The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-05 00:00:00

THE FATAL ACCIDENT AT CHATHAM.

Thomas Hills, Esq., coroner, held an inquest on Tuesday
on the body of William Merchant, a private of the Chat-
ham Division of the Royal Marine Light Infantry, whc
was killed by the breaking of a flying bridge, at the re-
hearsal of the troops in siege operations.
Major-General J. L. A. Simmons, C. 8., the director to
the Royal Engineer Establishment, was the first witness
examined. He stated that the Royal Engineers had lately
been preparing for siege operations. On Monday the
troops of the garrison, consisting of the Royal Engineers,
Royal Marines, and line regiments were ordered out for a
rehearsal. In the course of the proceedings a flying bridge
was thrown across the ditch at a part of the lines known
as the Redan. It had been reported to have been care-
fully constructed for any number of men to pass over. This
bridge, which was of the same kind as that used last year,
was constructed of round beams of timber lashed together,
with props resting in the ditch. These beams supported
the planks. His Royal Highness Prince Arthur was the
lieutenant in charge of this bridge, and in this duty
he was assisted by a thoroughly-qualified sergeant. It
was the duty for the main body, consisting of a battalion
of Royal Marines, with fixed bayonets, forming the
assaulting column, to pass over the bridge. Two or three
of the leading columns of companies had passed over when
a slight check was observed in the advance from some
cause, which was presumed to have brought a greater
weight on some part of the structure, and the men keeping
step together, which was very difficult in well-trained men
to prevent, the bridge gave way, and the troops who were
on it fell into the ditch below, a distance of 25 feet. The
structure was not capable of bearing a number of men in
a body "marking time."
The :Sergeant-Instructor, John Foster, RE., was next
examined. He superintended the construction of the
bridge. He made his own selection of blocks, ropes, and
other materials from the store, and he was quite satisfied
that it was strong enough for any number of men to march
over. On two occasions he had proved its strength.
Colonel W. Adair, R.M., who was in command of the
leading battalions of Royal Marines, said that two com-
panies and a half bad passed over the bridge before any-
thing occurred. Prince Arthur had charge of the bridge,
and Captain Thomas had charge of the rear company when
the bridge broke down.

All the evidence went to prove that every attention
had been given to the strength of the structure, and that
it would bear any number of men passing over in the
usual way.
Assistant-Surgeon Rogers, R.M., deposed to the nature
of the bayonet wounds the deceased had received, which
caused his death.

The Coroner having briefly summed up the evidence, the
jury returned a verdict of accidental death.

LAW 4ND POLICE.

IMPORTANT DECISION WITH REGARD TO STAMPS.--In
Vice-Chancellor Malins's court his Honour had before
him the case of Rawlins v. the Metropolitan Railway.
Notice to treat had been given in the usual manner, and a
jury assessed the damages at £25,000, and the Registrar
considered that the notice to treat ought to be stamped the
same as an agreement. This being the case, the matter
was brought before the Vice-Chancellor, who decided that
no stamp was necessary.
HEAVY DAMAGES AGAINST A RAILWAY COMPANY.—At
the Guildford Assizes an action was brought against the
Great Northern Railway Company, by a Mr. Croker, for
damages on account of injuries received by him on the
defendants' line. The plaintiff is a young man 23 years
of age, and in consequence of the accident, which occurred
a few months ago at Sandy-bridge Station, he was quite
prostrated, insomuch that he could not safely be brought
into court. The great question was, as usual in such cases,
as to the prospects of recovery, and upon this question
the most eminent medical men were examined on both
sides. The jury ultimately gave £2,200 damages.
A DEED OF SETTLEUENT.—At the Leeds Assizes LIM
cause of Travis v. Ashforth was heard. It was an action
by the assignee of a bankrupt to recover possession of a
house of the bankrupt which he still continued to occupy,
and of which he refused to give up possession to the as-
signee. The defence was that four months before the
bankruptcy the defendant had executed a voluntary
settlement of the house in que Alen in favour of his wife
and children. It was shewn, however, that at the time
of executing the settlement an award had been made
against the bankrupt in an action brought against him by
the now plaintiff, and that on the day after the date of the
deed judgment was signed in that action for £75 and £ll2
costs. The deed included the whole of the bankrupt's
estate and effects, with the exception of some book debts
valued at £l9. The learned judge held that the deed
was void at common law, and gave a verdict for the
plaintiff.

BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY.-At the same assizes,
In the case of Marshall v. Feber, the jury awarded £2O
damages. It was an action for breach of promise tomarry
by a woman of 30 years of age, against the son of a
small manufacturer. The plaintiff was a weaver, and is
was shown that about six years ago the defendant wrote
her several letters, in which, after talking of Isaac and
Rebecca, and Zacharias and Elizabeth, he begged the
blessing of God upon their approaching union. There was
no evidence of the terms upon which they had lived since
then, but about two months ago the defendant married
someone else.

THE STMCIILEY MURDEIL —The trial of Harris for tlit
murder of Bernhard Zusinan is still proceeding, and isnot
likely to terminate for another day. Dr. Kenealy, for the
defence, pointed out various discrepancies in the evidence,
after which the court adjourned.

Madame Alexandrine Bris has just passed
brilliant examination before the Faculty of Sciences at
Paris and obtained the degree of Bachelor. Her intention
is to study medicine with a view of obtaining a phygcian's
diploma.

BRITISH ARCILEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION. The
twenty-fifth annual meeting of this association will be held
at Cirencester, from August 10 to 15 inclusive, under the
presidency of the Earl Bathurst. The Earl of Ducie,
lord•lieutenant of Gloucestershire, and the Lord Bishop of
Gloucester and Bristol are patrons ; and there is a long
list of vice-presidents. On Monday, August 10, the pre.
sident will deliver the inaugural address. On Tuesday
the members will inspect the numerous antiquities
of the town. On the following days there will be various
recursions,

CATHOLICS IN WORKHOUSES AND

PRISONS.

That public opinion in England, regarding
the treatment which Catholicism has hitherto
received, is undergoing a complete change, is
obvious to everyobserver. This change is owing
to a variety of circumstances, some accidental,
indeed, and personal, others of a more per-
manent and deliberate character. On a future
occasion it may not be without interest to trace
the more remote, as well as the more obvious
causes of this return, on the part of the vast
majority of our countrymen, to a wiser and
juster estimate, both of the character of Catho-
licism and of the position it ought to occupy
in the Empire.
Not now to speak of the resolution, to
remove at all costs from Ireland an esta-
blishment which has long filled to overflowing
the measure of religious injustice, we have
only to look to the determination manifested
by the leaders of public opinion no longer to
tolerate the proselytism of Catholic paupers
and of Catholic children in the workhouses
and workhouse schools, to convince ourselves
that the death knell of an antiquated bigotry
has already sounded. Justice to Catholics in
the workhouse, is a cry at last taken up by
the Protestant press, or rather, as it would
be more accurate to say, by journals which
are neither Protestant nor Catholic, but repre-
sentatives, nevertheless, of the current educated
opinion of the country. The Pall Mall Gazette
and the Times unite in demanding, as a matter
of strict right, that Catholics in gaols and
workhouses shall no longer be deprived of
the services of chaplains of their own faith,
and the free exercise of their religion, and
that Catholic children shall no longer, as they
now are yearly by thousands, be brought up as
Protestants, in Protestant workhouse schools.
In an article, which we reprint in another page,
the Times says " that some time ago Arch-
bishop Manning, in one of his addresses, drew
a pathetic picture of the numbers of Roman
Catholic children who were forced to abandon
their parents' faith, and were educated as
Protestants." The Times, whilst acknowledging
that such a complaint was just in principle,
expressed, at the time, a certain scepticism as
to the facts alleged. Such a charge against
the guardians of the poor of deliberate pro-
selytism was so grave, as to seem to the Times
" to require some confirmation." It now, how-
ever, acknowledges that this confirmation "has
been furnished, and that Dr. Manning has dis-
tinctly made out his case."
To have produced such a conviction on the
public mind, is not the least of Archbishop
Manning's services. The fact is now pub-
licly acknowledged by the Times, that at least
a thousand Catholic pauper children at a
given moment, and in London alone, are being
educated as Protestants, in Protestant work-
houses. The religion of the children is known,
as according to the recent provisions of the
law, a creed register is kept at the workhouses
in which on being admitted their religion, or
that of their parents', if known, is recorded.
For this wholesale yearly proselytism there is
no palliation, no plea on the score of provid-
ing education for these destitute children, for
the Times candidly admits, what indeed is well
known, that Catholics have shown themselves
unflagging in their persistent efforts to obtain
these cildren, in order to have them brought
up in Catholic schools in the religion of their
parents. There is something almost perfidious,
it seems to us, in bringing up Catholic pauper
children, thrown helpless on- the mercy of the
nation, in an alien religion, which had they
not fallen to the tender mercies of the guar-
dians of the poor, they, like their parents,
would have regarded with insuperable aver-
sion. By no act or fault of their own, they are
made unconscious apostates from a faith, which
1 it may be safely. predicted from the history of
the land. they mostly come from, they never
would have surrendered, even tinder the fiercest
persecution. It is bad enough to attempt to
force or allure grown-up men and women in
gaols to abandon their religion, but to deprive
helpless children of their faith is inexpressibly
mean and contemptible, in the opinion, we
should imagine, even of those who know not
what faith is, but to those who believe that
these children by losing their faith, lose their
best hope of heaven, the only inheritance—
but one worth more than an .earthly crown
—of their parents. Moreover, what a terrible
addition does not the knowledge bring to the
misery of pauperism, the knowledge which the
Catholic pauper too certainly has, that his
children in English workhouses, under the
eye of the English law, will be taught to
abominate the religion of his parents, and to
blaspheme the truths which they hold as the
most sacred gifts of God !
This terrible addition to the pangs of pauper-
ism, this long-standing injustice, this practical
result of Protestant supremacy, is at last about
to cease, for one of the last acts of the dying
Parliament was the introduction, in the Poor
Relief Bill, of a clause authorizing the removal
of pauper children to schools of their own de-
nomination. This clause was the last battle-
field of Protestant bigotry, but the barefaced
attempt to continue the system of wholesale
proselytism by the rejection of a clause dic-
tated alike by common sense and common jus-
tice, was happily defeated. By this act a thou-
sand Catholic children in the metropolitan
workhouse schools alone will be liberated from
the hands of the proselytizers. For the Catho-
lics of England, this Act, as far as this most im-
portant clause is concerned, is a real Relief Act.
1 It is to be regretted, however, that the oppo-
, nents of equal justice succeeded in defeating
1
i that clause of the Act which entitled the
Catholic priest to visit, for the purposes of reli-
gious instruction, Catholic prisoners, by an
1 amendment which made it optional on the part
I of all prisoners above 14 years of age to receive
his spiritual ministrations. The priest is en-
titled to make one visit, but after his first visit
his instructions are to be dependent on the will
of the prisoner. By this enactment those very
prisoners who stand in greatest need of re-
clamation, will be enabled to escape the religi-
ous instruction best adapted to their reforma-
tion. The absurdity of such an arrangement
is so glaring that this clause in the Poor Re-
lief Bill ought not to be allowed to become law.
It is cruelty to the prisoners themselves, and
an injustice to the community at large, who
are interested in the conversion of the criminal
classes. We trust that those who possess the
ear of the nation will speak out in such tones
as to shame and terrify the bigotry which is
seeking to perpetuate in secret this cowardly
mode of proselytism, for such it is in effect on
the most helpless portion of the community.—
Westminster Gazette.

