Star. — London, England, 1827-08-04 00:00:00

CONFESSION OF SLADE. THE MURDERER. We stated yesterday, exclusively, that Slade, the mur derer of Mr.WArantrousa, had, on Thursday, confessed his guilt, to the Rev. Mr. Bnowta, Chaplain of Hunt ingdon jail. The following is a copy of Slade's con fession, as certified by Cara nt.as MARGZDrs, Esq. the Uoder•Sheriff of Huntingdonshire a N HUNTINGDON, AUGUST 2, 1827. Joshua Slade says, that on the morning of the 3d j u i n tfift, I went direct from the Swan public-house *a quarter past two o'clock, and got over the garden *all; I was then fresh; I saw Peter Saby at the door; I went to a straw-wall near the dove-house, and laid there till five o'clock in the morning ; I had a sword bid in the straw-wall about four or five weeks ; had stole it from the Horse and Jockey public-house, Huntingdon; drew the sword out, and left the scabbard in the wall ; and put the sword down my trousers, by my thigh ; I went into the garden ; saw Mr. Waterhouse in the yard, but he did not see me ; the garden door was not fastened ; I opened it, and went op stairs, and hid myself in the wool chamber, from five o'clock till ten, for the purpose of plundering the house ; I meant to hie robbed the house at night of any thing I could ; I was asleep from five till ten amongst the wool. Mr. Wateshotise happening to come up stairs, heard me breathe—date say I was snoring; upon which Mr. Waterhouse came up to the chamber, and called " Hot- Ina I who are you ? what do you do here r I then got sp, drew the sword, and laid hold of him. bk. Water louse tried to go into the chamber where his blunder buss was, but I would not let him ; I led him down bil ks, he trying all the way to get up stairs; no conver tatiun passed in coming down. When we got down stairs, I said—" Now, Mr. Waterhouse, if you will for give me I will forgive you; and if not, this is your death-warrant," holding up the sword. He said Islo; I will suffer any thing first." I was standing opposite to him in the lower passage when I let him go. Mr. Waterhouse went to run by me to the kitchen door to call for some body ; upon which, just as he was turn ing into the kitchen, I struck him a back-handed blow, the great cut across the jaw, and he reeled back, caught himself against the tub, and fell backwards into it. He guarded his head with his hands. When in the tub I struck him several blows with the sword, and he laid bold of it twice; upon which I drew it out of his hands, and cut his fingers; I also stabbed him in the throat, which was the last blow. Mr. Waterhouse then said, lam done," and died immediately. There was no blood whatever on me, except on my finger, which 1 ask on, and wiped it on the grass; and also one spot on my waistcoat, which I scratched out. I did not hear the dog bark all the time; he would not bark at me; he barked once when I got over die wall, but as soon as be beard my step he knew me and was quiet. The kitchen * door leading into the yard was open all the time. No instrument was used except the sword„ sod no other person was present or knew any thing about it until I made a confession to the Chaplain yes terday. All that passed between Heddings and myself on the Wednesday and night of thelnquest was as follows: Inked Heddings whether be would go and drink with we? He tbera , drove nee on one side, and asked me "that do you think of this concern?" Heddings said, "I have strong suspicions of old Wright," and said " I am sorry he is dead, I would as lief all the folks in the town dead as him, for I counted of having a quarter of barley from him this week." Having committed the murder, (which was all finished by ten minutes after ten) I had my watch with me, I immediately ran out of the house. I had polled off my shoes when I first went into the garden at lye o'clock in the morning,and am sure the loot marks alluded tots the evidence at the trial,were not gads then. (The one in thegarden might have been mine, I was in the garden on the following day, when I was tunined at Mr. Waterhouse's by Mr. Tockington); I tamed immediately to the right and threw the bloody wad among the young oaks near the privy. I then tin at the back of the hay ricks, went over that stile (where it was said the steps were) without my shoes, which I put on when I got up to the top of Horse-close. In going through Dovehouse-close, I saw Parker by the lleovebothe, but be did not see me; there was an old man :work in the churchyard at the time, but be never saw wafer getting over the stile ; I turned to the right and vent across the closses into the tunnel, as stated in the evidence; saw the two women on the hill; did not stay is it a minute; went down the dyke, and laid in Mr. Waterhouse': fields. It was about twenty minutes after ttn when I got into the barley field, and staid there until seven at night, and then went to my own home round by the town, had my supper, and went to bed ; as I w as go i ng home I saw folks running about. On Wednesday was at work at Stanyons. The >sl of JOSHUA SLADE. Witotiv—OcAßLOS MaIIOATIS, Joao Thomas. ." I wish th e pu bli c to b e acqua i nte d w i t h t hi s conies ton, which w ou ld h ave b een ma d e b e f ore i t w a s , but from a dread of meeting my family with their know. ledte that I was guilty. The >4 of JOSHUA SLADL . it oes--Coa &LIM NA AGM% • Joins THONAIL THI SW.RD.