The Express. — London, England, 1853-09-03 00:00:00

it.IRNST.4PLE BRIBERY CoMMIsSIO.V. ba aItaTAPLE, Tit t itiDAli NIGHT. Ike inquiry was resumed this morning at ten o'cl . L. Mr. J. S. Clay, principal strut for Lid Ebring!on, tor t) eased the ',Weiser et Mr. Bare at viih regsrd to the • oA et the oe...tics on the liberal side, and the strict Loved agienat tt. aticg or uthet Alessi expendi tar,. K... 1. of no tame of motley paid for travelling ex tea... •s t of time, or ahytits*.nit e f that ,tot. Na ill-feel- I ins , Ir.stwee witness and Mr. Oil', de on acc o un t e t t cis 5..!a5...) b. ieur elected chola to the magi trate., and did I t .. e ve Mr. Grabble thou,:ht of the t arkship to the j until ofter 11b.: election. Knew a person Rained 1..• Uam, and hod filen Lan I) tat: the t !mai sa in the • coast, r oat for • eight due to S . A. Brune Chicheste r, and Rat judgment against him. Ilad not heard that he •. :soot to vote fur Lind Ebrington unl.is the money an, repaid to him, anal would swear tint no coo 1.,1 cepa .1 him the money na Lord Ebt.annoi's r, numbered that Lc drinan.led the ri pay meat e I the amount, which was lot Witness receive el the fifes gceneas to pay Mr. Li r.l..'e the expeasce of his jewelry t Loudon from Lord I:hrilott L Fortcscue had no ten into who were elect .rs ~t s so b erough, • wept Oar •r, who uccatied a )4141 iie'.l lolotering to his let:-!.;. Uame from C hot Men tin the borough for the Fet yeas& of was sent often to ye-,r pen n.e, but ignites ri Wit not say whether they were all 'wets- liad sen or helped to make a list of {aroma to a: ens sane nahtle. au sent advaltage to Lord Fortuna. ..a interest in rio borough- B.lieved that tt.oez received it sassesiai-a voted the othe r nay, but could n toy whether they received it Lama. (I. tughter.) Lord f•xt.reue dealt mainly uith the lila cols, and the other sides were advocates of eaclucaos dealing, and pub lish. el the poll-hook as • guide to their party. Dir. (:urge li. Kin;,stoen slieisor, and went for Lard Ebr /•te , R. is viejonetion with ,ir fray, ;..; c irrobora tire evidell.. , ! with sager(' to the espentes ut the election. Received 'aid/. for hi. own prof.ssional s.-rviera and ex. pence.. Knew at no illegal es,.enititure in the part of Lord I:hringtor, direct or indirect, bi fore, during, or after •to• ehotion, nor of any promises given by or en - hair of Ws licrl-hip to iedlu.nie runs. rt Bidder, farmer, at Oa m:eigh, remembered stand ing a e.r the Nor:h County 1 ii whin Lord Ebriegtun ✓aw there with Mr. Cloy easifiessing. ti_veral persons were there and asked foe some•hing to drink, hut Mr. Clay mad, no answer then. Lord Ehriii4t.ll:l Iltoi a gla s ..f milk to drink; Mr. Cloy hod sonsethin,z, nod also liir. K ngten and the savant, and when poi •g away Mr. Cloy gave wigs- es ball a-crown to Trey for it, and told him to stand she fist tit the good of the hose°. (Louchter.) Lord Eb fin,r,i had out many friends at G salleigh, and the half crow a did not g. t him any more. (Lcughtir.) The clergy man there helooniot to the other -id -, 410 the people were very peer. (Laiolver.) Ahont 10 pimple drank out of the bait-erowte—wi•n. a. being one. Witates was not a voter. Mr. 1/ iniel Tremblay Brew, r-114d Keen stewor•l to Leh Formseur for about 21 years. Hot lints of peso,. to whom gams hail been sent from C istlehhl riuet 1522. re...laced the lit fur Itti2-3 About oac-fifth of the was given to peteirts residing at Bernstaple ineludiot amen and non-voters. la giving his orders oitniio hail no instructions to consult any list of 7-re no who hod voted on tee rat oils. Lord Fot tescue w. , not in 'h • habit of chmatiog at, tradesmen, but ITC pkyed tone some now as when he rim cams to the estates in 1.11. and whom his father hod employed before him. Their: ea. as rota to give tires and pheasants to thole , their rotes, and a haunch of venison to those were gave y lamp -ra. (Laughter.) No new n - once were added to lists to 're the tketi in in IS:2. Tbr Chief Commitsisocr, after inspecting the list, lee watid That there Jul not appear to lie any great MOS' of drawl as it. Waters had g . .ve.l orders far malt to tradesmen in 15,52, bat they bad ' , applied the handy before. An order was gives to u man aimed C..wrniu, by Lord ilietagnea'a banal; for some plough hianess. Cowman had avert ones employed by Lord Her:agues before, and voted against bia 1ard.:..,. st the . Mr. &lama might have bad as seder tor malt before the tiec'ioo, but hod no bricks gives t him from Lor 1 Fortescue's ry. There was an ezeoonne of bricks fur gravel in the usual way, and mitosis knew nothing of the tram-action t.:l informed by Lord Khriasion em sudsy n'T;ht Dist. It was all left to the brick Darr-r, and the exocrine was upon the ordi airy terms. %Viten sa Kul pod co money on, account of the election, and Lad had no derninds for money made upon him on that account. Ila.l no autliorio• to lay oat mum; or entertoin voters at tha... election. Since the e lee ties witness had teal an septic .tion for game from a l a rs n who had voted for Lord Kbrington, and who said he wouli sot ate for the family again mil , as his request were caul plieol with. (Laughter.) The following letters were put in and read by the Chief Canficassioner amid much laughter. They were to the fo,- lowing effect : "January 19. "s:r,-1 shall he much ob!i,:ed if you will send me a Ore and phe.saut, dirt cud u.e at the Ilfracombe Arms. Ba rn it,p!e, a, 1 tent the p!u•••mt p.aticularly to maks a pules% to a frimd.—Your humble •rnant, JOHN Uoot•Ea." A •etond letter slid : " S.r,-1 wrote you some dap a:n to send me a hare, bat i re received an aftswcr. I hog you will tend it to me at 1; imt iple west Friday. I hope you will do this, or shat :.ot vote tar the family again. I have always done so, sad do nut see why I should he rli:thted TlV,ell than the rest. " Your humble aervdo, "JOHN Hooriu • Etamination continued—Witnew did not rend the bare. Had no mach applies ions before the election Knew a mao mimed liotll, end recommended him for employment in the tilery, but pot bi rause be was a freeman. Mr. Alderman Cation, a wire merchant, and member of Lord Ebriogtun's committee. but nut particularly active, deposed to the purity of iviori.le upon which the elective: was tosdected by his party. Sopplied wine, sulfite, and pale ale to Davis's, where Lord Ebriraton lodged, to the amount of 20/ 24. id. Had no further demands upon L.rd Ehrington or his committee. IL, order was for his lord. ship's private use, and commenced in the February before the election. tVas • magistme, and had been so sines February, 1452, when he was made ono in cunsequence of the death of Mr. White. After some further but unimportant evidence, the inquiry ir Ai adjourned till the following day. THE DURHAM PITMEN. A very general movement for an advance of wages is at present being made by the pitmen throughout this county, the average amount of the advance asked being one shilling per store. On the owners refusing to comply with the demands of the men a strike almost invariably imme diately takes place. A few days ago the whole of the men employed at Pease's West Colliery ceased work in curiae gume of the retinal of the owners to grant what they de manded. Twelve of them were apprehended and brought before the Bishop Auckland magistrates, amidst a perfect riot, between 400 and 600 pitmen besieging the town, and defying the body of rands, who had hem collected at the spot in order to prevent outrage, to take any of them into custody. The men were charged with a breach of contract ig leaving their work without giving the usual month's notice, and to avoid a committal to prison they *greed to resume their work and give the required month's notice, at the end of which time they express their intention to strike again. At Seaton, the property of the Earl of Durham, the demands of the men have been positively refused ; and on Monday a number were evicted from their houses, which in this district pitmen hold rent free. At lloderidge Moor, on Tuisday, the men taking advantage of eke knowledge they had just gleaned, that several shire of heavy tonnages, which the owners of Roderidge Moor were bound by contract vs supply with a cargo of coke and coal, had come into Ilartlepool harbour, and knowing that the quantity at " hank" was insufficient to enable the contractors to fulfil their contract, seis.3l the opportunity thus afforded and demanded • considerable advance per score, which on the following ch.y the owners concerkd. Strikes have also Liken piece at Ludworth, Franwellgate Moor, and other collieries, the twisters in most instances giving the additional price per score de manded by the men. An opinion is expressed by persons engaged in the coal trade that the men will continue to strike during the ensuing winter, and should this opinion prove to be comet, the price of coke and coal wait of emir be enhanced. Lout OF Lira i c .t " Lout-up."