The Sun.
London, England, 1850-09-13 00:00:00

LITE RA T URE.

MR. IIUDSON'S EVIDENCE AT YORK.
" A Revised and Complde Report of the Recent
Trial for Libel, Richardson v. Wodson, pub•
lisher of The Yorhshireman with Preliminary
Observations, 6•c." London: C. Mitchell, 1850.
" Report of the Evidence of George Hudson, Esq ,
111.1)., on the Trial of the Cause, Richardson
v. Wodson, York Summer Assizes, 1850.
Edited by a Barrister." London, John Hearne,
Strand, 1850.

[CONCLUDING NOTICE.]
The weakness of a case against a person unjustly
accused of some grievous mi,,detneanours, is often de-
tected in the mode of preferring the accusation. IF,
instead of singling out and isolating some individual
fact of striking and decided character, unembarassed
by collateral issues—on the merits of which a fair
judgment could be more easily formed—a number of
disconnected charges and complicated details are
brought forward in a menacing phalanx, the impartial
observer is apt to suspect that the patties moving as
accusers depend more upon clamour than upon proqf
and bring forward these supplemental accusations
for the purposes of prejudice and myttitication,—
trying to " make up iu number what each
wants in wei,;ht".—having, as it were, several barrels
charged in anticipation that some will miss fire,
and that not a few shots will miss the mark !
We have already investigated two of the princi-
pal charges on which Mr. Hudson was examined
in the progress of the cause, Richardson v. Wodson,
at York, and have afforded our readers the means of
judging how far they were just, or unjust. No un-
biassed mind can hesitate in pronouncing that, so far,
! Mr. Hudson has succeeded in setting himself right
with the public, and in fairly putting down his ac-
cusers. Sergeant "Wilkins was instructed to press
against Mr. Hudson no less than five other charges,
arising out of transactions connected with the York,
' Newcastle, and Berwick and the York and North
Midland Railways. For the particulars of these
charges, and the several answers to them, we -must
I refer to the report of Mr. Hudson's evidence, pub-
lished by Hearne ; but we cannot close our notice of
so remarkable a passage in the career of this public
man, without glancing at each of the five remaining
counts in the quasi indictment against him.
It was insinuated that Mr. Hudson had paid divi-
dends, in the two companies mentioned, out' of ca-
pital; see how he meets the charge in the face of his
opponents. In answer to a question from Sergeant
Wilkins, Mr. Hudson replies, before judge, jury, bar,
public, and press :
" I distinctly deny that I ever paid their dividends out
of capital. lam ready to be examined upon any balance-
sheet that has ever been furnished to the shareholders.
If I had been dealing dishonestly I would not have kept
shares to the large extent I held when I left these com-
panies."

And again, on his re-examination,—
" Q. Do you now persist in saying that you have
never paid the dividends out of the capital?
" A. I never have.
" Q. Never?
" A. Never.
" Q. And that you swear?
" A. I do, most solemnly."
- -

Now, on referring to the " preliminary observa-
tions" prefixed to the "revised and complete report"
issued by the York paper, we find no apology to the
public or to Mr. Hudson that such an unfounded charge
was suggested;—there is no retractation, no admis-
sion that Mr. Hudson had got rid of the imputation,
and that, in this point at least, he had been misrepre-
sented; but, instead of anything of this sort, which
was surely to be looked for at the hands of any one
entrusted with the use of a public pen, we find the
same general charge of having declared " false and
unearned dividends" put forward in the pamphlet!
Does"not this speak volumes?

The next accusation was ushered in with a great
flourish of trumpets. It was to the following effect ;
—that on the 30th December, 1845, cheques were
drawn for the payment of six several sums of money
due from the York, Newcastle, and Berwick Com-
pany for land purchased by the company,-4,0001. to
Lord Tankerville, 10,0001. to the Duke of Northum-
berland, 5,000/. to Earl Grey, 3,0001. to Sir Matthew
Ridley, 7,0001. to the Earl of Carlisle, 2,0001. to
Lady Mary Stanley ;—that these cheques were at
once cashed by Mr. Hudson, but that the money in
each case was withheld from the parties named till
May, 1849, being passed to Mr. Hudson's account,
while from the books of the company it would appear
as if the accounts had been settled.

