The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-04 00:00:00

OCTOBER.

Bedford 1
Bromley Autumn
Newmarket 2d October 5
Lanark
Chelmsford Autumn
Cheltenham l3

Sudbury and Ealing l5
I Newmarket kiougnton 17
1 Irarrow . 27
I Woccestor Autumn 27
ILincoln Autumn 29

THE MURDEROUS OUTRAGE LV THE

CITY.

EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED BOY MUIZ-
DELERS THIS DAY.
This morning Arthur Forrester Smith, aged 15, and Hec-
tor Augustus Smith, aged 13, brothers, were placed before
the Lord Mayor, at the Mansion house, charged with
"feloniously assaulting, on the Ist of May, in the house
No. 2, Catherine-court, Seething-lane, Mary Ann Nunn,
aged 65, a housekeeper, by striking her several blows on
her head with a wooden mallet, with intent to kill and
murder her ; also stealing from a box in the said house the
suns of £2 Os. 61, her money."
Inspector Tillcock was the first witness called. He said
on Friday night he went to the house No. 2, Seething-
lane, and in the passage ho saw Mrs. Mary Ann Nunn,
the housekeeper. Her head, face, and hands were
covered with blood. She was sitting up, suppOrted by a
constable. She had severe cuts on her head, her nose was
broken, her eyes blackened and swollen, and the flesh on
her hands all cut off. He sent for a cab, and had her con-
veyed to Guy's Hospital.
The Lord Mayor— Do either of you boys wish to ask
any questions ?
Both prisoners hung their heads down and muttered
"No," crying at the same time.
Inspector Moss, detective, said that he went to Deacon's
Coffee-house, in the Strand, and from inquiries ho
made he wont upstairs to one of the bedrooms. He
knocked at the door and it was opened by the younger
prisoner. Witness asked him his name. lie said
Smith. Witness went into the room, where the
elder brother was lying in bed. He said that ho
charged them with committing a murderous assault on
Mary Ann Nunn. He asked the elder prisoner if he knew
that person. Ho replied "No; oh no." Witness said to
the younger one, " Smith, do you know that person ?" lie
replied hesitatingly, " Yes, I did know her." Witness
then searched their clothes. In the trousers pocket of the
elder prisoner he found a quantity of loose gunpowder,
some caps, and a portinonnaio. Ho found in the room, at
the back of a looking-glass, a pistol broken, an opera-
glass, a powder flask, and various other things. Under
a chest of drawers he found fencing foils and two pairs
of boxing-gloves. The clothes were all spotted with
blood. Before leav ng the room witness said,
" Now, do you quite understani the charge against you ?"
The elder prisoner replied, " Yes, I did it ; I was tempted
to do it." Witness said, " Who tempted you ?" He replied,
"I don't know; I was tempted." The younger prisoner
said nothing. Re conveyed them to the station, and then
to Guy's Hospital, where the injured woman recognised
them both. He then took them to Bishopsgate Station
and placed them in separate cells. The elder ono asked
to see his brother, fur ho wished to make a statement.
Superintendent Foster was present, who cautioned the
prisoner and told him that anything he said would be used
against him. Ile replied, "Yes, I know that perfectly
well." Ile then stated—We were in the coal cellar for some
time. We hoard Mrs. Nunn go out about 7 o'clock. Then
we went upstairs and took screws out ef the box, and
forced it open by putting the handle of the mallet in. While
we were forcing the lid 1 believe that Mrs. Nunn, who
had come upstairs, and gone into the front room adjoin-
ing,she hoard us, and came to the door where we were.
lv had
began to scream. I thought we would stop her.
and
she brazil
not planned to murder her. I laid hold of her,
landing.
My stairs, but I stopped her on tte first-floor
mallet. I replied,
My brother asked me if I had
My brother brought
held her, and she tried to screahme.ad.
Both me and Mrs.
"No, it is upstairs." He ran upstairsgot
the mallet and struck her onatmhees. ihe
and fetched it. I
I said to my brother,
Nunn fell two or t,hree
While the bell was ringing
"Strike her again.'o,._ng
noisJ on the fluor. We
i downstairs for our boots,
the cel•
W ar. o t ien went
which wo had left in
top, got out of tabu window, and slid
upstairs to the
dust-bin, a . got over a wall into a
down the pipe iut) a
leftshe la
her r makingaud a wontin
o into Seething-lane. I took my pistol to
te
rug
,not intending to hurt her. My brother had a
pistolfcrigurht ln'i e
a s'ablviell. He either lost it or threw it away. I
walked home without my hqt. The next morning wo
brushed our clothes to get the blood off.
The prisoners said they had uu questions to ask witness.
Mr. Ellis, son-in-law of the housekeeper, said that the
prisoners were the great-graudehildren of Mrs. Noun.
The house surgeon at Guy's Hospital then stated that
the unfortunate woman was rather better to-day, although
in considerable danger.
The prisoners were afterwards remanded till Monday
next.

