Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1883-06-23
GLIMPSES IN ENGLAND.
OPERATIONS OF THE COM sULsoRY EDU-
CA3IoNAL SYSTEM.
Penalty for Stealing Partridge Eggs to
Make Pudding Justice IN Glass
House-Rents, wages-Etc.
LnsnnN- Nay 81 1859.


splendid place to emigrate from, ," was what
Horace Greeley said Of Vermont, and the
same remark, slightly altered, may be
made with reference to the metropolis of
the British empire. II is a good place to
live in and most desirable place to occa-
sionally get away from. 1t is only, in
deed, by leaving it once in while for
run into the country that residence in Lon
don is rendered at all tolerable. A few
notes picked up during recent excursion
OF this kind may be as pleasant variety
to the readers Of the RECORD UNION as
the experience of gathering them was to
the writer. My first day in the old-fash-
toned England village to which l betook
myself happened to be Court day. A trio
of country squires were sitting in judg-
ment on the petty offenders of the neigh.
borhood. The scene was Enthusiastically
English, as also were the offenses and the
way in which so called justice was admin.
istered. 1t was Court of the very lowest
Jurisdiction, and comparing its appearance
with that of similar Courts in my own
land, | observed at once that several famil-
lar objects were remarkable for their alb.
sence. The boots of the aspiring young
lawyer who adopts the literal method of
displaying his understanding, were missing
! from the table. The constable with
PASTE DIAMOND
In his shirt bosom was not there. One
looked vainly on the floor for either the
beautiful spittoon or any of those luscious
splashes of dark amber hue which indi-
cate the need of such an article of furni-
ture; nor could the keenest olfactories de-
! tect the faintest trace of tobacco in the
room. On the contrary, the floor was
| clean, the atmosphere pure, the table used
/ exclusively for legitimate purposes, the
| officers attired in tasteful uniforms. with
white gloves, and the whole proceedings
/ marked by dignity that could have held
| its own even at the coronation of Gar.
/ Strangely out of keeping however, with
/ the impressive surroundings, were the triv-
| ial charges preferred, though this feature
/ of the scene was as peculiarly English as
! was the scrupulous orderliness of the trial,
and equally so, too was the disproportion
! between the charges and the penalties.
! One poor wretch was accused of stealing
partridge eggs, an infraction of the odious
i game laws of the country. His defense
/ was restitution he wanted the eggs to
make pudding Number of eggs found in
| his possession, 49, Penalty 81 so an egg,
or, in default, two months imprisonment.
Another offender was charged with walk
! ing across field of grass-damages one
penny two cents). Judgment OF the Court
guilty and must pay damages, and plank
! down twelve shillings and siX-pence NEARLY
a weeks wages for costs. What gave
| special piquancy to this scene was the in
| formation, impaired to me In strict secrecy,
! that one of the Justices sitting on the
bench was an old sinner who had distin-
| guished himself a few years before by
RUNNING OFF WITH ANOTHER MANS WIFE.
That this gentleman should have been
more anxious than either of his colleagues
to have the autecedents of the poor devil
who stole few birds eggs examined into,
and more determined than they to give the
offender the full penalty of the law,
! afforded, to say the least, a singular study
| in human nature. 1t also brought to light
one of the weaknesses of the English judi.
cial system. These magistrates are ap.
pointed for life !; and whilst it is true that
power TO remove them for cause is in.
vested in the Lord Chancellor, it is fact,
too. that removals are very seldom effect
ed. Consequently, it is no uncommon
! thing at all to see on the bench men whose
] /, L.
infirmity, while occasionally one meets
with a case. like that recorded above,
where the Judge ought to change places
with the prisoner. But what chiefly in
terested me in this English Court of JUS
tics were the two cases which came up I'M.
! der the
COMPULSORY EDUCATIONAL ACT.
This Act makes it incumbent on parents
to send their children to school, The
child comes under the operation of this
law from five to thirteen years of age,
though there is provision that makes the
law imperative to children over ten years
| if satisfactory examination in the fourth
standard the three Re- has been passed.
! Technically the law requires attendance
! by the child at every session of the school,
when not lawfully kept away. but consid-
| cradle latitude is allowed, and proceedings
! are taken only in the most fragrant cases.
! The legitimate excuses for absence are
three: sickness, residence of more than
two miles from school house, or evidence
| that the child is receiving satisfactory in
struction elsewhere. In the matter of re-
porting absentees to the School Board the
! teacher has no option. He must do this,
! and the Board then decides whether there
| Is ground for action. Usually, before a
summons is issued. parents are notified Of
what is intended in the hope that fear of
the law will produce amendment. Then
| in case of long-continued and willful neg
! lect, the School Board and teacher place
! certificates in the hands Of the School At
! tendance officer, who secures summons and
| prosecutes before the magistrates. The
/ teachers certificate, which comes before
1 the Court in evidence, is that the school
/ has been open certain number Of times
within a given period, aud that the child
! of the accused parent has been present
/ only so many out of that number. The
certificate from the Board sets forth that
there has been
NO REASONABLY EACUSE
For the absence complained OF. In the
two cases heard tried, one child had been
present st forty sessions out OF eighty, the
other at only forty out of ninety. On a
frat complaint the rule of the magistrates
is to simply make an order for the ohild's
regular attendance in the future. This
was done in the first of the two cases in
question, but the parents of the other
child had been up before, and the Court
followed the usual practice toward them of
imposing fine. The maximum sum in
which csntumacious parents can be pun.
ished is five shillings, or one dollar and
quarter, including the costs. Nor is the
penalty sccumulative, FIVE shillings being
all that could be exscted, even to the sew.
enty. seventh offense. Toward those who
plead poverty the Court makes a show of
leniency by giving them little time to
get the money together. The parents in
the case referred to were given fortnights
grace, accompanied BY an admonition to