—On Saturday two vagrants entered Wimburne, vending lucifer matches, end for some misbehaviour. weed taken into custody, and, of course, put into the ordinary durance tile. Although the wreak s arch was made by the constable, • box of heifer matches (concealed by the younger prisoner under his armpit) seeped notice. Doi the night of their con thement the y grim) ted a release by collecting the straw in their et 11 and setting fire to the door. A csa of water is aloofly left by the constable with his prironter on thetas oecasione, and it would seem that they endeavoured to ea haguish the fire by pouring this w. ter over the blaze, thus treating a dense smoke. There being no ventilation for this, one of the peisonets seon fell a victim to hie own rashnem ; the other prolonged his exist ence by placing his mouth to a small crack in the door. On the arrival of some workmr n engaged on a budding close by early the next matting they heard a Lois, of groaning, issuing from the " bibud \cure," surd called up the eonstable, who, on ripening the dour, found use of tt e prisoners quite dead and the other in .1 state of syncope. The latter lei , ' conveyed to the union heuee, sad, having bees rallied by itiinulanta, was er.ableil to make • vita intent to the r if, et shove given. The second prisoner, however, lingered only till Monday morning, and then died ads 0. Inquests on the bodies have been held. and verdicts ace gto the eireumtt.nees given ; the jury, however, in one eat. iseemnpleyte.• their verdict with the followisd eltinion.—" The jury see of opinion that 11.. leekrep, or t o ed-house, to the town of K imborne, is totslly unfit fur nay homer. being to be placed in, more especiallit dune' the night, as it appears there is • great waut of veotil hies std ber conveniences; and in thus expressing their feelings, believe that they are representi ng three of the inimbetante generally. H. S. Mout, toresuan."—Poole Itrruld. THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1853. come into court against my will, upon e.bpmns, eemelled to appear, to prove the debt and agreement. Mr. Norton meets me there, in person, and by counsel, once more to fight his battle against me with cruel treachery, ones more Ito raise the ghost of that departed slander, and to contrive tharthe whole world shall believe (u they do believe) that Lord Melbourne sou again the subject of our quarrel ; that some pledge, stipulation, or promise was made and broken by me, and that that is Mr. Norton's excuse fur his breach of covenant. I rebut that imputation on oath, and by proved sects; and Mr. Norton publishes, in the Times nowsinper, two columns of abuse of the dead and including coarse anecdotes of the mother of his g I gro wn up sons, which, ev en if true ( w hi c h t h ey are not) ehimself dates back to the time when we had " au only child," that is, twenty years ago. Shah the verdict not once more be against him ? • • • • • a Mr. Norton says, he comes forward " as a magistrate and administrator of justice," to prove he has been just also, in his private affairs. In that eanacity, and with that view, he proceeds to make the following admissions; he admits, that we did not part on Lord Melbourne's cc count ; and that before be ever Inside Lord Melbourne de• fendent in the action of 1836, he had already endeavuurcil to establish a case, first against one gentleman, and then—l give Mr. Ncrton'e own printed words: " And then, respecting one or two other; hut no suffi cient evidence war Maud. Then a negotiation for a "pa vieelnoarltstirhaltvfokl.loorieett h s e ir sa s y v s . ration a as entered u p on ." ohe rle al tt g i u s id d e e d ad b ; y h t u h t e f a o d r . - tunately has left un record hie cen•radiction of this false hood, via any este may "certain by retereuce to the Timis of dime 3S, le3d, where it is contradicted, on authority, by Messrs. Currie and Wouelgate. I have also a private letter from Sir W. Follett (whom I e!ote to reproach), s :prewar repudiating the idea of haviug advised my husband. "I was his counsel," he Boys, "not his adviser." Perhaps noihing can better mark the opinion of the trial of 1836 than that anxiety shown by all parties to disavow Vide share in it. Mr. Norton admits—that after this public trial, and these private efforts to establish eases against " one or two °there "—" It is true that in 1837 we contemplated a re -1111a.)11 ;" and that the miserable jest between us was (on account of my having feared to meet him in an empty' h. use, as he had I reposed), that we adopted in our tor respenilence the signatures of a man and woman, the former of whom had been hung, for luring the latter to his house, and there murdering her. He feels that this re retiree a little explanation, and proceeds to say : " My own conduct, I admit, at that time was weak and vacillatisig in the extreme. I had loved her to m One" for three or four years before I married her, and after we were united she had all power over me." I was a very young girl at school, when Mr. Norton ',re posed for me. I was alwnys maltreated by him from the earliest per.od of our marriage. I parted from him in 1833, and in l'-3.i, as my family can witness, for violence, such as is brought before police courts; and I returned to him on his own passtunate entreaty that I would not "crush" but " fur:ive him," and that he " went on his knees to me for pardon." I was safe out of his power, and my reputation un su:lird when he made this prayer; I returned, and five months after this letter we were again and 1.1, tiurtively parted. Thar parting was followed by the attempt publicly tu dis grace me. After that public disgrace, he did, us be adnsita, ask me to emir u to him. But that is not, as he would have the world believe, his only " vacillating " attempt at re conciliation. My husband, who pretends to have loved me so tenderly, and thrown me off so completely, aid neither one nor the other. lie maltreated me while with him ; and he has been in almost constant correspondence with me, and occasionally a visitor at my house, down to the %neer of the year 18•30. Would any ore be lieve that two pats after "oar reunion was rendered impossible," he wrote letter after letter endeavouring to arrange tot our living together again : and steaks of " et:kitting me in a husbana's arms ?" That at the time he alludes to, he was endeavouring to resist my petition to the Chancellor to regain puese , sion of my ehddrin " that lie then gave his solemn word of honour to Mr. Hardwick, a brother magistrate, that he had out been raising a fresh scandal against me; that he never ventured to defend my petition to the Chancellor ; that in his letters, two years subsequently, he begs me, with coaxing expressions, to call in all copies of a pamphlet, containing our strange correspondence; and in one of these litters of 1842, speaks of himself" as your Geordie of former and happier !ears ? " That not only then, but in all the years since, 1 can produce letters more or less friendly end air. eti- Late; asking services of me; thank ing me for serving lilin , announcing the marriage of his sister ; full of phrases of jesting and utrectien ; many be ginning " Dear Carry " and " Dearest Carry ; " anxious about me; complimenting me; asking " how my travai ling uloue can be obviated ; " finally (for I weary over these instances of caprice), in April, (846, be begins:— " Your kind letter, written in the good old spirit, which should never have been broken " and on Christi:lei-day, 1816, exactly ten years and six months nfter the trial, and six years alter my petition to the Chencel:or, he hopes my health is " crisp" like the froe.