—Search has been made on the spot Pouted out by Slade, and it was instantly found; it lla light cavalry sabre, and fitted the case mentioned : the be f oun d i n the straw stack a few days after e murder. The sword, though bloody, was not so deeply rued r as might have been expected; it was within a few paces of the scene of the murder, std it seems strange that it should have so long re• untied without discovery. Ist a very short time after Slade had made confession to ••Ir. Bross n, Chaplain of the Gaol, the Under Sheriff wired from Cambridge, and alighted at the gaol door ; he was the bearer of another respite from Chief Baron Ailexander, deferring th e execution till the Ist Sept. next. r, e Under-Sheriff, upon being informed that the pri "crhad made a confession, considered it immediately . 14 : c estary to take the direction of the Judge, under the ,""'_oircurnstances, and instantly posted to Cambridge; tot R " he could arrive there, the Judges had left . , to which place he followed thew, and called Lordihip. up ; and the Judges having consulted , "eie of opinion that they had power to grant aod as it had gone forth they would not t ; so the respite remains in force till the Ist -P'erW,er. lt vr o $ u have been a singular coincidence bad Slade '77 etecwted according to his sentence, on the 2d of 1 7e';4 as it wo u ld h ave b een t h e ann i versary o f t h e mution los murder in this .couuty, which took set 11 )ears ago. LAW INTELLIGtNCE: COURT OF CHANCERY, Avouse 5. THOMAS AND IWONTOOMNRY. A petition came on to be heard in this cause which involves the subject of the legacies under the will of the late Duke of Queensberry, and the claim by the Stamp Office for legacy duties. The SOLICITOR GRNDRAL, on the part of the Stamp Office, contended that the Government was entitled' to interest upon the stamp duties, in respect of the legacies, from the time at which they became payable, up to the present period. In support of this, he cited a case which had been decided in the Court of Exche quer, where it was decreed that the stamp duties at tached upon the accretions made by way of interest to a legacy from the testator's death. He also commented upon the various clauses in the Stamp Act (36 Geo. IV.) by which the legacy duty now payable was imposed, and argued that it Was clearly the intention of the Le gislature to make the duty attach upon the amount of the legacyi Whatever that might be, when it came into the hands of the person entitled to it. In this case the payment of the legacies had been postponed in consequence of certain claims which had now been disposed of by the Cotrt, and which could not have been settled by any other authority, having been set up against the fund out of which the legacies were payable. The disadvantage to the Crown was obvious, unless the Court should decree that it was entitled to interest ; and there could be no ground of equity by force of whi.h the legatees, whether specific or residu ary, ought to be benefitted by the accumulations upon the money, which,. if it had been paid in due time after the testat. r's death, would have been in the hands of the Government, and employed by them. The ques tion was one of great importance in this case, where the sum in dispute amounted to upwards of 300,0001. and of still greater importance in other matters under simi lar circumstances. _ _ Mr. BICKRESTETH and Mr. BOTELER were heard on the same side. Mr. HEALD, Mr. Hoax% Mr. SFEADWZIM, Mr. Teas tows, Mr. Rose, and Mr. Rourect., on the part of the executors and •arious legatees, opposed the claim, and contended, that as the Stamp Act contained no express direction respecting interest, the Court could not decree it to be paid. They argued. that the case was like any other instituted in that Court for the administration of assets, and that the claim of the Crown was to be treated like that of a simple contract creditor, which in a Court of Equity was never allowed to bear interest, while lei. I gatees and persons having interest under the statute of distributions received interest. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the CM ought to be decided upon the principle, that when the case came into that Court for decision, it was the duty of the Court to appropriate to all the parties claiming, such a portion of the general fund as they were justly entitled to. The tight of the Crown was clear, as soon as the amount of the legacies could be ascertained. That had not been done in consequence of other claims, which were said to be entitled to satisfaction before them. At the beginning, therefore, it was not clear that the lega cies would be paid at all. In the course of the proceed ings, all the doubts had been removed, the claims had been settled, anti the legacies were now to be paid.