The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-09 00:00:00

appeared in our assize calendars. A party of
poachers proceeded to the Earl of Derby's pre-
serves at Knowsley, and found themselves con-
fronted by some of the Earl's gamekeepers. It
was before daybreak, and hardly light; shouts
and threats were exchanged on each side. One
of the poachers (Roberts) fired, and killed one of
the gamekeepers(Kenyon). For this murder he
and four others, who were of the poaching party
at the time, and are therefore by the construc-
tion of the law participators in the crime, now lie
under sentence of death. Now, we are not
going to thrown one palliating shade over a case
like this. It would be inconsistent with what we
have all along said upon such subjects to do so.
We have oftener had rather to take the very con-
trary part, and animadvert upon the extreme
leniency and softness which has been shown
in our courts of justice to cases of outrage and
violence. Again and again has the ruffian, whose
act has really come so near murder that it would
be scarcely possible to draw the distinction, and
who, at any rate, has shown all the animus and
brutality of the murderer, escaped with some
few months' imprisonment, while the miserable
half-famished purloiner of a bit of bread or a bit
of bacon has had his seven years' transportation.
It is on this very account, and following up this
opinion, that we take the view we do of this case
at Liverpool. We say we do not see in the whole
aspect of this trial any sign of its having been
really conducted upon that genuine simple prin-
ciple of abhorrence for bloodshed, which ought
to be always the mainspring of a trial for mur-
der. Our courts, we repeat, have for years dallied
with ruffianship and brutality, and the hatred of
the crime for its own sake seems very much to
have left us. It is only as it interferes with the
rights of property, and attacks our pocket
and purses, that we treat it with the severity that
is due.. There is, if appearances do not very
much mislead us, a good deal of this mixture of
feeling at the bottom of the Knowsley trial. It
is impossible to help more than half suspecting
that the case that might have figured as a mere
fatal outrage, and dropped down into man-
slaughter and some six months' imprisonment,
or, at the most, a transportable affair, underother
circumstances, has gained criminality from its
ominous connexion with preserves, and that the
poacher gives the judicial stroke to the mur-
derer. We may be wrong, but we cannot help
thinking that policy and expediency supply more
than half the substance of our march-of-mind
disapprobation of murder; and that the ob-
ject of smoothing one or other difficulty in the
civil system, and protection of this or that inte-
rest, furnish modern law with its most grave and
retributive feelings on the subject. There is an
awkward appearance about the fact of joining the
other four prisoners who did not fire with the one
who did, and bringing all under one head, as
this trial does. We know the law implicates
the whole of such a party in the crime of any
one of them ; but it is obvious that there must
be immense hardship often in enforcing such a
rule literally. A party of poachers are not ne-
cessarily men of exactly equal amounts of men-
tal villany and hardihood; they agree in the act
of poaching, but one may be far more of a thief
or a murderer than another. They are not pre-
pared all of them for equal development of atro-
city. The greatest ruffian fires, and kills, per-
haps ; others abstain from firing, because they
were not ruffians to the same extent. If such
should. be the case—and it is fair to give per-
sons the most favourable construction of theirout-
ward behaviour—to lay hold ofj.the common
ground of poaching, and hang them all with-
out distinction, because, though one fired
and another did not, all poached alike, and
you have them there—such a judicial
course goes very far to make murder and
poaching parallel offences. The old stoic maxim
of the equality of crimes seems to have a chance
of reviving again, and transportation, imprison-
ment, the lunatic asylum, and the halter, will be
distributed from our Courts according to some
system of metropolitan police and gendarmes
justice, and with reference to some changing
centre of expediency, that has as little to do'
with Christian principle or natural law as the
rules of free trade or the manoeuvres of a field
of battle. What we mean is, let there be fair
play. There are four men who, at any rate, are
not chargeable with the literal crime of murder.
They may be lawless, headstrong ruffians, and
their outrage may deserve in itself, and ab-
stractedly, or morally considered, any amount of
punishment—even the gallows. Still, what is the
standard of punishment on which we have prac-
tically been going ? Only the other day a
man named Stolzer was convicted of stab-
bing his fellow-workman so as to cause his
death. There is, really, very little difference
between his crime and that of the actual mur-
derer of Kenyon • and with that of the four who
did not fire at Kenyon it stands in an actually
unfavourable comparison. Stolzer, however,
was reprieved. Or what do we say to Mac-
naughten ? That was a case indeed of insanity,
if we are to believe the mad doctors, of unac-