—preises my brother—signs himself "Your ever"— and in ai.other letter begs I will embrace the boys " for absent me, as well as for vourself !" Is it possible to con ceive, that in the face of all this, Mr. Norton can to depend on my not i cowering him, as to venture to print such miasta•ements ? Is it possible he does no: see, that they leave him iu this position, either he disbelieves these calumnies whist: nevertheless he reiterates to my injury r when it suits him, or, believing me to be a bad woman, he wishes me to return be me ? It is indeed difficult to choose which alternative shall save his honour. The admi-si•ioe he makes respecting the late proceedings in the County Court are as extraordinary as his assertions. No one can read the evideuce and n.l conclude that Mr. Norton broke faith with me, because I broke some stipula tion made with him, and that that stipulation was respect ing mon y from Lord Melbourne. Now read Mr. Norton's admission in his letter to the Times:— _ " She was suite correct in court, when she iwore that her non-reception of the annuity from Lord Melbourne formed no part of the conditions upon which that agree mi nt was come to. I utter said it did." • • • • • " It is true, therefore, that the agreement of 1848, to allow 500!. a year, was not conditional u• on the relinquishment of an allowance from Lord blolbourne's estate. It is not true that I ever said or suggested the contrary." • • • " The confusion that prevailed at the trial rendered it im possible for me to explain the matter to my counsel ; and hence arose that part of the cross-examination which im plied that a pledge had been given before the signing of the memorandum." Mr. Norton is unlucky in his choice of legal assist ance. When I said that my copyrights had been claimed, the "benefit of which," he says, "ehe has always been allowed by me to enjoy," be threw the blame on his solicitor, who bad subtcenaed the publishers; and when I complain of being all but accused of perjury, he says it was the mistake of his counsel, to whom he could not ex- plain the matter—though he sat by his side, and suggested, in an undertone, almost every question that was asked me in court. Nevertheless it is certain Mr. Norton did make this auertion, which he now says he did not make. Here is the printed report as given in the papers : " Mr. Norton—The annuity of 6001. was given by me only on this basis. I would not have given this sum, or one aribing, if she had not given me the most solemn assur ance that she would nut receive one shilling from Lord Melb .erne. " Mrs. Norton—l stand here on my oath, and I say that that is false." The reports may be, and Cr., in many respects, ver bally inaccurate ; but that Mr. Norton made the auc tion in court which he now denies having made is in controvertible. Now read Mr. Norton's own account of the drawing up of this disputed agreement. He admits, that being desirous of borrowing the trust funds settled on me and my sons in ease of my widowhood, he found— " That the trustees could not lend the trust money with out the permission of Mrs. Norton and myself in writing ; and further, that she would not give her permission un less I consented to give her an addition of 1001. to her allow ance, making it 5001., instead of 4001. I was driven into a corner by this unexpected discovery, and I had to submit to the addition." What addition ? if, as he Mans in the next breath, he knew the agreement " was not binding," and that he could break it at pleasure ? And if it could be broken at pleasure, ace bound no one, why did we sign it ? He himself establishes the reason why; and proves by his own statement, just given, that, instead of its !being an agreement based on the stipulation that I should have no other resources, it was a matter of bar gain, for his own interest: and so great did he consider , the advantage to himself, that he wax willing to give for it (or to seem to give fur it) an extra 1001. • year for life. In making this apparent concession, however, he ems he knew even at the time, that it was only apparent. Ile says that I certainly wished to make it "a binding document, by finding trustees, but failed to do so, as not one of her relations or friends would become her surety." 1 h. g, on behalf of "relations and friends," to contra dict this. I signed without sureties, because I received 1 1 from Sir Y. Thesiger (who, at my earnest request, consented to see Mr. Norton at his chambers on this business) • letter dated Bth August, 1848, in which he stated that Mr. Norton would give me a deed, " without requiring guarantees." Nor had I previously named, or thought of naming, any but one member .f my family, whom I had not even consulted as ta his willingness to be mixed up with Mr. Norton's alleles. Having given his account of the making of the covenant, Mr. Norton thus gives his account of the breaking it: " 1 ltornt that Mrs. Norton had been left 600/. per annum by her mother, from whom I was not aware that she had any expectations. I then proposed to her a reduc tion of her allowance, which she would not accede to, and after she had received her mother's legacy and for some time s ',payed it, I did reduce it." "' • " I did, in 1851, upon Mrs. Norton's income being in creased by 500/. a year upon her mother's death, while mine was from various causes diminished, propose to re duce it." By his own admission. then, no stipulation respecting Lord Melbourne was made ; and no in. talon of him was made in Mr. Norton's letter to me, which letter distinctly states, that, my brother's 'elicitor having informed him I had my mother's legacy, therefore he will break the agree ment. He does not say, "you have had money given to you by Lord Melbourne's family, therefore I stop your allowance." He says, " you have got a legacy from your mother ; share it with me, or I will force you to share it, by non-payment of what I owe you ;" nor was it " eft.er I had eenged it some time," but, on the contrary, at the exact date of receipt of my mother's property, that Mr. Norton fulfilled his throat; and, as he expret,my says, he never knew till he saw my banker's book, '? sat I had Lord Melbourne's bequest, he admits that was his ooly noon. my mother's annuitj this agreement, Now about which so much has Men slid, was based on the eiogle stitulation, not that I should be richer, but that he should be poorer; poorer Iby one thousand a year, being the value of the office to which he was named by Lord Melbourne. My being , richer certainly did not make him poorer ; on the eon- ; trary, at my mother's death, the email portion I de- rived .item my father went to him, and nut to me. He gives his own account of my previous eonduct in money matters; most plausibly and most falsely ; the exact end witnessed truth being, that during the two years, ; 1836 aad 1837, I had not one single farthing from Mr. ! I Nerton ; that he then ens; lnyed Sir John Bayley, who had been his counsel, to arbitrate as to my allowance and all other matters; that he would not abide by the arbitra tion ; made what allowance he pleased; and advertised me (to guard himself from further liability) in the public papers; being, I believe, the only person of his own rank in life who ever adopted such a measure. I copy two sen truces from a declaration with which Sir John Bayley has lately furnished me, in contradiction at once of the whole fabrication respecting