$•PIIIIT Op THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

..--------

The Times sincerely trusts that the present anomalous
relations between the Government and the House of
Commons will soon terminate, never to reappear. It is
a consummation devoutly to be deprecated that we should
ever recognise a similar state of affairs as a normal inci-
dent of political life ; and the bare possibility of such a
result may not unreasonably make many doubt whether
a Ministry condemned by the House of Commons on one
of the highest questions of national policy should ever
be maintained in office. The absolute novelty of the
circumstances demands the utmost caution and sobriety
on the part of all who can influence their course. It is
evident that a false step may be followed by the
most dangerous consequences. Mr. Disraeli has waited
on the Queen at Osborne, and has no doubt informed
her Majesty that the House of Commons has proved
its want of confidence in its administration by the hostile
votes on Mr. Gladstone's resolution. We may safely
assume him to have expressed his belief that the policy
approved by the House of Commons would not be con.
frrmed by the country if submitted to the constituencies,
whether reformed or unreformed, but that he could not
venture to advise her Majesty to dissolve Parliament
unless there should appear urgent and imperative neces-
sity for such a course. Whether that necessity exists
must depend very much on the disposition of the victo-
rious majority of the House of Commons. If, for
example, they should determine upon and carry a direct
vote expressing their want of confidence, dissolution
or resignation must follow. If, on the other hand,
they should be content, as some of them have shewn them-
selves to be, with what has been already done, reserving
further action for a new Parliament, the Ministry might
continue to direct the business of the country, so as to
expedite as much as possible the summoning of the new
Parliament. It cannot be assumed that either of these
extreme courses will be adopted. The Liberal majority
are indisposed to vote a want of confidence, and, flushed
with their present triumph, are as little disposed to be satis-
fied with the acceptance of Mr. Gladstone's first resolution.
But there maybe a middle line tolerable both to the Govern-
ment and the Opposition. The withdrawal of further
opposition to Mr. Gladstone's resolutions, and a pledge to
push on the Reform measures before Parliament, may be
sufficient to content both. The Queen may constitu-
tionally decline to accept the resignation of her Ministers
or to permit a dissolution until it has been made apparent
that the House of Commons would not sanction such a
compromise. If Mr. Disraeli signifies to the House of
Commons her Majesty's pleasure to be further informed
of the will of the House, what may be expected
as a reply to such an intimation ? What course
should the House of Commons take if the statement of
Mr. Disraeli involves the continuance in office of the pre-
sent Ministers until after a dissolution next January or
February ? The question is, of course, mainly addressed
to the Opposition. It is sometimes said that victors can
easily be magnanimous, but that their magnanimity does
not often lead them to abstain from seizing the fruits of
victory'. There can, however, be no question that, as a
party, the Liberal majority in the House of Commons
will find their advantage in maintaining the present
Ministry in office if suitable conditions can be defined.
The Ministry can do nothing, and the succession of the
Opposition to power immediately after a general
election is certain. In the meantime the Opposition
itself is in course of development. Their policy has
ripened, but it is doubtful if even yet it be quite ripe ; and
a new election would greatly assist the solution of that
most difficult of practical problems, the reconciliation of
different claims to high place in the councils and leader-
ship of the party. The number of persons designated as
members of the next Cabinet is already considerably over
a score, and it is more than doubtful whether the selection
made from these candidates now would correspond to the
selection that might be made next spring. If the Oppo.
sition can secure through the present Ministry the com-
pletion of the work of Reform in the sense they desire,
they may be satisfied to wait until they can enter naturally
upon possession of their inheritance.
The Daily News discusses Sir William Hutt's bill for
regulating joint-stock companies. The importance of the
end sought by the bill is admitted. The first point of ird'
portance in the bill is the positive obligation for every
company to furnish full and precise accounts, to be open
to public inspection. This regulation is of the highest im-
portance, only it has been unfortunately proved that as
regards correctness it can be too easily evaded. However,
leaving that question aside, and admitting for the moment
that the rule is rigidly enforced, it is difficult to see of
what material good it will prove. The accounts may be
unsatisfactory, and an official investigation required.
There is little doubt that the first mode of request would
prove nugatory. Two directors might, under peculiar cir-
cumstances, be found to sign this self-condemnatory appli-
cation, but the secretary is certain to be prohibited by the
majority of the board from doing so. A requisition from
holders of one-twentieth of the share capital is more
feasible. Still, if preference proprietors got their divi-
dends, and a decent show could be made of a return, how-
ever small, to the ordinary proprietors, it would be no
easy matter to obtain the necessary signatures. For the
same reason the debenture holders would not be- induced
to move ; without reckoning whether, according to the
Act, the words " loan capital" may not legally mean
holders of Lloyd's Bonds, who would certainly prefer the
more summary proceedings, in case of default, of law.
But supposing the inspection is granted. A vast quan-
tity of documentary evidence is put in, oral evidence taken
on oath, and the inspectors send their report to the Board
of Trade after an unknown but certainly a very
long interval. What is the ultimate result of this quasi-
judicial investigation? Nothing. The report once pre-
sented, the matter ends there, as far as the Board of Trade
is concerned. If shareholders or debenture-holders wish
to act upon the merits of the case, they must do as they
do now—go to the Court of Chancery. It may be said
that at least the Board of Trade inspectors would give
excellent grounds to proceed upon. In other words, their
report would serve as a brief. But, on the other hand,
it is almost certain that if a company came to such a
pass that this inspection was likely to be demanded,
the proprietors would take the affair into their own
hands at once without incurring the delay of the pre-
liminary intervention. There is nothing gained in
doing the same work twice over. Before leaving this
question it is just to add that Sir W. Hutt has intro-
duced the serviceable proviso that the expenses of an
inspection shall be borne by the applicants, or the
company, as the Board of Trade may direct. Another
good clause is that of snaking directors and officers ame-
nable for conscious misrepresentation. It would have
been better, perhaps, to have simply declared that offences
of this sort came under the provisions of the Fraudulent
Trustees Act. The inevitable fault of all measures to
enforce commercial morality is that they are operative
only as against the good companies, and useless against the
bad. Take, for example, the question of signing the
accounts. A consci9ptious director or secretary would not
consent for a moment to put his name to an incorrect
balance-sheet, even if it were never to pass beyond the
hands of his own shareholders. Unconscieutious officials,
on the other hand, will comply with the regulations of
the Board of Trade in the strictest manner, and yet con-
trive to misrepresent the truth.

