The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-24 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAX 24, 1844.

pose of his heart, may—without any forced construction,
at least so it appears to us—be taken as intended to
indicate that, in this particular, he would cautiously ab-
stain from following in the wake of his predecessor. The
Duke seemed to be in excellent humour. His friend
and companion, both in the field and in the Cabinet, had
been appointed to the highly honourable and im-
portant post from which Lord Ellenborough was re-
called. This had apparently obliterated from his feelings,
if not from his memory, all trace of the " monstrous in-
discretion" he had so recently denounced. Whatever
his Grace had thought, and said, respecting the Court
of Directors, and the Necessity of putting a curb on
them—that no more such " indiscretions " as that they
had been guilty of in recalling a Governor-General,
without leave and license from the Ministers, might he
committed—it was obvious that the Duke was now satis-
fied that they knew how to use their power with discre-
tion ; seeing they had appointed his Gallant and Right
Honourable Friend to the honourable and lucrative post.
The Premier was hoarse—from the effects of a severe
cold. His speech was therefore short ; but his words
were also well chosen. One uninterrupted flow of
smooth compliment to the inimitably• qualified indi-
vidual, whom the discernment of the Court of Directors
had led them to select for the high honour and great
responsibility pertaining to the government of an empire
so vast, constituted the staple of Sir Robert Peel's ora-
tion. The last occasion, until Lord Ellenborough's return
—which will not take place until after the pi orogation
—has passed, without any direct, or indirect, intima-
tion of the cause which required such an extraordinary
exercise of the power vested in the Court of Directors ;
by which, in the teeth of the Cabinet, they have re.
called the Noble Lord from his important post. One
of the earliest motions to which the attention of
Parliament will be called in the next session, will in-
volve an inquiry into Lord Ellenborough's adminis-
tration. His Lordship and the Cabinet which suggested
his fitness for the office, and obtained his appointment
to it, will be then put upon their defence. The Go-
vernment may be desirous of suppressing the inquiry.
It may again refuse to produce the correspondence
that has passed between the Court of Directors and the
Board of Control upon the subject. But, we apprehend,
Lord Ellenborough will not remain quiescent. The blow
which his Lordship has received, in his most sensitive
part, from the Hon. Company, and the marked silence
which her Majesty's Ministers have preserved on the
subject, leaving the public to infer the worst against his
fame, will, we apprehend, induce the Noble Lord to sup-
ply that which, if withheld by him, will be taken as an
unequivocal admission against himself.

