Star. — London, England, 1828-08-19 00:00:00

know that there was; I wish there were many such wives and such husbands. Mr. CAMPAILL—I dare say you do. Mr. TAUNTON objected to his Learned Fliend's ques tion as-not quite fair, from its applying to a privileged seerec--(a laugh.) Mr. Rich, in continuation, said, that Mr. Hall might have the appearance of a man, but he had not the heart of a man. _ Mr. Justice GAMER thought this cause had now gone far enough, and as the plaintiff had nothing more to substantiate his charge, he thought he must be non slaked. The plaintiff was nonsuited accordingly. Mr. Rich expressed a great desire to be permitted to talk a little mote, and begged to know from the Learned Counsel whether he and his wife were likely to be wanted any more ? Mr. Rich, upon being old he might go home, left the Cotut with a very low bow, and a look of the most perfect self satisfaction. DANIEL V. RoNLATSON. This was an action of trover, for the purpose of reco vering certain articles of jewellery and wearing apparel. Plea--Not Guilty, and non adwinistravit. Mr. Taunton. Mr. Sergeant Russell, and Mr. Ward, were for the plaintiff. Mr. Campbell, :Mr. Phillpot, and Mr. Charles Phillips were fir the defendant. Mr. TAUNTON, in opening the case to the Jury, ob • served, that the plaintiff was a Gentleman of respecta bility, practising at the Bar, and going the Oxford Cir cuit ; and be now came into Court upon an action of * troffer, for the purpose of trying the validity of the marriage of his daughter with the defendant, a person .named James Robertson. The last titne he (Mr. T.un-.. ten) had seen that daughter, she was in all the pride of health and beauty, and he was sure the Jury would participate with him and with the parent, in the feelings of regret which they expressed, when he told them that daughter, thus glowing with yoath and beauty, had been hurried lama premature grave by the unfortunate connection which she bad been induced to form with that defendant. The avowed object of the action was, to recover from the defendant a considerable number of trinkets, and a quantity of jewels, clothes, and other .articles, of which the defendant bad become possessed by the death of the plaintiff's daughter. Mr. Daniel. had been for some time a resident at Bristol, but he had also an estate at Tetbury in this county, where he occa sionally spent some time, and during the last year be i took up his residence in the city of Gloucester. It was his misfortune to have fixed himself in Brunswick -square, close to the Spa, and to a house occupied by the father of the defendant, who had formerly kept the Spa Hotel, and then occupied a house which he had fitted up for those who required board and lodging during their sojourn in Gloucester. The plaintiff. in the month of December last, having occasion to go a short time to the Continent, left Gloucester, but on his return, at . the latter eud of the same month, he was not a little surprised to find that his daughter,. who had been at all times one of the most dutiful and affectionate of chil dren, no long . er remained an inmate r f his house, but had eloped with a man he had never seen, whose name be had sever heard. and with whose very existence he . was till then unacquainted. • marriage, it appeared, •ttad been effected with the defendant, who possessed, he staderstood, a handsome ezterior, and who was, there ..foreiVerhaps, qualified to make a conquest ci this des cription. The circumstances under which that mar ..aiage took place, it would be necessary to state aainniely, as they involved a question both of law and of fact. In his opinion the mairiagelvas wholly void, but of that the Jury would fona their own judgment from the ori dence which he should lay before them. When the plaintiff went to the Continent, his daughter, Miss Eliza Eugenia Daniel, a younger sister, and a brother, about twelve years of age, were left is the house. They were nor, however, without proper protection, as an elder sister, who was married to Captain Long, a Gent;eman of family, lived within a few doors of them. The plain. tiff is a widower, and dining his absence Miss Lim, frequently went to dinner at Captain Long's. On the night of the 2441 of December, it would be in evi dence, that after dining as usual at Captain Long's, Miss Daniel was taken in company with her little brother into a carriage, which was standing waiting in a beck lace, and with the blinds down, trans- 1 ported between one and two o'clock in the morning,. with all celerity to the city of Bristol, in the company of the defendant. •In that city Miss Daniel was mar ried by banns to the defendant, in the church of St. Mary Redcliffe, and immediately afterwards they set oat 'on ;heir return to gloucester. Before they entered the city, Miss Daniel, her brother, and Mr. Robertson ggt pp, and sent the carriage forward without them. — Mies kaniel then:requited to her fathei's house, and *Alt a P9rd was said about the marriage for sottle'daiv, maker by Miss Daniel or the deiendant, until Captain 41 1111.:641.111as received ;ogle private inforination that a Zoorralliftwai said to km ttien place, mile such in .. . VA?