my conduct in these matters: " I was appointed arbitrator on Me. Norton's behalf, in the year 1837, hoeing been counsel Or him; and thus be came intimately acquainted with the circumstances of thews disputes. Mr. Norton gave me at that time a written pro mise to abide by my decision. Ile broke his piomise, and refused to hold himself bound by the pledges given." • • • • " I consider Mr. Norton's conduct to I. Site, so far as it has citing) under my knowledge and cognisance., to have beta marked with the grossest cruelty, injustice, and inconsistency." It is with pain I approach that portion of Mr. Norton's letter in which he his chosen t / make referent : to our sm. I think my sons' names should have been held sacred in this dreary quarrel, which began in their childhood, and which their manhood finds unreconciled. My eon is not yet iu England, nor was he in England at the time Mr. Norton states be had these communications with hint. 1 utterly deny that I ever mails Inn the charnel of a false hood to his father; oud I deny that I ever said ur implied that it was "an insult" to be *opposed to be aided by Lord Melbourne's t..mily. I did say (and perhaps others will agree with me) that it was the coarsest of insults when Mr. Norton talkril of these affairs to my son; that 1 te• fused to discus, them with him ; that I denied Mr. isi , irton's right to question me ; he having bound himself " strin gently" in writing to my solicitor never more to int. rfere in my affairs from the date of the agreement; aad Mr. Lewin has a Itttrr front me, written at that time, stating that 1 cons, nteti to Mr. Norton's proposals—'• mainly because it is intolerable to me to have my son talk over matt, rs from his father." That Mr. Norton protested afterwards, either respecting a bequest from Lord Melbourne, or my mither's legacy, only proves the truth 31 my warning to Mr. Leman, that if it were possible ter Mr. Norton to find an excuse for breaking his word, he would break it; as he had done to Sir John Bayley. With respect to Lord Melbourne ; three years after the date Mr. Norten himself assigns to the anecdote he has thought fit to publish, he writes thus; speaking of the woman who afterwards left him the Yorkshire property, and who had invited him to dine:— " I sent her a civil excuse, which was answered by a thorough love-letter; indeed it is high time that I should sanction to a remarking world your perschata for old men, by suffering this ant iquefassx pas." The post-mark of t..at letter is August 8, 1831. I do not know if Mr. Norton will persist that it is the re mark of a jealous husband. In January and February, 1836 that is, one month -before our final separation). Mr. Nation speaks of the "unparalleled kindesti" of Lord Melbourne; and strenuously untes me to write to him, to press the appointment of a friend. I will not rote, into the fabulous history of the letters; Mr. Norton forgets, that as ho was then, by his own admission, occupied on "one or two other" names, it could not be foreseen that these notes from Lord Melbourne would be important ; and the whole of that statement is false. With the exception of myself, most of the persons Mr. Norton maligns are stead, and cannot answer him. Lord Melbourne is no lower here to give his word of honour that the man he served win n living, has stated that which is untrue of his me mory ; but I can very clearly contradict Mr. Norton as to one statement ; and I do en to show what credence may be given toothers. Becoming apparently uneasy as to any remarks which may be made on the affectation of looking with abhorrence on my acceptance of aid, while he himself receives one thousand a year horn Lord Melbourne's ap pointment—Mr. Norton asserts as follows : " Lord Melbourne promised me the appointment of police magistrate beiore he visited at our house, or before, I be lieve, he even knew Mn. Norton." And he ?rives this very plausit•le reason : " Lord Eldon had appointed me Commit______. rupts in 1827, and when such appointment was abolished by the construction of the Ernkruptcy Court, in 1830 ••‘• 1831, I coneittcred that I had somo claim on the Home Se cretary, having received no compensation for the loss of my situation." of Bank• Both these sentences are directly contrary to the real facts. By Mr. Norton's express wish and desire, I wrote at that time, not only to Lord Melbourne, but to all those friend. I thought mig:t serve us. I wrote to Lord Holland, Lord Lansdowne, the Duke of Devonshire, and 'there, to make interest with Lord Brougham ( hen Lord Chancellor), to get Mr. Norton a legal appoint ment. This not appearing probable, we asked for a Commitutionership of Excise or Customs. We did not succeed in this second request any m. re than the first, brit when Mr. Wyatt, a police mogi.trate, died, Lord Melbourne wrote to me to offer the vacant magistrecy.'Un the 18th April, Ib3l, Lord Melbourne wrote me word that the Chancellor had sent his secretary to inquire respecting this matter ; and had intimated that he should expect Mr. Norton to re sign hie Cummissionersoip of Boni:milts; Lord Melb urn.- added, " this is not 11 , 1 agreeable, but still was to be ex pected, and is perhaps not unfair in these reforming times, and I mention it that you may not be surprised when you receive the intelligence." Mr. Norton was disappointed and demurred; he desired to hold both appointments; I wrote again to Lord Mel bourne to state this, and received in reply the following note : " House of Lords, Quarter-post Five. "Take my advice, and make Norton write a line imme d;ately to the Lord Chancellor, giving up his commissioner ship. What you cannot keep it is always best to give up with a goad grace. "Yours faithfully, " MautotalNE." The statement, therefore, made by hit./TOrton,iS en tirely fictitious; and if I notice it, it is to ask, what reliance I can be placed on all the other mis-staiements in which blind I wrath, imnerfect memory, and utter irresolutlin, have in volved him ? Mr. Norton calls his published letter a " vindication." A man of keener moral perceptions would hay., felt, when he wrote it, that he was not writing his de fence, but his confession. From beginning to end it is a tissue of degrading admis sions, or incorrect assertions; of which the contradiction, I am thankful to say, does not rest on my helpless denial, but on the clearest disproof. ♦ • • • • • • I say again that, henceforth and for ever, I rest my jus tification on this published confession of Mr. Norton's; on its glaring contradictions in all matters to which it re fers i on its strange admissions as regards his conduct to wards me. Even on the showing of that confused letter, our gory stands thus :—that after bringing a divorce trial, in which he himself so little believed that he wooed me home again the next year, he revives the slander which an English jury, the pledged word of the deceased, and his own recall, had refuted, with the bitterest expressions and false accu sations lau againiit his wile and his dead patron. That he has done this in the course of defence to a common action for debt; the simple question being whether be was or was not bound to provide and set apart for a body of tradesmen the sum of 6871., the security rOf And "n being an agreement drawn out formally by a solicitor, at his own urgent request ; to procure an arrangement he desired; signed by his own hand, and witnessed by two other persons ; that he cannot assert, that he had any stipulation what ever with me, respecting Lord Melbourne, my expec•ations from my mother, or my literary resources (all three of which he gave as his excuse) ; neither can he deny, that as the agreement embraced the contingency of his be coming Lord °motley, it was intended to be permanent. I complain that the original simple question has been cunningly lest and covered by the overwhelming scandal of Mr. Norton's false defence. I resent, not his treachery about the broken agreement, but his attempt to raise the laid ghost of a dead