut the following
regulaions wero enjoined by what were termed the
'Blue Laws,' viz.:—

"No 17. 'No one shall run of a Sabbath-day, or
walk in his garden, or elsewhere, except reTerently, to
and from his church.'

" No. 18. 'No ono shall travel, cook victuals, make
beds, sweep houses, cut hair, or shave on the Sabbath-
day.'

"No. 19. No husband shall kiss his wife, and no
mother shall kiss her child on the Sabbath-day.'"

Fancy that ! The dirtiness of the day ! No
cooking victuals ! No sweeping houses ! No cut,
ting hair, or combing or brushing of course ! No
shaving ! No running ! (Why according to this,
the possession of a pair of wooden legs must produce
a sort of everlasting sabbath 1) No walking in the
garden ! (Alas, for the days when "ADAM delved
and EVE span" in the garden of Paradise !) No con-
jugal kisses! The curmudgeons ! No kisses for the
" tiddy•ixi-sing," that might wreath into a pout, even
the vestal lips of Lucretia Tox ! Why, what a farce is
this—rendering Sunday a time characterised only
by its filth and formality. " Cleanliness next to
godliness " is hence not to be thought of as in the
creed of the saints. And then their prohibition
against all innocent manifestations of affection—of the
holiest of affection—the affection of a husband for
his wife, of a mother for her child. They forget,
these Puritan?, that HE said to his disciples in
Palestine—" I give you another commandment—
that ye love one another !" But we need not go all the
way to Connecticut to see the disgusting results of
this canting system of asstuned sanctity : turn we to
a case of oppression at Loughborough, where one
Mr. BARNES, of Six Hills, summoned his servant,
FRED. PICK, for a wilful violation of the Sabbath, in
cleaning on Sunday a pair of lace-up loots ! and
" the magistrates, to the extreme surprise
of all present, fined the lad in the sum
of forty shillings and costs, which their worships
humanely ordered to be paid out of the wages
due to him from his master !" What decorous
villany ! A poor fellow mulcted of forty shillings
and costs out of his wages for cleaning on Sunday a
pair of lace-up boots! The brutality, the pigheaded-
ness, the dirtiness of the whole system is incompar-
able. We commend it to the attention of all sanitary
reformers, and to the hearts of all those who love the
benignity, the sweetness, and the divine beneficence
of the creed of the Christians.

* " The Lawfulness of Sunday Trains and Sunday
Letters. By a Christian but no Fanatic." Pp. 24.
Alard, London, 1850.

THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.

We have received the Paris journals of yesterday.
The Ecclesiastical Budget came on for discussion
in the Assembly on Tuesday, and a motion of M.
JULES FAVRF, for rendering the inferior clergy in-
dependent in their cures, as the beneficed clergy are
already, was rejected by a majority of 433 to 142. At
present the inferior clergy are the mere slaves of the
bishop, who possesses the power of depriving them of
their cures without giving any reason for so doing.
The Cominittee of the Assembly on the Press met
on Tuesday. It was resolved that the deposit-money
of the journals should not be incre2s?d, but that fines
imposed for libels should be paid within three
dap, so that the deposit money should be always
complete.
It is considered that unless this Bill on the Press
be greatly modified there is every probability that it
will be rejected by the Assembly ; the Bill prohibit-
ing electoral meetings also meets with great opposi-
tion, and the Ordre, the organ of MM. TITTERS and
ODILON BARROT, recommends the Ministry to with-
draw both Bills.
The divisions in the ranks of the reactionary party
are daily increasing, and the approaching election for
Paris threatens to make them still more profound.
The Union Electcrale have announced as their can-
didate M. FERDINAND For, the Orleanist, who was
the highest of the unsuccessful candidates at the last
election. The Legitimatists refuse to agree to this
arrangement,started instead of m
and insist upon
Foalz and
gitirrinatichtecaenvdenidtatj
being

a refusal, they threaten to start a candidate of their
own. The Opinion Publique, the organ of the ultra-
LegitimatistF, thus announces the intentions of that
party :
" M. Vidal has decided to sit for the Bas-Rhin, and
consequently the department of the Seine will have a
new election. We are informed that the Union
Electorale, which, according to its statutee, ought to
dissolve end reconstitute itself afresh, intends remain-
ing in function, and that it is decided to maintain
M. Foy au candidate. We like clear and frank posi-
tions, and I% e therefore think it our duty at once to
state, that they who had accepted the definitive list
of the Union, notwithstanding their repugnance, as well
as they who had rejected it, are decided this time not to
admit any candidatet-hip which in their eyes would have
the great wrong of being the expression of the selfish
policy which alone produced the present situation, and
the promoters of which are still the greatest obstacle to
the solution demanded by the general interest. As to
Us, we made, in the first straggle, the concession of our
silence to conciliation; but this time we cannot consent
to accept the same position."
The Voix du Peupk thus alludes to its seizure on
Monday, for the publication of an article which the
Proeureur-General considered an outrage on the
Roman Catholic religion :
"We are prosecuted, Lays the Moniteur, for outrage
or derision against the legally•reco€nised religion of the
country, and for an attack against the principle of pro-
perty. Are we in the 19th century? Is it before a
jury or before inquisitors that we must appear? In
what are we guilty ? If wo have criticised Catholicism,
the Protestants do the same, and the Jews absolutely
deny Christianity, and the parquet cannot prevent them
doing so. The Univers is not prosecuted for having in-
criminated the propagandism of Dr. Achilli; the Anti de
la Religion is permitted to rail against Luther, and the
Gazette de Lion against Calvin. Where then is our
crime?"

The Committee on the Bill for the nomination of
the mayors has had several sittings ; at its last the
Minister of the Interior was present. No definite
resolution has yet been adopted, but it is stated that
the majority of the Committee is opposed to the mea-
sure. Some members have proposed different modifi-
casions in order to render the Bill more palatable to
the Assembly, but they were warmly opposed by
others, who regard the measure as an attack on the
true principles of communial organisation.
The Moniteur announces that a new monthly jour-
nal, called Yoix du Peuple et da Peuple Saul, was
seized on Tuesday for an article headed, " A has la
Republique." l'he journal is accused of attacking
Republican institutions and the Constitution.
It is said that Marshal GERARD is seriously indis-
posed.
According to the Voix du Peuple, the departments
of France are ready to combat for the sake of
" avenging the Republic and the outraged revolution ;"
they accuse Paris of " having departed from the
love of liberty which for sixty years made her the
titled executioner of perjured powers and of arbitrary
governments," and threaten if she does not soon give
the signal to deprive her of her initiative and to com-
bat without her.
Pants BOURSE, APRIL 3.--Latent Prices.—Five
per Cents. 89f. 50c. ; Three per Cents., 55f. 40c.;
Bank Actions, 2,175 f.

BUSINESS DUNE IN FOREIGN RAILWAYS AT THE
LONDON S'IOCK-MICHANGE. ArluL 3.
Luxembourg, 2 Paris and Rouen, 2014.

SPAIN.
Madrid journals cf the 29th ult. have arrived.
Their contents are unimportant.
The 13olsa was closed.