Two observations arise naturally when one hears
this charge :—first, is it pretended that the company
lost anything or suffered in any way by Mr. Hudson's
arrangement in this matter ?—the cheques were
drawn at the time they were due, and Mr. Hud-
son was responsible both to the company and
to the landowners for the amount; indeed it would
be difficult even to imagine a state of things in
which the company could have been prejudic:Lif by
the transaction. In the second plar,+, is lo!'
terous to suppose that the landowLersA wenl
foregone their claims for ever; ,of
knew that at any moment these parties might ask for
payment of the money. But people chose to forget
the peculiar position that Mr. Hudson occupied in
respect to this railway. He was the originator of it;
but fur his lion-like resolution it never could have been
constructed ; to him the task was assigned of beating
down opposition, and overcoming all obstacles ; he had
to conduct all the delicate negotiations with landowners,
and to make terms with municipal corporations; the
company believed it was for their interest to entrust
him with extraordinary, we might say unprecedented,
powers, and great latitude of discretion. He had
the management of millions in his hands, and was
placed in a position of great responsibility and au-
thority. In emergencies he had never hesitated to
advance his own money when necessary ;—he had
been in some cases in advance for the company as much
as 100,0001. On him devolved the payments to
the landowners,—in many cases he was personally re-
sponsible to them ; and when the cheques were drawn
they were paid in to his credit, the settlement of the
accounts with the landowners being left to him.
" I Wll9 (said Mr. Hudson) in the habit at that time of
paying large sums for the company,
frequently in advance
for them to the extent of 100,000 L I held this money,
for the purpose of settling with the several landowners."
And again,—

" I had managed the purchrue from the Duke—l was
personally responsible to him for the purchase motley.
I settled with landowners for the company to the extent
of many thousand pounds—the purchase money was paid
by me. All those cheques. and many more, were given
to me to settle with the landowners; I paid them into
the Bank to my own account, and when I retired from
the board, in 1849, I accounted for every penny so
placed in my hands—ad the moneys I had either paid or
received on account of the company were then settled."
In reply to another question, Mr. Hudson remarks
" It was usual for ire to buy the land for the company,
and tettle with the principal landowners. I received
from the company the money due to the landowners.
When I ceased to be connected with the company, as a
matter cf course, all these transactions were settled. I
paid interest on money I received, and was paid interest
on money I advanced—I was paid interest on cheques I
gave on account of land, which I had omitted to charge
egairat the company. It is quite absurd to suppose any
imputation can rest on me in reference to those cheques."
It only remains to add that Mr. Hudson him-
self called the attention of Mr. Pews the direc-
tor who investigated these items, to these matters,
requesting him to examine the vouchers and receipts
with the accounts ; when it was discovered that these
payments made by the company were yet to be settled
by Mr. Hudson, with the exception of the claim of
Earl Grey, to whom Mr. Hudson paid his money
soon alter the cheque was drawn, and immediately
afterwards the landowners were paid in full. Again,
on reference to the " revised and complete report of
the trial," we find that a great part of Mr. Plews'a
important evidence is omitted!
The next accusation was of the same kind as the
preceding—that Mr. Hudson had held in his hands
cheques signed by the company for payment of certain
contractors, but it admits of a different answer :
" When I was handed that chi que Rush and Lawton
kept their account at the Union Bank; the end of 1847
will be recollected as a time of peculiar pressure. Rush
and Lawton had overdrawn their account 50,0001, and
for this advance I was security to the bank. When I
received the cheque en their account for 30,0001, I
,I
brought the matter before the Board, and I continued
security to the bank for 50,000/., and held as a security
the cheque for 30,0001. If I had not done this the rail-
ay
stopped
There has, perhaps, never been a case in which ex-
traordinary powers have been intrusted to an indi-
vidual, in a great emergency, where he has not, after
7worksthe their w °
audlvci n ,havece advances."
There as the bank would hate
the crisis has passed over, been accused of high crimes
and misdemeanours. All the smothered envy then
, foiled in andevery one who was disappointed in
his aims, crossed in his little plans,
burstsh
his
schemes,
who was snubbed, or passed over, or who fancied that
his merits were neglected, comes forward as accuser
or a railer ! In the case of more than one Governor-
General of India, but for whose energy and decision
the Indian empire' would have been lost,
enemies, as it were,
c
we have seen the man, who had conferred priceless
services on his country, on his return home,
likeassailed a
bees, ad s
aanmdalef malefactor,—beset
subjectedcto r,
impeachments,— tboetshse
autt bhya
cloud of imputa-
tions
the public began to
think that the man they had honoured as a hero had
been a very oppressor au(' a plunderer I It has, how-
judgment till all the facts
how-
ever, happened that these public men have outlivt d
the slanders heaped upon thorn, and the world have
eventually found out that it is necessary to regard with
extreme caution the clamour raised against men
placed in posts of unusual dliculty and responsibi-
lointYt;(7hdstiode7 arele nfdulltyhebirefore them.
We dismiss as unworthy of notice the charge that
in February, 1848, Mr. Hndson had sold 400 Hall
and Selby shares to the York and North Midland