* crip koliss P A K; bs ended in Ter making to him a watt tintesereed declaration of every thing which j . tAtsia place betwegn her and the defendent: At Jye , znflitot till den, rim the defendant came forward . pith ¢eelaration of losinaeriage. and barring claimed hi, auppmed or pretended wife 3 hertrtied her to a cot ta ee , Aar, CoOtioued to reside .I'lol she died. rt teas 1 4 ecessairy now 19 6 , LI te why Reconsidered the mar riage to be altogether void. The pass of the Lady was .Lifzasugenia. the one being a Christian name as much as the other, and Mr. Daniel, the father, spelt his name without an w s" at the end 'of it; but the banns were published, not in the names of James Robertson and Eliza Eugenia Daniel, but between James ifLobertson and Alias Daniels. Neither of the parties 'resided in the parish of St. Mary Redcliffe ; and although the law de .claled that the mere fact of non-residence did not ren • der the Marriage illegal, yet, when coupled with these 'other circumstances, this fact too deserved considerable weight. When parties were married by license, they were obligee to appear before the Surrogate, and swear to these filets which were considered necessary to make a marriage valid; but when, as in the-present case, that marriage' took place by banns, the information for which pas tarnished by the defendant, it was with the express intention that they should furnish such public information to ail parties concerned as would enable them to come forward and wake any objection they thought fit to the solemnisation of the marline. The Leaebed • Cnrensel then read the judgment of Lord Stowell in the ease of Paget v. Page!, for the purpose of proying that the Learned Lord entertained an opinion tipon the effect of the names cif one of de parties net being regularly published, precisely simi lar to that which he ttqw advanced in the present ease. In drat case the Learned Lord laid it down that any fraud practised on the parental rights mast be , porptiflereti sufficient to invalidate the marriage. The'r Learned Croaniel then proceeded to advert to those cis eamstanees which succeeded the pretended mai rine of Miss Daniel, and observed that in March last tile ( ) ether was informed that Ins daughter was dangerously He berried to hei with all the affection of a p are n t alarms to witness the last moments of a beloved child. To have refused. in such a aviation, to hold any Ryer. course with the husband, would have only tended to accelerate that fatal event, which his tenderness end affection had been unable to avert. lie (Mr. Taunton), was not prepared to say that the plaintiff did not sit on friendly tams at the same table with the defendant: but, upon the death of his daughter be would show that the defendant himself gave up to she plaintiff the keys of the b.‘xes in which those articles of jewellery and those trinkets were placed, which now formed the sub. ject of the action. With that resignation of the keys the, plaintiff imagined that all the misfortunes brought upon him and his family by the defendant were to cease; but when he proposed to place a plate upon the lid of his daughter's coffin, describing her as the daugh ter of Edward and Mary Daniel, without any allusion to her being the wife of the defendant, the defendant immediately made a demand for 3001.. upon the plaintiff, and when it was resisted, he refused to give up any of the atticles contained in the boxes, or even to allow the body to be removed, although the plaintiff had offered , to pay the expenses of the funeral. Finding therefore that he was unable to gratify his wishes in burying his daughter, the plaintiff left the funeral to be conducted by the defendant in any manner he th-ought fit, and now' appeared before a jury in that Cnust to endeavour to obtain a restitution of that property which belonged to him as a father, and which the d&endant wrongfully