countableness in the individual, not of pardon,

ableness in the crime. But, with all deference
to their insanityship, we must say his was the
oddest kind of insanity to excuse a crime that
the world ever heard. And, although we cannot
undertake to say that the poachers at Knowsley
can reap the primary benefit of it, or claim
the privilege of an hallucination with re-
spect to all distinctions of day or night, and
shooting as poachers and as licensed gentlemen,
and between Knowsley and Australia or
any other place where people may shoot as
they please—still, a thoroughly lax and indulgent
sentence as that was toward Macnaughten, would
come into odd comparison with the present
Liverpool verdict (it it is to be carried into
effect)—by which four men who have committed
no external act of murder are left for execution.
It goes against our feelings to seem at all to be
glossing over a crime of such an atrocious and
ruffianly character as that just perpetrated. We
think an abhorrence of such crimes, and a dispo-
sition to visit them with the very worst conse-
quences, are inherent in a proper state of moral
and social feeling. All we say is, let crimes be
punished .as the crimes that they are, and not as
other crimes; let murder be hanged as murder,
and not as poaching; and if we lose the sharp-
ness of our moral disgust at such offences, and
take to laxity and leniency, then let one man
have the benefit of it as well as another. We

like a deep and an equal system of justice ; but
if our justice loses its depth, let it, at any rate,
retain its equality.

COMMERCIAL NEWS.

MARSEILLES, DEC. 30.—WHEAT.—In consequence of
the festivities of the season, the commercial week has
been of short duration. The orders from England, so
confidently looked for, have not yet arrived, and the im-
portations continue to be extensive, producing a certain
depreciation, which would have been more notable but
for the already extremely low price of wheat. Several
cargoes of Roumelia have been sold, and the good sorts
have obtained no more than 17f. to 17f. 25c. per charge.
Mention is made of sundry sales of Polish at 21f to 21f.
500., and 22£ for a very superior parcel.
OLEAarcrous SEED.—There has been some business
done in Sessame this week, without, however, producing
any real activity in the market ; 400 quintals, disponibles,
were sold at 45f., discount one per cent., and 2,000
quintals to arrive in January, at 44f. 25c. ; 600 quintals
Russian Linseed, disponibles, have been sold at 26f., dis-
count one-half per cent. ; while in other descriptions no-
thing whatever has been done. Our market for cotton
seed continues dull ; 500 quintals Rape have realised
18f., discount two per cent., which is reputed a high
price ; 2,000 quintals Poppy have been disposed of at
38f. ; but this seed has as yet no fixed position or rate
of value.
Oms.—Olive, notwithstanding the absence of arrivals,
has fallen in price this week, in consequence of the in-
activity of the soap-boilers, and the amount of business
done has been very trifling. First quality, disponible,
remains offered at 1111. 70c. per hectolitre, but without
buyers. In a livrer, what was in demand at 112 f. 50c.,
is now neglected at 112 f. 10c. Malaga Oil, to ar-
rive between March and June, has been contracted
for at 110 f. 93c. ; Tunis, between January and
March, at 105£ 46c. ; and Sicilian, between January
and February, at 106 f. 25c. Sessame Oil occupies a
somewhat better position than it has done of late. Fifty-
five thousand kilogrammes have been sold, deliverable
over the first nine months of 1844, at 89f. 45c. per 100
kilogrammes. The price now held for future delivery
is firm at 90f. 70c. Linseed Oil has not yet recovered
from its degraded position, although the price of
disponible is maintained at 71f. 10c., and an
amelioration is expected to take place in the
early part of next month. The position of edible
Oil has mueh improved, and during the week
some rather important transactions have been concluded
for re-exportation, principally in the products of the
kingdom of Naples. In Bouches du Rhone qualities
there has been less demand, and in the Department du
Var purchasers are few at 123 f. to 145 f. per hectolitre.
CoAL.—There is no change to notice in this commodity.
The price continues high, and the arrivals not sufficiently
important to shake it. Freights remain low, and ship-
ping is abundant.

