The New York Herald Newspaper, April 7, 1859, Page 2

2 THE CLD MUNICIPAL POLICE. Decision of the Court of Appeals in their Favor. ‘The Mew'bers Restored to Office, and Declared Entitled to their Back Pay, MEAPLY A MILLION DOLLARS DUE TO THEM Pre Judges in Favor and Three Against the Decision, de, Ker ke. ‘The following is tho decision of the court of last resort ‘W the case of McCune ys. the Metropolitan Police Commis- sioners, taken upon appeal by the Commissioners. The epinien of the Court was delivered by Judge S. B, Strong, and declares the plaintiff still a member of the police force, ead entitled to all his bag pay from June, 1857—Judges Birong, Gray, Comstock, Selden and Allen concurring, amd Judges Denio, Johnson and Grover dissenting. This i bot a test question, and, of course, restores all the mombers of the old force who have not joined the new to their former positions as policemen, and insures them Mhelr back pay. The amount of pay thus due is about $878,000. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS. WEE PROFLE, ON THE RELATION OF JAMES M'CUNE, AGAINST THE BOARD OF POLICE OF HE METROPO- LITAN POLICE DISTRICT. Before Hon. Judge 8. B. Strong. ‘The alternative mandamus in this case was issued on Mee 11th day of December, 1857. In that the relator ‘lloged that by virtue of the act entitled ‘an act to es- Yadiish a Metropolitan Police district, and to provide for the government thereof,” passed on the 11th of April, 2867, he became, and continued to be,a member of the Police force and patrolman of the Metropolitan Police dis- ict; that the defendants, on the 26th of June, 1857, un- Juetly, unduly, and without jurisdiction in that behalf, re- ‘moved him from office, and deprived, and continued to deprive him of the profits and emoluments thercof,and of Inia arrears of pay since the day of his alleged removal, and refused and continued to refuse to ise im as, or to permit him to exercise the powers and duties of patrolman, and the cefendants were com- ™manded by such writ to restore him to such oilico and permit him to exercise it, and to take the prefts and pay thereof and to discharge his arrears of Bay, or to show cause to the contrary. The defendants in their return (among other things) that upon ‘tbe parsing of the said uct of April 15, 1857, the relator Publicly withdrew from the police force established by or ‘wader such act and resigned bis place thereia; and that on the 16th of June, 1857, written charges were preferred agsinst the relator averring a neglect of duty by him in dwobeying an order issued by the sergeant of his pre- Sinct; whereupon the defendants directed a notice of such yes to be served upon the relaver; and that upon proof @f such service, and bis failure to appear and answer the @harges, three of the commissioners made and signed an order, which appears from the papers incorporated in the Special verdict to have been in the following words:— “ Dismissed und removed June 26, 1857.” They state Mat such proceedings were had against the relator for ‘ee purpose of making and procuriag record evidence of bis separation frum the police force of the Metro- politan Police district. If that had been their pur- ove it seems singular that they should have Proceoced against him for the disobedience of an order to Fepert himself for duty. Whatright had the sergeant to make such an order, or what duty could devolve upon the Bubordinate, if he had, as the defendants allege, soparated Iamself from the police force? Besides the order or judgment @ the three commissioners was pot that the relator had im effect abdicated the office, but it was that be should be dismissed and removed. A judgment that one should be re- moved from an office \ hich he had never held would have been a blunder of which go intelligent a body as the com- mlesioners would not have been guilty. It seems ta me What the whole proceedings, whatever may have been the alleged object, were in effect an admission that the relator ‘was at the tune when it was instituted a member of the |@xmting police force. The judgment of the commission- €r8 was, Lowever, entirely ineffectual as to the relator, ‘ecause no notice of the procedure was ever served upon Ahi, nor was it even nominally ageinst him. The list of upon whom the oiicer served the notice, as stated. aad given by him in hig affidavit, does not include the mame of the relator. The name which bears the greatest resemblance to it is James McVine, but that has not even the same sound, ‘and as the relator did not appear, the proof did not au- theorize any further procedure as tohim. Tne manner im which the notice is stated to has been served does, in fast, indicate that it never reached the relator. The no- fice ‘was delivered by the witness, who swore to the eer- ‘Vice to Licutenant Brower, at the station house of the company to which the relator was attached. Brower on the same day Landed it to Captain Rinner, who was com mander of the company and bad charge of the station Reuse. Rinner locked up the notice in his private drawer, fend it was never delivered, or its contents communicated f the relator. There is n0 evidence to show that he was Informed, or knew, that any change had been mate t him, or that he was to be tried for any offence ‘whatever. Handing the notice to his superior officer at Bis station house might bave raised a suspicion that it was Sommunicated to him, if it had not appeared from the stetement of the officer himself that he put the paper in his chest, and never mentioned it to any of the per- sons to whom it was addressed. It is an essential princi- pie of justice that no man should be condemned unheard, er at apy rate without giving him an opportunity to be ‘beard in his defence. It was imputed to one of the hea- ‘Seen deities to whom the trial and punishment of spirits im the future world were covfided, that he first’ punished and then he heard; but the supposed rule of procedure ‘was ridiculed and condemned as grossly outrageous and unjust. It was @ maxim of Seucca’s that he who decides against a party without hearing him, though he decides justly, ts not just. In the recent Case of Poole vs. the ‘Arembishop of Canterbury, where the plaintiff alleged, and it appeared, that hie appeal had been decided against him wthout givivg him an opportunity to be board, the Court of King’s Bench awarded a mandamus to the Arch- bishop, requiring bim to give the appellant a hearing, alicough the Chief Justice admitted that tne Archbishop had acted most conscientiously. In reference to the matter under consideration, the Metropolitan Police act provides expressly ’ that ‘Bo person shall be removed except upon written charges Preterred agaiust him to the head of police, and after an ‘Opportunity shall have been afforded him of being heard in bis defence. (Sec. 7.) Snrely that requires that the Mccused party shall be personally served with a copy of the charges, and a notice of the time and place of the in- ended trial. There is no provision for a substituted or Ganetructive service. There have been cases in which it has been held that ‘the certificate of a public officer upon whom the law de- ves the duty of serving process is sufficient to confer iction, on the ground that the tnjured party may redrese against such ofScer when he is wrong. That, however, is often productive of great injustice, and the Fale ought not to be extended to those who have no spe- Gial authority to serve such process, According to our code of procedure our courts do not acquire jurisdiction im civil cages except from the time of the service of the Summons upon the defendant personaliy or by advertisement. There is no provision that a mere afidavit, when there has been no actual service Of original process, is sufficient to confer jurisdiction. Be- sides, the order of removal does not in terms affect the re- According to the certificate of the clerk of the commissioners it directs that James McVine should be dis- maiceed and removed from the department. Clearly that ‘wea pot a judgment inst the relator. He was not, UWerefore, de jure or de facto, removed. It appears’ from the’ special verdict that after the at- tempted removal of the relator, and on the 9h of ¢ ber, 2857, the defendants adopted a resolution that such of the Oid force as had not been dismissed from the police in con- formity to law should be, and that they were thereby de- Clared to be members of the Metropolitan Police of this city, and entitled to do duty, and to be paid, assuch. Ags the relator had not been dismissed from the Police in con- ity to law, he was of course included among those Who were declared to be existin ig members of the police, and he was » a - ot the ‘a8 & member #0 far ag the provi. Statute and the action of the comm a fs extended. If he was a member then, of course the repeal of the iast mentioned resolution on the 2d of December, 1857, could not deprive him of hie office, He could not then be dismissed without & trial. the defendants were acting us public officers, 1t may be doubted