STANDARD.—The petition of Sir Augustus D'Este,
now before the House of Lords, recalls public attention
to the Royal Marriage Act of 1772. Sir Augustus
D'Este, it is known, claims to succeed to his late
father as Duke of Sussex, grounding his claim
upon a marriage celebrated between his pa-
rents, at Rome, in April, 1792. There was a second
marriage celebrated between the same parties, the
late Duke of Sussex and Lady Augusta Mur-
ray, in December, 1793, at St. George's, Hanover-
square : but as this second marriage has been long
since pronounced to be ab initio void, the first marriage
is the only marriage relied upon by Sir Augustus. This
first marriage was, as we learn, celebrated at Rome, not
according to thelex loci, but by a clergyman of the Church
of England, the Duke being at 'the time a minor, circum-
stances that, in our opinion, would invalidate the marriage
even had the Royal Marriage Act never passed, or were
the parties wholly unconnected with the Royal Family.
Even supposing that the English form of contract, had
been sufficient to give validity to the marriage, it is plain
that the English conditions in the substance of the con-
tract (one of which is consent of parents in the
case of a minor) were requisite ; but in this case
the alleged husband was a minor. Supposing this
general objection, however, got over, there will remain
the Royal Marriage Act of 1772, which provides " that
no descendant of his late blajesty Geerge 11. shall be
capable of contracting matrimony without the previous
consent of his Majesty, his heirs or successors, signified
under the Great Seal ; and that every marriage or
matrimonial contract of any such descendant, without
such consent first had and obtained, shall be null and
void to all intents and purposes whatsoever." The
only question that can be raised against the invalidity
of the Duke of Sussex's marriage upon this statute, re-
spects the power of the Legislature to extend the au-
thority of British law, even in the ease of British sub-
jects, beyond the limits of the British dominions. Now,
much as we may regret the effect of the decision
upon the interests of Sir Augustus D'Este,
we have no doubt whatever that it must be
decided that the Legislatare does possess this power.
We think that we see clear evidences of the ex-
istence of such a power from the public law of
Christendom, and from the common and statute law
of this country. The right to protection and the
obligation to allegiance are reciprocal, and in public
law we see admitted the right of a Government
to protect its subjects, to reclaim its subjects from
foreigners, whether voluntary or involuntary absentees,
except this right is qualified by treaty ; and in the
every day administration of justice we bear the common
law and statute law doctrine, that wrongs committed
abroad may be righted at home, and that crimes
committed against Englishmen, though beyond the
Queen's dominions, may be punished by her Majesty's
Courts. It is impossible to doubt, in the face of so
many proofs, that the authority of a law personally dis-
qualifying any individual or any family from the per-
formance of any particular act, must attend the indi•
vidual or family wheresoever he should go. That this was
the conviction of the framers of the Act of 1772 is quite
clear ; for if they had regarded the authority of the Legis-
lature as merely local, they would have spared. them-
selves the trouble of a law which any couple could evade
at any moment by merely crossing the Channel. We
fear, therefore, that Sir Augustus D'Este has little to
expect from his petition; and we certainly regret the
individual case, because we believe that the individual
hardship falls upon an amiable and honourable man.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 23.
THE DUKEDOM OF SUSSEX.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday,)
Sir TuomAs WILDE concluded his opening speech at
half-past three o'clock, by submitting to their Lordships that
Sir Augustus D'Este had made out his claim to the dukedom
of Sussex. As soon as the Learned Counsel had finished his
speech the further consideration of the case was adjourned
stne die.

hair, and shaving him at short intervals, and that the
last time he did so was about four years ago, and that
the poor creature was " quiet and good," but dirty in his
habits. Mrs. Pelham appeared kind and indulgent to
him, and supplied him with fool, of which witness did
not think he was stinted.
Mr. Warden, surgeon to the Chelsea workhouse, saw
the lunatic on Saturday last, when he had been cleaned.
Found no marks of violence on him. He was in good
condition, and rather fat, and his bodily health good.
Had no hesitation in saying that it was not necessary,
for his safe keeping, that he should have been in such a
state. He is a lunatic. _ _

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.!
(YESTERDAY.)
C GERKEN WELL. .
Three Italian boys, named Angelo Sarti, Andrea Tci.;6
burial, and Guiseppe Consarini, were brought before .the
Magistrate, under the following circumstances.
The ages of the boys were 17, 15, and 14. Nothing
could exceed the squalid misery of their appearance.
Sarti seemel very unwell.
Mr. E. Ford, landlord of the Old Mark's Head, Cross-
street, Islington, came forward and stated, that on the
previous day he saw Sarti lying on the footway in Cross-
street, with his organ beside him. The poor lad was so
ill that it was feared he would die there. lie had him
removed to his own house. Mrs. Ford administered
some cordials to him, and after a little time he became
considerably better, and police-constable, 107 N, removed
him to the Islington Workhouse. The attendance of
Dr. Temple, the parochial physician, was instantly ob-
turned, and he, after a careful examination, gave it as his
opinion, that want of food was the cause of the boy's de-
bilitated condition. The boy himself, on being interro-
gated, stated that he had not eaten a morsel of food for
the preceding two days, except a dry crust which his
master gave him on that morning when going out with
the organ.
Lucnori, an Italian, acted as interpreter.
Mr. GREE:NNVOOD elicited frem Sarti, that his master,
Francis Ragahi, lived at 37, Saffron-hill, and kept
twelve other Italian boys, whom he sent out with organs.
Ragahi had brought him from Italy, through France,
into this country, about three weeks ago. Ile was a na-
tive of Parma, whence Ragahi had taken him, with a
number of others. The doctor at the workhouse had or-
dered him beef tea, and he now felt better.