Railway, at 101. per share above the market price; it
is simply Else, they were sold at their then value-
-981. a share, as near the market price as possible ;
these shares have since been sold at 1001.
The last remaining charge refers to the Brandling
shares—and such a charge! Let us hear how Mr.
Sergeant Wilkins puts it:—

"In 1844 the Newcastle and Darlington Company
purchasA the Brandling Junction. In order to raise
capital fur that purpose, it was found necessary to create
new shares, and 22,000 were accordingly raised. Only
20,000, however, were necessary at that time, and the
remaining 2 000 were confided to the care of the directors
to lay out for the company. What do you think Mr.
Hudson did wish them? He appropriated to his own
use 1,600 out of the 2 000, and 51r. Richardson had 100
as his share—so on this transaction Mr. Richardson made
about 2,1001. and Mr. Hudson about 36,000/. to 40,0001.
Yet my friend has the coolness to etand up and say it
was agreed that these should be made a present to him.
At any rate I believe Mr. Hudson had to dligorge the
money for them; and if he did, what becomes of the
pretext that they were given to him?"

In 1844 the Br3ndling railway was purchased by
Mr. Hudson on his own responsibility ; he was for
some time individually the owner of the line, —he
himself raised the money and paid for it without any
Act of Parliament. The purchase money was
550,0001. Mr. Hudson agreed to transfer the pur-
chase to the Newcastle and Darligton Railway, with
all the profits, on terms which must he admitted to
have been exceedingly liberal on Mr. Hudson's part,
—terms which show anything but a disposition to
take advantage of his own influence in the board of
directors. Here is the minute of the dire6tors
"16th Aug., 1844. Pret,ent—George Hudson, Chair-•
man, Rob..rt Davie, Deputy-Chairman, James Richard-
son, and Edmund Oxley
"In consideration of Mr. Hudson transferring the
above purchase (the Brandling line) to the Newcastle
and Darlington on the same terms that he purchased it,
that 500 new shares be allotted to him, to pay the re-
mainder of the purchase"?