whether they may not, in behalf of’ the public, Bull insist that tho relator never, in fact, obtained. tee office, OF that if he did he denuded himself of it by his refusal, until July, to act under the new Board, Thave alluded thus far principally to the alternative mandamus, and the return to it by the defendants, There ‘was subsequently a plea to the return, to which this was & reply, and to there was a rejoinder. The substan- tial issue raised by the pleadings was whether the re- lator had not, by continuing to act under the old Board after the e of the Metropolitan Police act, and omit- ‘Ung to take a new oath of office, forfeited any claim to bo Sousidered a patrolman of the new district. ‘The facte ‘Dearing upon this question are stated in the spectal verdict found at the Circuit Court, and the inference to be drawn them was rly submitted to the Court. The Sapreme Court decided the question adversely to the defendants, and directed that a peremptory manda- mous should jeeue conformably to the application of the ‘ated in the alternate writ to which I have Defore alluded. | It appears by the special verdict that the relator was on the 14th of September, 1854, duly appoint- ed by the then Board of Police Commissioners (consiatin, the Mayor and Recorder of the city of New York, ani City Judges), and sworn in as a policeman, in accord- with act of April 13, 1864, entitled “An act in relation to the Police Department in the city and county of New York.” Ho was attached to the Fourteenth ward patrol district, under Capt. Kixener, and continued to do duty as a policeman of that dietrict \intil, and was engaged in the Png iy of such duty on, ‘the 15th of April 1857. that day the act constituting tha Metropolitan Police district was passed. hew district wag an ex- Yension of the old one, and comprehends the countios of Kings, Kichmond and Westchester, as woll as the city and county of New York. it changed the names of the various officers composing the active and efficient force, but, a# was said by Judge Denio in the case of the People vs. Draper, (15th, New York R., 632.) “the Su. perintendent of police, ca Sergeants and patrolmen, ‘Mentionad in the Metr lice bill, are officials of the eame character, esing substantially the samo F seta and authorized to perform the same functions ax heretofore existing under somewhat different namer.”’ ‘The sixth section provides that the offices created for the Police force shall be severally filled by appointment from NEW YORK HERALD, THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 1859—TRIPLE SHEET. the Board of Police in the mode prescribed by that act, Dut that muet bayve reference to such as are to be newly introduced into the force, as the latter pert of the S2d section haying reference to the same subject is ia the following words:—"The police force in the cities of New York wad Brooklyn, officers and patrolmen, shall continue to do duty under existing laws at the passage of this ae and uecording to the regulations of the Departments ol New York and Grooklyo, until after the first meeting of the Board ef Police under this act, whea the said police sball hold office and do duty under the rovisions of the act hereby enacted, and as mé‘o- rg ot ‘the Metropolitan Police district’ hereby Consti- tuted” The ** patrolmen’’? mentioned in this provision are evidently the policemen appointed under the act of 1853, as there could be no new patrolmen until after the first meeting of the new Board, and the direetion was ag to their conduct previons to such meeting. Besides the expressions that they shovid contiaue to do duty until that meeting vnder previously existing laws, when they should hold office and do daty uuder the act as members of the Metropolifn Police district thereby constituted, clearly refer to, aed include, the policemen who were in office when the new act was paseed. The defendants now con- tend that thie was a pew and legislative appointment of officers, aud tbat toe Legislature in making it transcended its power. The Legislature has frequently appointed offi- cers newly created, and probably has the power to do so when not Tesained (as it was not in this instanse) by the constitution, This, however, does not purport to be 4 new appointment, but is in terms a mere continuance in oftlc The officers designated were to continue to dothe same du- Lies a8 before, wad to hold, in effect, the same offico, but under a different uitle. The policemen under the old pci and the patroimen under the new one, as was truly sai: by Judge Davis, officials of the same character, possessed Dy the eeme powers and authorized to periorm tue same junctions. Tbote were te most important particulars connected with the office, and in conjunction with the upequivecal declarations i the statute, are suflicieat to indicate its continual identity. Nor was that identity des troyed by the ebanges in the rules of procedure, or the tension ct she district. Tne alterations as to the maaner i which the duties were to be discharged were priao!- pally formal, were uot greater thau such as are (re. quently adopted when there is no pretence of a change of office. The enlargement of a district merely extended their ephere of action. The patroimen were not to be ap- pointed indiscriminately from the entire district, but quotas were to be selected from the different localities—as m: from the county of New York as might be determined upon by its Board of Sapervisors—ss mapy from the city of Brooklyn as should be determined upon by its Common Covnc!!—as many from the towns in the coanty of Kings a¢ might be determined upon by the Supervisors of such towne—and as many from each of the counties of Richmond and Westchester 'as might be determined upon by the Supervisors of those counties respectively, and, vntil otherwise provided for, the quota of patrol force for the county of New York and for the county of Kings should be of the number of patrolmen then existing by Jaw ip the cities of New York aud Brooklyn, aud eaca of the locaiities thus specitied in the act was to pay for its own patrolmen. (Sec. 6) Thus, then, the Supervisors (except in Brooklyn, where the service was to be per- formed by the Common Couneil) were to determine the nurober to be appointed in their respective counties, and they were to be selected from and paid by their own counties. It seems to me that in consequence of these pro- visions, each county maivtained its individuality as to those affairs. They may not have been county otficers as to their atment, as was decided by this Court in the cave o copie v8. Draper, and as to the extent of territory in which their services were to be performed; Dut they were euch in ali other important particulars; and, therefore, the Legislature were consistent in providing that the ocenpants of the ola office ehould continue to hold it, allongh uncer a new designation. If, then, the relator untitled to hold the office of pa- trelman When the act of April 15, 1857, went into opera- tion, no fortual acceptance by him was necessary. The act itself continued the officiai tenure. It has never been held, nor could it be with any reason, that a mere change of the name of the of or of its duties £0 long as they remained substantially the same, 80 far ousted the occu- pant frow cflice #8 to require bis direct aagent to hig ro- storation, He would sustain the office (while living) until the expiration of the term, if there should be any, or his removal from it, or his resignation, and poesibly its ac- ceptance. It was contended, bowever, that the relator by his conduct vacated the office. The Revised Statutes de- deciare in w bat cases an cffice shall be deemed vacant. (1R.8 i2z sec. 24.) They provide that every office shall becowe vacant on the bappening of either of the following uts :—(J.) The death of the incumbent, (2.) His resignetion. (3.) His removal from ottice, (4.) His ceasing to be an inbabitant of the State, or, if the office be local, of the district, county, town or city for which he sbali have been chosen or appointed, or within which the duties of bis office are required to be dis. cbarged. (5.) His conviction of an iafamous crime, or of any offeuce involving a violation of his oath of office. (6.) His refusa! or neglect to take tite oath of office with. in the time required by law, or to give or renew any bond within tee time prescribed by law. or (7.) The de- cision s competent tribunal, declaring void nis elec th or appointment, ‘The only charges brought against th relator, independently of the allegation as to his re- Lb from office, (which I have already considered,) Which could, if true, bring his cage within this category, are: first, tilat he neglected to take the oatn of office with- in the tame required by law; and, second, that he, in ef- fect, resigned the office. It is to be inter , although I do not see it distinctly Stated in the special verdict, nor was it mentioned in the charges preferred against the relator before the Police Board, that be has never taken the