The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 4, 1845.

suggested that he was induced to commit the act out of
revenge at his father, to whom the farm he occupied be-
longed, not having left it to him at his death, which, it
appeared, the prisoner anticipated he would have done.
From the evidence of the witnesses who were examined,
appeared that the fire took place on the night of the
31:t October, and when it was discovered the prisoner
appeared to be in a very excited state from drink, and,
on his being questioned, he said he knew who had done
it ; and, in reference to the prosecutrix, who is his
mother, and another brother, he said, " --their hearts,
they shall never have it." He likewise said that the
farm-buildings were gone, and the - house should go
next.

In cross-examination by Mr. CLARKSON, the witnesses
admitted that the prisoner was a man of most intempe-
rate habits, and that he was continually intoxicated, and
after he was in custody he was attacked with delirium
tremens. His conduct during the period the fire VI as
burning, seemed to be more like that of a madman than
a rational being, as he got some bread and toasted it,
and then did the same with a herring, at the burning
ruins, and then sent for beer, which he drank with the
food. It also appeared that it was all his own property
on the farm, and uninsured, the whole of which was
consumed.

One of the witnesses caused a good deal of amusement
in the Court by his definition of drunkenness. He said,
in answer to a question put to him by Mr. Clarkson, that
he had often seen the prisoner tipsy, but had not often
seen him drunk.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON asked him what difference he
considered there was between being tipsy and drunk ?
He replied that he only considered a man to be drunk
when he could not walk.

Mr. Baron ALDERSON—Then, so long as a man can
roll about, or walk at all, you think he is only tipsy ?
The witness said that was what he meant.

The Learned JUDGE, amid much laughter, remarked
that he thought it was drawing rather a fine distinction.
The inspector of police, in whose custody the prisoner
was placed, proved that he was in such a state of excite-
ment, that he appeared like a madman ; and he was in
consequence induced to send for a surgeon to attend
. .

upon him.
Mr. HAWKINS, having intimated that he could not
carry the case any farther,
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said it appeared to him there
was nothing to support the charge, except the conversa-
tions and hallucinations of a man drunk and almost in-
sane, and he put it to the jury whether they would think
it safe to convict under such circumstances ?