There was a general meeting of the shareholders of
the Newcastle and Darlington Company held on the
4th Feb., 1845. The transfer of the purchase of the
Brandling line was then confirmed. It was resolved
that 22,000 shares should be created to raise the
capital necessary for the purpose, and that these new
shares should he appropriated to the shareholders of
the York and Newcastle,—one new share to each ori-
ginal share. Of course the parties who accepted the
allotment of the shares were bound to pay up the ca-
pital upon them. After allotting the shares in the
manner mentioned, 2,000 new shares remained
undisposed of. A proposition was made at
this general meeting, that these 2,000 shares
should be placed at the disposal of Mr.
vfomtsttgrsHoohhheeofi
racseaavtut
rtoetorehdkhsdlenntesuueeshdhot,trtcteenephi
surrender
eernmnenhghodTmidaeepuwbmnlreahgyipayingaeruneoahstirmytotan:amfi
naeanrconsiderationebantl.odl
allotment
publiclyesr lep.
thei
of
n:tof6l:
iaoccnol
pptkhpugl
ohrrod proposed
tatshsnohovoweeosftenenhhs
he
oettsaoi
goandhba
Irfafpaeeaenhsvi
sbsefrtaedieyaenaslits
cslfdoahpg.
\rt. upon them. The
away
amlhohtoraaohri
prospective
dpanhdcßteooeo4scwwwalneottdrrsaiehi
:svivtredtrhi
ieeyootcspe
flperiri
nsasertl
whtsosaaiteeaenohnhnrnistndoddeeest
accla-
mationl
as an acknowledgment of his prudence and
disinterestedness in the affair; but when it is con-
sidered that this premium was mainly owing
to the goodness of the bargain that he
had voluntarily foregone, and to the prestige
of his own name, is there anything so very wonder-
ful that a general meeting of proprietors should have
allotted to him shares at par, which, but for his exer-
tions, would have remained at par, or probably have
fallen to a discount ? But because the shareholders
chose to be generous, was Mr. Hudson therefore cri-
minal in accepting their free gift ? " Fie on't, oh, fia !"
Well might Mr. Martin, Q.C., exclaim that to insti-
tute a Chancery suit to recover back the premium on
these shares was as paltry and mean an act as he
had ever known in his experience at the Bar !
The object of those who called Mr. Hudson as a wit-
ness at the late trial at York has thus been completely
defeated. They hoped to have overwhelmed him with
obloquy ; but the manner in which he demeaned him-
self in the presence of the Court struck every one
with surprise, and excited sympathy in his favour,
while the clear and explicit answers which he gave to
every question of Sergeant Wilkins will tend materially
to remove many of the prejudices against him. The
speech of the learned advocate against the ex-railway
chief will be looked upon as a fine rhetorical display,
but the reader in admiring its brilliant invective will
remember that there is often a wide difference be-
tween what a counsel tells a jury he hopes he will
be able to prove, and the facts which afterwards are
substantiated by his witnesses ; and having examined
the proofs for themselves, pro and con., the public
will, we confidently anticipate, give a true verdict
according to the EVIDENCE!

A LETTER TO THE ELECTORS OF
_ WESTMINSTER FROM AN ARISTO-
CRAT. Third Edition. John Hearne, 81, Strand
~This is an extremely. clever pamphlet, end we are
;.-not at all surprised that it has already run to a third
edition. It is written in such a vein of satirical hu-
mour, and with so much real wit and eloquence, that
it bids fair to rank among the most popular
jeu d'esprits of our time. The author is
evidently a gentleman and a scholar, and though,
to keep up the essurned and exclusive character in
which he is writing, he calls himself " an Aristocrat"
(thereby, as he pleasantly says, expressing the " semi
and political bias" of his mind), he is, we believe, a
man of profound thought, of enlarged and liberal
principles, and of well-cultivated understanding.
This pamphlet belongs to the same class as Arch •
bishop Whately's " Historic Doubts," and Burke's
plea for " Natural Society."
Better to expose the fallacies of the Protectionist
party, their strongest and most favoured arguments
are stated in such a manner as at once to exhibit their

hollowness, even though they are pointed by a re-
fined wit, and set off with the seductive colourings
of a gay and exuberant fancy. Indeed, while we
perused these admirable pages we could not refrain
from a secret expression of regret that an author so
able and so accomplished bad not addressed himself to
some more serious task, and employed his masterly
pen in a more appropriate and dignified manner.
The commencement of the letter cleverly exposes
the dark forebodings and gloomy prophecies of the
Protectionists :