slander to shame me. I resisted it with passionate despair, because, let a woman straggle as she will, fair fame is blotted, and fair name lost, not ny the fact, but the accusation ; and I feel it more now even than in 1836, because then my children were infants and it could not grieve them. Those who have commented on the exas peration with which I answered in court, would do well to remember that I stood there answering questions on oath, which had no possible bearing on the case ; well know ing those questions to be put with the express view and purpose of defaming me ' • knowing the charges im plied by those questions to be false; knowing (the most despairing knowledge of all) that Mr. Norten knew they were fal.e, even while he put them; and that, instead of being allowed to prove the debt and agreement, I was once more being insulted with the echo of the trial of 1836, with as little just cause fur the insult. Mrs. Norton concludes her reply thus : 1 have done. There will always be thewe to whom a slander is precious ; and who cannot bear to have it refuted. There are also those in whose eyes the accusation of a woman is her condemnation, and who care little whether the story be false or true, so long as there is or was a story against her. But juster minds, who will pause and review the circumstances Mr. Norton himself has published, will perhaps think the fate of that woman a hard one, whom neither the verdict of a jury, nor the solemn denial of a voice from the dead, nor the petition of her husband for reconciliation and oblivion of the past, can clear from a charge always and utterly untrue. I did not de- serve the scandal of 1836, and I do not_deserve the scandal of 1853. Lord Melbourne did not tempt me then to break my wedded faith ; and his name has 'Kt now been the ground of a broken stipulation. Or, Mr. Norton's own letter I ant content that people should judge us both. Many friends have winded me to pees over that letter in disdainful silence, as refuting itself ; and perhaps, if I were happy enough to he obscure and unknown, that would be my course. lint. !a have a position separate from I I my woman's destiny ; am known us a writer ; and I will not permit that M r. N ton's letter shall remain on the joemals of Oret'e Britain, as the uncontradicted record of my actions. I will, as far us I am able, defend a name, which might have been only favourably known, but which my husband I n to rendered notorious. T he little world of my chance readers, may say of me after I am dead and gone, and my struggle eve: and forgotten— '• The woman who wrote this book had an unhappy his tory ;" but they shall nut say—" the woman who ata wrote this book was a profligate and amen's , y hypoetite." Sipe my one gift of writing gives me Winds among atrangers, I appeal to the opinion of strargers as well as that of friends. Since, in however bounded , and narrow a degree, there is n chance that I may I e re membered after death, I will not have iny whole life mis ; represented. Let these women who have the true iv. man's lot, of being unknown out of the circle of their homes, thank God fur that blessing: it is a blessin , ; but for me, publicity is no longer a matter of choice. Defence is pos sible for me : not silence. And I must remind those who think the right of a husband so indefeasible, that a wife ought rather W su , mit to the martyrdom of her re.puta tem), than he justified at his es• ease. that I bare ref. tined. All I state now, I might 1141 , 0 stated at any time during the past unhappy years; but I nev. r did publicly state it till now ; now, when I find Mr. Norton slandering the mother of his sone, b coarse anecdotes signed with his name and pub lished by his authority: endeavouring thus to overwhelm me with infamy, tar 1110 offence but that of having rashly asserted a claim upon him, which was found nut to be valid iu law, bat only binding on him as is man of hoeonr." CAttomxis N111:TON. BIRMINGHAM BOROUGH PRISON. YO V AYH DAY. BIRMINGHAM, FAIDAY. This inquiry was resumed again to-day. Another witness was examined relative to the death of nodgetts, who was found in his cell in convulsions, as al• ready described—this witness was Edward Henry Perks. who was an infirmary warder at the time; he also swore that when Cotterill saw lloslgt its I)inu it,wn he said, ' 5 Oh, d—n Lim, he's ' pecking' it—there's nothing the matter with him." Was quite certain that the surgeon did not see the 112/(1 till between ten and half-past ten in the morning. Late., in the day witness thought the man was a little better, and aslst d him if he cooed eat anything. Fetched him a little broth and white bread from the kitchen. Cotterill corn plr!ned of this, and threatened to report him to the go-' veruor. lie said that brown bread wa• good enough fir him. Saw Cotterill shake llo.lgetts violently, though it must have bren apparent to every one that he was in a eery dangerous state. Witmss Fad been at the county gaol at Coventry three years, and eighteen months chief warder. Capt. Williams—Whm was the surgeon sent fur ? Wiine‘s—When the man was in the ..ceund Capt. Williams—What distance dues the surgeon live fr •nt e nu on ? itntas— Ahamit a mile-and-a half. Thomas Cooke. a Inother-in law lloilizett., saw him in the wail six days la fore his death. lio..getts was at that , iine very ill, and 131,1 that he couldn't <tt his food. flc ain health at the time he entered the goo!, and had never a day's illness in his life. In the governor's report to the vi , iting justices this was des-611,1as a coma •• sudden death." The neat case inquired int., sea that of a prisoner named I rug% Brown, who was received ;n the gaol last Fehruiry f”, Lei/gine : sentence 14 days. Norton, the warder, wee re•ealled. lle stated that the prisoner was put into au un derground crank cell; wss put to work at the crank, whereupon the privinf r 1.1 dorm. lie .is then put in the strait•facket. Another day I saw t:n., man with his clothes set. _ . Mr. li —Do yes think the man Was in his right mind? Witnea—Yes. It .as a arid day in February. I think the man remained in his wet clothes three how,. Law son r.-eslled—Deposed .hat he say/ Lieut. Austen thru s a bucket of wad r over who was at that time cr..utltion on the tkor ; further that the privuner had told him be had 'brown fear hutkets of water over him. Lieu.. Anieen, the Oovsrnor, ti-called—He described Brown as n man of tiithy Wants, who was seldom entirely dressed, and w is geneiady touial crouchius down in his cell. He was put to crank 1-bour, but wou.sl not do any work ; he was set to nine thousand revolutions at the crank. Chief Comrois.inter—Was the prisoner punished ? . . . Witnem—Yes ; bread and water. C.ipt. Williains—!s it recorded in the punishment book rhea pris,ners aro put on bread and muter? Witness—No ; it is not. . . . Captain Wiiiisms—Then that book i■ not a correct re- cord. ayes that sort of puui,htnent find its way is your re turn to the Secretary of State Witness--No. _ _ Capt. Williams—Tina it's not recorded as a punishment. Witness—l considered its priva:iou—out a punishment, This man was arty dirty and refused to speak, 14 I con sult, d the surgeon as to what should bsi dome with him. He said a little cold water would 11.0 hint stood. The nest morning I went to the man's.cs II ; hu wa, CrOlalhiog down as usual and refuted to speak. I sent the warder for two or Curti buckets of water, which I threw over Brown myself. Chief Commissior Witic..ss—lt was. •Wu it cild watt r ? Chief Commi.si..ner—What sort of a day was it ? Witnest—lt was a reasonable day in Februa.y. After I told Holder, the warder, to give the man dry clothes atter be had dried up the cell. lie might Lave the cry clothes in a hoar, but I don't know pchitisely. I didn't go to see Atter the water had cern thrown over the inan he reused hiiwielf, and worked at the work to amuse himself; I think. lie app. and more cheerful. Oa another gay he bad the strait-jacket on for three or four hours. Cant. Williams—ls