— During all this time the payment to the Crown had been postponed ; and was the Court now to say, that, because, owing to the peculiar circumstances of the case, that had not been done which ought to have been done, the Crown should therefore be injured? Ought it not rather to treat it as if the several interests of the Crown and the legatees had been appropriated, and then to give to each patty the accumulations on that which was now ascertained to have been their respective interests? This was the light in which the matter appeared to him, and for these reasons he decreed that the Crown should be paid such accumulation of interest as had been made upon the capital sum, to which the legacy duty would have amounted from the time of its be. coming payable. IN RE THE CORONER Or HERTFORD. Mr. HE.ILD moved, upon a petition from the inhabi tants of Hertford, that the Lord Chancellor would issue the usual writs de coronatore amovendo and de coronatore eligendo, in consequence of the Coroner for the county, Mr. Benjamin Rooke, having neglected his duty, and having quitted the neighbourhood. One of the affida vits stated him to be now in the King's Bench prison. Mr. SUGDaN, with whom was Mr. P.ASHOttg, said that it was not intended to oppose the application, but he was compelled in justice to his client to state, that on the ground of alleged misconduct, he was perfectly reads to meet the case on the other side, although he must admit that Mr. Rooke's embarrassments had now compelled him to withdraw from the office. It was then agreed that the writs should issue, and that the petition should be granted without costs. KUHL Ullll ICVCIO.I bold of it twice; up sad cut his fingers; which was the last 1 am done," anc blood whatever on spit no, mad wiped on my waistcoat, • hear the dog bark a me; he barked one soon as be beard m The kitchen door the time. No inn: sod no other perso about it until I ma , terday. All that pas the Wednesday anc tasked Heddingss se? He auto , dr° "that do you thin "I have strong sus am sorry he is dead town dead as him, I barley from him CI merrier, (which wa I bad my watch wi house. I had pullet the garden at See , loot marks alluded made then.(The on , a I was in the gar namined at Mr. turned iinmediatel wad among the ran at the back 01 (where it was said which I put on wh In going through Dowebonse, but be stwork in the thus meaf,er getting oil went across the cic evidence; saw the ; in it a m i nute Vaterhouse's field, *n 'hen I got int until seven at nigt mend by the cowl as I Was gning ho Wednesday was ai whom —commas Jolla Tr " I wish the pul lion, which woulC from a dread of n ltdte that I was y W iaval—ca.lll.o Joins Ts Tin SW RM..— Pouted out by S ed a light cavalry to be found in the murder. Thi tir deeply imbrued ; ea" laying withi n a f e rte. ateand it seems itra lad baited without d to - In a very short to Nit Brow n, Ch arrived from Cam he was the bearer 0 hirrander, deferri ft .1"e Under -Sherd 'cher had made a Ik tessary to take i that circumstance * l "" Istfore he cou iw Bury, to whirl tlusr 1 4;dship r . ui • I 'Mte, were 01 file iripte, acid q; so the Is "TerW,cr. It would have I ewe executed as ihtilla AI It Won tzecution fot pirc e 11 )e415 FRANKLIN AND THE DANK OF ENGLAND. Mr. Summar stated that this case was compromised, the Bank having agreed to pay the dividends as decreed by the Master of the Rolls, and not to bring on the ap peal which had been lodged against that decree. ROLLS' COURT, August 3. V. TAILOR AND ANOTHER, EXECUTORS 01 HIS LATE ROYAL HIGHNESS THE DUKE 01 TORE. In this case, which is a suit instituted for a general administration of the assets of his late UoLai Highness the Doke of York, and in which a reference has been made to the Master to take an accoont of his late Royal Highaess's debts, &c. a petition was presented on the part of a goldsmith and jeweller (Mr. Hamlet, as we understood), praying an inquiry before the Master on the [ subject of a supposed lien of the petitioner to certain 'articles of plate, &c. of his late Royal Highness, which had been deposited with the petitioner. It appeared that the petitioner had furnished various articles of plate, &c. to his late Royal Highness, to the amount of several hundred pounds, and that, on the occasion of the Duke being about to take a journey into the country last year, his Royal Highness deposited with the petitioner certain articles " for safe custody," and after wards gave him an order for mote plate, which was accordingly supplied, the petitioner conceiving, as' he