The Sun.
London, England, 1850-11-25 00:00:00

tart' efforts ; still, they do what they eau, getting 311 the
;dd 11ey coo btaio from tho State. Bat tle voluntary (Niu-
cationists do pretend that their unaided efforts can o:llicate
t? ;e people, and the result is—they do nothing ! There
is their 'one school, it is true; let them boast of that if
they like: it represents pretty accurately the power
of their educational principle, and the sum of their
activity. If they have bu:lt nny schools whatever,
if they support any schools beyond this one, let
the voluntary educationists produce them. There may
be more: we want to know. They have before been
asked for their statistics of voluntary education in Leeds;
and Mr. Ryland again challenges them to produce them.
Let them also exhibit the last balance-sheet of the one
school fund, and of any others, that we may know the
full extent of the power of the voluntary principle in
education. The truth is, as was well stated by the Rev.
Mr. Baynes, the other evening, there is no more certain
method of bringing the term " voluntary principle" into
contempt than by the vain c•flirt to apply it to purposes
which it is altogether inadequate to effect. And such is
unquestionably the case in its application to the work of
educating the nation. When, out of upwards of forty
schools in the borough of Leads for the education of the
poorer classes, it is known that, at the most, only three
(including the one school of the voluntary education
party) exist without aid from the Government, the pro-
clamation of " the power and efficiency of the voluntary
principle" in education, is sheer humbug. We commend
the subject to Punch. Mr. Ed ward Baines, proclaiming
" the power and efficiency of the voluntary principle,"
and pointing to his one school for 160,000 inhabitants,
would form the subject of a screaming farce. There is
nothing in Bombustes Furioso equal to it.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
156
156 COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 23.
(Sittings in Banco.)
34 THE QUEEN V. THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS OF THE
TREASURY.
A rule had been obtained in this case by Sir Frederick
Thesiger calling upon the Lords Commissioners of the
iy Treasury to show cause why a mandamus should not
as issue commanding them to award compensation to Mr.
Wright for the loss of his office as crier of the county
q. 6
) court of Middlesex, and for the loss of his fees as clerk of
;4 the Bloomsbury County Court. Under the 9th and
I 10th Viet., c. 95, Mr. Wright became the clerk of the
Bloomsbury County Court, and up to 1849 was paid by
L% fees, but in that year an Act passed under which Mr.
Wright had a salary of 5001. per annum allowed him,
'34 and his fees, which amounted to more than 5001. a year,
were abolished.
N The SOLICITOR-GENERAL this day showed cause
I% against the rule, which was supported on the other side
;, by Sir Frederick Thesiger.
" Lord CAMPBELL was of opinion that the rule ought
.0d to be discharged. When Acts of Parliament were
'° passed for reforming offices respecting the administra-
iii
210 non of justice, it was just and expedient that those who
209 suffered in their pecuniary interest should be
4.9, amply remunerated:; but it was monstrous to say
3'4 that those reforms should lead to the private
advantage of individuals who had enjoyed
offices which were abolished. Mr. Wright here
made two claims without showing that he was placed in
a worse position than before the Act passed, but be-
im cause he endeavoured to take advantage of the liberal
terms of the Act, disregarding the intention of the Le-
gislature to give indemnity to those who were injured
) when the new reforms Were introduced. It was ad-
'% witted by him that the situation he held after the
Act passed placed him in a better situation than
formerly; but he relied upon the words of the
Act, which provided that any person whose office should
be affected or abolished should be entitled to make their
claim for compensation to the Commissioners of the
Treasury, but that must be compensation for loss sus-
tee tained, and there could be no compensation without loss.
Mr. Wright, on the contrary, appeared to be greatly bet-
- tered by the passing of the Act. For those reasons he
was of opinion that the rule should he discharged.
The other Justices concurred, and the rule was dis-
charged accordingly.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nov. 23.
A young man, only 21, named John M'Cundie
Campbell, a lieutenant in the R iyal Artillery, was
opposed by Mr. Sargood for Mr. Isaacs, tailor, in St.
James's-street; Mr. Cooke supported.
The insolvent had seventeen creditors on the sche-
dule, to whom he owed 3471., contracted from October
1847, when he was a mere youth, to July last.
Among the creditors were " six " tailors, two boot.
makers, two hair dressers, two hotel keepers, and a
confectioner for 131. for pastry whilst he was a cadet
at Woolwich Academy. There was no property for
the, creditors beyond a proposal he now made to pay
them 241. a year out of his pay of 6s. 10d. a day
as first-lieutenant. Mr. Isaacs was a creditor for
1261., incurred from April to July in the present
year, of which 201. was for money advanced. Prom
this creditor he got cambric embossed handkerchiefs
at ss. 6d. each. He was arrested on the 17th October,
on a judge's order, when about to embark with his
company to Malta. His servant had packed up his
baggage, which a brother officer sent on board, and it
had gone to Malta. The property sent to Malta which
he had obtained from his creditors was worth 1001.
When the case was called, a strenuous effort was made
to get the opposition withdrawn, and the offer of 241.
a year was urged. It was, however, refused, and it
was said that whatever might be the result the inves-
tigation must take place. The case proceeded, and the
disclosures were startling. His father, a barrister,
who had resided in India, placed him at the Academy
at Woolwich, paying 1251. a year. He had not seen
him for some time. In June, 1848, when he got his
commission, he was only 19. Before that time he
had contracted a debt of 131. for confectionery.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS asked what business
confectioners had to give such boys credit to the
amount of 13.1. ?