claimed under the assumlrd title of a husband. If he was not the legal husband of Miss Daniel, he had no better right to retain those valuables than if he had been . a total str anger to her and her family. The plaiotiff hAd taken out Lettersof Administration to his daughter's property; the defendant. he believed, would admit a demand of the at ticle, in question, and the only imme diate point for the consideration of the Jury was, who had really the right to possess the property? Mr. CAMPBELL, before the witnesses were called, asked the Leained Judge if the validity of a marriage was to be tried by an action of trttver ? Mr. Justice GAsaLEE saw nothing which required him to stop the cause, and the following witnesses were then examined : . - Ann Simmons, a servant of the plaintiff, proved the number of the plaintiff's family, and their leaving their country house for Gloucester ; she remained behind, and did not see Miss Eugenia again until she went to her at Cardiff, when she was dying; that was by the order of her . maste •; Mr. Robertson and her master were both there; Miss Eugenia died on the 11th of April. and on the Monday following my master asked Mr. Robertson to return the trinkets, as they were ta• mil,' ornaments, and ought to go to the youngest daughter ; Mr. Robertson said he had no wish to keep them, end gave my master the keys of the trunks in Which they were placed. My master then said some thing about the clothes, and Mr. Robertson brought a trunk to pack them in, as they were placed in the chest Of drawers, which stood in the room where my young mistress lay dead; I heard high word' between my master and Mr. Robertson after that, and my m rater went away the next morning. I have seemed the family four years, and have generally heard my young mis tress called Pip Eugenia; some, however, called her Eliza, and some Eugenia. Cross-examined—She was generally called Eliza, bat she signed her name Eliza Eugenia. Mr. Cxs(peaLL here ebserved, with extraordinary appearance of emotion, that this was one of the most extraordinary proceedings he had ever heard or seen. Here was a father endeavouring to prove his child to have been a prostitute! Coos-examination continued--My master called her Eliza; I do not know that the high words between my master and Mr. Robertson arose from my master's re fisipg to allow the name of RObert , on to be put on the coffin, but I heard my master say the coffin should not be carried to Bristol with the name of Robertson upon( the plate; my mistress was afterwards buried at Cardiff,! by Mr. Robertson; when I went to the cottage, she was. called Mrs. Robertson, but I never heard her father call her by that name; when 'I went first, my master! and Mr. Robertson seemed to be on very good terms, and sat at table together ; I never, however, saw them shake hands ; I believe Mt. Daniel had been there about a week before me ; my master had, however, paid a visit to Mr. and Mrs. Robertson before, although I do not know how long that visit lasted. (Several letter. were here handed to the witness). She said they 111911 all in her master's hand-writing, and addressed en Mrs.! James Robertson; they began with the words, A kr dear 'Eliza.* Re examined—l heard my maw say that Mr. ite. belt on made a demand of Mi. from him. and that he refused to allow him to put the name of Robertson en the lid of the coffin. Mr. Edward Moreton Danis)--I am the eldest son if the plaintiff, and now twenty-three years of age; my sister was four years younger ; spell our name with out the s ; my sister was called by various names as substitutes for 'Eliza, such as Betsy, Betty, and Bet; my father called her Eugenia, and she signed her name Eliza Eugenia ; I have a younger sister, and a brother fourteen years old. Captain Long—l married the eldest daughter of Mr. Daniel in November last; I lived in Montpellier-place, and Mr. Daniel in Brunswick-square; Mr. Danid was in London and France in December; I did not knew there was such a man in existence as Mr. Robertson, until I made inquiries on the 28th of December, in con sequence of some information which I received ; up to that moment .1 had not the slightest idea of her mgr. tinge. as I saw her almost every day; she dined with us the very day before she was married; in consequence of the conversation I had with Miss Daniel, I went to Brunswick-square, and discharged the cook ; Mt. Daniel returned on the 31st of December, but Miss Daniel had gone away before that with Mr. Robertson ; I never saw Mr. Robertson