oath of office under the itan Police act, If I am_ right in supposing that the act coutinuec office wae becestary uuless it was positively required by bi in his,old office, no new oath of | Tbe vhirtieth section provides that the Board fi make suitable provisions for the taking, by of the police force, of an oath of office, and the regisiry of the same ia a book to be kept for that purpore, It does vot appear yery clearly whether this permission bas reference to all the members, or onty to those who might be pewly appomted. The reasonable in- ference would seem to be that it included ouly those who bad not previously faken the oath of office; but if it re- ferred to bh ere not required by law to take the oath unt Board had made suitable provisious op the subject, and bad furnished a book in which it was to be regisiered, and it does not appear, nor is it alleged in the return by the defendants to the alterna- tive mandamus, that the board bad performed either of theee service © Was not, therefore, any fault impu- table to the or in his omission to take an oath of 's do not directly allege that the relator », but they say that he refased to take T the Dew act or under the board of po- d, which they probably deemed tion. The 12th section of the act ver of the police force, under po- nalty of forfeiting the pay which may be due to hint, shall withdraw resign from the police force, unices he shall have given one month's notice thereof, in writing, to the General Superintendent of the Police. This would seem to prescribe the manner in which, and ia which only, a rerignuetion can be made, and there is no pretence that the relator tbus resigned. It was contended, how- ever, that the relator had, by his conduct, ab- dicated the office, which was, in effect, a resigua- tion, and the case of King James the Second of Engiand was cited to show that the abdication created a vacancy. But that unfortanate and misguided monarch had avan- doned the country and eeased to perform any of his royal functione, and yet \t was doubted by manoy eminent men of the time whether he bad vacated the kingly office, and it ‘Was supposed that the Parliament, in reaolving that be bad, acted rather from a great State necessity than from any well settled principle. In the case under consideration. however, the reiator did not abandon his district, nor di he cease to perform the actual duties of his station. In- deed, it would seem from the special verdict that for a Jong period efter the passage of the new act he could uot bave performed apy police duty in his (the Fourteenth) district in any other manner, The special verdict states, “that the members of the old force, including the relator, under the command of Captain Kissner, did the police duty of the Fourteenth ward up to the last of June, 1857, and were the only police force on daty in the Fourteenth ward.” It was not inthe power of the re- jator to reorganize the district; and the omission bof le it in @ proper conaiton for the performance of avy duties under the new act was aitribotable to the higher powers, and no}to him. Tbe only charge which was intended to be brought against bim before the Board was that he had neglected to obey au order to report for duty at 88 White street on the 18th cay of Jane, at eight o’clock P.M. If he had been named iu the charge, and it had been proved against him on a trial of which he had been duly notified, and he had omitted w make any defence, such disobe- dience might have been a sufficient cause for his dismissal. But, as hos been already indicated, the irregularity of the proceeding deprived it of all effect. It was not even in proof that the cherge was well founded. Besides, according to the decision in the caso of Vanarsdale vs. Husard (34 Hili, 243), a refural to serve, although without sufficient reason, i# pot per se a forfeiture of an office. The Judge who delivered the opinion of the Court in that case quoted the decision in Lyon vs. the Commonwealth (3d Bibb, 420) and Rex ve Exeter [Sige 191), that if an oficer should remove beyond district to which his office related, for the purpose of temporary occupation, and that even for months, if he had done so with an in- tention to return, and continue his former domicil, that would not of itself have vacated his office. If, therefore, the case had shown more clearly than it does, that the re- lator bad neglected or refuged to perform ome official duty, that woud sot have established the charge that he bad vacated his office, The principal charge against the relator, and that which has finally caused the entire controversy between him and the defendants, i, that under the advice of the late Mayor of the city of New York and the captain of his district, he cid not recognise the Metropolitan Police Board, and in asrociation with a body of several hundred men who belongeo to the police of the city of Yew York, under the act of 1863, refused to act under the new Board, but continued to obey all general orders t issned from the old Hoard, That the defendants to consider ‘8s “flat rebeiiion,”’ aud their counsel eon} the con- duct of the relator with that of the traitor Arnold, of Revo- Jntionary notoriety. But there geoms to bea wide diffe- reuce in the character of the two transactions. Arnold rebelled and fought sgainet his country, which had ap- ee be to a high and confidential office, Telator dors Dot rebel against or dispute the of the people, whose officer ewes; but he doubted the authority of persons alleging themselves to be the people's agents, Thi¢ conduct resembled of the boy who, having found a valuable diamond, réfusod to give it up to the perton Gemanding it, on the ground that he did not know that such applicant was the true owner. It was held that such refusal war, under the circumstances, reasona- ble, aud did not amount toa conversion, although it turned out that the person making the demand was the actual owner. There is no pretence that the relator acted wil- fully wrong. Te was advised by the Board from which be originally received his appointment, and by thecap- tain of his district, under whose immediate orders he had been placed, that the statute purporting to establish the new Board was unconstitutional and void. He no doubt aecertained that the same opinion had been expressed by learned lawye The question involved was a doubtéul one, a8 was eubeequently shown by the diversity of opinion among eminent jadges. The relator was not pro. bebly weil versed in conetitational questions, and coald doubUers apply to himmelf th mark attribated to the Fas! oF Warwick in Shakaper King Henry IV.,”” part » Wot 2, seene 4: But to the bblets of the law, Good faith, Yum to wiedr thet ne By the controversy between the old Board and the Rew one, the }’ Aicemen were jetbid to a serious dilemma. If trey acknowledged eas of the old Bourd, and it should tarn out that the act of 1857 was ccnetibution®, they were im imminent peril of losing their positon, and if they acknowl the authority Of the Pew Board, and the act constituting it should ‘be adjraged vocovsttutional, they would encounter the sure peril. Under such circumstanoes, it would seem ‘to be a harsh rule to bold them responsible for a simple error in judgment. It might be that public necessity might require prompt action by the new Board against the re: cusants, and in that cage they could apply the remedy of triais and removals, But if they neglect to organize a dis- trict under the new law, and thereby reduced the police- men to the neceseity either of being idle or of acting ua- der the old act, and those officers chose to act uuder the old law, pureuant to the advice of their superior officers, and from an honest belief that such advice wes correct until a final decision of the qnestion as to which of the Boards they owed obedience, and when that desision was pronounced, promptly offered to submit to the recognized Board, it sects to me that, although their conduct was not ftrictly justifiable, yet it was excusable, and that it would not imperatively call for their ejection’ from oflice—cer- tainly, it would not amount to a forfeiture, without a trial, It appears from the special verdict that the relator por- formed actual duty a8 a policeman or ® patrolman until we 8d of July, 1857, and that he then promptly tendered hig services a8 a patrolman to the new Board, which were de- clined. He received his pay up to the 26tn of June, 1857, Dut has received none since. He ig, I think, fairly entitiod toa restoration to the oilice from whieh he has been irre- gulerly ejected, and to the emoluments appertaining to such office. 