The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-15 00:00:00

EGYPT.

We extract the following from a letter received from Dr.
Labat, ex-surgeon of the Pacha of Egypt, and dated from Suez :
.‘ Since the measures adopted by Mehemet Ali for giving
complete security to Europeans passing through Egypt, the
Isthmus of Suez become* more and more the high road, by
which civilisation passes into Asia and the eastern shores of
Africa; the Red Sea formerly so inhospitable to Christians
is now open to the commerce and industry of all nations. At
Suez, Kosseir, Gedda, Massouah, and Mocca, French and
English Consuls are found vieing with each other in lending
assistance to the travellers and commerce of the different
European nations. The English steam-boats on the Red Sea
ply as regularly as on the seas of Europe. They make the
passage from Bombay to Suez, touching at Aden in twenty
days, and that to Calcutta in a month. Both lines dis-
embark at Kosseir the travellers who are bound for Upper
Egypt, by going down the Nile from Kena to Cairo. Two
days' journey on a dromedary are sufficient to go from Kos-
seir to the river. Such passengers as continue their read to
Suez, find in this town English and French diligences which
cross the desert to Cairo in 24 hours. From this city to
Alexandria, the English have established a line of steam-
boats, by means 'of which travellers can go down the Nile
in a single day. When once arrived on the shores of the
Mediterranean, there is a double line of correspondence, French
and English, to Europe. A circumstance worthy of remark
is, that thanks to the abolition of the quarantine at South -
amplon, a person can arrive at London or Paris more quickly
by that route than by landing directly at Marseilles. In fact,
the English boats, which repair directly from Alexandria and
Southampton make the passage in 15 or 18 days. On their
arrival in that port, as a quarantine of only 24 hours is required,
it is evident that a traveller can reach London or Paris more
rapidly than by Marseilles, where a quarantine of 25 days is
exacted. This practice, which is founded on ancient pre-
judices, does infinite injury to Marseilles. The period ought
to be reduced to five days at most when there have been
neither deaths nor illness on board during the passage. This
excellent sy.stetn of the English allows despatches from the far-
thest part of India to arrive in London in less than six weeks,
whereas it would take four times the period in making the
circuit of the Cape of Good Hope. If the plan of a similar
correspondence between the Isle of Bourbon and Suez can be
put into practice, the French will be as well off as the English.

As the port of Sus z is the most important intermediate point
of the line of communication with the Indian Ocean, it is de- ,
sirable that it may always remain in the power of a neutral
Government like that of Mehemet Ali, this being the only
means of leaving it easily accessible to all nations. At present
the utmost harmony reigns between the English and French
Consuls, and it is to be hoped that no political incident will
occur to trouble this state of things so rioalable to the general
cause of civilization."

LAW INTELLItiENCE.
HOUSE OP LORDS. June 14.
The Lord Chancellor, Lord Lliougham, Lord Campbell, and
the. Judges, sat in the House -of Lords to-day to hear writs of
error.

SIR F. BURDETT, BART. 0. DOE AND OTHERS.
The arguments in this case, which were partly heard at the
conclusion of Easter Term, were resumed and concluded to-day.
The House propounded certain questions of law for the con-
sideration of the Judges, which their Lordships took time to
consider.

SICYNNEK V. DOE AND minas.
This writ of error stood in the paper for argument to-day,
but the case involving the same question as the last, similar
questions were put to the Learned Judges, who took time to
answer them.

RUTLAND V. 'DOE AND OTHERS.
This wns also a writ of error from the judgment of the Ex-
chequer Chamber, reversing a decision in favour of the plain-
tiff, who claimed certain tenements in Norfolk, wider an in-
denture of lease, executed in Dec., 1833.
The arguments not having concluded at four o'clock, were
postponed till to-morrow.
•

MESSRS. WIGNEY'S BANK-
RUPTCY.

