Star. — London, England, 1821-11-09 00:00:00

CAN I FORGET YOU? /ROM HAPPINEss:" A TALE FOR THZ GRAVE AND THE GAY-JUST PUBLISHED. Can I forget you?—Ask the silent hours, That glide unseen by ev'ry human eye; View me awhile, when radiant morning pours Her glitering colours o'er the illumined sky ! Ask, while each lovely flower erects its head, And hails with fragrance sweet the rising morn— Why the fair tints that once were mioe r are led, And left alone within my breast the thorn? Can I forget you ?—Ask the midnight hour, When all is silence round my lonely bed ; 'Tis then for thee I tears of anguish pour, And chase soft slumbers from my aching head ! Or worn with grief, sr spent with fruitless sighs, Should nature yield, at length, to sweet repose, In dreams, I see thy form belov'd arise, And feel a sad renewal of my woes! Can I forget you?-11n the social hour, 'Why shed I oft the strange unbidden tear, And turn, indifferent, from the wonted power Of scenes chat late were tv, my bosom dear? And why has solitude such charms for me Above each joy that friendship can bestow? Alas ! because I weep unseen for thee, And, undisturbed, indulge my silent woe ! 11=2 LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT.OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 8. /MALES V. BARLOW.—CONTEMPT OF COURT. This morning Mr. ROUPELL, the Counsel for Messrs. Barlow, stated that his clients had filed affi davits in answer to the plaintiff's case, as stated yesterday by Mr. Ching, but they were of that na ture which would render it expedient that they should. be read in his Lordship's private room, his Lord- ship being willing. Mr. CHING said he had received no instructions how to proceed, as he consideted the case as ended, after what had passed yester by. He had not read the affidavits of v. hich Mr. Roupell spoke. The LOHDCHANCELLOH.—" You will come into my private room, Mr. Ching, and hear the affidavits read ; for the case, as repre s ented to me yesterday, is one of the worst nature of contempts I ever heard. I cannot presume it to be proved until I read the affidavits on the other side. If the Counsel and So licitors of the patties will attend me now in my pri vate room, I will hear it." His Lordship then retired, and after being absent an hour, returned. The LORD CHANCELLOR.—" I had some difficulty in hearing this case out of Court, or any other where a Ward of Court is concerned; hut where both par ! . ties consent, Ido not think I ought to refuse. I ap- prove highly of the conduct of Mr. Roupell, in asking that it should be heard out of Court, and of the con duct of Mr. Ching, in consenting to it ; for, nom the painful circumstances disclosed in the affidavits, it would have made it very unpleasant tor me to have performed my duty in Court. 1 have committed one of the defendants." His Lordship committed Thomas Barlow to the custody of the Warden of the Fleet, and observed, that he would read the affidavits, and further con sider how he would deal with .Joseph Barlow. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOVEMBER 8. John Lindsay Turner was brooght up at the sitting of the Court t:, plead to an indictment preferred against him by the Bridge-street Society, for the publication cf certain parts of Carlile s Works. The indictment was read over to him by the Clerk, and the defendant pleaded Not Guilty ; and was informed his trial would come on at the Sittings after Term. RICHARDSON V. SIR R. NEAVE.t This was an action against Sir Richard Neave, as Sheriff of Essex, and another for an assault and false imprisonment of the plaintiff. The action was tried before the Chief Justice at Guildhall, and a verdict was taken for the defendant. Mr. SCARLETT now applied for a new trial. The following were the circumstances .of the case, as proved at the trial :—The plaintiff, whose name. was John Richardson, resided in Essex, at a short distance from London. On the day of the alleged assault he was on his way to town, when he was met by the Officer of the Sheriff of Essex (the second, and real defendant in the present action), who stopped him, and stated, that he had a writ of ca. sa. against him. The plaintiff said he must be mistaken, as he did not owe any person such a sum as that mentioned by the officer ; he also observed, that the name in the writ was William Richardson, and not John. The officer, however, persisted that he was right, and made the capture, taking the plaintiff to his own house, where he kept him prisoner for some time, until it was ascertained that the whole proceeding of mill; out of the writ was the malicious act of some individual unknown ; that no such proceeding, or judgment, as that upon which this ca.sa. was founded had ever . taken place. The plaintiff was accordingly discharged, and, subsequently, brought the present action. At