1 bave not deemed it neceesary to advert to the ordi- nance of the Common Conneil of New York to establish a bureau of ¢ay and night watch, or Municipal Police, ap- proved on the 2d of June, 1867, nor to the collisioa be- tween the two contending bedies on the 16th of the same mouth, ag it does not appear thet the relator acted under the ordinance, or participated in the conflict. If the rela- tor hog been wrongfully ejected, in fact, from an office to which be is legally entitled, a mandamus would seem to be ab appropriat® remedy. The question in auch cases is vot whether the applicant may not have some otber remedy for the whole or eyes his grievances, but whether he can obtain any other that would be equally prompt and eflicacious, If the Metropolitan Board had renderet a judgment against him without sufficient warrant, taat might bave been renewed by a certiorari, But there is no jucpgment against him, while he has been actually ejectod from office: a certiorarijwould not therefore reach his case. Where one is refased an office to which ne is entitled, and there is no actual claimant against whom a proceeding iu the nature of a quo warranto can be instituted, u manda mus furnishes the appropriate remedy, Thus it was ro- marked by Lord Munefield, in Rex vs. Barker (3d Bur rows, R. 1,247), tbat writs of maudamus have been granted to admit lecturers, clerks, sextons and sca- vengers to restore an alderman to precedency, aud ap attorney to practice in an inferior court. In Rex ve. Blooer (2d Bur., R., 1,043) such writ was allowed to restore one to the office of curate of a chapel; and in Rex ye. The Vice Chancellor of Cambridge (3d Bur., R., 1,450), it was allowed to admit the last of Hardwick to the oftive of High Steward of the University of Cambridge, when its authorities bad declined to do so from doubts as to the validity of his election. The writ is algo allowable where a public body or officer refuses to pay the legal oficial remuneration. It would undoubtedly be a sufficient ob- jection to the writ, if it appeared clearly that there had been a enflicient cause for the removal of the relator, a8 was decided inthe cage of Rex vs. the Mayor, &c., of Uxbridge; but then the officer implicated had declared to the corporation, over and over again, that he would do po more of their business. In this case there has been no such declaration; nor hag the officer expressed any unwillingness to perform his duties, but his actions prove the contrary. ‘The judgment awarding the mandamus must be af- firmed. THE CAMPAIGN IN VIRGINIA. Special Correspondence of the Herald. Esmiivinte, Scorr Counry, Va., March 23, 1859. Travel on Horseback—The Country— Effects of Botts’ Coali- tion Policy—Wise’s Strength in Western Virginia—The Discussion, die., de. ‘This region resembles more the frontiers of civilization than of the Old Dominion. I venture to say that in point of accessibility any region cast of tho Rocky Mountains would compare favorably with this. It can only be reached on horseback, at least with any degree of cor- tainty, within a given time; and my time to reach here being limited to twenty-four hours, ! resorted to this mode of travel. The distance from Abingdon to this village is forty miles, and if such auother road exists in the country as that which connects these two points, I have no kaow- ledge of it. A triweekly stage is advertised to rua be- tween these places, but it sometimes takes a whole week to make the round trip; and the probabilities of a few rolls in the mud meanwhile are somewhat imminent. These were by no means agreeable incidents to contem- plate, much lees endure; and I therefore took the safer aud quicker mode, This, however, was not without its disadvantages. It rained for a portion of the way in tor- rents, and save the little protection afforded by an um- brella of small dimensious, I was exposed to all its fury. ‘The candidates were alto mounted; and as I contemplated the hardships which they had to endare, travelling and speaking, with but few hours left for rest, I could bat sympathise in advance with the one whose lot it is to be beaten in this race. The Governorship will be dearly bought by whoever wins, and of course the beaten candi- date, whoever that unfortunate individual may be, will parchase defeat at a still dearer rate. He has no hope of recompense in the future; but there are some who feo honored even in defeat, and regard the high compliment of a nomination as a full equivalent for the labor, expense and inconvenience jncurred in a campaign of this charac- ter. I observed to the candidates, a day or two ago, as they condoled with me, sincerely 1 Believe, for the fatigao and labor which I bad to encounter in this tour, that I ‘would come out gecond best in the race anyhow, and that my condition ultimately would be enviable compared with that of the beateo candidate. The gentlemen agreed with me, but they said it was time enongh to bid the d—-1 good morning when you met him, and they were deter- mined to keep in good spirits while there was a hope. Notwitbetanding the utter want of facilities of trana- portation and travel along this region, there are indica- tiovs of prosperity which would seem inconsistent with the limited advantages which it possesses. How they got to market is aquestion which Tam unable to solve; and yet [have heard but few murmurs at this condition of unenviable igolation. But the Laplander lives in the con- sciousness that his lot in the cold, forbidding regions of the north isa happy one, and go, doubtless, with the people of this secluded locality. The wonder is that the candidates should bave undertaken to canvass a region as sparsely populated as this, with but afew hundred yotes to be polled in the whole county, The number pregent at the discussion was small, as might be expected in view of the want of travelling fa- cilities. The interest manifested by those present, how- ever, was intense; for it is seldom that the people here enjoy such a treat as was alforded in this instance. I bave never witnessed the same degree of interest mani- fested In @ political discussion that I have observed at tho different points where the mectings have taken place 80 far. It 6 a novel spectacle in Virginia to see two opposing candidates for the Goyernorebip face to face on the stuinp It is this circumstance, as well as the reputation of the present nominecs, that has, doubtlees, created this intense interest in the diecussion. In a correspondence of mine to the Herann, some time ago, I predicted that the impradent and unguarded senti- ments expreseed by Botte in the Whig Convention at Rich- mond would operate prejudicially to the whig cause in Virginia. My experience since then eatigfies me that I ‘was right in that prediction. There is not a single feature in the whole train of arguments presented by Mr. Letcher, strong and cogent as they generally are, that i more damaging to the cause of the opposition than Botts’ senti- ments in that Convention; and to crown the evil, the Con- vention put on record, in the ferm of a special resolution, offered by Mr. Scroggs, of Fauquier, a fall and completa endorsement of the obnoxiogs sentimonis which Botts ox- presked. Tho people of Weetern Virginia regard bim in a little Jess favorable light than thoy do Seward or Greeley, and, a# @ consequence, view with distrust any organiza- tion or movement with which he is identified. The policy of the opposition party would have boon to have excluded him altogether from the Convention, or, in theeventof his admiesion, to have enjomed silence upon him. If that were done, or even if the Convention had not endorsed hisspeech, doubt if the opposition would not succeed. They would have at least reduced the democratic majority to a very ow standard, and thus broken the preatige of the party ia the State. Had Botts even confined himsolf to State in- fue8, Which would not involve the necessity of any allu- sion to coalition schemes with the black republicans, the njary which bas resuited would have been in a great “measure ayoided, and federal issues would not have been dragged into the campaign, as they now are, under the force of the example set by Botts. To him, therefore, who invited the “ immortal’’ into the opposition convention should attach the responsibility of defeat, if euch should be the result of this contest. T have taken occasion during my travels in this wostern region to inquire very minutely into the relative prospects of the democratic candidates now spoken of in connection with the next Presidency. 