Gentlemen,—The cold-blooded conspiracy against our
working classes, which Fraud and Folly have combined
to call Free Trade,' is raising such a spirit of discon-
tent, and threatens us with such appalling disasters." &c.
' Two fictitious characters, " PROTECTION " and
" ARISTOCRAT," are then introduced, who keep up a
smart dialogue, the point and irony of which is ably
maintained throughout. It is a game of " battledoor
and shuttlecock." The sophistry of Protection being
thrown and returned from one to the other, till at
last the game is ended just as the feathers are giving
way, and the little bauble is going to pieces !
The following is an inimitable hit at the language
of Protectionists on the subject of Political Economy
—a science which it has been thought prudent of late
to disparage, because the great truths it teaches in-
culcate commercial freedom, and tend to the peace
and brotherhood of the nations
:
ARISTOCRAT speaks :
" Ah! Madam, it was indeed an evil day for England,
when her public men, from the vanity of proving them-
selves proficients in a new science, narrowed their minds,
and sank the statesman in the political economist. As
long as political economy was subservient to political
science, the statesman, less attentive to the theory of
the production of wealth, than to the laws which affect
its distribution, pursued his high career unfettered,
and regarded as his paramount object the happiness of
the people committed to his charge. But from the time
that Adam Smith treated political economy as a distiuct
branch of the science of legislation, he degraded it, cor-
n ectly indeed, to the mere theory of the increase of wealth;
a subject, which the purest minds turned from in disgust,
which the highest intellects would not condescend to study,
and which deeding hearts could not bring themselves eve' ri
to understand. How interesting is that anecdote of Fox
in Butler's charming Reminiscences
" PROTECTION.
"I cannot say I remember it.
" ARISTOCRAT.

"It runs thus, Madam. 6lt was the good fortune of
the Reminiscent, to have the honour of ►pending a day
tile-a-tete with Mr. Fox at St. Alai's Hill. The Remi-
niscent mentioned what certainly was of no consequence,
that he had never read Adam Smith's celebrated work
on the Wealth of Nations.' To tell you the truth,' said
Air. Fox, nor I either. Thtre is something in all
these subjects which passes my comprehension; some-
thing so wide, that I never could embrace them myself,
or find any one who did.'

" PROTECTION.
" Ah! I have a great regard for the memory of Fox.
I wculd pardon ten times his profligacy, could I discover
in the cold-blooded theorists of the present day but one
of the generous emotions that animated his heroic heart.
But now-a-days every petit suflisant, who has slang
enough at.commitud, sets to wink to traduce the labour-
ing classes, and p!umes himself on every penny he can
pilfer from the poor."
The absurdity and weakness of the Protectionist
argument is next shown by An illustration from New-
market, H hich the supposed Aristocrat employs, and
we have also a gentle insinuation that much of the
Protectionist warmth and zeal arises from party pique
and vanity e•frethled, the sneers and language of their
oppont :

competiti, if
There's on you please, Madam ; but
where are ' the sound principles of Free Trade?'
What an uprcar amongst the jockies st Newmarket
would such principles excite ! Who und, ratands
better than those worthies, quid ferre recusent, quid
valeant, humeri ? Is not eucb horse weighted accord-
ing to his age,' and ascertained powers ? and is it to
be tolerated that the Russian. or the American, with
a weight on his back of only half a pound, should be
allowed to ewer for the same stakes as the Briton, who
is sinking under the oppression of thirty pounds ? In
other words, that their lightly-taxed corn should come in
duty free, to compete with ours, that iota 1;1011 heavy

taxation to boar ? By all mcars, admit all foreign com-
modities ; but levy uu them, as they coma in, a toll,
equal to the grit, vans burdeas which Debt imposes on
us, of necessity. at home.