the trial a small note was produced, which was pin ned to the writ at the time it was delivered to the officer ; and pointed out the residence of the plaintiff, and such other circumstances as led the officer to believe he was the individual meant; and the Chief Justice, in summing up, observed, no doubt could exist that here had been a fraud and deception prac tised on the Court ; and that the writ was sued out with a malicious motive. The only question for the Jury would be to say, whether they believed the plaintiff was the person meant in the writ, though the name was William, instead of John ? The Jury being of opinion that the plaintiff was the person meant, found a verdict for the defendant, on the ground that he was justified by his writ.—Mr. Scar lett now contended, that the writ could not be pleaded in justification for arresting a person of a different name, and cited several decided eases as authorities in support of this opinion. The CHIEF JUSTICE said, this was a most import ant question, as regarded Sheriffs and their officers If they were to be made liable for a mistake" . in th e , na me, though the identity was proved, the conse quences might be most serious. Mr. SCARLETT.--My Lord, the present action would not have been brought, but for the conduct of the officer in keeping the plaintiff so long. The Cam Jvancr.—True; he was detained three or four days; but it appeared that the fault of his detention rested principally with himself and his friends. His friends were most zealous and active; but their activity and zeal were directed to a wrong object. Mr. Justice BEST.—Was there no Attorney's name to the writ? Why did not the plaintiff make inquiry in that quarter•? Mr. ANDHEWBr—WE did, my Lord, but were de layed in consequence of there being four attoraies of the same name. The CHIEF Jusnca.--On account of the import ance of this question, you may take your Rule to shew cause. GURNRY V. GUYON. This action was tried before Baron Wool), at Croy don.—The COMMON SERJEANT this day applied for a new trial, on the ground that the Learned Judge had rejected admissible evidence. The question was, whether the signature of the plaintiff to a warrant of attorney was genuine? Evidence was called to prove the plaintiff was not in the room when the instrument was said to have been signed, long enough to put his signature to it. The father of the plaintiff also de posed, that it was not his son's hand-writing. The Common Serjeant was prepared to call Mr. Lees, In spector of Bank notes, and persons from the Frank Office in the General Post Office, as being well skilled in judging of hand-writing, but the Learned Judge considered such evidence inadmissible. The Jury found a verdict for the defendant, thereby affirming the signature to be genuine. The COMMON SERJEANT contended, that the direc tion of the Judge was erroneous, such evidence as he had rejected having been received by Lord Kenyon, Judge Buller, .Mr. Justice Ashhurst, and Mr. Justice Gould, in a trial at bar. The Court granted a Rule to shew cause. WEST V. ANDREWS. Mr. GURNEY moved to set aside the nonsuit in this case, and enter a verdict for the plaintiff. It was an action to recover penalties under an Act passed in the 55th of his late Majesty for the protection of pau pers, and to prevent parish-officers supplying the poor with provisions. The Bill was brought in by Mr. D. Gilbert. The action was tried in Sussex, and it appeared that the defendant was one of the suardians of the poor of five consolidated parishes in that county. It was proved in evidence, that he had entered into a contract to sell sheep, to a person named Griffiths, who farmed the poor, and the Learned Counsel for the plaintiff contended that such a contract was an infringement of the Act of Parlia• menu before named. The defendant consequently had incurred the penalty of £4O. The Learned Judge held, that inasmuch as the defendant did not supply the poor directly with provisions, but the man with sheep who farmed the poor, he did not come within the meaning of the Act. Mr. Justice BEST asked who the farmer was ap pointed by ? Mr. GURNEY.—He is appointed by the guardians of the poor, and the contract is obviously an infringe ment of Mr. Gilbert's Act, which was passed to pre vent the very thing which the defendant h:td done. If half a dozen guardians of the poor make contracts with the farmer, they have an interest in the provi sions supplied, and consequently they cannot exer cise a proper superintendence over the concerns of the poor. In that view he submitted that the non suit ought to be set aside. LORD CHIEF Jesrice.