Mr. CLARKSON observed that everything that was de-
stroyed appeared to be the property of the unfortunate
man himself, none of which was insured, while the build-
ing. which belo,iged to others, was insured.
The jury expressed themselves satisfied, and at once
returned a verdict of Not guilty.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, March 3.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat OR the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.
LAW IMPROVEMENT.
Lord CAMPBELL moved the second reading of three
Bills for the improvement of the common law process in
the Courts of England, Scotland, and Ireland. It was
not necessary that he should now occupy the
House by going into the details of these three
Bills. For two of them, the Courts of Common Law
Process Bills for England and Ireland, passed their
Lordships unanimously last session. But they were
objected to in the House of Commons, on the ground
that there was a want of reciprocity, as the Bills did
not apply to Scotland.—(A laugh.) That objection
was now removed, as his Right Honourable Friend
the Lord Advocate had prepared a Bill, called
the Court of Sessions Process Bill (Scotland)
on precisely the same principles. The object of the Bill
Was to enable actions to be carried on without the per-
sonal service of process upon the person sued, that per-
son being in a foreign country at the time. A cor-
respondent of the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs had expressed apprehension that these
Bills would be regarded by foreign Courts as a usurpa-
tion of their jurisdiction. But that could not be the
case, as the Bill related only to process in actions between
British subjects, and for debts contracted in the United
Kingdom.
Lord BROUGHAM said, that his Noble and Learned
Friend, having made a reference to what fell from
him last session, he would beg to observe that his
objection had not been to the principle, but to the details
of the Bill. Of the principle he highly approved, for
he thought that it was calculated to remedy a great
evil. There were, it was true, some objections to the
Bill which he entertained, and if they were not removed
he should feel it his duty to press those objections. But,
with regard to the principle of the present measure,
he appealed both to his Noble and Learned Friend who
moved the second reading of this Bill, and also to his
Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack, whether it
was not a right and equitable principle which the Bill
affirmed? There was one thing especially to be observed
in the Bill—that the object of the plaintiff was to con-
ceal his proceedings from the defendant, and he
consequently might, and probably would, get some
foreigner of indifferent character to swear that process
was duly served. Now such a foreigner might be out of
the jurisdiction of any court, and beyond reach of all
punishment for perjury. What he wished was, that the
service, or that the affidavit of service, at any rate, should
be a British service.
Lord CAMPBELL said that the opinion of his Noble
and Learned Friend was worthy of attention, but the
objection might he considered in Committee.
The Bill was then read a second time.
FORCES IN IRELAND.
The Duke of WELLINGTON, seeing the Noble
Marquis (the Marquis of Normanby) in his place,
begged to suggest that the motion, of which he had
given notice, should be brought on on the same day with
his previous motion ; for he had not had time to look
over the returns of the forces sent to Ireland,
and if the Noble Marquis would postpone his motion,
it would give him time to look over these returns.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that his motion
was not for the amount of the force sent to Ireland, but
the number of troops in that country on the Ist of
January in each year for the last ten years. He should
be happy to comply with the Noble Duke's request, to
bring on both the motions on the same day. He had
been anxious to bring the matter before the House,
because his Noble Friend (Earl Fortescue), who had
stayed in town on purpose, was unable to remain longer
than to-morrow. Understanding that his Noble Friend
the Sgeretary for the Colonies would remain in town
the whole of to-morrow, so as to be present at the
discussion, he could not say that he would postpone his
motion without he had the consent of his Noble Friend.
The Duke of WELLINGTON—My Noble Friend
the Secretary for the Colonies will certainly not be able
to be in the House to-morrow.
THE AMERICAN TARIFF.
The Earl of CLARENDON wished to ask a ques-
tion of the Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs, as to whether measures had been taken to procure
the abolition of a certain portion of the American tariff.
The portion to which he alluded pressed exceedingly on
the merchants of this country, and he thought the duties
imposed on them were in direct violation of an existing
treaty between this country and the United States of
America. The American tariff imposed a heavier duty on
goods imported into the United States from the East than
from the West ; and goods coming from China were
admitted at a lower rate of duty than goods coming
from England. Indeed, he believed in some instances
the amount of duty varied from 90 to 120 per cent.,
whilst the goods from the West, were subject to a much
lower rate of duty. Now, there could be no doubt that
this pressed heavily on the English merchant, and was
Friend
had ad
brought rightly
s under
in direct violation of a treaty existing between the two
countries, China shawls at a much lower rate of duty
than those sent from this country. The merchants, there-
fore, had a right to think that that was not only an inju-
dicious, but an unjust distinction on the part of America It
must be remembered, too, that while they were praising
this tariff they were claiming a return of the duties
which had been paid on their rice imported into this coun-
try, in consequence of us having lowered the duties on the
same article imported from the East and West Indies.
The whole value of the rice received during the time of
the low duty was not 3001.—(Hear, hear.) He
thought that the United States suffered no hard-
ship ; and the whole case was very different
from their conduct towards us ; as they laid on
heavy duties on English goods, and reduced them upon
other goods. All he wished now to ask his Noble Friend
was, whether he recognised the claims of British sub-
jects, and what effect his representations had had upon
the American Government?—(Hear.)
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that his Noble
some
hadoi
le
mstatedent
ieommnt notice
engaged
might
decuo aotf snehvt
convince
nhecewei hrai
attention
thoughtt
himhe L
n ttt,
that
ohhda
neet.
experience
Lord-
ships.
thes Government . The
hoef his subject t
for c
Noble
t Friend
it was possible to have a very good case without being
able at once to succeed. The gentleman who now re-
presented her Majesty's Government (Mr. Pakenham)
had represented the matter to the American Govern-
ment, but it had not yet received the attention which it
deserved.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Pakenham's last dis-
patch upon the subject was Gated the 3rd of Oc-
tober, and at that time he proposed to put
himself in communication with persons in New
York, who were principally interested in the case,
and he hoped to receive from them information
which would strengthen his means of applying
to the United States' Government. But he (Lord Aber-
deen) would deceive his Noble Friend if he did not say
that the subject of our claims had been brought forward
very prominently in Congress.
CONSTABLES BILL (SCOTLAND).
On the motion of Lord DALHOUSIE, the Constables
and other officers in Public Works Bill (Scotland) was
read a second time.
THE BISHOPRICS OF ST. ASAPII AND
BANGOR.
The Earl of POWIS presented a number of petitions
from places in Wales, against the union of the Welsh
bishoprics.
THE NORTH WALES RAILWAY.
The same NOBLE LORD presented also a number of
petitions in favour of the North Wales Railway Bill.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 3.