" Pr OTECTION.
" Well, Sir; I may be partial, from being so deeply
interes'ed in th!s question; but, indeed, I thiak you
make out a very strong case in my favour. And yet, if
your views are correct, I am still more confounded at
the insolent coadt.ct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to me, last May.

" ARISTOCRAT.
" What! Madame,'did he venture, even in that merry
month, to take any unwarrantable lib-?

" PROTECTION.

" Judge for yoursel; Sir. He positively had the as,
surance to call me, to my face. before the whole House—
an exploded sophi•m: There's language fur the Trea•
Bury-teach'!''

Out of so much that is excellent selection is diffi-
cult, but perhaps one of the best things in this pam-
phlet is the argument (pp. 71-73), in which "Protec-
tion " contends that the scheme of M. Proudhon in
1848 for " An organization of a reciprocal credit
among citiz:ns" is, in fact, a compound of the united
views of Sir J. Graham and the late Sir R. Peel !
With this difference, that Proudhon's " is the most
comprehensive, and consequently the most just!"
The climax with which the pamphlet winds up is a
piece of cutting irony, showing, as it is no doubt in-
ten.led to do, the extremes of fully and intemperance
in loAic and language into which the Protectionists
are desperately and deplorably lapsing.
"Farewell! then—but n, t without a parting sigh of
indignation at this sc.indalous ' experiment,' which
Wealth is making at the cost of Labour; degrading,
with ' universal benevolence,' the bulk of our working
classes to the 'continental level;' and, with cheap
foreign corn' throwing our lands out of cultivation, and
our cultivators out of bread; plausibly pretending to
lighten the springs cf Industry,' yet, in reality,
clogging every wilcol in the machine: but, to the most
sceptical, ere lung, will Truth be revealed: every
lie-'in-aid' is well nigh exhausted; and soon will
eve •y knee be bent, and every hand uplifted, to implore,
for millions of loyal men Pictection from a scheme which
did require the head of the Devil to contrive, which will
require the heart of the Devil to carry into execution,
and which—in firm reliance on the Divine Justice-1
leave, with hope and confidence, to the unerring ven-
geance—not of man, but—of God, to repay.
"Voms—supplicii eorum spectaculum, non moth') non
acerbum, sod loetunz etiam—Sl SARA DIEMS REDllT—debet
esse ; de nullis enim, guam de vz,Bzs, infestins aut ininii-
cius consuluerunt."

We have now given a brief and hurried notice of
" A Letter from an Aristocrat." Seldom has our pen
paid even this homage to an anonymous writer, but
no name, however great or respectable, can add to the
value of that which is so intrinsically excellent.
We cannot close, however, without observing that
a contemporary, of Protectionist principles, gravely
asserts this work to contain the true and genuine
sentiments of the author! that by " Aristocrat" is
intended a friend to an hereditary monarchy and a
constitutional peerage, and that under the name of
" Protection" the genius which inspired Bentinck,
and presides over Stanley, is verily and indeed sym-
bolised and expressed ! !
If this be so, and seeing how prejudice and error
lift their heads among us ; how sophistry has its re-
presentatives in Parliament ; how the " ldola Tribus"
haunt and infest high places, we cannot deny its pos-
sibility, however we may doubt it, or believe the con-
trary—if, we repeat, this be so (and sooner or later
the truth must, be declared), we can only lament that
so much wit is linked to so little wisdom ; that such
real eloquence is united with such real ignorance,
and that the gifted author of this remarkable letter is
himself blinded by the " darkness" he has made so
" visible."

COURT CIRCULAR.
BALMORAL, SEPT. 10.
Her Majesty rode out this morning on a pony,
accompanied by bis Royal Highness Prince Albert,
who afterwards went out shooting.
In the afternoon her Majesty drove in an open car-
riage, accompanied by the Princess Royal and the
Princess Alice.