—Suppose on a complaint made to these guardians that the provisions to the poor are bad, and it appears one supplies the sheep, another the bacon, and others different articles to the farmer, will they not have an interest in upholding , the supply, and consequently the judicious controul they are expected to exercise be withheld. The COURT, considering all the bearings of the case, held there was sufficient ground to grant a rule :o shew cause. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NOVEMBER 7. DAVIS V. VIE BANK OF ENGLAND. Serjeant LENS moved the Court for a Rule to shew cause why a new trial should not be grantei in this case. It will be recollected by our Readers that the plain tiff, Mr. Horatio Davis, brought an action against the Bank of England for the value of stock which had been sold by his brother, John Henry Davis, under a forged power of attorney, which was tried at Guildhall, be fore the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, during the Sitting of last Term, when a verdict was given iu favour of the Bank. Serjeant LENS now moved to set aside that verdict, on the ground that part of the evidence given in fa vour of the Bank on the trial, and which, unexplained as it was by any evidence on the part of the plaintiff, was fully sufficient to justify a verdict for the Bank, had come by surprise on the plaintiff, which pre vented his being able to give it that satisfactory ex planation he was now fully prepared to do. The Learned Serjeant proceeded to state the evidence to which he alluded. The action had been brought for the recovery of two sums of £5OO each, in the Three per Cent. Consols, and £75 Long An nuities. There was not a question that the Stock had been sold under a forged power of attorney ; but the only question on the trialwas, whether the plainti ff had, by connivance at his brother's act, precluded himself from the right of recovering the value of his Stock from the Bank; and, in proof of this connivance, evi dence was adduced on the trial that, on the 10th of January, being the time of the payment of dividends on the Three per Cent. Stock, John Henry Davis had paid to the plaintiff's bankers, and to his credit, the sum of 1:150, being the exact half-year's dividend on the Stock that had been sold under the forged power of attorney; from which, as the fact could not be explained at the time, it was inferred that the plain tiff then knew that his brother had sold the Stock in question, and that he received from him the sum paid in lieu of the dividend that would be payable on it if not, old. The plaintiff is now prepared to prove that the sum of £l5O, then paid by John Henry Davis, was a payment made on quite a dif ferent account, namely, on account of housekeeping expenses incurred by both the brothers, and Lady Dav is, their mother, who then lived together in Albemarle-1 street at their joint expense; and on a settlement of accounts which at that time took place, there was a! sum of about £460 to be provided for, and it was agreed that each should pay £l5O ; in consequence of which a t, John Henry Davis made the' payment that sum to the plaintiff's banker, that had been paid in evidettco. To this fact time was perf :4; lirnas4)of:leicin:l:l : not only the affidavit of The plaintiff, but of Lady I to surprise him with a new and Davis, and of their butler, who kept their accounts.. clothes, when he went down into the country to l- i t ‘ The Learned Serjeant, in proof that the plaintiff was , her relations for the first time. She had placed% taken by surprise, on the trial, stated, that in a bill t money under a loose board in the floor filed by the Bank against the plaintiff for the dis- : chamber, where she thought it would b e closure of evidence, they did not put any interrogX- safe; but on going to it the other dav, in order ' tot yon this point. It was certainly true, that in the pay the tailor for the suit of clothes—h e ho d i: .° month of March John Henry Davis had communi- . gone! At first she was quite duneVoinded at ,„'''',! readily acku le cated to the plaintiff that he had made some use of i an unexpected calamity; then she thou g h t i t e " . " his stock, which information the plaintiff did not I have been conjured away by evil spirits! and at must communicate to the Bank until after his brother's she recollected that the house had just underv or escape from prison; and although this delay may pre- thorough repair, and that the three prisone rs 1 1 ,7 d , 4 a vent his recovering against the Bank, yet he is anxious at work in that very room for a whole slay, w i t r e2 ,. to prove that he had not connived at the sale made any person to watch them—her suspicions, the re f 4: by his brother, and was, in fact, ignorant of it at the very naturally, as everybody must allow, fell „c 4; time the payment of £l5O. was made by him. had taken the ru ne ~ ,s them ; and so she bad them taken into • A I ca custr,q, and As soon as Serjeant LENS had made his motion, had the mortification of learning that th e y had beet The CHIEF JUSTICE said, " take your Rule; and as drunk every day since they had left her house!