We have the greatest satisfaction in observing that
one of the first acts of the Earl of Leicester on attaining
his majority has been to identify himself, like his noble
father, with the feelings of the yeomanry. and to come
forward' to the aid of his countrymen in distress. We
understand that his Lordship has not only subscribed,
within a day or two of his coming of age,to the
Hail Storm Fund, but has adopted the principle of
the parochial contribution, by directing the 3d. in the
pound to be paid on all his extensive estates. We are delighted
also to see that the name of the amiable Countess of Leicester
is attached to the list with the munificent donation of 501.
The poor of the parishes of Sparham, Bintry, and the very nu-
merous other parishes comprised in Lord Leicester's estate, beg
to return their thanks to the Earl and Countess for their bene-
volent donation on his Lordship's Mesnion to his majority.—
Norwich Altrourf,

GRAND COURT OF WARDMOTE,
GUILDHALL.

Y..sterdty a Grand Court of Wardmote was held by the
Lord Mayor and Aldermen, for the purpose of receiving the
presentments of the several wardmote inquests.
COMPLAINTS AGAINST NON-FREEMEN.
The Lord Mayor having taken the chair,
Sir PETER LAURIE called the attention of the grand ward-
mote to the presentment which was about to be handed in by
the officers from the ward of Aldersgate. A course of rather
an unusual kind had been adopted with respect to the indi-
viduals who were believed to be non-freemen. The proper
officers had received ;directions to return the name, address,
profession, trade, or occupation, of every one in the ward who
was supposed not to be free, in order that measures might be
taken to ascertain whether al!, without distinction, were not
compellable to prove that privilege. The question had become,
by recent proceedings, one of extreme interest and importance,
and ne hoped that it would not sink into a mere matter of form,
as had hitherto been the case, but that the City Solieitor should
be directed to proceed against the large dealers, who had
hitherto evaded the obligations for which the poor man, to whom
the payment of even the small sum at present required was a
serious object, was prosecuted for the omission.—( Hear, hear.)
The return would include all ranks, and all trades and profes-
sions, and he should, at the next Court of Aldermen, propose
that a Committee be appointed to examine and report upon the
presentment.
The presentment, which contained the long list alluded to
by Sir Peter Laurie, was then handed in by the Ward-clerk
and received.
The presentment from Bassishaw ward contained the follow-
ing observations, which particularly attracted the notice of
some of the members:--
" And as touching more persons occupying or dwelling
within this ward, we beg to draw attention, as we have fre-
quently done before, to the presentments made by the inquests
of this ward in the years 1828 and 1829, and to complain that
although more than fifteen years have since elapsed, and al-
though throughout the whole of that period several of the per-
sons included in these presentments have continued to carry on
trade within this ward without taking up their freedom, the
right claimed by those persons (and by others in similar cir-
cumstances in various parts of the City) to carry on trade
within this City without being admitted to the freedom
thereof, has never yet been brought before any legal tri-
bunal. And we present that in obedience to the articles
given us in charge, we have caused to be summoned up-
wards of eighty persons now carrying on trade within this ward,
and who were suspected not to be free of this City, and required
them to appear before us to produce and show the copy of their
freedom under the seal of the officer of the Chamber of this
City, but that such summonses have (with two or three excep-
tions) been entirely disregarded by the persons to whom they
were addressed, in consequence, as we believe, of the known in-
' attention that has been shown to our former presentments. We,
therefore, present our request that the decision of some com-
petent tribunal may be obtained, first, whether wholesale
dealers are compellable to take up their freedom, in order to
their carrying on trade within the City, and, if not, then se-
condly, what constitutes a dealing by wholesale. And, we pre-
sent our further request that until those questions are decided
the articles given in charge to the inquest may be so altered as
that the members of the inquest may be relieved from the in-
vidious inquiries which, under the solemnity of an oath or af-
firmation, are now so unavailingly cast upon them."
Some remark having been made by one of the law officers as
to a certain inaccuracy in the language of the presentment,
Alderman FARNCOMBE rose and moved that the present-
ment should be at once received.
Alderman FAIRBROTHIR said he merely wished to have the
opinion of the Town-clerk as to the admissibility of the present-