Mr. and Mrs. Farquharson, of Invercauld, will
have the honour of dining with her Majesty this
evening.

OSBORNE, SEPT. 12.
The royal children take their usual drives and
airings daily, and continue in the enjoyment of good
health.

The Marquis of Lansdowne (Lord President of the
Council), It fc town yesterday, for his seat, Bowood
Park, Wilts.

SIR CHARLES NAPIER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir,-Sir Charles Napier's observations upon the
court-martial which, it is said, caused the melancholy
death of Colonel King, of the 14th Dragoons, need
neither apology nor illustration ; but the shameless
efforts of writers, evidently tools of more powerful
persons, to abuse the public mind as to his aptech,
wade six months before, when invecting that regi-
ment, shall be exposed in all their malignant re:lief.
"The 14th Dragoons would go anywhere if pro-
perly led.'"rhese are the words put into Sir C.
i Napier's mouth—but they never came out of t ; and
if they had, would not of necessity imply more than
that some officer had failed in judgmen', unless some-
thing known or surmised hsd given them force and
peint. However, Sir C. Napier never uttered them;
they are the invention of calumniators, who, in their
eagerness to lower him in public estimation, do not
hesitate thus to forge insults against the unhappy
officer they pretend to defend and bewail.
Some of those writers have spoken also of a last
letter to the Commander•in-Chief, predicting that it
will be suppressed. It is as follows
Sir,—You asked me the weight of men mounted
on the 16th December, 1849. I answered 17st. 51b.
You said—` Ehat is three stone lighter than at home,'
which I accounted for by saying the men were young,
and tall men were not sent out from England to India.
When you asked about the swords, I said we could
not keep them so sharp as the natives, who use leather
scabbards. 'Was it judicious in you to repeat my
words before the men, perverting their meaning ?
You bore testimony to the discipline cf the regiment
that day under my command. Your remarks before
the regiment sowed the seeds of discontent, which
have ripened into mutiny. You are the cause of the
stripes and punishment which that mutiny has led to,
and distraction and death to one who once had friends;
now disgrace and misery to those friends. I have
not been an accountable being for this last month.
"J. W. KING."
This letter, the result of insanity, as I shall pre-
sently show, would have been thus replied to, if the
writer had been living when it was received :
When a General-in-Chief is publicly told by a
commanding officer, in the hearing of his men, against
whom a cry had gone forth for misbehaviour in action,
that they were very small men and not strong—that
their swords would not take so sharp an edge as their
enemy's swords, and were so heavy the men could not
use them—for these were the real expressions used—
when such language was employed at such a time, it
was nut only judicious, but necessary, that Sir C.
Napier should address the regiment as follows
Soldiers, the Colonel says you are small men, and
your swords are too heavy for you, and not so sharp
as the Seikhs' swords. I beg the Colonel's pardon.
I see before me men with big hearts, and broad
shoulders, and strong arms, and if we have another
war I would give them an opportunity to show what
they are made of.
That Colonel King's letter was the result of in-
sanity is but too easily shown. He says, remarks
made six months before caused mutiny and drove him
to suicide—but there was no mutiny, nor an idea of
mutiny, in the 14:h Dragoons, and the following
letter to the Commander-in-Chief's secretary, written
immediately after the inspection, proves that the
writer, Colonel King, was pleased and gratified with
Sir C. Napier's address, and the assertions in his last
letter are the hallucinations of a distempered mind.
" We were not
.a little gratified by the expression of
the approbation of this morning of the most discern-
ing, as well as deserving great captain in India ; but
I beg of you to believe that it was no friendly veil
which the dust threw around us, concealing good a,
well as evil."
No more need be said.
W. NAFIEB, Major-General.