until he came to my door to demand his wife; I.told him she was at perfect liberty to go, if she desired to do so; she did not, however, go that night, for she was too ill to be removed ; she had told me that dayshe was married to Mr. Robertson. Cross-examined—Mr. Daniel, I believe, made two visits to Fairivater Cottage, where Mr. and Mrs. Ro bertson resided ; at first he staid only a few hours ; I never heard that Mr. Robertson and Mr. Daniel had diued at the same table, and shook hands ; I don't remember Mr. Daniel saying he dined with Mr. Robert son, but I heard there was a settlement about to be drawn up. Re-examined—Mr. Daniel told me .he went at his daughter's request, to see her,...and her alone. Or his way•to see his daughter, Mr. Daniel passed thtough Bristol, and examined the register of the mama e; he said, upon seeing it, that he was 'sure the marriage was net good, and he then gave orders toatep the prepara irons for the settlement ; this was about a fortnight after his return from France. Henry Maddox Daniel, a boy of 14—I recollect going with my sister to Bristol, on the day before Chrtitmas' D ay ; my sister was taken to the coach-house behind • Mr. Hales's, in Brunswick-square; Mr. flobOt son wa „ the person who took her there; I knew him to he the sob ale person who kept a boarding mad lodging-hum in Brunswick-square; my sister and Ann Seymour, and Mr. Robertson, got into a carriage, and then I got in, and the blinds were polled up ; some men then pulled the carriage out of the coach-house, and horses being put to, we went off on the road to Bristol; when «e got there, we breakfasted, and then we went to St Mary Ratcliffe c' well, where the ceremony of marriage was pet [primed ; I put my name to the book, as a wit ness, and Mr. Robertson's brother was another witness. (The Register Book was here shown to the witness, and he pointed out his name.) Mr. Robertson was so artful as to get his brother to drive the coach to Newport ; I have written my mime with the S, although I never did Iso before or since, hut I was so confir , ed I did not know what I WAS doiug; when we returned to Glouces ler my sister and I got ow and walked borne; I pro mised tot to tell I had been at Bristol; and Mr. Ro bertson slid he would trust me; that was the reason I did not tell. _ _ True Rev. Martin Richards then proved the publica tion of the banns and the solemnization of the mart iage. Cross•examined—l showed the register to Mr. Daniel about a fortnight after the marriage; Mr. Daniel told me he ha.l permitted his daughter to give a gold watch to Mr. Robertson, but that a negociation which had begun was broken off; when he said this he had been somewhere in Wales to see his daughter. Evidence was then given to prove that the name of Eliza Daniel in the body of the register of the marriage was in the same handwriting as the entry of the banns fir publication. A copy f the baptism of Mrs. Robertson was then put in ; she was baptized by the name of Eliza Eugenia, second daughter of Edward and Mary Daniel. Tnis was the case for the plaintiff. Mr. Cameseti then addressed the Jury for the de fendant, and said, that although he must regret making use of any observation which could bethought to wound the feelings of Mr. Daniel, yet it the painful duty he bad to discharge required such a course, he was determined not to shank from the responsibility of making these observations. He must say then, in the very outset, that a more sordid, a more unfeeling action than that they were now considering, was never before brought onto a Court art Justice by any one bearing the character of a Gentiemaa. The wealthy Mr. Daniel was here seen, for the sake of a few paitry trinkets, endeavouring to blast the tame of that daughter who was at rest in her grave, and who had lived and died the wife of the de fendant. Here he was as a father labouring to have her marriage declared void, and prove that he had suf fered her to live with Mr. Robertson as a concubine, while he actually believed the marriage to be viAd. Was this, he would ask, the conduct of a Christian father, whose feelings oh enmity should have ceased with the life of his -daughter ? There might be some reason for his being displeased at the outset, but when he had par doned his daughter's offences—when he had become reconciled to her husband, and received her back to his bosom—when he had acknowledged her marriage in her life time, what motives could justify his attempt to invalidate that marriage when her body was not yet laid in its