THE STATE OF THE ODDS.—Suppose there are
two horses (amongst others) engaged in a race, and that the
odds are 2 to 1 against one, and 4 to 1 agst the other, what
are the odds that one of the two horses will win the race ?
This case will doubtless remind our readers of an amusing
sketch by Leech, called (if we remember rightly) "Signs of
the Commission." Three or four undergraduates are at a
" wine," discussing matters equine. One propounds to his
neighbour the following question—" I say, Charley, if the
odds are 2 to 1 agst Rataplan, and 4 to 1 against Quick
March, what's the betting about the pair ?" "Don't
know, I'm sure," replies Charley; "but I'll give you 6 to
1 against them." The absurdity of the reply is, of course,
very obvi us. We see at once that the odds cannot bo
heavier against a pair of horses than against either singly,
still there are many who would not fiad it easy to give the
following correct reply to the question : —The odds
against one horse being 2 to 1, his chance of winning is
e.lual to that of drawing one white ball out of a bag
of throe, one only of which is white. In like manner
the chance of the second horse is equal to that of drawing
one white 1441 out of a bag of five, ono only of which
is white. Now, we have to find a number which is a
multiple of bo!h the numbers three and five. Fifteen is
such a number. The chance of the first horse, modified
according to the principle explained above, is equal to
that of dro.wing a white ball out of a bag of fifteen, of
which five are white. In like manner the chance of the
second is equal to that of drawing a white bailout of a bag
of fifteen, of which three aro white. Therefore the chance
that one of the two will win is equal to that of drawing a
white ball out of a bag of fifteen balls, of which eight (five
added to three) are white. Thus there remain seven black
balls, and therefore the odds are 8 to 7on the pair.—
Chambers's Journal.