1 have actually met with but one man who was not for Wise, and he was a native of Albemarle county. The commonwenlth’s attorney of @ Jeuding democratic county through which I have passed, in speaking of Wise’s prospects, remarked that ‘* hig #tock was riging at the rate of one hundred per cent @ moath.”” “Tf,” paid be, “ bis availability and strength in other States developes as tt has for some months past until No- vember next, he would not only carry Virginia nnani- mously in the Charleston convention, but the whole South.” Thave italso upon the authority of a distinguished federal representative, that the democratic members from the North deemed him the strongest of all the Cr pirants among the masees. From what I have cen and aecertauwd during my travels in Virginia, I hesitate not to say that if Wise is defeated to Virginia, or rather if he fails | to secure the unauimous vote of that State in the Chacies- | ton Conventon, the voive and wishes of the people shall cease be regarded, In such am event I shall cortataly accord to politicians & power and an ipfuence which I | sbould be loath to beliove they possess. They may well be said to constitute a dynasty in the land—a dynasty, too, iopre dangerous than any that has ever flourisned in the feudal eras of France or Englaod, a8 its operations are more secret, while its purposcs are no lees corrupt. Wise | is not the mau to be made a tool of by spoils-huoting poli ticians ; and as a Consequence he is not aoceptadle to them. I can see that a few of the leaders are marked oat by the people, and there is a decided dstermmation wo treat them as they deserve. gale The discussion between Messrs Iatcher and Goggin took place togay in the Court House, commencing about twelve o'clock, Mr, Lewher led off in a few preliminary remarks in re- ference to his being the nominee of the democratic par.y for the office of Governor, and then proceeded to say that inasmuch as his vote against the Pevsioa bill was made a subject of comment in geome portions of the State, he would refer to the character of that bill, by way of justi fying bis action in regard to it. He said that to meet the Provisions of that bill, which was to co into effect from the Ist of December, 1857, It proposed an appropriation at the last session of Congress of $29,760,710 to meet tae out- lay for three yeare, and at the end of three years from the Ist of December, 1857, a sum of $3,800,000 « ) ear for ton years, waking an aggregate at the end of that period of Over $103,000,000, ‘The whole amount appropriated for pensions since the foundation of the governimeat was $36,376,087 56, while in this bill tt was proposed to appr priate over $103,000,000 for tho period specified, aad to reward only the solders of the war of 1812. How does the gentleman (Mr. Goggin) propose to raise this amount? Dees he want another tax ou tea and cotfee, such as was embodied in the turiff bill of 41, for which he voted? [s that the way in which he would raise the monoy for this purpose? Was that the measure of relief that he pro pored, And if not, he would like t know whatit was. It capnot be that, because he himselt (Mr. G.) bas put upon the record a yote showing that whenever the tarill shall go beyoud twenty per ceat then the public fands should cease to de distributed, Aud here the genvieman by thie very vote, was furnishing an argument against the policy of distribution, which he seemed pow to favor; for it was estimated that the tariff’ had already reached an average of 1934 per cent, Buthow woald tis pension bili operate? There ts General Cass, who isgaid to be worth over three millions ot dollare; aod he, under the prog! sions Of this bill, would be entitled to receive a pension of $96 aa year, which, of coarge, would have to be paid by the poor working men of the country. And so with James Buchanan, who is worth about a quar. ter of a million of dollare; while many other in- stances of @ esomewbyt similar character are known to exist. t would thus be seen that, apart from the enormous expense which this measure would in voive, it would operate unjustly, inasmuch as it would tax the poor to give annuitivs to hundreds who do pot stand in need of them. He referred to his vote against the bounty land bill of 1865, which proposed to give one bondred and sixty acres of land for feurteen days’ service, even if these fourteen days were employed in marching to the Beene of battie, whilst it proposed to give ouly that mount for twelve months’ service. See how it would operate: —Before the battle of North Point, Maryland, there Were about 14,600 troops engaged throwing up defences to prevent the march of the British troops upon the city of Baltimore, Five thousand were sent to keep tho enemy’s troops at bay until the defences ehould be completed. A battle ensued which resulted in the retreat of the British forces; and altbough the fourteen thousand Jeft behind took no actual part in the conflict, they would be entitled to one hundred and sixty acres of land cach, under the pro. visions of that bill, e8 well as those who were engaged in it, Moreover, the bill proposed to admit parole proof, and ‘thus open the door to frauds innumerable. He would in- stance one result of the admission of such proof. At the battle of Piatisburg there were engaged about four thon- sand five hundred troops, and about thirteen thousand five hundred on the way to the scene of battle. That occarred about forty-five years ago, and strange to say, not one out of that eighteen thousand has sivee died, but, on the coa- wary, the number bas increased to thirty thousand, land werrants baviwg becn issued to that number. It would thus be seen whether or not he was right in voting against the bounty land bili. ssut if pension sbould be given to the soldiers in the war of 1812, why not to the soldiers in tbe Mexican war, the Fiorida’ war, the Black Hawk war, and the other wars which have been fought upon our frontiers? If it was just to reward the soldiers who served in 1812, it was oqually go to reward those who served in those other wars. Their sufferings were no less intense, and po one would doubt that they had an equal claim to receive pensions. And then, if this principle were recog nized, and all dealt with alike, as they should be, who can estimate the amount that would be necessary to discharge the obligations which would be incurred under a bill allowing pensions to such a pumber as would be entitled to thom. He discussed very elaborately the question of distribution of the pablic lands, which, in this region, seems to constitute the chief igsue in the contest. He showed the necessity of reserving these lands for revenue purposes, and thus obviating the necessity of incressing taxation. His competitor was in the habit of commenting upon his haviog taken the $3,000 & year ag member of Congress, which was allowed by the members and Senators’ compensation bill. He (Mr. 1L.) might say that he rendered goroe service for the pay; but his competitor received $842 on the occasion of his contesting his seat with Thos. W. Gilmer, without render. ing any service m hen of it. He referred to the inconsis- tency of the gentieman’s charge against him of a want of fidenty to the South, when he himseif voted against the annexation of Texas, constituting, ag she did, a large slave empire. If bis vote could have accomplished it, that magpificent State wonld baye been excluded from the con- federacy, and the South deprived of her valuablo aid in the contest Dow going on between it and the North. He voted algo against the Mexican war, and if his plan of sot. tlement were carried out, we would never have possessed Catifornia with her boundiess wealth. Mr. L. then entered nto an explavation of his connection with tho Ratfner pamphiet, and contrasted bis position with reference to the South and her institutions with that of Botts, who was endorsed by the Whig Coaveution which nominated his competitor. He also quoted the sentiment of the Hon. Wm Baliard Preston, president of that convention—« that maut had no right of property in man”’—and of R. E. Scott, ot Fauquier, another leading light of that body—that Con- gress bad the power to apply the Wilmot Proviso to the Territorics. Thess, he enid, wore the associates of his competitor; and while no cepeure was cast upon them, he (Mr. L.) was violently assailed by the party to which they belonged, nud the people were now called upon to pro- neunce judgment condemnation upon him. He ima- gined, however, that these efforts would fail, and that the people would duly appreciate the relative positions of him- felf and his aeeailante, and render a just and proper judg- ment in the premises. Mr. Goggin proceeded to reply, by referring to the unte- nable character of the argument presented by Mr. Letcher against the Pension bill, namely, that General Cass and Mr. Buchanan would both come within its Operation. Apply this argument, eaid he, to our internal improvement syetem, and see how it would work. If there are a few men along the line of a railroad who raiso two thousand bushels of wheat, and are besider wealthy, while there are hundreds of others who raise but a few bushels, are these hundreds to be deprived of the benefits of the road merely because it would benefit the few rich men located on the line? No one would estecin sich a Pprincipie juet; and yet it is upon such a@ principle that his competitor based his opposition to the Pension bil, He (Mr. G.) was in favor of a pension bill, not perhaps such @ bill ag the one which passed the House of Representa- tives at the last session of Congress, but a bill affording relief to those old soldiers who needed relief. He referred to the fact that Judge Hopkins, the late representative in Congress from this district, voted in favor of the bill, and it was for the people here to say who was right or who ‘was wrong. If they sustained his competitor, they should