_ far as it is proper for me to have any wish in the case, prisoners, Osborne and Murphy, 0. j„a I wish it may be made absolute. This is a most dis- to the Magistrate that they tressing case; if the present verdict must stand, the spent the greater part of it ; and they seemed to y t ' hi t innocent plaintiff must be ruined by the act of his they were perfectly right in so doing. The !rowel guilty brother—and ruined too because he delayed to were old, they said, and they looked up on i t a, give the Bank information that would have led to "luckyfixdr—They were committed f or f arther e : the prosecution of his brother for a capital offence. amination ; but the prisoner Kentish wasdi..charq,t, Independent of everything else, the fact that the as he did not appear to have had any knowledie t Bank had not made any inquiry in the bill they had the affair. filed against the plaintiff respecting the payment, MARLBOROUCII-STREET.—Yesterday, William lii; which they had given in evidence against the trial, man, aged eighteen, was fulle committed, clha ge l was a su ffi cient cause for granting the Rule." with ass a ultin g and robbin g Mr. Godfr ey of a gold Rule granted. . watch. The prosecutor, an infirm man, 70 yeartei NOVEMBER B.—WHITEHEAD V. BROWN: age, was sitting in his apartment, in Chapel Greet, Serjeant Hut.t.otat mdved the Court for a Rule to South Audley-street, when the prisoner entered e r shew cause why a writ of sequestration, which had some frivolous pretence, and snatched the watch har k been sued out against the defendant at the suit of the the mantle-piece. Mr. Godfrey attempted to r r e q4 plaintiff, should not be set aside, or staid in the hands him, when the prisoner knocked him down, ai i g , i of the Register of the Bishop of London, till the clear off with it, but was some time after taken ()rul e claim of Sir Alexander Campbell, on whose behalf Parade in the Park, while pursuing his atoca ti ons , the motion was made, should be satisfied. T. Trout seas charged with stealing a counter. The motion was made on the affidavit of Sir Alex- pane and other things, the property of a p oor i n fi za ander Campbell's Solicitor, which stated that the de - woman. Two women swore that they g ave the,. fendant is a Clergyman, and Rector of the Parish of tides to the prisoner, but they contradicter tip Tracton, in the County of Essex, and that he had selves so palpably that their oaths could sod be . granted an annuity for valuable consideration to Sir pended on, and the prosecutrix swearing psilivei Alexander Campbell, which being in arrear, an exe- to the property, the prisoner was fully couluitted. cution was sued out, directed to the Sheriff of Essex, R. Perry was frilly comnritted for stealing aqu who made a return null° bona. In consequence of city of lead from the premises of G. H. Sunntr, Esi, which, a writ of sequestration was sued out, directed M.P. for Surrey, in Gralton-street. • to the Bishop of London, to sequestrate so much of MARY-LA-BONNE OFFlCE.—Yesterday, S. Pa m I the defendant's ecclesiastical income as should satisfy was charged with stealing a large qualizity of i. i Sir A. Campbell's claim. This writ was lodged in and three Clergyman's silk gowns, a silk scarf, .i l A = the Of fice of the Bishop's Register on the 25th June communion-cloth. The prisoner and anotherr , en I last, and it appeared by notice from the Register stopped with thein by the watchman, on the KJ ci given since, that a writ of sequestration at the suit May last, in Buckingham -street, New-road, butwer of the plaintiff had been lodged during Hilary Term, down their booty and escaped. The officers haring but had not been renewed till the 27th July, being a received a clue, apprehended the prisoner in his bed month after Sir Alexander Campbell's writ was room, in a court in Grub -street, yesterday morning, lodged. On the ground of this irregularity the and found in his room a number of pawnbroker's Learned Serjeant prayed the Court that the Rule tickets, and a complete set of house-breaker's irnple should be granted, and that the Bishop of London, ments. He was identified by the watchman, and or the plaintiff, Whitehead, should pay the costs.