The two other boys, who were acquaintances of
Sara's, when questioned said they earned a livelihood
in the street—the one boy exhibiting a hedge-hog, and
the other by grinding a wretched barrel organ—one of
them was a native of Genoa, the other of Vicenza.

Mr. Ford inquired if this system of entrapping those
poor little Italian boys could not be put down. He would
be most anxious to lend all his humble aid to suppress it.
Mr. GREENWOOD said the miseries which the system
entailed were lamentable, but there were great and pecu-
liar difficulties to be contended with in putting it down.
Mr. Ford said he understood that a society had been
established for the protection of these poor Italian chil-
dren, and he should certainly lay this case before it, and
call a meeting for the purpose.
Mr. GREENWOOD observed that Mr. Ford's conduct on
this occasion entitled him to the gratitude of the public.
'rho Magistrate then directed the boy to be brought be-
fore him on the following morning, when some of the
parochial authorities of Islington would be in attend-
ance. Meantime the boy might remain at the work-
house. The parties then ►eft the court.
QUEEN-SQUARE.

Mr. Steele said there was no charge against the male
defendant.

Mr. BURRELL said he should remand the defendants,
who might again be admitted to bail, until that day
fortnight, when, if no further evidence was adduced
against the male defendant, he should discharge him.
The case was of a different nature against Mrs. Pelham.
The defendants were accordingly remanded, and, on
leaving the Court, they entered a cab which was drawn
up at the office door, and drove off amidst the hisses of
the mob.

THE LATE COLONEL FAWCErT
AND MR. MUNRO.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—l have not hitherto thought it necessary to offer
any remarks upon the correspondence lately published
in the Times, regarding the unfortunate duel between
the late Lieutenant-Colonel Fawcett, C. 8., and Mr.
Munro, nor should I do so now, were it not that
Mr. Munro, in his letter to you, of the 20th of
April, has mentioned me several times by name,
and attributed motives for my conduct which are to-
tally at variance with the real state of the case. As
regards the " instructions," as Mr. Munro calls them,
given to me by Colonel Fawcett being so imperative as
to leave me no discretionary power whatever. I have
only to remark, that they have been already published,
and lam perfectly willing to be judged by them. As
to what passed between Mr. Munro and Mr. Grant, I
can of course have no knowledge of it whatever ; but,
in justice to the memory of Colonel Fawcett, I feel
myself bound to contradict the statement made by Mr.
Munro, to the effect that I was of opinion that Colonel
Fawcett intended to kill him, or " that he (Mr. Munro)
was moved at my suggestion off a target on which he
would otherwise have been placed, and which plainly in-
timated the intentions of my principal." The reverse is the
fact—Colonel Fawcett solemnly assured me, previous to
the affair taking-place;that although he felt himself forced
to meet Mr. Munro, no consideration whatever should
induce him to fire at the husband of his wife's sister, and
such was the case, as he did not discharge his pistol
at all.
In corroboration of the above, I beg to inclose a letter
I have received from Major Daubeney, C. 8., 55th Regi-
ment, who attended him until his decease, and which, I
trust, will sufficiently prove that Colonel Fawcett not
only did not fire at Mr. Munro, but moreover, that he
never had any intention of so doing.
I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servant.
W. H. L. D. CUDDY, 55th Foot.
_ . _