stated in his affidavit, that he should be entitled to, retain the articles deposited with him as a security for the amount of his demand on the Duke, of whom,' nevertheless, he took acceptances for it. It was stated that the aiticles deposited with the petitioner had been given up to the executors of the late Duke, and slld with the other property of his Royal Highness, upon an understanding that the petitioner's claim to lien should not be prejudiced by that course of proceeding. Mr. SUGDZN, on the part of the plaintiff, now ap peared to oppose the prayer of the petition, which, he said, was quite unprecedented. There was no pretence for claiming a hen on the articles deposited with the ,petitionet by the law Doke. It was clear that the , to6ds furnished by thr former were not furnished on the credit of any supposed lien, because a considerable portion of the amongst was incurred before the deposit was made, and the petitioner- had taken the Duke's acceptances for the whole amount of his demand ; be sides, the petitioner's own affidavit stated that the arti cles were deposited with him , 6 for safe custody;' and therefore, in the absence of any agreement as to a lien, it was impossible that he could be entitled to what he claimed by his petition. There were many Noblemen and Gentlemen who were in the habit, on going into the country, of depositing their plate, &c. for sate cus. tody, with their jewellers; but who ever heard of the jeweller claiming to retain the deposit as a itcurity for his bill, without some express agreement or understand. log on the subject? The Learned Counsel said he thought this was a most improper application, and he hoped his Honour would refuse it with costs. Mr. TINNET, who appeared for Sir Herbert Taylor and Colonel Stephenson, the executors of the late. Duke of York, also opposed the petition. Mr. Moons appeared in support of it; and in answer to a question by the Master of the Rolls on what prin ciple his client claimed to be entitled to the lien which he had ret up, stated that he was not then prepared to argue the question of lien, but his client contended ge nerally that his late Royal Highness having contracted a debt with .him, and deposited artain articles in his hands, he bad a tight to retain them as a security for that debt. The %wise of the ROLLS—There is no principle like that, in the t nglish law, Mr. Moore. The petition most be dismissed. Mr. SUDDEN said he hoped his Honour would dismiss it with costs. The MASTER of the ROLLS—Yes. Mr. Sioaaorrom said he appeared for the Princess Sophia, the residuary legatee of the late Duke of' York, and he had to ask for ber Royal Highness's costs. The MASTER of the ROLLS—The costs of all parties appearing must be paid. Petition dismissed, with costs, VICF..CHANCRLLOR'S COURT, Am. S. INJUNCTION AGAINST A TAILOR.—ROBINSON AND Co. V. HOLMES. Mr. Holm', for the plaintiffs in this suit, applied to 'the Court for an injunction, under the following cir cumstances :—The plaintiffs were tailors and drapers, at Beverley, in Yorkshire, and in 182 S the Nobility and Gentry resident in and neat Beverley represented to them that it would be extremely advantageous to the 'plaintiffs, and eery convenient to them, if a tailor who was a skilful cutter-out was procured from London, in order that the clothes they had made might approximate to the shape and semblance of those worn in the capital, without putting themselves to the trouble and incon venience of sending up to London every time they stood in need df a coat or a pair - of trousers. In compliance with this suggestion, one of the plaintiffs, Mr. Mark Robinson, came up to London, where he made diligent inquiries after a person skilled in the metropolitan mode of cutting, and was introduced to the defendant, John Holmes, as a person likely to suit him, and fit his cus tomers to their satisfaction. After a variety of preli minary negociatious, with which he would not trouble the Court, the plaintiff engaged John Holmes as his foreman and cutter-out, under certain conditions, which were reduced to writing, and signed by both parties : thle effect of this agreement was, that John Holmes should serve the plaintiffs as their foreman and cuttet•out, and that he should visit their customers for one month upon uial. If at the expiration of this term of probation it should be found that John Holmes's talents equalled the representation that had been made of them to the. plaintiffs, then he was to continue in their service for the term of six years, commencing with a salary of 255. a week, which salary was to increase by Is. a week until the gross amount thereof reached the sum of 90e, per week. The VICH CHANCELLOR observed that they had scarcely given this poor tailor the wages of a poet. Mr. MoRNZ said, that provisions were cheaper in the north than in London. In addition to this salary of 901. per week, the plaintiffs