Mr. COOKE said they did all the mischief ; they
looked to the family to pay them.
On being asked how he came to contract, such a
debt, the inscivent replied that they (the boys) used
to go there when they had nothing else to do. Before
he got his commissioa he owed for clothes, boots, and
shoes, and for perfumes. He had anti-cholera shirts
and Eau de Cologne. He expected his father would
have paid his debts, but he rQfused. When he was
arrested some offers were made to Mr. Isaacs, which
he had refust:J, and his company had sailed to Malta
without him.

Mr. SARGOOD considered that the creditors had a
good cause of complaint. Ile acquitted the insolvent
of all fraud, but it was impossible for the Court to
pass over such a case.

Mr. CooKE said the young man deserved deep
sympathy. He had been tempted with goods.
Mr. Commissioner PRILLIPS felt for the insolvent,
and also for the creditors. He saw that a relation
had assisted him, and, in the hope that something
might be done, he would adjourn the case for a few
days. He was glad no fraud was imputed, and he
trusted that an imprisonment would be prevented, by
which the commission would be saved. His Honour
expressed his anxiety in the case for all parties.
It was adjourned to Thursday next.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HO USE.
9d Mary Kitson was put to the bar upon the charge of
14, having stabbed her brother, Mr. Ely Kitson, of No.
154, Fenchurch-street, saddler, with a knife, with in-
tent to do him some grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Parry, instructed by Mr. Moakley Wood, at-
tended for the prosecution, and Mr. Ballantine ap-
;B peered for the defence.
s Mr. Parry said that there had been dissensions in
- the family for some time, and that it had been found
necessary upon former occasions by the complainant
to represent the violence of his sister, who had
threatened to do him some serious personal injury, in
1
consequence of which the chief magistrate had bound
hsr over to keep the peace.
Mr. Ely Kitson said—On Friday evening, at about
seven o'clock, I was going up the stairs of the house
in which my sister (the prisoner), my mother, a very
old woman, and myself resided, having a can in one
hand and a candlestick in the other. I had just, let in
a friend of the family, who called to see Mrs. Kitson,
when the prisoner opened the door, and to my great
surprise stabbed me in the arm with a knife, which I
afterwards saw in the station house. She did not
speak a word to me before she stabbed me. I believe
I cried out, upon feeling the weapon, " Oh dear! oh
dear I she has stabbed me," or "I am stabbed." She
had very frequently said she would make the place
too hot for me, and that she would do for me before
we parted.
Cross-examined by Mr. Ballantine—The knife
went through my coat, shirt, and flannel-waistcoat.
I never saw the knife in my life before. I believe my
sister, the prisoner, is the owner of the house. She
was left executrix by my father, and my mother and
she occupy part of the house. I did not see where the
knife was found.
Re-examined—I took proceedings against her
about my father's will. I received no netice to leave
from her, and I am interested in the will as well as
she.

William G. A. H. Capes, surgeon, of Philpot-lane,
said—Mr. Kitson came to me between seven and
eight and eight o'clock last evening. I examined his
left arm. There was a wound in the upper part of it,
is size and shape like the bowl of a dessert spoon,
and he appeared to have lost a good deal of blood.
The wound was about two inches and a half deep in-
side the muscle in the direction of the artery. The
knife produced was just such an instrument as would
have inflicted the wound—a knife sharp pointed and
double-edged.

Richard Norris, a man in the employment of Ur.
Kitson, said he saw him go up stairs with a can and
a candlestick, and soon after heard him say, " Oh dear,
lam stabbed." He (witness) also heard the shriek
of a female, probably caused by what Mr. Kitson
had exclaimed. He then went up stairs, and found
the knife produced.
Crouch, a policeman, gave evidence as to being
called into the house and finding Miss Kitson sitting
by the fire in a room. He told har that he must take
het into custody for stabbing her brother. She at
first refused to go, but upon force being used,
she put on her bonnet and shawl. In going to the
station she said she could not have believed her
brother would be so silly as to injure hinaself, as she