Junior United Service Club, May 22.
Junior United Service Club, May 19,1844.
My dear Cuddy,—l was with Colonel Fawcett about
two hours after he was wounded, and attended him, with
little intermission, until he died.
He repeatedly exprsesed in my presence his thankfulness
to the Almighty, ;not only that he had not fired at Mr.
Munro, but also that he had never intended to do so. He
also told me, that although he had felt himself forced to
meet Mr. unro, he did so merely as a point of honour,
and that it was his intention, had it been so permitted,
to have left the ground with you immediately after re-
ceiving Mr. Munro's fire, adding also that you were per-
fectly aware of his intentions on that head.
I should state that Colonel Fawcett appeared to be
perfectly aware that he was dying at the time that he
made these observations, and that the clergyman and
surgeon who attended him in his last moments can
doubtless corroborate what I have said, if necessary.—l am,
my dear Cuddy, yours most sincerely,
C. B. DAUBENEY, Major, 55th Foot,
W. 11. L. D. Cuddy, Esq., 55th Foot.

Harriet Eleanor Pelham, an elderly female, and Nel-
son Pelham, her son, were placed at the bar before Mr.
Burrell for further examination, on the charge of con-
fining Nelson Pelham, a lunatic. The case, which was
fully reported in The Sun of Monday, has created con-
siderable sensation in Chelsea.

The Court was crowded by respectable-looking per-
sons, who evinced considerable interest in the proceed-
ings. Several of the porochial authorities of Chelsea,
and Mr. Loveland, a solicitor, attended to conduct the
case on the part of the parish. Mr. Steele, a solicitor,
appeared on behalf of the accused parties.
Mr. Loveland said the parish authorities had taken up
the matter on public grounds.
Several policemen were examined, who gave nearly a
repetition of the evidence taken on Saturday, as to the
filthy state of the room in which the poor creature was
immured.