necesearily repudiate their late Representative, who, it was probable, would be again a candidate for their suf. es. For bis part, he would have voted as Judge Hop- king did, if he were in Congress, if no other bili moro acceptable in its character could be introduced, He re- ferred to the attitude of opposition to the administration, held by Mr. Letcher, and appealed to the people to show if they were prepared to sustain him under such circum: stances. He (Mr. G.) stood yery much upon the game platform with the President, and was, therefore, entitled to their eupport. He then proceeded to show how he and Mr. Buchepan stood side by ide upon the tariff question, abd bow, in advocating the construction of the Pacific rail- road, he was vindicating the whig internal improve- ment doctrive. He referred to the question of distribu. tion, and pointed out the advantages which that policy wold yield to them by supplying means to conatruct works of internal improvement, the cost of which had bow to be borne by the people, He pointed out the ex- travagances of tho present administration, and showed bow the democratic party had faiied to make the neses- Bary provirions to carry on the Post Office Department. In Tegard to his vote upon the Mexican war question, he would gay that he had nothing to retract on that score, He voted against it becausé the Texan boundaries were not duly defined; and in this vote he was sustained by Rives and Archer, their own Senators in Congress. Mr. Goggin then proceeded to comment upon Mr. L.’s position on the slavery question in 1847, when he favored a divi- Bion of the State and the emancipation of the slaves in Western Virginia. He warned the people against rein. Stating in power a party which bas betrayed such incom- petency to conduct the affairs of government. The pre- sent administration, he remarked, went into power with a surplus of thirty milligns in the treasury, and they have not only exhausted this, but run the country in debt forty millions more. Mr. G. closed with areference to the avowal of Mr. Letcher in Congress, that if in the Logiala- ture of Virginia, in 1857, he would compel all the a pended banks to wind up their affairs, and require the Pay Tent of taxer in apecie. have just been informed that the Convention which met at Marion, Smythe county, to day, to hominate a candidate for Congress to encceed Judge Hopkins, bad failed to make a nomination, It ad- journed over until to morrow, when it is probable some al action will be had. Col, B. R. Floyd, brother of the Recretary of War, was some one hundred and odd votes shead of Hopkins. Governor McMullen did not permi bis name to go before the convention, his intention being to run as an independent candidate, My informant seem to think thet a scrub race willfollow, no matter what tuo ‘action of the Convention aay, be. In that case there will be four candidates in the field, viz.: Floyd, Hopkins and McMullen, on the democratic side, and Martin on the side of the opposition. It is a remarkable fact that no two out of the whole number agree upon any leading prin- ciple as reflected by the present administration. McMullen, I understand, is in favor of the several recommendations of the President in his last message, save the Cuba policy. Hopkins is understood to ‘be opposed to these, while Floyd, a8 is suppored, favors all, save the tariff policy. Hopkins and MoMautlon are di- rectly at jesue upon the Pension bill, the latter being op- pored to it, while the former voted for it. Martin diffurs with all. tia hobby is disteibation, to which, it uppoarn, all the others are opposed, In this etate of things there is every reagon to apprehend a serious division in the de. mocracy of the district, which will result in the aucco# of the opposition candidate, Martin. This conflict is unfor- tunate for Mr. Latcher’s prospects in the district, for it appears that cach one of the candidates is at issue with him npon some point or other, McMallen differs with him on the Pacific Railroad question; Hopkins on the Pension Dill; Floyd on the Pacific road or Cuba bill, and Martin on éttribution, Ihave heard many loading democrats assert, however, that whatever division may exis in re- ference to the Vongrosioual candidates, a union of the democratic strength upon him was inevitable, The Canvass in the Seventh Congressiona District of Virginian. As we before stated, there are bree candidates for Con- gress in the Seventh district of Virginia, two democrats and one oppesition, and the contest has already com- menced to be quite warm and animated, The three aspi- rants are: Hon, William Smith, the democratic repre- sentative in the last Congress; Henry Shackelford, also a emocrat, both of whom are stump candidates, neither baving been put forward by a convention; and Henry W, Thomas, on whom the entire opposition have united, The district {a composed of the counties of Spottsylvania, Alexandria, Fairfax, Fauquier, Prince William, Rappa- bannock, Culpepper, Stafford and King George, and is pretty equally divided in political sentiment, it having given about fifty majority against Governor Wise in 1855- Mr. Shackelford has announced his willingness to go intoa convention with Mr. Smith, and abide by its deci- sion; but it appears the latter is not willing to submit his chances to an ordeal where the result would be so very uncertain. So the matter stands, and if it continues in the fame position up to the day of election, the sucess of the oppos.tioe Candidate is next to certain. ihe tbroe gentlemen are stumping the district togethor, taking their regular turns io addressing the electors. We have the following report of their speeches recently de- livered in Prince William: — Governor Safrn firet took the etand, and after thanking the democrats of Priuce William for the renewed mark of confidence they bad expressed tu a resolution passed in a democratic meeting which had just adjourned, proceeded to give an “account of his stewardship.’’ He said iy and interesting questions bad arisen during the late seseion of Congress. Two great States had been added to the Union—that he had voted against the admission of both, and that while he did not feei inclined to admit, by his vote, any more free States, this was not the main reason that gov- erned him in his vote. He dwelt for some iength of time on the financiai condition of the country. Some time since, he remarked; we bad miilions of surplus in the treasury. The present depressed conditioa of the country arosy from various causee—they originate in the changes of the times, A tlnctuation of-trade, he said, begat a fluctuation of ex- penses. A heavy expense—six millions of dollars—was incurred in adding to the Capitol buildings, there were that bad to be paid, and the imcreage in the salaries of members of Congress, government officers, &0., all tended to increase the expenses of the government. He bad advocated, in a caucus of the democratic members, retrenchment, and submitted a proposition commencing by curtailing the salaries of members of Congress. A powerful eflort was made to raise the tariff—be thought ihe public expenditure could be bronght down. to the pre- sentrevenuc, He stated that an extra session of Congress would probably be called. The Governor’s time having expired, be concluded by announcing himself a candidate for re-election Mr. SHACKELFORD next took the stand. He was still. a candidate for Congress, but was ready to submit his claims to a Congressional Convention, It the democratic party was beaten it would not bo his fault. He said that Gov. Smith had given the most meager account of his rep- reachtative course that he had ever heard given by any representative; that he bad not defined hs position on many of the great queetions which had been before Con- grees; that he bad told them he hat voted against the ad- mission of two new States, but had assigned no reason for so doing. Mr. Shackelford said he was himscif a demo- cratand expected democratic support. Gov. Smith was not entitled to it; he had solicited the nomination of the Know Nothing party for Governor in opposition to Mr. Wise. He stated that he was credibly informed that on the evening before the clectioa in 1855 there wore two po- litical meetings held sn Alexaudria—one by the demo- cratic party, at the Lyceum Hall; the other by the Ameri- can party, at American Hall, Gov. Smith wag at the Mar- shall Houge, in that city, at the time. He (Gov. 8.) did not attend the democratic meeting; » committee from the Know Nothing Council waited on him and invited him to address them in their meeting, which he consented to do, and started in company with this committee to the hall in which their meeting was being held; having proceeded more thin a equare, they were met by a gentieman who advised the Governor to retarn to the Marshall House and address the Americans from that piace, and he accordingly returned; the commitice reported to the Council that Gov, Smith wae ready to xddress them at the Marshall House, and the meeting