ment, containing, as it did, a charge against those to whom it
was addressed. His object was merely to maintain the order
and dignity of the Court.
Sir PETER LAURIE considered that the inquest had a right
to send any presentment they considered it to be their duty to
sign to the Court of Grand Wardmote, and that the subject was
one of too serious a nature to be subjected to injury or inter-
ruption by verbal forms.
Alderman HUGHES Humus said he felt, for reasons which
were perfectly well understood, the deepest interest in the sub-
ject matter to which the presentment claimed the attention of
the Court—the question whether the wholesale dealers could,
or could not, be compelled to take up their. freedom. He
pledged himself to pay the most scrupulous attention to it when
before the Court of Aldermen.
The TOWN-CLERK intimated to Alderman Farncombe (the
Alderman of Bassishaw-ward) that the reception of the pre-
sentment was not matter of motions but upon the face of it
there was an inaccuracy. It stated that the inquest had
before called the attention of the Court to these presentments.
Now such was not at all the fact. The present inquest had
never done anything of the kind. What had been alluded to
was the act of an inquest of a former period.
Alderman MUSGROVE said it appeared to him that the
Court would not compromise its dignity by receiving a
presentment charging it with inattention to former present-
ments.
Alderman FARNCOMBE declared that the gentlemen who
had made the presentment never contemplated an offence or
slight to the,Court. Their object was to press the attention
of the Court to a matter which had, hitherto, whatever might
be said to the contrary, been very much neglected.—( Hear. )
Sir PETER LAURIE said the inquest was perfectly justified in
the language they had used. They had constantly presented the
wholesale dealers of the ward who were not free, and these
presentments had been as constantly disregarded. He did not
see how such a matter-of-fact statement should be withheld, or
how it could be contradicted.—( Hear. )
The Foreman of the inquest begged to be allowed to state
to the Court that he and his fellow-jurymen could net act
otherwise than they had acted, in making the presentment,
with satisfaction to their own consciences. For seventeen
years they had been in the habit of returning from 70 to 80
individuals for not having taken up their freedom. Their
summonses were now almost wholly disregarded, no more than
two out of the number having condescended to take any notice
of the proceedings of the Inquest on the recent occasion.
The Inquest of Billingsgate Ward presented that certain in-
dividuals carried on trades in that ward without being free, and
complained that the state of the market was such, that dan-
gerous diseases were to be apprehended if remedy were not
applied promptly.
The Foreman stated that 60 persons had been summoned to
show that they had taken out their freedom, and of that number
one only attended..
The Inquest of Bridge Within Ward presented the coach-
stand near the Adelaide Tavern as a nuisance. They also
stated in their presentment that the streets were in a deplor-
able state of filth, and that respectable persons, particularly
females, were subjected to great annoyance by the conduct of
idle vagabonds in the neighbourhood of the wharfs at which
the steam vessels received and landed passengers. They like-
wise prayed the attention of the Court to the notorious in-
stances of neglect as regarded the treatment of non-freemen.
The Inquest of Cordwainers Ward handed in a presentment,
but it passed sal) silentio, and no mention was made of the
dangerous state of Watling-street in the document, notwith-
standing the fact that the Alderman of the ward strongly ad-
vised the Jury to present that choked-up thoroughfare as a
nuisance ; and Mr. Lott has, in the Court of Common Council,
upon every occasion which presented itself, within the last five
or six years, spoken of it truly as one of the worst street evils
in the whole City.
The Inquest of Candlewick Ward presented that King
William street was dangerous, in consequence of the want of
proper crossings, and that on account of the inattention of the
scavenger contractor, the whole neighbourhood was in a state
of filthy puddle.
The Inquest of Castle Baynard Ward presented Puddle
Dock as a filthy and disgusting nuisance, in which masses of
animal and vegetable matter were accumulated to the preju-
dice of the health of the inhabitants of the vicinity. The pre-
sentment called upon the Court to interpose its authority to cure
or abate so dreadful a source of disease, to compel the
person who superintended it to do his duty, and to prevent the
additional evil arising from the conveyance of all sorts of abomi-
nation to that place fromvarious parts not at all within thelimits
Of the City.
Coleman-street Inquest presented that the laxity in the per-
formance of the duties of the law officers of the City had caused
a great increase in the number of non-freeman in that ward,