Further evidence was adduced, which merely corro-
borated the statements of the policemen. One witness
said the room was like a pigeon-house which had not
been cleaned out for years. Another witness, whose
garden is at the back of the house, said that he had for
many years past heard the most discordant noises issuing
from the room in question, such as laughing and singing;
at other times, an unmeaning kind of noise, as If some
person were calling after another ; and sometimes as if
the unfortunate inmate were suffering severe bodily pain.
Some time ago a light had been placed at night on the
outside of the window, the glass of which was so dis-
coloured that no ono could see through it, but after a
while it was discontinued. Having children of his own,
he had often been awoke in the night, when he had
sometimes heard flue cries of the unfortunate lunatic.
HileisnryegTnadnlcets,i: btahrbeerw, doervkotelsow
chuatlingbetre
ictilueaa
tilt);
a.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 23.
ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Royal Assent was given to day to the Eastern
Counties Railway Bill (No. 1), to the Eastern Coun-
ties Railway Bill (No. 2), to the Selby and York
Railway Bill, to the South-Eastern Extension Rail-
way Bill, to the Furness Railway Bill, to the
Darlington Junction Railway Bill, to the Hartle-
pool Dock and Harbour Bill, to the Coal Mining
Company's Bill, and several Inclosure and Naturaliza-
tion Bills.
The Lord Commissioners were the Archbishop o
Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, and the Earl o
Shaftesbury.
Their Lordships re-assembled at Five o'clock.
The Earl of GALLOWAY presented a petition from
Glasgow, in favour of the Bill lately introduced by the
Bishop of Exeter for the suppression of brothels.
Lord BEAUMONT presented petitions from York-
shire in favour of protection to agriculture.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a gen-
tleman named Henry Archer, against the Chester and
Holyhead Railway ; also a petition against the Brighton
and Chichester Railway Bill.
Messengers from the Commons brought up certain Bills.
Lord DENMAN presented a petition from certain
ministers of the Gospel, praying for the abolition of
oaths in certain cases.
The Criminal Law Amendment Bill went through
Committee, after some observations from the LORD
CHANCELLOR and Lord CAMPBELL.
Lord LYTTELTON presented a petition from
Newark-upon-Trent against the Debtors and Creditors
Bill.
LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY BILL.
On the motion that the amendments of the Commons
to this Bill be agreed to, some discussion took place, in
which Lord BROUGHAM and the Marquis of CLANRI-
CARDE joined, the former deprecating the provisions of
the Bill, and the latter supporting them.
Lord CAMPBELL thought that there could be no
doubt that the clause had been improperly introduced,
and ought to be abandoned. It was not introduced
in the Committee on bringing up the report, but on
its third reading. It was not in the power of the Com-
pany to procure permission for his Noble and Learned
Friend to erect gates across the Queen's highway, and
that, too, upon the great north road. He appealed to the
Noble Earl, the Chairman of Committees, who was a
most meritorious public officer, whether it was the prac-
tice of the House to introduce such a clause upon a third
reading without notice ?
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said that it was not
the practice of late years to introduce such clauses on a
third reading ; but it was competent for any Noble
Lord to move the addition of such a clause if he thought
proper. But if these gates were to be at a distance of
three-quarters of a mile from the railway, the clause
would be, in common parlance, dehors the Bill, and could
not be admitted.
The Earl of DEVON recommended that the Bill
should stand over until after the recess. In the mean-
time some compromise might take place, and his Noble
and Leaaned Friend might get, if not exactly what he
wanted, at least something to satisfy him.
Lord BROUGHAM was perfectly ashamed to detain
their Lordships upon what might appear a personal and
trumpery matter relating to himself ; but he thought
that the way in which he had been trepanned into giving
up his opposition to the Bill was a matter of public
importance. He complained that no intimation
had been given to him of the course which had been
adopted that evening with respect to this Bill. His
Noble Friend near him said it was exceedingly hard that
any body should suppose this was a personal or party
motive. Now, he (Lord Brougham) would like to know
if this Bill had not been opposed by him, whether there
would have been all this noise and fuss about it? Would
Noble Lords near him have taken so much interest in
the measure ? It was absurd to think of such a thing.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE indignantly denied
that he bad been actuated by any party or personal
motive in the course which he had taken with respect to
this measure. The Noble Lord complained of being
taken by surprise, yet the Noble and Learned Lord had
allowed Monday and Tuesday to pass without making
any motion upon the subject. The insinuation which
the Noble and Learned Lord had indulged in, was one
which no other Learned Lord would have dared to put
forth. He begged pardon if he had used an
unparliamentary phrase, but he would say, that
a more unfavourable insinuation had never been made ;
and he could assure the House that it would not have
the effect of deterring him (the Marquis of Clanricarde)
from doing his duty.
Lord BROUGHAM could not allow the insinuations
thrown out by the Noble Marquis to pass without obser-
vation. He had made no charge against the Noble
Marquis ; all that he had said was, that the extraordi-
nary zeal that had been displayed with respect to this
measure gave it an air of suspicion.