adjourned to that place, where he addressed them. Mr. Shackelferd said he held in his hand letters from John Minor Botts, R. F. Walker and C. W. Lewis, all of whom state that Goy, Smith cid, in a letter written by him to Mr. Waiker, before the meeting of the Winchester Convention, which letter is now in Gov. Smith’s posses- sion, solicit the Know Nothing nomination for Governor, Gov. Sarr—That is simply a lie. on SHACKELYORD—Do you mean to apply that to me, sir! - Gov. Surru—No, sir. Mr. SHAcKELYoRD then read the letters from Mess Lewis and Walker, and was abont to read that from Mr. Hotis, when it was announced that his time had expired. Major Toss said that the Governor considered the President of the United States the embodiment of the de- mocratic party, and read from a speech of the Governor w prove it. He said many of the measures recommended in the President's message were such as had been sug- gested acd approved by the whigs. He adverted to the tariff of 1842 and 1846, aud showed the prosperity of the country under the former and its pecuniary embarrass- ment under the latter, He said that in 1842 the Governor advocated a revenue from direct taxes for governmental support, and asked him if he was in favor of such a mea- sure now? Governor SxrTH made no response, Mr. Tuomas continued—Hv said the Governor had told the people what he bad done in Congress as their representa- tive, and that he would tell them what he had uot done. He then reviewod the Goveraor’s course during the jaat session, and argued ‘het it was impotent and of no beaetit to the country. Mr. Thomas thought the country had | been under democratic misrule long enough; it was time there was a change, After Mr. Toss had concluded, Gov. Simm again ad- dressed the audience, He had mucin to say to the people, but had not suflicient time. He was surprised that he should again be compeiled to deny that he had ever solicited the nomination for Governor at the hands of the Know Nothing party, acd produced letters from Col. Suttle, of Alexandria, and John Williams, Baq., of Washing- ton city, to refute the charge. He was astonished that the gentlemen should have expected a fuller account of his Me ohne course, during the short time he had to speak. Mr, Smackerrorp read the letter from Mr. Botta, and called on Gov. Smith, if he desired to clear himself of the charge, to produce the Walker letter, The apeeches of all three of the gentlemen wero well received by their respective friends, who frequently ap- plauded them Pruasian Princes and Prussian Refugees, TO THE DITOR OF THE HERALD. Your Berlin correspondent, a short time since made some statements which require explanation, Your readers must remember that the present Prince Regent is the runaway Prince William of Prussia, who fled on the 19th of March, 1848, disguised as a post coach driver, from Berlin through the Priegnitz to Aamburg, and embarked from thence to Englani—as he afterwards expressed him- self, “to study free institutions.” There he lived as a r fugee till 1849, when amnesty was givon to him by the so- vereign people. Aga deputy ofthe small city of he entered into the Chambers under tho strict Prohibition that he was not to be regarded as a princo, but asa deputy simply. After he had broken h Staatsstreidi; after his miserable butchery of the Prussian Landwehr, against their republican fellow countrymen in Baden; after shaking hands with the black re-actionary (Kreuz Zeitungs) party for ten years, and intr! against his mad brother, Frederic William 1V.; afer al this, it looks rather singular for him to throw himself into the arms of the so-called lideralista—hetter called feols. When your correspondent describes the ‘Kartatachon Prinz’? (Cartridge Prince) asa Progressist, he is in error, When further, in reference to the Prussian emigration or refugees of 1849, in saying that ouly one man of note (Kinkel) and some journalists, belonged to this very small huraver, ho is very much mistaken. There are over 20,000 Prussian refugees alone in this country, and a good many in Brazil, Chile and_ Australia. Some of the most noted ones—the Counts Reidunbach,C, Marx, A. Ruge, Engels, &e.—live in London. Of thore officers of the trucly gp Prussian army, and of representatives of the peo- ple, who are citizens of the United States at present, 1 merely name Anoecke V. Willich, V. (ou? Ve D Loewe, Latour, Caspari, Siebert, Koch, Count Goerg, ust, &c, The only mistake the Prussian people mavle in 1849 was this: that they could not wait with bis amnesty for tho Car- tridge Prince until the Blocksberg gave birth to a mouse— naseitur ris us mus! The princess may geta baby, boy or a girl—your Rerlin correspondent may rest asa that not one of the 50,000 refugeos of Prussia of 1849 will return on pardon. They leave the Le { Sesiopied monarchic baby blessing to such republican donghfaces as bow before crowned humbugs. Still they hope to return to their native country as soon as the princes and kinga shall arrive here to study froo institutions. SEVERAL PRUS8O-AMERICANS, To be Hung. Pig od Recta! eee Cee, Deny en and John 5 ius, con’ Murder, are Baltimore on the 8th of April.” brcnen: An Englishman by the namo of Carter, who assaulted and killed a Mr. Blackevsbip, in December, 1867, in Union count} int ‘was fen! hanged day of Aprily in Carlisle, Tlinois, besfhass Isaac Freeland has been sentenced to be hung in Fay- ette county, Georgia, on the 15th of April, for the murder of Claiborne Vaughan. Mrs, ayn for the murder of her husband, and Joho Wilson, for killing Patrick McCarty, have sentenced to be hung in Albany on Wednesday, the of April. Henry Jumpertz, the man who murdered his mistrors, ieee her body in a barrel and shipped it to New York; ichael McNamoe, for killing his wi id Michael Fann will be executed im Chicago on Friday, the 6th of May. David Curry, for the murder of James Fawcett on the 4th of March Inst, has been sentenced to be hung, in Ba- tavia, N. Y., on the 13th of May. James M. Johnson, of Rappahannock county, Va., who took the life of a most affectionate wife last Ton, by ad- ministering to her ine ina ginas of | has been sentenced to be hung on the 13th of May, James Stephens was sentenced to be hung on the 20th of May, in New York, for murdering his wife by administor- ing poison. Patrick Murphy will be hung in Covington, Va., on th 24th of May. \ John McMahon, who debauched the youngest daughter of Stephen Overby, and then mu dered her fathor in an affray, has been sentenced, at Knoxville, Tenn., to bo hung on the 27th of May next, Legal Intent, , Court or Crams, Arnit 4—the following porsons wore appointed Commissioners of the Court:—a. KE. Ames, of St. Anthony, Minnesota; Edward Ingorsoll, Browns and John Codman, Raqe., of Boston, Mass, Jaton Valentine netighes of O. Wiley, vs. tho United Statos.-3, Ke Avert ned the argument in this case for the petitioner, Mr. iidett, the solicitor, replied fur the United States, ‘eseritz, | a Re . THE CROPS, Splendid Prospects—Promise of an Abandant ¥leld of Wheat—Cheentng Titeligence of Other Crops, &c. WHEAT. From all sections of the country, far and near, the same gratifying intelligence reaches ns that the growing wheat crop promises an abundant harvest. Although the joy and enthusiasm of the furmer may be considerably heightened by the present pros- pect, yet we should not be oversanguine of the re- sult, for he too well knows how easily and how enddenly his hopes may be destroyed and his anti- cipations broken down by the ruinous influences of* the fly, the weavil or the rust; and even after the grain has left the cradle, and is put up in shooks om the field for drying, how often it is rendered defect- ive by continued damp weather, which is almost certain to cause it to grow in the head. But while these drawbacks may, and no doubt will, visit certain localities, we would not be war- ranted in casting a single doubt upon the present cheering prospect. We give below a few extracta from letters and newspapers, showing the promis- ing appearance of the crops in different parts of the country:— New York.—From the interior of our own State the in- telligence is general, and represents tue wheat fields as. looking fine; but it is, nevertheless, rather early to judge. The Rochester Union is informed by o:i farmers of West- ern New York that the growing wheet is now forward and looking remarkably well. It bas suilered Jittie or none from the winter exposure, and it is eo promising now that hopes ure entertained that it will steal ihe march of the insect and be sayed, Manyianp.—The wheat crop in St. Mary’ county, ex- cept in Jow lands, is eaid by the Leonardtown Beacon to Jook very promisiog, and is much farther advanced than usnal ut this seuson. In Frederick county it is also said to present an unusually fine appearssce, Tho frederick Citizen bas received some stalks which are from twelve to: fourteen inches in Jength. fhe oniy complaint of the farm- ers 18 that its growth 1s too rapid. ‘The Kent Vews spoake _ favorably of agricultural prospects in that portion of tho’ ‘Stat Tho wheat generally presents a fue and vigorous appearance on high lands, but on low land itis by no means promising, being seriously injured and thrown out by the beavy rains and frost. Iu the neigvborhood of Rockville, the appearance of the whest is at pregont indi- cative of a large yield, Vincinia.