The Standard remarks that the member for Gateshead
has shewn a tolerably correct appreciation of the require-
ments of the situation. What he aims at is the establish-
ment of a system which will afford something like a
guarantee to the shareholders that the balance-sheets put
before them are correct, and which will enable them, if
that guarantee be broken, to come down upon the
guilty parties with sharp and severe punishment. Of
course this is exceedingly desirable, and Mr. Cave,
speaking for the Government, offered no objection to
an endeavour towards effecting it by the agency of a
private member, though a somewhat similar bill, pre-
pared by the. Crown's advisers, has been introduced
into, and is now in progress throng' li, the House of Lords.
But Ministers have, wisely as we think, limited their
action to railway companies exclusively, deeming it unatl-
visable in a tentative measure to deal with the thousands
of companies now in existence for all kinds of objects and
in it l parts of the country. Apropos of a, Government
audit, Mr. Cave stated the singular fact that after all the
disclosures of the last few years only one set of share-
holders has availed themselves of the power they already
possess of having an official investigation into their affairs
—a circumstance which seems to shew that there is, after
all, no very great anxiety for official interference.

In an article apropos of the case of Lyon v. Home, the
lleruid asks, who was Mrs. Lyon? She had been for
seven years the widow of a successful merchant, who had
bequeathed her ample wealth, but whose death had left
her lonely. At variance with her husband's relations,
with few acquaintances, and no friends, addicted to reading
eccentric books, highly superstitious, anticipating her own
speedy departure from this life, yet yearning for an oppor-
tunity to see it in its fashionable shape, with a blot upon
her birth, but a peer among her ancestors, she had
scarcely any enjoyment of her wealth, but occupied
shabby lodgings cheap neighbourhood, and gossiped
3
away her time with a few inferior persons who humoured
her fancies. And who was Mr. Home ? An American,
of tolerable education, but no independent means and no
regular calling. When he came to England, heralded by
puffs, he was called a charlatan. At any rate he was, in
the proper—which need not be the offensive—sense of the
terni, an adventurer, who lived upon the gift he affected
to possess, who had published the most incredible
stories about himself, who made out his existence to
have 'been one long and almost angelic romance, who
in sonic qnarters was denounced as a quack, and
is others believed in as a seer ; flattered, cherished,
lionised, and, what is more germane to the matter, sup-
'meted in luxury. lie was a topic of the day; the novelty
of his pretensions procured him admission into fashion-
aide circles ; lie even lodged in the palaces of the Conti-
nent ; and we can well imagine that when his fame
reached the clil lady, immersed in her chimeras, she
would he immediately attracted by it ; while it is hard to
credit the assertion that spiritualism bad nothing to do
with her sudden and overwhelming preference. She was
opulent, he was needy ; she wanted society, he could
supply it • she liked mystical conversation, he had a whole
Lexicon of it on the tip of his tongue. An intimacy
grew up with surprising swiftness, which she attributes to
his persuading her that he could interpret her dead hus-
band's spiritual voice calling to her from Heaven ; whereas
he swears that, after nominally adopting him as her son,
she really wanted him to make ber his wife, and, as an
inducement—though this he did ilot suspect at the time—
loaded him, of her own free act, with benefits until he be-
came A man of fortune.