The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock.

The Bridgewater Navigation and Railways Bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
The Chester and Holyhead Railway Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.
The Thames Navigation Debt Bill was read a second
time, and ordered to be committed.
On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the Man-
chester South Junction and Altrincham Railway Bill
was read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
On the motion of Mr. H. JOHNSTONE, the Cale-
donian Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered
to be committed.

Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition in favour of
the Plymouth and Stonehouse Gas Bill. On the motion
of the Noble Lord the Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed.

the Bill had been got up with a commendable degree of
care.—(Hear, hear.)
The Bill was then read a secoad time.
GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD JUNC-
TION RAILWAY.

On the motion of Sir J. C. .110BHOUSE, this Bill was
read a second time.

SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY EXTENSION.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition from the borough
of Lambeth, in favour of the South-Western Extension
Railway.

On the motion of Sir J. Y. BULLER, the Devonport
Gas Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.

On the motion of Mr. CHRISTOPHER, the Great
Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.
Mr. 11. HINDE brought in the Newcastle and Dar-
lington Branch Railway Bill, which was read a first and
ordered to be read a second time.
LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY.

Mr. ASTELL moved the second reading of the Lon-
don and York Railway Bill.
Mr. M. MILNES would not, as it was understood
that the second reading should take place pro forma,
and the discussion be taken in the Commit-
tee, offer any opposition at the present moment.
He might as well, however, take that opportunity of
mentioning that there were rumours abroad of an agree-
ment having been made between this and a competing
lino, calculated to injure the interests of private pro-
perty. The arrangement, as he understood, con-
sisted of these terms :—" You shall give up a
certain number of objections which you have made
to our line, and we will give up a similar number of ob-
jections which we have made to yours." Now there
could be no doubtluch an arrangement as this was in-
jurious to private property, particularly as these under-
takings have the advantage of possessing great
influence and immense capital. It behoved Par-
liament, tin retire, to see that these abuses
were not tolerated, and it would be as well that
some step should be taken to give parties whose rights
would be injured by such an agreement, notice
that they had full power to bring all their claims before
the Committee on Standing Orders. If such a
course as this were adopted it would effectually
prevent the rights of private property being injured in
other instances by similar undertakings.
Sir J. YARDE BULLER knew nothing of the merits
of the Bill, but as chairman of the Committee on Standing
Orders, to which the petition on the Bill was referred,
he could state that the standing orders had been strictly
complied with.—(Hear.) Whether such an arrange.
ment as that mentioned by the Hon. Member had been
come to out of doors was not for him to say—all that he
could state was, that no petition whatever alleging
any non-compliance of the standing orders was
brought before the Committee.—(Hear, hear.) With
any such arrangement, of course, they had nothing to
do; but as far as ordinary care was concerned, he could
state, that the Committee used their exertions to arrive
at a proper conclusion. The • line passed through from
200 to 300 parishes, and the general impression left upon
the minds of the Committee was, that the case for