that punishment recordt d ? W mesa—NO. Chief Commissioner—Will you swear that the man did not remain M his wet clothes three or tour hour• 7 Witness—No; I will not. Capt. Williams-1s the strait jieket punishment recorded M • punish= ti , Witness— ;it is not. Chief C. mini,siontr—ls the tilting away a bed from a prisoner recorded as • punishment? %Vitners—Not always; thst was not considered as • punishment. I Woke.' upon the man as a low, dirty, Irish men. —••••• Mr. Baly—Did it never occur to you that Brown was a aka of weak mind ? Witness—No ; he was a strong athletic clam. Mr. Batt'—Are you in the habit of Irking the opinion of the surgeon as to the punishment to be mulcted on a prieoner Witness—The surgeon happened to he going round with me. and I thought this a peculiar ease. Mr. 13ply—but if there was no medical reason for con sulting the surgeon, would guts throw the responsibility of a punishment on him ? Witness—Certainly not. William Taylor, formerly a warder, sworn—l remember retelling three or four buckets of water hr the governor to throw over Brown I saw them Oman. The governor said he did it because the man would not get up to work. This was between 11 and 12 in the day. The man remained in his wet clothes two or three hours. Brown was not athletic. lie se. , med to be an old, worn-out man. His habits were very 'lmage. I heard bun tell Mr. Austin that he was unable to work. . Chief Commissioner—Do you think be was able to work at the crank ? Witness—lie appeared to be a worn-out rum. Mr. daly—Wiiat was his manner when he said be could hot work: was it impudent ? Waimea—No ; he woke in a whining way. ➢[r. Blunt, the surgeon, was re-called. He admitted that he advi-ed the governor that a few buckets of cold water would do Brown goad. It was done the nest day, mad the man was more rational afterwards. Chief Commissinuer—Should you recommend three or four buckets of water to be thrown over a wan Wittices-1f one had no effect, pertuips 1 might order three or four. Chief •W•re you present when the water was thrown over the man ? Witness--I was not. Capt. Williams—Did you not consider it your duty to be present, and see the effect? Witness—l didn't know the time when the water would be need. Capt. Williams—Did you, as a medical man, order that water to be thrown over the man ? Witness—Yes. Capt. Williams—And you are willing to take the respon sibility as a medical man ? Witmer-1 am. I would have done the same tootle of my own relation. Chief Commissioner—What do you think was the matter with him? Wituns—l thought he was sulky. Chief Commissioner—Then the only reason you had for ordering tbe water was to care the man of sulkinese ? Witases—Yes. Chief Caelansaioner—Do you consider that a meilie,alap pliestioo fitted for such a cue ? Witness—l hardly know how to answer that question. Commissioner—Was not the water thrown over the manse a punishment for his obstinacy and idleness ? Wiliam—Perhaps it may be considered so. Chief Commissioner—Then the disease you wanted to cure was obstinacy and dirt? Witness—lt was. Captain Williams—Have you recommended that punish ment on other occasions ? Witness—Once or twice before. Holder, the warder, swore that the man wu so said and shivery after the water, that he had to remove the wet clothes from him ; and Freer, the deputy-governor, deposed that the man crid out a great deal when the water was thrown ever him, and he wouldn't swear that ha did not remain in his wet cluthea fur three or four hours. The circumstance connected with the suicide of a boy nerAadrews was next inquired into. Rev. Mr. SbtfWill, the gaol chaplain, was called niallonsunitsed. He said—la the discharge of my duty as Iffingiolo I conversed with Andrews several times. Dui bop was a very desolate, ignorant poor boy. He was omnitted the last time tor stealing four pounds of 11 On the 19th of April I heard him shrieking bis cell. I went, and found him in the strait jacket and 'sew &trapped to the wall. Ile slid that he was unable to work, and that he had been deprived of his fool on a Sunday; that he had been so fur three Sundays and *sato be so deprived of it fur seven Sundays. Ou the day of which I am speaking he appeared very desolate, and was suffering from great bodily pain ; his arms and chest were strapped very tightly up to the wall ; it was so tight that I could not get my finger between the strap and the sails. He was a mild, quiet, and docile boy. I heard him say that he would destroy himself. lie was a thin spare lad, and he complained to me that he had been put on bread and water. I think the punishments to which he was subjected and the deprivation of his food hail made a deep impression on the boy's mind. I never saw him after that Sunday. He had then been deprived of hie food and was very hungry, Other prisoners had committed suicide, they being unable to er.dure the pangs of hunger. I think the punishment he eadurcd, end the deprivation of food, caused Andrews to commit suicide. The visiting justices directed me to make .11 reports to the governor. Capt. Williams—Do you not know that the act of parlia meat requires the chaplain to report to the visiting justices any acts of abuse, or impropriety, in the discipline of the gaol, that came to his knowledge ? Witness—These punishments were tl.ought to he a part of the discipline of the gaol. I thought the visiting justices knew ad about what was going on. Capt. Williams—lf you could nut report in your official capacity, did you not tuiok it your duty to do so as a cler gyman ? Witness—lf I had reported or complained on the subject of punishments, it would have been thought I was attempt ag to upset the discipline of the gaol. Mr. Daly—Were the Visiting Justices ever pre.ent when a prisoner was stropped to the wall ? Witness—l think not. Capt. Williams—Did not these punishments and this isc lotion of the prisoners greatly interfere with your duties ? Witness—They did. Capt. Williams —Have Ton ever applied in writing for a change in the system of discipline ? Witness—l have. I also spoke M the Governor on the subject of di prising the boys of gas-light on a Sunday night. kiss. Baly—Was your application attended to ? Witch u—lt was Williams—Did you ever remonstrate ag ai nst the extraordinary punishment of withholding from the pritiancirs the privilege of going to chapel ? Witness —lt was uppsseel that the privilege of going to ' chapel wan an great that to deprive prisoners ul it would be a puni,hment. Cape. Wthiams—Did you approve of it? Witneits—lt was an experiment. Capt. Williams—Did you ever make a general complaint of the system of diseipline pursued ? Witness—l thought it entirely a matter for the visiting justice's and the governor. The governor intimated that I ought not to interfere. I objected to the system of non assuciatien amongst the prisoners at all times, and was laughed at by Mr. Luckcoek and other of the visiting jus tiers. I objected to the prisoners being cooped up in the chapel in the way they are, but there were no alterations. Capt. Williams—Do you not think it was your duty to interfere to prevent a continuance of some of the punish ments inflicted on the prisoners? Witness—lf I had done so, it would have been thought I was interf. ring with the system of discipline, which was scarcely my duty as chaplain. I beg to ray, with reference to this suicide of Andrews, that the visiting justices ineti tu'ed an inquiry, and they resolved that none of the prison offi era were to blame ; and subsequently Mr. Wells, the ch tirman, rout/eyed u friendly intimation to me, to the etf,et that I hail been misled relative to the case by a series 01 ties. That 4:111101g 1 respec fully protested against the conclusion to which the vioting juetices had come. After some core-oboe alive evidence, Taylor was re.cal:ed—He produced the crank labour book. From this it appeared that un the 4th of April An drews exceeded his 10,000 turns at the crank by 1,500. On the Bth be did all Lis te. rk ; on the 9 . b there was