were also to allow the defendant pocket money, and provide him with board and lodg ing. In return for this, the defendant was to bind him self not to practise as a tailor within 50 miles of Bever. ley for the apace of 20 years from the date of the agreement; and the plaintiffs covenanted, on their part, not to dismiss the defendant without reference to a Justice of the Peace, and to give him two guineas to defray his expenses to London whenever they parted with him. On trial, John Holmes was found to be a cunning workman and a steady person. He was ac cordingly engaged ; the agreement was signed and sealed, and the Nobility and Gentry in Beverley and its neighbourhood had abundant cause to congratulate themselves on the improvement in the appearance of their outer man up to December, 1826, when Holmes became extremely negligent, and misfitted the customers of the plaintiffs, in consequence of which many suits of clothes were returned upon the plaintiffs' hands. Now, if Holmes had really been a bad workman, there might have been some apology for him, but he was known to be a very good one; and, finding that there was a very lair opening for a tailor at Beverley, he had recourse to these measures for the purpose of obtaining his dis missal. This object he effected. The plaintiffs were obliged to dismiss him in the month of January in the present year. The VICE-CHANCELLOR asked what equity Mr. Horne's client had ? Mr. MoRNI said that the defendant had refused all reference on the subject ; he had taken the two guineas to defray his expenses to London, which he had not devoted to that purpose, but had set up business for himself at Beverley, in direct violation of the agreement, and was now employing five or six workmen and ap prentices. Under these circumstances, he trusted that the Ostia would interfere, and extend its protection to the plaintiffs. The VICE-CHANCELLOR asked what was prayed for , in the bill ? Mr. Hoene said it prayed fir an injunction, and for a specific performance of the agreement. The Vicx-CnancaLLoa said that they had better have prayed for an injunction to restrain him from misfitting the customers. Mr. !WWI was heard on the same side. The Learned Counsel said that the only case which he should cite in support of the present motion was a case of " Williams v. Williams," reported in the 2J volume of Swanson.— In that case a man entering into a similar agreement was restrained from running a coach, from a certain place, through Reading to London. • The Vice CHANotLLon said, that no case that he had ever heard of could be cited in support of an applica tion of chi; nature. It he granted this injunction, he should expect to be applied to next for an injunction to restrain the Irish giant froth exhibiting himself contrast to the contract with his keeper. lkisould not grant injunctions in cases where the patties Itad a better medy open to them by an action at law. Mr. Hon said, the object cf this bill was to patent the multiplication of snits—(A laugh). Mr. y D if (who was on the other side) salt there could be no doubt that it was intended by this applies: Lion to prevent the multiplication of the suits of hi, client, in order to multiply those of the plaintiffs. The Vice CA Anntoa—vltieser saw a case in which there was less foundation for an injunction. Pray more something else, Mr. Horne. The motion was consequently diimissed. ASSIZE IigTELLIGENCE. SALISBURY, Atrouse e. MANSLADOHTER.—THE CELERITY AND DEZIIANot. John Mauk was indicted upon the Coroner's verdict for manslaughter, for killing, on the 18th of July, Thomas Strange, by violently upsetting the coach on a hich the deceased sat. Mr. Powin, in stating the case tt, the Jury, recom-; mended them to banish from their minds their previooi impressions from what they had heard of this cast. The prisoner was the driver of a coach called the Celetiity, and the other coach with which it had come in contact was called the Defiance; they were coaches pasang be taeen London and Exeter at a very fast rate, and is opposition. On the night of the 18th of July, about half-past one o'clock, as the two coaches were proceeding in opposite direttions, the Defiance ascending the hill near Amesbury, and the Celerity descendi g, the latter at the rate of I I miles an hour, while the lotmer was only proceeding about 5 or 6, the coachman of the De fiance hallooed out, and endeavoured to airoid the contact which' unfortunately took place, by which One Gentleman was killed, and several persons severely in-' jured. He then desetibtd the evidence for the tea' cution as it seas afterwards given on the trial. 