BRIGHTON, Teesna v.—This morning an adjourned meet-
ing took place in the large room of the Town Hall, for the ex-
amination of the bankrupts, and production of the balance-
sheet.
Mr. JAMES addressed the meeting at some length, and ob-
served that a most important question would arise, as it appeared
from the books at the date of the late Mr. Wigney's death, in
November, 1836, there was a deficiency of 58,000/. It also
appeared that a balance had never beer, struck since 1824.
Mr. BENNETT considered the, accounts had better not be put
in, as the books of the Scotch concern were not forthcoming.
Mr. HALLETT, one of the assignees, said they had made an
arrangement with Messrs. Houlttsworth, which he hoped would
be satisfactory to the creditors.
Mr. Isaac Newton Wigney was then sworn and examined
by Mr. James.—ln 1836, at my father's death, mysei
and father were the partners. The deficiency at that
time, according to the balance-sheet, was 54,816/. Bs. 7d.
I never knew of the deficiency until the accounts have
been recently gone into. The last balance was struck
in 1824. My father toot an active part in the bank, and the
books were under his revision. I joined the bank in 1830.
took no capital in. At my father's death I look no account
of the state of the bank. On reference to the books, 31st Dec.
1824, the whole claims were 89,342/. 4s. 4d. The accounts
will not tell the state of our afEirs. The assets, good, bad,
and doubtful, aretlre same in amount, viz., 89,342/. 43. 4d.
I have not the least idea what •amount of this was bad. Mr.
Stanford and 11Ir. Valiance were partners. At their retiring
I never took an account of the bank. The deficiency found at
my father's death, amounting to upwards of 54,0001- com-
menced in 1824. In the year 1825, during the panic, the loss
was nearly 9,000/. I speculated- that year to the extent of
26,000/. That sum was the commencement. of the deficiency,
as far as I was concerned. My father was aware of my losing
9,G00/., and that amount was never replaced by myself or my
father, but the bank went on with that deficiency. In 1826
1,147/. 10s. 3d. was lost. In-1827 the deficiency was 1,499/.
by speculations. In 1828, 2,001,11' In 1,29, 2,426/. 15s. 2d.
In 18.30, 1,8511. 2s. 6d. In 1631;590/. Bs. 6d. In 1832, 1,0041.65.
In 1633, 559/. 11s. 4d. Up to 1833 the deficiencies were
19,7461. 12s. 2d., of which I was the sole cause, and which
amount was never replaced.. There was a loss in hops, in
1828, of 3,979/. From 1825 to 1833 I lost 23,725/., and no
part was replaced. Up to 1836, the time of my father's death,
49,357/. I ls. 3d. was the total amount of deficiency caused by
me. I have spent about 4,0001. on the electi ms. The two
first cost 1,1631. ss. 6d. The two next 2,816/. The cost of
the la,t 1,8001. The expemes of the last el, ction are paid.
Sly father from time to time knew of the losses. I carried on
the concern with the deficiency unsupplied. When my brother
joined in Jan. 1837, he brought in no money. I have not ap-
propriated any money belonging to my father's estate to snake
up the deficiency which arose- whilst he was a partner. We
have paid off the debts of 1836 by the'subsequent deposits.
The Court then adjourned until fen o'clock to-morrow.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LQADS, June 14.
THE INCOME-TAX.
Lord WHARNCLIFF presented a petition from the
Law Society of the West 'Riding of Yorkshire,.praying
that they might be exempted from the Income-tax, on
the ground that they were obliged to pay yearly for the
renewal of their certificates.
The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from the
Guardians of the Poor-law Union of Bradford, praying
fur the re-enactment of the Poor-law of Queen Eliza-
beth. He did not concur in the prayer of the petition.
THE PLEA OF NOT GUILTY.
The same Noma; LORD presented also a petition from
John Smith, of Liverpool; a lecturer upon education,
and praying that the plea of " Not guilty " should be
abolished, and that some modb should be adopted to
enable accused persons to plead, without asserting that,
of the falsehood of which they were conscious.
Lord DEN MAN remarked, that the practice of Judges
persuading prisoners to plead." not guilty," had entirely
disappeared from the courts of law in England. Fur
himself, be could see no occasion why prisoners should
be calledon to plead at all, unless they desired to express
their plea of guilty. Thap.vas the opinion he enter-
tained, and he had expressed the ,same sentiment, some
time ago, in the House of Commons.
Lord CAMPBELL was of opinion that the asking ofpri-
soners whether they would take their trial or not, was much
the same as asking them whether they were guilty or not.
The scandal of Judges solemnly advising the prisoner to
tell a falsehood, was now dime' away with ; but he must
say, that he thought it would be a still greater improve-
ment upon the present practice, if no questions should
be put at al!, but that the prisoner should have the right,
if he chose to prevent trouble, to confess his guilt.
Lord WYNFORD never knew a Judge who advised a
prisoner to plead " not guilty." He had himself, when
a Judge, recommended a.prisoner to pause before he
gave in his plea ; and he should do the same thing now,
if he were in a position to do so. Ile thought that
. great inconvenience arose from continued alterations in
the law.
The Bishop of CHESTEU suggested that the prisoner
should be asked whether he Wished to confess, or whether
he wished to be tried ?