no re cord ; on the 12th there were 6,000 turns performed, leavit,g a deficiency of 4,000, hut be received his food in cote...queue, of ward inspection; on the 13;h and 14th ho did his full work bob days; on the 15:h the re was an exceas of a thousand revolutions; on the 16th, the deficiency was 9,500; 'diet, bread and water; on the 14th (Sunday), tread and water; punishment, strait jacket; on the 18th, 12,000, there were 10,000 tut-lief/I the crank, and the boy had his Intl ; on the 19th, one thousand was performed, deficiency, 9,000; food, bread and water; punishment, jacket; on the 20th, the excess was 2,000; on the 21st and 22nd, the excess was 3,000; the prisoner had his breakfast, und breed and water for supper; on the 21•11 (Sunilsy), the prisoner's diet was bread and water, with the punishment, and there the sail record coded; he burg himself a few days afterwards. Freer was re-celled. Ile said Andrews took to his work badly, but he submitted quietly to be put into the jai, kit. ' Whenever I put it on him he never showed any restrance. But though he was stubborn at his work, I could manage hint. lle was always respectful to me, but ithouted when under punishment of the jacket. Ooce when he had it on I heard him call out, "Oh! Lord—l am not guilty; I've nut broke the cranks." I saw him, and he appeared to he in pain. I have seen him in the cell when he had the jacket and collar on dripping wet. There was a bucket with water in it near him. I have thrown water over him, when he appeared to be shamming fainting. Chief Commissioner—What do you mean by that. You SUM us just now that he neve r fainted ? Witness-1 thought he was shamming. Chief Commissioner—Why did you think he was sham ming ? [The wituess sadism, answer]. I'll have it, sir, if I sit here a month. Witness--I don't know why I thought so. Chief Commissioner—Was he pale ? Witnet•s—No. Did he droop his head ? be droop his head with that Chief Commis Witness-140. Chief Commis' collar on ? Witneta—No. Chief Coro — that w•• —..wiseioner—Did you believe on every occasion ..bt water was thrown user huu be was sbammiug ? Witness—He wee very low. Chief Cummiesioner umming Witness—l did. •Weil, did you believe be was Chief Conniv , ioner—Did you leave him, wet u he was ? Witem—The governor weut 41.wn. Chief C nurnissioner—Wall you answer my question ? If you don't, I will take measur:s that will be extremely dis• agreeable to you. Witneu-1 diJ leave him. Chief Commis, this shamminir ? Wi 11114—Yes. C ins:n , winner—What vras the water thrown upon him the second time for? Witress—l believe be hod broken a window. Chief Commissioner—Did you strap him very tig ly ? Witness—Not more than at any other time. -Were his eyes slut at the time of Chief Commissioner—lf you do not give me an answer to my question I'll send you to prison. Witness—lt was moderately tight. Ido not know that he was relieved from this tightness by Brown, Ile ;. not beg me not to strap him so tightly Chief Commissiorer—Wal it after all this, and when he appeared to be fainting, that the water wu thrown over him ? Witness—Yes. Chief that •Now, Freer, have you ever said Andrews committed suicide because of the fear of fur- ter punishment. Witness-1 may have said so. Chief Coots i,sioner—Did you lay so to the visiting istiess Witness—l may have done. Chief Commi.siuner—Tell me, sir; is that now your opinion: did he commit suicide trom dread of further punishment in that place ? Witness—Yes. (Sensation.) Chief Commissioner—Did he behave well at the time he wtut in that gaul before? Witness—He did. Chief Commissioner—Now, sir, let me tell you that in all my experience, I never had to deal with a witness out of whom it was more difficult to got the truth. Witness—Will you hear me ? Chief Commissioner—No. By whose orders was it that that jacket and collar was put on by you a second time? Witness—By the governor's orders. Chiet Commissioner—Now withdraw. A number of other witnesses were called, who gave evi dence in detail of the cruelties practised towards this poor boy, till exhausted nature could bear no more, and he terminated his life olmost at its dawn. Time is not lett to us to record the evidence of those other witnesses—indeed, it was almost too shocking to write— shocking because of the minute character of the persecution the poor fellow endured—till his spirit gave way, and the night watch goieg at 10 o'clock at night to take him his little bed—that bed of which, ill as he was, he had been on that fatal night deprived, he found him banging, stone dead, by the bars of his prison cell. Mr. Webby might well say, "Before this inquiry closes we shall investigate the whole system of punishment and privation in this prison as a distinct part of the case." The inquiry stands adjourned to this day. HON. MR. AND MRS. NORTON. The statement published by the Hon. Mr. G. C. Norton on the 24th ult., has induced a reply from his wife. The points in Mr. Norton's statement are re-stated with sufficient fulness in the reply to render unnecessary the publication of that document in exert:so. The Hon. Mrs. Caroline Norton says: On Wednesday, the 24th ult., a long letter from Mr. Norton appeared in the columns of the Times. I did not expect ever to feel thankful for anything Mr. Norton would say of me; but I do feel most deeply thankful that he wrote and published that letter. He has now deliberately given to the world, on his own authority, and under his own signature, that history which I had always refrained from giving, beyond the circle of my own friends; and he ' has thus given me an opportunity of refitting slander, of which I should sooner have availed myself, but that to do so completely I have been obliged to look through a mass of papers and correspondence, and I have been too ill since the day I had to appear in the county court to make the requisite exertion. [Having replied to the charge of extravagance in her per sonal expenditure and establishment arrangements, Mrs. Norton proceeds :—] The charge I publicly bring against Mr. Norton (who bu brought so many against me) is a far graver charge than any Injustice in pecuniary matters. I complain, that twice in my life he has endeavoured, on a false pretence, to rub me of my reputation. In 1836 I had a quarrel with my husband. Our cause of quarrel was, whether I should, or should nor, take my children to the house of my brother, who would not receive my husband. I persisted. My husband baffled me by sendieg my children to the woman who has since lett him her property, who thrvateetd to give me into the hands of the pogce when I went to claim them, and 1 left town alone, for my brother's country seat. Such being our real quarrel, I charge Mr. Norton with contriving that the whole world should believe (as they did be lieve) that my misconduct had broken up our home, that I was an untaithfel wife, and that my lover was Lord Melbourne. lie brought an action against Lord Melbourne. The witnesses for that action were proved on trial to be of the lowest and moat &graded class. The chief wituess was a drunken and discarded groom, who was then a rag-uller in Monmouth-street; both be end others were proved to have been sent down to Lord Grant ley's place, and to have received a weekly stipend from his agent while there. The trial was brought in 1838; never thelees no •eidence wu offered alter the year 1833; the servants living with us after that time were not called; nothing was heard but the witnessing of the rag seller and hie companions, who admitted in court that they had received money. In spite of all which strange advan tages, and the fact that a woman is not allowed to defend herself in those actions, the verdict went against Mr. Nortua. In this present year of 1843 I have a quarrel with my husband. Our quarrel is, whether I shall or shall not, be compelled to cede a portion of my mother's bequest. I refuse. Mr. Norton insists. I rashly count on being certain to obtain a compulsory fulfilment of our agree• ment, which I imagined to be beiding. I Sod myself, on my return to England, without funds to meet my English creditors. I stop one action against my husband at my own expense. I write to Mr. :lonian's own solicitor, in the forlorn hope that Mr. Norton is acting against advice. I 6P O.R TIIV G. LATEST BEIM° AT MANCHESTER. immAy. Thero wu a very small muster at the roods this mormieg, most of the member• having It ft for Lincoln. For the Leamington Sulu, the only horses in forest were th.