The Earl of RADNOR could not but think that their
Lordships were placed in a most awkward position.
The question now was, whether their Lordships would
agree to the amendments of the Commons, or adjourn
the debate. He bad heard rumours of Noble Lords
making terms with railroads, but he had never heard a
proposition put forward that a question should be ad •
journed in order that a Noble Lord might make terms
with a railroad.—(Hear, hear.) What was all that had
taken place for but to enable the Noble and Learned
Lord to make a better bargain than he had made?—
(Hear.) He could not believe that the House would
adopt the proposition that had been laid before it.
The Duke of WELLINGTON felt bound to say a
few words on this question. He thought that his Noble
and Learned Friend opposite was acting rightly in the
course he had pursued. Had he any interest in this
matter except upon public grounds? No, he had not ;
but it was his duty to come forward aid see that the
public were protected. That, he apprehended, was the
position in which his Noble and Learned Friend stood,
and what had been asked was, that this matter should
be postponed for twenty-four hours, in order that an ar-
rangement might be made which would be beneficial to
the public.
Lord BROUGHAM said that the object of his oppo-
sition was to have these gates erected, by which the
public road would be improved.
Lord MONTEAGLE contended that there was no
pretence whatever for putting up these gates, and urged
upon the House the necessity of refusing to accede to
the proposition which had been made to postpone this
measure. He contended that it would be most benefi-
cial to the public to have this measure passed as speedily
as possible. Although the delay which had been asked
for was only twenty-four hours, yet practically this
would be a delay of a week. He had no interest in this
matter, but he trusted, on public grounds, that their
Lordships would at once pass the measure.
Lord BROUGHAM explained,
The Marquis of SALISBURY supported the motion
for postponement. He thought there were sufficient
grounds for recommitting the Bill.
Lord MONTEAGLE—The Bill has been read a third
time.
The Marquis of SALISBURY said it was still in
the power of their Lordships to recommit the Bill.
Lord BP.OUG HAM—I shall move for a Committee.
The Marquis of SALISBURY—I move that this de-
bate be now adjourned.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE—That is the mo-
tion which is already before the House, and the Noble
Marquis is of course out of order.
The Marquis of SALISBURY—As the Noble Lord
is so particular about the order of this House, I think it
would be as well if he would be more in order himself,
and not rise to speak six times on the same subject. •
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and their Lord-
ships divided, when there appeared—
For the adjournment 32
Against it 33
Majority
On cur return to the gallery, we found
Lord BROUGHAM proposing that a Committee be
appointed to inquire into the amendments to this Bill
which had been proposed by the House of Commons.
Lord MONTEAGLE said the House of Commons
had made no amendments.
Lord BROUGIIAM said the Committee could be ap-
pointed to consider the message from the Commons.
Earl FITZWILLIAM thought they ought to know
what the Noble and Learned Lord proposed to do in the
Committee.
Lord BROUGIIAM said he had a case to make out ;
but, of course, he could not go into detail then.
The Duke f RICHMOND suggested that the matter
should be referred to the Committee to which originally
the Bill was referred.
After a short conversation,
Lord BROUGHAM consented to withdraw his oppo-
sition ; but lie intimated that, when the parties pro-
moting this Bill should again come before Parliament,
he would look closely after there.—(Laughter.)
The motion was then withdrawn.
The Customs' Bill was read a first time, and was
ordered to be read a second time on Thursday next.
The Debtors and Creditors' Bill passed through Com-
mittee.
Messengers from the Commons brought up several
Bills, which were read a first time.
Their Lordships then, on the motion of the Duke of
WELLINGTON, adjourned till Thursday next.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 23.
The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour.
ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Usher of the Black Rod appeared at the bar and
summoned the House to the bar of the House of Lords
to hear her Majesty's Commission read for giving the
Royal assent to certain Bills (for which see Lords'
report).
The South Devon Railway Bill was read a third time
' and passed.
Mr. GREENE moved that all Railway Bills which
under Standing Order, No. 123, stand for further consi-
deration on Tuesday next, be taken into consideration
on Thursday the 30th day of May.—Agreed to.
HARWICH AND COLCII ESTER RAILWAY BILL.
Major BERESFORD moved that the Harwich Rail-
way aad Pier, tali the Colchester and llarwich (No. 2)
Railway Bills, be recommitted to the former Com-
mittee, with instructions to the said Committee;
that they have power to rescind their former resolu-
tion on the preamble of the two Bills, if they think
fit ; and to consider the expediency of consolidating
the said Bills, and amalgamating. the Companies
promoting the same respectively, with power to carry
jointly into effect the undertaking thereby contemplated,
in the manner agreed on between the two companies, or
in such other manner as, in the opinion of tho Com-
mittee, would be beneficial to the public. He thought
it was of national importance that a railway
should be constructed from London to Harwich.
Another reason why he thought this Bill should be re-
committed was the present state of the money market.
In a different state of the money market, persons might
not be found to engage in such a speculation. There
was besides a great deal of money expended, he believed
12,000 E in promoting the Bill, which would be lost if ,