44,4 The first witness, T. B. Naylor, stated that he seas student of Magdalen College, Oxfbrd, and was passing on the night of the 17th of July between Andover mid' Amesbury, towards Exeter, in the Defiance coach. The night was hazy, but there had been a little moon' light. The Defiance had its lamps lighted. When they first SAW the cthet coach, the Cavity, there was arl ascent immediately before the coach on the hot of which he was sitting, and the Defiance driver, who was on his right side of the road, hallooed out to the other, ands pulled aside upon the turf. Both coaches had their. lamps lighted, and the Celerity appeared to be driving, down hill, at the rate of about eleven miles an hour, while the Defiance was not exceeding six or seven miles. In a moment the coachman next whom be sat, Paid, " Sir, we shall be over;" the upset instantly esecnrind, ‘ and the passengers uttered a shriek of distress. The Celerity carried off the cap of the fore wheel of the Defiance, and then struck the Coach between the bind wheel and spring. Most decidedly there was room enough for the Celerity to have passed without this con.! tact. None of the passengers on his coach was hurt 0 it fell on the turf on the side of the road, and so near to the bank as almost to touch it. The Celerity appeared to him to have fallen as near as possible in the Centre' .of the road and across it, and about four or five far& from the Defiance. Cross•examined—lt was about half past one o'stlock in the morning, and the night was hazy. He was muffled up in his cloak to escape cold, and his view of the approach of the Celerity was only fbr a few setonds. He was positive the Defiance had both its lamps lighted, for they were brought to assist the sufferers after the accident. The hallooing out of the coachman was fol lowed instantaneously by the contact. He ceftainly , heard the prisoner call to somebody to look at the pod sition of the coaches, and his was found in the centre of the road. His estimate of. the rate of driving of the coaches at the time was of course formed upon ma mentary conjecture. He admitted that he had expressed an opinion upon the conduct of the coachmen, bat he had never said that they were equally to blame, on the morning after the accident. It was a gravel road be• tweets two turf lines. • James Bridge, a coachman of Mr. Bastard, of Devon. shire, was a passenger on the front of the Defiance, be -hind the coachman; he saw the Celerity about 100 yards before them descending the hill at the rate of ten or eleven miles an hour, and heavily loaded. The Defiance was at its right side of the road, and only going at the rate of six miles. The coachman of the latter hailed and pulled up, to draw off, leash% con• siderably the greater share of the road to the Celerity. He then corroborated the first witness's description of the position in which the two coaches fell. From the best judgment he could form at the moment, he did not think the prisoner had a sufficient command of his horses. In, hie cross-examination he repeated mach of hie direct testimony, and said the night was rather foggy. When the accident happened, the Celerity coachman said, " Maule, you have often tried to do this;" and there was some recrimination between them. Wm. B. Rendle, an inhabitant of Clerkenwell, and an ironfounder, was an inside passenger in the Defiance on the night in question, with his face towards the horses. Just before the accident occurred he looked out of the window, to see why the jumbling of the coach ceased, and he observed that the near wheels of the Defiance were driving on what he first thought. sand, but afterwards saw it was turf. While doing so, he heard his coachman bawling loud to another coachman, and a few seconds after the contact took place, and the Defiance went slowly over. His account of the respec tive positions of the coaches did not differ from that al ready given in evidence. He assisted in raising up the Celerity to extricate two Ladies,who were much injured, beneath it ; be also saw the deceased Gentleman lying on the road. The coachman of the. Defiance appeared to him to be perfectly sober at the time. Nothing par. ttcular arose out of his cross examination, except his repeating that the Defiance was driving partly on the turf at the road-side when the accident occurred. • Mr. John Leather, a London auctioneer, who had been outside at the back (and his back to the horses) of the DeSance, described the particulars of the accident in nearly the same terms as the preceding witnesses. On going towards the Celet ity, after the occurrence, be observed the deceased lying near it; he was not then quite dead, but life became extinct immediately after. Upon calling over the names of the Celerity passengers, there were some who did not answer. Jehn Fowler, a surgeon, of Amesbury, proved his having been sent for at the time of thy accident; he reached the ground between two and threeo'clock; he was strewn a dead Gentleman lying on the road side f the prisoner came to him at that moment; there wai a thick fog at the time; the face of the de'rWed wat . ' covered with dirt and blood, and a •ast quantity of t>:e ,1, 1 • •