—From Virginia our intelligence is rather meager. Insome places the crop is represented as being exceedingly fine in appearance, while other accounts are: somewhat discouraging. We should bear in mind, how- ever, that a great many people in Virginia, like some of the cotton planters in the South, think it their interest to be continually crying out poor crops, in order to keep up the price, without considering for a moment that if the yield does not warrant the alarm, a reaction must as- suredly follow. The Norfolk Argus says that it has been shown a letter from afarmer in Washington county, in which it ia stated that the wheat crop in that section ‘will be nearly ruined by the rust, which bas aypoared a month earlier this year than usual. fhe Charleston (Jefereon county) Spirit of Jefferson says:—In our county we know of nothing that affords more pleasure to every one, than the present promising aspect of our wheat. In some in- #tances,as is always the case, destruction bas occurred from ‘freezing out,” but upon the whole wb have not for many years seen our fields arrayed more beaubfally in “living green.” : District or Cotumsis4.—The Washington Siar of the 1st inst, saya thatthe wheat in that region is recovering rapidly from the effects of the drowning-out process to which it has so frequently been subjected since the winter get in—that is to say, that portion of it not wiater-killed. We have scarcely seen a field this spring not more or less injured from being winter-killed—many to tho extent of two thirds of all that vegetated in the fail. That propor- tion, however, is far too great {or the avorage winter- killed, which is not roore than a fourth, ot most. PENNSYLVANIA.—We would like to provont a more gone- ral view ofthe wheat crop in Pennsy!yanis; but the pa- Pers in that State are just now go muck occupied with Political questions that they seem to have lost sight en- tirely of this important matter. The Manheim Sentinel, printed in Lancaster county, says the growing crops of grain in that neighborh and, iv fact, throughout the country, as far as it is able w leern, jook remarkably well at this time, and from preent’ ‘ndications promise an abundant yield. The Harrisburg Jelegraph saye:—So far a8 we have heard the wheat in this section jooks remarka- bly fine, and gives promise of a boun:ifal harvest. Missourt AND Kansas.—We havo 2 letter from Holt county, Missouri, which states that the wheat crops in that section, and algo on the eastern borders of Kansas, are growing finely, and never looked better or more pro- mizing for a rich yield. Tr11no1s.—In Iinois the crop has peen unpromising, but 8 improving, and the prospect is sow gol. The Chicago Press and Tribune has the followicg:-—We learn that the | prospect of the growing wheat crop hay sonterially im- proved in Central and Southern |)\iaois, and tue fartors in those portions of the State «re eneouraged to ex- fair uverage crop. It wae e::)por «i that most of the fall sowing bad beeneifectually winir kclied; but the pro- valence of warm, moist weati infased new life into the young piants, and many fi Lint were supposed to be utterly ruined now give signs of vitality truly retresh- ch ing and encouraging. This is ly the case in the timbered regions; bat en on her prairies ‘bere is a marked change ip tne eppearance of the wheat fields, and, unless there ud be ® retorn of hard freezing ‘weather, foi: will be grown where only a few days since 10 The Peoria: Transcript says:—We bh counts of the wheat crop from 1 | around. A gentieman from Knox ¢ the wheat looks weil throughout it better than at this season in son from Woodford county brings intelligence from that portion of the travelled through six counties in (% inoia reports to the Chicago Tribune that winter wv promises to make a fine crop, and tbat the farmers feo! greatly encouraged atthe prospect. The Carlinville Jmccras gays of the wheat in that portion of the State (noar the capital) that the crop will be littie short of an average crop, although the breath of wheat sown last fa’! much Jess than usual. The Chicago merchants aro charmed with the tidinge that every day reach thei. Inpiana.—The news from In¢ Evansville Journal says it is please accounts which our exchanges fro i parts of the State bring us of the appearance and prom's: of the wheat crop. The Lafayette Courier reports the wheat in that region a8 being in good condition and promising well. . MicuiGaN.—A Michigan gentleman who bas been through the Jarger portion of Berrien, Cass, Van Buran, Kalama- zoo and Calhoun counties, writes that be bas never seen the wheat ina more flourishing con:ition at this season of the year than in these different tocaiitics, and he is in- formed by gentlemen who have visited other portions of Southern Michigan, that its appearance ie equally flatter- ing. From all information obtained, it appears that a larger number of acres were frown to wheat last fall than onany Esk beie Man in Michigan. ho Grond Haven (Ot- tawa county) News saye:—Ths wheat crop never loozed: more promising at this time of the yoar than it does now. Bat little has been injured by the frosis of winter, and the spring is already so far advanced tht ‘vero oan be no dan- ger from that source. It is reasonable ™ expect a fraitfat season. The Lapeer Republican *ays:-—-Wheat in this county shows a'vigorous and uppreceicnted growth. Al- thor reportajhave gone forth that \ is gonaraliy winter killed, yet such is not the cage in Lapeer. On the contra- ry, much satisfaction is expressed «t the etart it bas al- ready made, and hopes are entertained of « growth never before surpassed. . Good farmers ani juclges gay & bounti- fal harvest is certain, should the weather prove auspi- cious. The Jonesville (Hilisdaie ) Independent adda:—The wheat crop, everywhere, bourd « 001 appear- ance. It looks far bettor than it did your avo this time. ‘Texxeseae.—We have before publirhiet somes accounts from Tennessee, which gave sebcranc = thatthe wheat. fields of that State presented a cheerijy aspect. Tae edi- tor of the Cookeville (Putnam county) Times snys:—Dur- ing our visit to Roane county, week before last, and also the present week to Overton, on the head waters of the: Wort Fork, we observed that the wieat crop looks pro- mising, the flelds being quite green Similar reports con- tinue to be received from all parte of Tennogeas, Mrsussirrt.—The Greensboro’ (Choctaw county) Recor- der says of the Mississippi wheat crop.—We have con- vel with many farmers from various portions of the county the past week, who inform us that the wheat crop never looked better at this season; in fact, it is said to look almost too well. Kestocky.—A letter from Kentucky says tha grow! crops of small grain have come ont ‘wonderfully, wad th of an abundant yield of wheat is highly flatter- & was expeciod, © encouraging ao- st of the counties informs us that ‘tion, and much of years. Another per- ve came flavtering A man who & ® cheering. ‘The read the flattering ng. Lovwiana.—The Cape Girardeau Hagle srys:—We have latterly been examining our grringe pits aview to learning something of the prospects uf the next wheat crop, and find that in almost every jocality the promise te unusnally fair, Should no unseen dieasvor happen, the next crop will be one of the heaviest on record; at least so far as the Missias Valley ia concerned. ‘The Claiborne (1a. ) Advocate learns that the wheat crop of that parish Promises a bountiful harvest. The swik is now nearly waist high, looks flno, and in some cases the heads are fully grown, Groraia.—A lotter from Ogletborps County, aay Piteat and oat crops tn that weetion hl romarvabiy 4 pon farmers are a little backward io consequence much wet weathor, “3 by ARKANSAS.—From Arkangas fs are also fi = ‘We learn from the Van Buren Jettligencer . that te whess crop of that county looks very prom: ing, and bids fair, if the season holds favorable, to produce a large yield. Texas.—In Texas the wheat is reported as boi monly promising. barns From Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota the account equally flattering. In Wisconsin particularly, wo 44 tho best authority for Stating that the number ef acres devoted to whoat this season is much greater than in any Previous year, With this mass of intelligence before us, we can- not but predict thatthe coming crop of wheat will exceed the average. There are some, we admit, who think otherwise; but we have failed to sod on what ground they have placed their ealeule tions. Somebody who claims to bel mg to the New York State Agricultaral Soc iety las made the fol- lowing estimate of the comparative yield of the wheat crop of 1868 and 1859 in the United States,