grave ? It could be from no other motive than spleen and revenge ; and although his Learned Friend had described Mr. Daniel as a man of high hononr and unblemi.hed character, he (Mr. C.) would rather be James Robertson, the son of the humble ,boarding-house-keeper, than the hih and mighty Coon 'aellor,'Daniel. Mr. liehertson wa g s not defending this action because he cared for the pos'ession of the paltry baubles claimed by the plaintiff, but because he felt hound to defend the memory and reputation of his wife, and because be would not allow Mr. Daniel to declare upon her coffin that she did not bear towards him that relationship. Mr. Robertson was determined to spend his last farthing in defending his title to be consi dered her husband. Such conduct was creditable to his feelings ; and if Mr. Daniel did belong to the 'Oxford Circuit, although he did not remember him, he must say that Mr. Daniel had studied law to very little purpose, it be supposed that with such a case he could succeed in obtaining a verdict. The Learned cogintel then referral! to the case of Paget, cited by Mr. Taunton, and contended that the marriage was not set midi from any omission of a name, but because the • arms were published in a name by which the parties were not known, thp banns having been published in the mane of William Paget, while he was known by the patine of Peter. After contending that the omission of the s was not material, as it was not to be found in many names, and as it appeared that one of the Daniel family wrote the name with the s, the Learned Counsel, proceeded to argue that Eliza was the name by which' the I.eslp was -generally koowo—Py which she was ashiresried by her father, and tinder which be had even reengnised the marriage. In support of this argument he read the following letters : Mir alma gLIZA—By the.permission of Heaven, I am come to see you wirtin this transitory world. Ido not approach with anj other feelings than those which nature and the mercies of Heaven towards myself inspire. Notwithstanding this declaration, which is true, I cannot at present consent to an intestines with your husband. What good conduct towards yourself, &c. may in time effect, if I should live much longer, is a subject rather of wish, than of immediate anticipation. " With sincerity, your's affectionately, " EDWARD DANIEL. Cardiff Arms, Sunday. March 9, Let the bearer return to me before I go to the house." Addressed—" Mrs. James Robertson. ° Brunswick-square, March le, ISM. 6 ' Mr mot Etas—Your letter, which I received on my re turn from Malnisbury, afforded ut great pleasure; and we sic. cerely hope that you may daily gain strength, especially as the weather is mild; but as it is prematurely warm and oppressive, I would advise you to be extremely cautious, and not expose your self to its influence at present. [After mentioning some further particulars cc-vetting friends of Use randy, it concluded]. With best wishes to you and pure, I ant, my dear Eliza, most sin. cerely Tome, " B. D." AtWresscd to " Mrs. James Robertson, Fairwater. cottage, near Cardiff, South Wales." These letters, the Learned Counsel contended, showed a very different feeling from that which now prevailed, and evidently proved that the plaintiff recognised his daughter', marriage. After explaining the circumstance 'of the three hundred and fifty pounds to have arisen from an offer of the plaintiff to pay a part of the ex penses of his daughter's maintenance, a promise which he had afterwards broken front the dispute about the coffin, the Learned Counsel concluded by declaring the only fault of Mr. Robertson might be found is the words of Othello— " That I have taken away this old man's daughter, It is most true—true I have married her; The very head and heat of my offending Hash this extent—no more." Mr. Daniel Davis was then called,. and proved that the defendant and his wife lived most affectionately at the cottage in Wales. I attended Mrs. Robertson in her last illness, and found she had broken a blood vessel in her youth. I recollect seeing Mr. Daniel at the cottage ; At. Robertson and Mr. Daniel sat at the same table, and seemed perfectly reconciled to each other. Etna Miles, the aunt of the defendant, recollected seeing Mr. Daniel shake hands with Mr. Robertson, • when they parted at night. They seemed to be on the moot ft-mildly terms with each other. Mr. Beaty Cook, the Overceer of the Poor of the palish of Littleworth, remembered Mr. Daniel seeing bit name rated in the book a& Daniels., lie made nod objection to it; add indeed be was known everywh ere by the name of Daniels, as it is written in the Ov er , seer's book. Mrs. Burrowes, a dress maker, made dresher for Miss Daniel before her marriage; the bills were alw 4I $ Mad e out in the name f Daniels, and paid in that name. Several other tradesmen gave the same testimony i s to the plaintiff bearing the name iii Daniels. Mr. TAUNTON then replied at considerable length, and the Learned Judge having summed up the eri. dance, the Jury, after deliberating about an huur, at II o'clock returned a verdict for the plaintiff. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. —wow — MANSION—HOUSE. THE POMMY AT 'la. HATTON'S —JAIL Kimble, who was charm( on suspicion of having been concerned in the extensive rutib ut committed in the shop of Mr. Hatton, the watch and clock-maker. in Fish street-bill, was again brought up for examination. it nig be recollected that the prisoner made a voluntary statement to t ee of the Borough officers. that he knew all about the robbery- 1 p" concerned in it—that be had received one hundred pounds fur his share—and that he was ready to put Mr. Hatton in the way of recovering his property, if he agreed to proper terms. Mr. Humphreys now stated that the prisoner was drunk at the time he made this statement. Mr. Hatton here deciareJ, that when the prisoner came to hint, the whole course of kis language and action was that of a m an completely sober. He Arm refused to communicate with the witti est unless the officers withdrew. When they left the room be entered into a detail of circumstances which left a strong impression in bis (the witness'.) mind, that the prisoner, if not a principal in the rob. berg, was in some way or other au accessary. fie said he spoke to the witness as a man of Wow, and he was ready to make a di,. closure to him on condition that himself and his family were first put in safety; witness replied, that the law held out certain indul. gentles to those who made such di closures Us the one proposed, sad that he (the witness), though his loss had bee. most ' , sere, coald not think of doing any thing which the public and the hw would not sanction. " Then,' said the proinet. " Iv. on't split!" The witness begged to add, that be had been fain,ured by Mr. Peel with an interview, and that excellent Minister had, on a rem sentation of his case, obtained a promise of his Majesty's tree pardon to any accomplice who should come torwrta 4gil make a full dis closure. Witness thought that it would be expedieil to remand the prisoner until after the promise of the pardon had appeared in The ConeSie. • The primmer was tken remanded to the time requested by Mr. Hatton. A young man, named Henry Evans, was charged with having embezzled monies to the amuunt ot upwards ot 40N. Tilt primmer had been in the service of Mr. Holmes, a cbeesemotigtt in Lime. street, and after he bad embezzled m. hies to the above amount he absconded, in August last, and went to America. He had since returned, and it was discovered bad opened a shop in his own n.we opposite White Conduit House.—He was remanded. GUILDHALL. John /ion, who has so many times been remanded nn charges se swindling, &c. yesterday underwent a final examination. Frna among the number of bills which he had issued, much pains was taken to bring home a charge of forgery, but be produced lettersto show that David Dickinson. the principal party in these matters, was really in existence, and was likewise rrady to come tnrwara and avow his signature, and on that account this line of prusecutius was abandoned. He was ultimately committed on two charges of fraud, one for defrauding Mr. Moore of a dial, and ore tnr de. frauding Mr. Adams of some watches. The Alderman intimated at the time, that as many more of the numerous complainants as chose might indict the prisoner if they were so inclined. The prisoner was told, that although he was committed for trial be might be permitted to have bail by producing two persons, of fifty pounds each, for every indictment, and riving forty eight hours notice ; he readily replied, that he would find unexceptionable bad immediately. MARY-LA.BONNE. Friday night two young men, sons of a Noble Lord, were taken to St. Pancras watchbouse, and detained under the rnllowing firearm. stances—Late in the evening they went to No 10, Fitzroy-square, the house of John Winter, Esq. an intimate acquaincancr. Winter was out, and his housekeeper, Elizabeth Paulen, did nut know them. They put their horse in the stable, look. d after corn to feed him with, and took seats in the parlour with peat freedom; and this being done in the absence of her master, made the house. keeper suspicions and inquisitive. Her questions were not an swered in a way quite satisfactory to her, and seeing afterwards what she supposed to be a dagger in the possession of one of them, she called in two watchmen, and, to place her master's property and her own life out of danger, tent the young Nobles to the watch. house, as persons refusing to give a good account of themselves.