A NEW COMET.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir,—Mr. Charles ltob2rtson, of Mr. Cooper's pri-
vate observatory, Markree Castle, Ireland, detected a
new comet in the constellation Camelopardus, about
midnight, on the 9th inst. The observations gave, at
13h. 4m. 33,., Greenwich mean time—
Comet's right ascension .... 6h. Om. 51.53.
north declination ... 53d. 29m. 225.
The hourly motion in R.A. is 40 seconds of time,
increasing; and that in declination about three
minutes towards the south.
Your most obedient servant,
J. R. HIND.
Mr. Bishop's
arkObserva t toryl2., Regenti-
p, Sep.

Suicinr.—Yesterday afternoon an irquest was
held by Mr. W. Baker, coroner, at the George and Vulture,
nateliff-highway, oil the body of Frances Flaherty, aged 17,
who committed suicide by throwing herself into the water
of the London Docks. It appeared that the deceased was a
most profligate character. She had been 'confined in every
prison in and about London during the last five years no le;s
than 50 times, on charges of stealing and violent assaults on
the police. On Monday evening last she met her mother by
accident, and as she refused to supply Ler with money for
drink, deceased said she would drown herself. About live
o'clock the nest morning a heavy splash was heard in the
water of the London Docks, and on Police-constable Knight,
313 K, who was on the spot, looking over the Gravel•lane-
bridge, the deceased was seen struggling in the water, but
before the arrival of the drags the body had sunk.—Yerdict,
44 Temporary inacity."

LOUIS PHILIPPE'S PROPERTY.
A letter from Paris, of the Bth, in the bidellendaitce
of Brussels, says :—" Since Louis Philippe s death,
the journals have been speaking of the fortune which
he has left, and it has been even said that the legacy
duties would amount to some millions. I find the
exaggeration which I suspected in these accounts is
greater than I had supposed. The landed property
belonging to the late King contains about 86,000
hectares (the hectare is nearly 2} English acres) thus
divided: 45,000 comprised in the donation made by
the King to his children on August 7, 1830, and of
which he reserved to himself the life interest ; 13,000
belonging to the King himself; and 28,000 be-
queathed to him, for his life only, by Madame Ade-
laide, his sister. The gross revenue of this property,
calculated on an average of 10 years, is 2,989,000 f.
Since 1848 it has been smaller, and for 1851 will
not, it is supposed, amount to more than 3
,900,000`.
But from all this it is necessary to deduct the
expenses of taxes, insurance, management, agency,
&c., amounting to 1,611,000 f. There therefore re-
mains a revenue of 2,378,000 f., which, at 3 per
cent., represents a capital of nearly 79 millions. In
this valuation I do not comprise non-productive
property, such as chateaux, parks, and gardens, which
it must be admitted, are not without importance. For
instance, the park of Monceaux, in the Faubourg du
Roule, close to Paris, is altogether unproductive, and
contains 19 hectares, worth, say, 2,000,000 f.; also
the Park of Neuilly, containing nearly 186 hectares,
gives no revenue, yet, if sold in lots, it would give at
least 4,000,000 f. I ought to mention that I have in-
cluded in this statcm, nt the property of the Duke
d' A.umale's domain, of which the Queen Marie-
Amelie has the life use, and which. gives about
137,000 f. a year. In fine, to be exact, I ought not to
pass over in silence the movable property of the King,
consisting of matters held in common by him and
Madame Adelaide, arising from canal shares and ton-
tines, which, without any exaggeration, must be
worth 325,000 f. a year; also Government securities,
belonging to Louis Philippe himself, amounting to
100,000 f. a year, including 30,000 f. a year in the
Five per Cents., for the Chapels of Dreux and
Neuilly. But this situation, so brilliant in appear-
ance, is considerably diminished by the enormous
debts contracted almost exclusively for the works un-
dertaken at Versailles and in the Royal palaces. The
names of the executors of Louis Philippe are now
known ; they are MM. de Montalivet, Dupin, sen.,
De Montmorency Laplagne, Barris, and Scribe, for-
merly advocate at the Court of Cessation."