• Et iar and Scarecrow. Fur the St. Legtr, West Auslratisti Rittioghourne acre itt force. Toe R, leer wan backed fur 50/. at 10 to 1, the lA, willina to go on. Gluing I trees: LE A M INGTON STAKES. 4 to 1 egit '1•oe Friar (t to 251.) 4 to 1 Scarecrow (t to 25011 10 to 1 Little F.teen (t) GREAT YORKSHIRE HANDICAP. 14 to 1 agst llomaeeturtl (t) 16 to 1 Gut'am,•r (t) 20 to 1 (ietAtov (t) CIiSAREWITeii s FAKES. 33 to 1 agst Pelion 33 to 1 Winter (I) mu to 20 Contentntera (t) 1000 to 20 Boarding Seboal ST. LEGER 300/. even on West Australian (t) 4 to 1 aget Sittinehourne (t) 10 to 1 The (t) DERBY. 7 to 1 agst Autocrat 25 to 1 Marley Hill (t) LINCOLN MEETING. CONCLUSION OF TIMRSDAI"S RACES. INNKEEPER'? SELLINU SraKEs were won at three bests by C.pt. Iteynare's Vinegerette, 3 yrs (31..), 41hs (Oliver, Jun.), beating Mr. Lis:er's Criterion, 3 yr.+ (3W ), Est 7lhs (Wells), Mr. ItLwris's Sir It mland Trenehard, 3 yra (301.), 7st ell.), (I.l.s . hion), and three others. 1' RIUIY. .......... MEI: MAJESTY'S PLATE of 100 guineas; 3-yr-olds, Sst 'Line; four, 9st 4lbs; give, 94t 9lbs; •uu ,ged, 9st 1116._ Two wiles. Mr. 3. Drwson's Young England by Gladiator, 6 in (H. Ni ale) Mr. Cunningham na Ann Ens, 3yn ,:(S2motion) Mr. Osborne's Merry Bird, 4 yrs (J. Osborne) 3 Mr. th.odwin's Musician, Byn (11.ishani) 4 Mr. Elwes' Linenlles, 3 yr s ( carr i e d S et 41b) (R oger ) 5 Mr. Whitt iker's Old Soldier, 3 yra (Charlton) 6 Betting : 5 to 4 apt Lascelleo, 4 to 1 cach Not Merry Bird and Ann Eliz t. Merry Bird wade strong running to the distance, where she was beaten, and the race was left to Young Enzland and A nn Eli as , the former winning by a length. Bad third. Musician a we...idled fourth. Poce 8"!!!1* Tenn Symtes of 5 sees. each, with to added ; for 2-yr old. ao.i Miles. Op , inns' stlling weights. Th..: se cond to sate his stake. Thtee-quarter. of a mile. Zetlsn.t's liotchpot (301.), 7w 31b ....(\Yelts) I Mr. lluen's be by Rata)+, of Mies Kamm (30I.), let 714, (Charhou) 2 Mr. J. Stevens's The Assayer (34.11), Tat 71b - (k'. Matson) 3 Capt. Skipworth's Claret (301), 7st 71b (J. Osborne) 4 Mr. French's Worthless (300, let 31b.... (Palmer) 5 Betting : fi 1, 4 agst The Ratan cult, 2 to 1 agst pot. A fine race. Won by a head. Assayer a had third. The winner was sold by auction to Mr. Lister for 53 guineas. • SCUI/KT HANDICAP STAKES of 3 goes. each, with 25 added for all ages. Three quarters of a mile. (8 cubs.) Mr. Hunter's Scarcity by Hindoo, 5 yrs, 74 10ib (Sabin) I Mr. Morris's King David, 3 yrs, 7st 51b (Unchain) 2 Captain Skipworth's Magic, 2 yrs, bat 1 Ilb (Lved) 3 Mr. Palliser's b g by Dromedary out of Apricot, 3 yr., 6.t 121 b (Wells) 4 Mr. J. Dawson's Young England, 1 yr+, 10st slb (Neale) 0 Mr. Hobson's Barbata, 4 yrs, 7st 81b (Charlton) 0 Mr. Armstrong's Julius Caesar, 2 yrs, sst 7lb (Oliver, jun ) 0 Betting: 7 to 4 apt Apricot gelding; 4 to 1 eacii agst King David, Young England, and Magic; and 10 to 1 eget Scarcity. Woc by half a length ; bad third. Baocio.usnY STAKES (Handicap) of 5 1101111. each with 40 added. Certain winners extra. Tee second to save his stoke. One mile and a quarter. (18 subs.) Mr. l'Anstin's Capt. Cornish, 3 yrs. Esc 101bs (car ried Est 12Ibs) Mr. C. Spence's Catherine Parr, 3 yrs, lst 4iirs (Cowley) 2 Mr. Flintors Whslebone, 3 yrs, 7st s'.bs (including 71hs extra) (Wells) 3 Mr. 11. Lister's Salyann, 4 yrs, let 6lbs (Charlton) 4 Mr. B itson's lkauclerc, aged, 7st 10114 (Sly) 5 Mr. Fresman's Miss Chance (h. b.) 3 yrs, fist Ulos . (S. Stegalest 6 BUELEICH STAKES were not run fer before oursparcel was despatched. The rain came down in torrents during the day, and the attendance of company was consequently very thin. MARLBOROUGH RACES.—FRIDAY'. SWEEPSTAKES of 10 eon. each, 5 ft, with 2.3 added, for 2 and 3-yr-ol& ; two 7st, three 9st; fillies and geldings allowed 31b. About three-quarters of a mile Mr. Bird's Besqulue by Harkaway, 2 yrs, Got Illb (Cordaray) 1 Mr. Webb's Blondellc, 3 yrs, Bst 111 b (Yates) 2 Mr. Baker's Thrush, 3 yrs, 84 Illb (Knight) 3 Mr. D 4? ieb Remnant, 2 yrs, fiat Illb (Preece) 0 Mr. J. M. Stanley's ,Orange Girl, 2 yrs, fiat 1110 (Wiladen) bolted Betting: 6to 4 aget Thrush. Won easily by a length. Two len,tths between second and third. MEMBER'S PLATE of 9.5 son., added to a sweepstake* of 3 son. each, fur 3 yr-olds and upwards. Optional selling weights, &c. Heats. Once round. About a mile. Mr. Treen's Lisa, 3 yrs (501.), Got 71b (Hayward) 1 1 Mr. Smith's Isabella, 4 yn (501.), lit 121 b, (Land, jun.) 3 2 Mr. Maxwe.ll's Tame, 4 yes (501.), 7st 121 b, (Alderwaixl) 2 3 First heat won easily by a length and a half. Second heat won by a length. The winner was bought in for 51 guineas. SAVERNAKE FOREST STARES (Handicap) of 10 SOTS. each, with 50 added, 5 ft, and only 3if declared, &e. (23 subs.) Mr. T. Parr's Pride, by Araby, 3 yrs, Bst 71b (Wakefield) 1 Mr. Cowley's Lampedo, 3 yrs, gat 41b (Knight) 2 Mr. G. Drewe'a Thrush, 3 yrs, Bst (including Std extra) (G. Lowe) 3 Even betting on Pride. Won cleverly by half a length. Two lengths between second aid third. Town STAKES of 5 son. each, with 35 added, for 2-yr •lds end apwards. Optional selling weights, ike. About a mile. Mr. Saxon's Antonia, 2 yrs (1001), 4st 131 b (in cluding 3lb extra) (Forster) I Mr. Waller's Heliogabalus, 3 yrs (501 ), Gat Ilb (Wilsden) 2 Mr. T. Parr's Catherine, 3 yrs (1001.), 7st lolb (including 31b extra) (Wakefield) 3 Mr. Jones's Young Cteilia, 2 yrs (501.), 4at 7.b (Creswell) bolted Won by • length and a half. Two lengths between second and third. LADIES' PLATE was won at two heats by Mr. Treen's Line beating Mr. Sluimpton'a Northman and Mr. Clarke's Golden Lady. BRIDONORTII RACES. BRIDGNORTIL STAKES were won by Mr. Merry's Silly, 4 yrs, bet 31b, bee ing Mr. J. Davis's Titterstone. sst 81b (second), and Mr. Osborne's Augv.sta, 3 yrs, Us: (tbird). NAVAL. PORTSMOUTH, SETT. 2.—The London, 90, Captain Charles Eden, exiled this morning from Spithead to join Rear-Admiral Curry's Channel squadron. The Me taws, 20, Captain Wellesley, also sailed from Spithead hot night for Plymouth, to be paid off. The weather has bomewhat moderalcd 0,-day, although we have bad a sun-iderable quantity of wind and rain. Provisions, in coarecvienee of the unfavourable character of the reason, have conddtrdbly advanced in price, bread having risen today. Tnr: SMOKE NUISANCE.—We had an opportunity of witnessing, a few days since, the operation of Mr. Join Lee Steven's patent smokeless furnace•, on the prenii,ts of Messrs. Keens and Welch, (tarlick-hill, where tt.c principle has been most succes•°ully applied to the furnaces ni* two engines, one 0 1 Ittacb is of about 16 horse power. The in vention cnsist'. in the admission of a current of air, heated to a high temperature, ea as to cause combustion of the car bonic snit hydrogen gases, before the smoke can be formed. The 11.041144 operandi is extremely simple, and capable of being applied to all furnaces at a comparatively small cost. The smoke appeared to be entirely consumed, and Mr. Keens ast.ured us that his firm were saving at least dO per cent. in the cost of fuel. . -- TILE ALCM IiEGIONSi-•—YZaterday a doennalut, printed by order of the Rouse of COI:WM.B, ouhlisned containing the Admiralty i nstruct i ons to Cumminatr field of the Phcenis, sailed for the Artic Regienc. ord•tc are vet) strict. Tire Commander is to communicate with Sir L. Beechey, and to land stores. 110 is not to risk the safety of the ship by being frozen in for ne.:tt winter, u ho is potiityely to return to England this season.