— Their case was heard on Saturday, in the private room of ibis Office,by Mr. Griffith and Lord Montford, and it ended with thew being discharged, upon paying the usual hoe of one shilling each. WORSHIP-STREET. Yesterday several of thei;l;bira;;;;Tlir itannia street, City. road, and other parishioners of Shoreditch, attended before Mr. in support of a charge against a woman named Merril, who keeps a house of such notorious ill fame in Britannia-street at to have considerably deteriorated the value or property in the neighbouahood—so much so, that two of the parishioners, under the provisions of Geo. 11. called upon Phillips, a eonstabie, to ran.- dee the powers vested in him under that Act. lie accordingly prepared transparencies, with a light in them having the words— " Beware of bad houses," one of which was placed near Uri. Har ries door ; and she in return not onl encouraged the most disso lute thasactets into her Lease, b t actually kept singing a song the mo,ez ditSlisting and rAltoking.—The Magistrate held 3lrs. Harris to bail—filet husband in SOL sad two sureties in 50/. each, to meet the charge at the Session. LA M BETH-STREET. Jilettiatnin "Wake was brought up from St. George's waft,- house, to answer a complaint preferred against idol by a nand looking girl, who charged him with personal violence, and having broken her parasol. The complainant stated that on Sunday last she went to visit a friend at West End. Ott her return she took a stage, and as she was alighting from it, near Catherine street, the defendant spoke to htr; on her remonstrating with him, ke struck her several times on the head, and broke her parasol. A watch man came to her assistance, and to o k him into custosly. Toe ,de fendant was amerced in the p e n a lty o f f u rry shillings, or one months imprisonment. He preferred the former, and was discharged, mu a comment from the Bench for his unmanly conduct. TOWN-HALL. One of the pew.openers of St. John's Church, was charged with assaulting a little girl, named Cabral. The child stated tMt she was at play when the defenti..nt seized hold of her, and owl throttled her, and set a dos on her, which bit her severely in the arm. At the same time a buy belonging to her tore 11+41. 11011 from her neck. Her mother stated that she went to her assutaice, when the animal was set upon her also; she caught it by the back elf the neck, and gave it to a by.statider, who dashed its bens , iste. The Magistrate said, unless the drtendant made some compensa tion, she must find balk The Magistrate's advice was followed, and the matter settled. UNION-HALL Sunday night two brothers, named Henry and Richard Lowe 4 a4 were apprehended in Bennett street, Blaesfriars-road. koffig their possession a variety of house-breaking implements, atanoS which were a crow-bar, a phosphorus-box, and part of a wag candle. Yesterday the prisoners were committed to Braxton, NSW the Vagrant Act, for three months. MA RR IRD. The Rev. William Douglas Veitch,Jt. A. of Bailiol College , ° l ' ford, to ails& !bltt, second daughter of Col. Baia, 1). A• C. C °6l4 ' - NEWGATE AND LEADENHALL MAItKEIS, Ami' Reef... lts 84 to 3s tid I Veal Mutton ........3s 04 to 4s Od Pork 4s 04 to is Lamb 34 4d to 4s 84 PRICES or HAY AND STRAW YRSTERDAY. ST.3llllltell. WHITECUArtt. Hay 5115, Od to 51 Os Od Hay 31 10s to 41 159 t d o Clover 41 Os Od to 51 10s Od Clover 41 0 to a 1g5 , 1 Straw 04 to 21 51 Od Straw 11 lis to "I" , rs, 'ER CWT. AUGUST IS. PRICE OF IF NSW MARTS. 111 4W taus. Kent earn to 90s I Kent $4 to 611 ' Sum: 6os to 76s i Sussex 04 to WA limes Farnham fine 112 s to 130s—Seconds. 900 to 1208 Old Duty laid at Z 150,000,. COAL MAIIICKT, Aspausr la. Ships at Market. Ships Sold. Fier. 871 Newcastle 411# 29i 3d CO 3 . ,s . 4 25 Sunderland 21 49+ od to 3 76 94 --- W ATEIt at LONDON-BIUDG ft TO 101kHf1liC Morning 33 aunute4 Arttr 9 Afternoon • 23 answers atter it, is: Printed and rutilisbcd by Julio Alarm', the ii top riO. at the &tea Orem, Nth 1, rickvit-pleres Temple Oa.