Daily American telegraph. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1851-1852, 1852-09-25
TIN. Romance or R.allty-Th. sterling

Case.
A correspondent Of the Baltimore Times,
writing from this city, gives the following inter
esting particulars of the celebrated Sterling case.
The parties interested in its prosecution are now
residents of this city, and the unAnching tenacity
with which they have pursued the matter hith-
erto is, no doubt, guaranty Of the way in which
they will carry on the war hereafter:
Correspondence Of the Baltimore Daily Times.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 20, 1862.
The Democratic Review for the month of Au-
gust, contains an interesting article entitled
"Who owns British North America ?" and shows
very clearly that the legal right is in the person
of Scotch noblamen, the Earl of Sterling, now
in this country.
Having completed his titles, and established
his right in 1881, the British Government after
much deliberation decided on the ground of the
political consequences" of the case, to oppose it
tooth and nail, and endeavor to destroy it.
An English periodical, the Metropolitan
Magazine" for January, 1887, in an article
severely condemnatory of the shutting conduct of
the British government in being afraid to meet
the case fairly, adds, at would be just to grant
the Earl indemnities, and spare him from being any
longer worried by the wolf dogs Of the law"
A majority in the Cabinet, influenced by an
outside pressure of English and Scotch aristo-
Gratis, determined to break down the case already
vainly opposed by the Crown lawyers-and &C
cordingly, having chosen tools fitted for the bust
ness, commenced an illegal action to suspend the
exercise of the rights, and followed up these
measures by most arbitrary proceedings, " un-
heard of before in British Court of Justice"
So said Lord Brougham in the House of Lords in
1916. But we think any other political trial will
give evidence of similar conduct on the part of
European Judges
The Scotch Judge under influence, counte-
nanced NIL these measures, and allowed the old
family documents to be secretly borrowed up and
experimental upon by chemists. The object of
these experiments, however, has been to destroy
signatures aud other material parts Of them, with
an evident ultimate intention of making charge
of forgery upon papers no longer having their
original purity of appearance. This project got
wind, and the Judges, for decency's sake, made
an order against such secret experiments. But
this was evidently blind, as they continued just
as before.
At length trial for forgery took place upon n
document afterwards found in Paris, and which
was thought to furnish greater chances of sue
cess. This document it is said, was stolen with
other papers from the archives of American pa
pers in France sent to Scotland to the agent of
the Crown there, and by him forwarded to Lord
Sterling through woman, an agent of the French
Police This document, from some error of the
Crown agent, was supposed to be forgery. But
on having it examined by French authorities it
turned out to be perfectly genuine, and was re-
cognised and attested as such. Lord Sterling's
counsel satisfied had it brought to Scotland 1t
was, however, Immediately seized upon,. and the
offer to prove it refused-a most singular pro-
ceeding-and he was then peremptorily asked
how it came into his hands? Thus escaping the
M nj N Mt nf xyhi bol toll
discovered, to attack him on q scandal of their
own manufacturing The witnesses were tam
pered with, and all those on Lord Sterling's side
kept back by collision with his counsel, ''to save
the honor of the Crown, compromised by its
agents." The Jury gave verdict for Lord Ster-
ling-but to appease the Crown, condemned the
document, although every one of the Crown wit
nesses swore "they believed the writings to be
genuine"
A more singular case, and one more. full of
contradiction from the close struggle Of might
with right, can hardly be imagined. The review
ing contains the first portion of the case. The
remainder is promised, and we can assure our
readers who are fond Of such romance in real
life, an ample treat.
In a small pamphlet upon our table, published
in 1916, contained 1.-TWO letters to Lord Den.
man." Lord Chief Justice of England we have a
report of the exposure made that year in the
House of Lords, by Mr.. Turner, Queens counsel,
acting for Lord Sterling.
1t may not be uninteresting to our readers to
know what transpired after the able speech of
Mr.. Turner had been heard by the Chancellor
and other Judges present.
One Of them, Lord Brougham, said that the
crown " bad no right TO interfere with Lord Ster-
ling Gin any way" And further characterized
its whole proceedings, as well as the conduct of
the Scotch Judges, as "arbitrary, unconstitu-
tonal, and unprecedented"
In fact, as Mr.. Turner observed, to break down
a right established by law, they had repeatedly
violated the plain letter of the law.
The Crown counsel instead of meeting the case
by fair argument, applied "to have il dismissed
on the ground that a judgment "about expenses"
had not been included by Lord Sterling in his
appeal to the House Of Lords. 1t appears that it
was Payposety concealed from Lord Sterling By Tie
Scotch courts, in order 10 give the House Of Lords
an grouse, on that frivolous ground for Diminishing
the case! But the exposure of Mr.. Turner
turned the scales and opened the eyes of the
" Learned Lords" and Lord Brougham stated
on committee that lit would greatly be regretted
that q case of such Importance should be 6urked
by such trick"
Lord Stirling, unable in England to publish
the rogueries of his noble CD opponents, who
have check-mated him in all his attempts TO en-
tighten the British public, appeals to the press Of
this country to enable him to speak the whole
truth. The reaction respecting the case among
the upper-tens Of the law in London, cannot fail
to be beneficial TO Lord Sterling, if he is backed
by the public sympathy Of this country and the
Canadas. c.
Gerrit smith.
The following quaint letter will be interesting
to such as desire to know anything of this philan-
thropic and eccentric "bg gun" of the abolition
lists. 1t will instruct some and amuse many:
PErERBoRo', Monday, Sept 81, 1852.
L. A. HNE, Cincinnati-Sir: have this mo-
ment read your letter to me in the New York
Tribune.