an evil, in the opinion of the jury, calculated to operate most
prejudicially to those who were free, in the competition so
warmly going forward amongst tradesmen.
The LOAD MAYOR—lnquiry shall be made, and if it be
found that the law-officers have been remiss, steps shall be
taken to make them apply themselves immediately to active
exertion.
The Dowgate Inquest presented that the streets in the ward
were so much neglected by the contractor for scavenging the
City as to be almost impassable. They also presented that
Dowgate Dock was becoming a most intolerable nuisance and
offence, and calculated to occasion disease as well as disgust.
Several of the precincts of Farringdon Without Ward handed
in presentments, with memorials attached to them, complaining,
in strong terms, of the indulgence granted by the inspectors to
the rich, in not compelling them to become free, and the hard-
ship inflicted upon the poor in subjecting them to penal inflic-
tion upon their refusal, from inability, to incur the expense.
The Foreman of one of those inquests presented a memorial
of rather a singular description. It stated that one of the
parties who had been summoned to attend as an inquest-man and
who was a wholesale dealer, had refused to perform the duty.
The gentleman who had thus refused was a non-freeman, and
still Sir James Duke, the alderman of the ward, was of opinion
eligible as an inquest man. Now, the freemen
t andhat
the h e
restw esofthe inquest did not consider that such a person
could legally serve as an inquest-man, inasmuch as amongst
other acts which he would have to perform he might be called
upon to present to the Court inhabitants of the City of London
who, like himself, were non-freemen, and the rest of the jury
being freemen, would, by admitting a non-freeman to act with
them, be chargeable with illegal acts, while performing what
under other circumstances would be the duties they were sworn
to execute. The jury presented the individual alluded to, and
his partner, as non-freemen.
The TOWN-CLERIC here observed that the Inquest had inten-
tionally not presented any other persons in the ward as non-
freemen, although they were sworn to present all the non-
freemen they could find in the ward.
Alderman T. WOOD said it was the bounden duty of the In-
quest to return all the non-freemen they, could prove to be
wanting in the privilege, instead of impugning the decision of
Sir James Duke, who was perfectly correct in stating that an
inhabitant of the ward, whether freeman or non-freeman, was
eligible as an inquest-man.
Alderman Iltrones Huomiesaid the Inquest Jury ought,
instead of selecting one instance; to have done all they could,
by presenting all the non-freemen:in the district, to show the
extent of .the evil.—(Hear, hear.) They would by such a
course show the strongest title to a remedy-
The LORD MAYOR said one difficulty described as regarded
the omission of the names of other non-freemen was easily
conquered. The jury could go back, and attend with another
memorial at another time.
The Foreman said: the jury had not had time since the
21st of December, to present all the non-freemen of the dis-
trict. He and his brother jurymen objected to the proposition
to have amongst them a non-freeman, from the palpable incon-
sistency of the thing. About twenty-six years ago he took up
his freedom, and it cost him all the money he
possessed to ac-
complish that object. Ever since that period he had seen mul-
titudes of persons flourishing in trade around him who would
not become free, and upon whom no compulsion was exercised.
Alderman Humus HUGHES said that he never would be
convinced, until he should see it ruled by the Courts above,
that a freeman was compellable to act upon a ward inquest.
The LORD MAYOR then directed the foreman to send in an
additional presentment, including all the other non-freemen of
the district.
Alderman Goes informed the several inquest that ors who
complained of the filthy condition of the streets,if the
inhabitants would attend the Commissioners of Sewers next
day, and prove breaches of contract before them upon the
part of that individual, penalties should most unquestionably be
inflicted.
PETITION AGAINST FOUR OF THE CANDIDATES
FOR FARRINGDON WITHOUT WARD.
Mr. WELLS, one _of the candidates at the late election in
the Ward of Farringdon Without, resented a petitien against
Taylors, Obbard, • Gresham,
and Mr, Hodgson.
The petition stated that the four gentlemen above named
were not inhabitant householders, abiding, dwelling, or residing
within the ward, as was required by the laws and customs of the
the return of Mr. Richard
City of London, and that, therefore, their election, at all events
as regarded them, was null and void, and it prayed that his Loscl-:
ship would issue his precept for a new electio , or amend the
return by substltuting for Mr. Taylor, Mr. 0 bard, Mr. Gre-
sham
rTi_ and Mr. goaron,* PaTtles pflims?lf the petiti9ner),
eptieriegti Alr. "a * d W 045,1
. i'- ' • •