— was remanded. Rule granted. Mrs. Spencer, of East-street, Manchester-squan, CLERKENWELL SESSIONS. was convicted in the penalty of £lO, for selling fire. works; and -Mr. Collier, of Mary-la-Bonne -Arm, it Yesterday being the adjournment day of the Ses sions, a cause was tried wherein James Ecott, Esq. the sum of £5, for a like offence. of Grafton-street, Bond-street, was plaintiff, and the L. Martin was charged with creating an obstrat. ticn in the street, by collecting a crowd to wings Trustees under the Act of 52 (ieoge 111. for making the tricks of a dancing bear. In deface, the pr a new north road from Haberdasher's-walk , Horton , sorer produced a sites% m in's license from the Lora to Highbury-place, Islington, were defendants. It Chamberlain. The Magistrate was stated that Mr. Scott held some lands at !sling- said, this only owered him to blow a horn, &c. off the stones; he em ton, which it was found necessary the Ti ustees should P purchase. They tendeted him the sum of £125, had offended against the new Street Act, and met which they had been advised was an ample compen- find bail. The prisoner was committed in defaul:, but his companions, with the bear and a Fay, were sation ; but this tender having been considered by Mr. Scott as under-rating the value of his property, set at liberty. he was determined that the case should go to a Jury for valuation. The plaintiff demanded £3BO as the fair and reasonable value of his interest in the land, and the case was argued by Mr. ALLEY and Mr. ADOLPHUS, who called three respectable witnesses in support of his claims. Mr. WALFORD and Mr. ELLIS, on the part of the Trustees, alleged £125 was not only a fair and ade quate, but also a very liberal valuation of Mr. Scott's interest. The CHAIRMAN having summed up, the Jury re turned a verdict of' £l5O for the plaintiff, with tests. On the east side of Whitcombe-street, nettle western entrance to the Mews, the workmen erorlorfi in excavating the earth for foundations for newb:l l . ings, discovered on Wednesday morning, abort; *- teen feet below the surface, a portion of an old d, about four feet thick, composed of Kentish raptte, so strongly cemented as to require considerableko, applied to an iron wedge, to break it to pieces:Clot to this portion of the wall were also found thresh letons, lying nearly parallel with the wall. Therm of several trees have been dug up in the same sprt, which, from these and other circumstances, and depth of vegetable mould, appears to have been merly cultivated as a garden. The thorougl , latterly called Whitcombe-street, it will be ty bered, was previously known by the name of lane, and the neighbouring Church still preserves distinction of St. Martin's-in. the-fields. Bow-sT ear.—Yesterday, Margaret Gilson and Sarah Doyle were brought up by Purton and Read, on suipicron of robbery. In searching Gilson's lodg ings, in.Tichburne-court, Holborn, under a search warrant, for some shirts which had been stolen, the officers discovered a trunk in her room, which they broke open, and in it found upwards of fifty skeleton keys, three crowbars, a dark lantern, and several other instruments for housebreaking; two silver spoons, the names on which had been filed off; and a silver watch. The prisoner at first said the trunk was her own, and her husband had the key ; but she af terwards stated, that it and its contents belonged to a man of the name of Richard Sholtock, who, it ap pears, was transported two or three years ago. The prisoner Doyle was with Gilson in her room when the officers were there, and they took them both into •custody. Her husband, however, appearing to be an honest industrious man, she was discharged, with an advice from the Magistrate to be more guarded in future iu the selection of her companions. The other prisoner was remanded for farther examination on Wednesday next. John Murphy was charged with stealing a snuff box from Lawrence Parodi, in the month of July last. Senor Parodi, who is an Italian dancing -master, swore that one evening in July last, he went to the Opera, and immediately before his coming out he had the box in his possession, but missed it when he got home. Harriet Newton stated, that the prisoner, who sold walnuts, &c. and dealt at her father's shop, told her that he found the box at the corner of Covent garden ; and having spent more money on the pre ceding day than he ought, he was distressed for five shillings, and would let her have the box for that sum. She accordingly purchased it from him. The prisoner was committed for trial. • Thomas Marsh and John Cooke, whom the officers described as notorious offenders, were also fully com mitted, for having picked Sir Charles Dance's pocket, when coming out of Drury-Lane Theatre. Purton, the officer, seized them both, while one of them had hold of Sir Charles's skirts. DIED. On his passage on board the ship Cochin, from Bengal tob tavia, in the 25th year of bis age, C. D. Grieve, Esq. cu dais of 'looker and Grieve, of Sourahaya, in the island of Java May 15, at Almoran, Martin Thomas Whisk Esq. olds& vil Service of the East India Company. May 25, at Ducca, P. W. Pechell, Esq. fourth Judges* Court of Appeals and Circuit. May 25, at Agandeep, Frances, the infant daughter dlf. Pringle, Esq. of the East India Company's Civil Service, lel five months and fourteen days. May 6, at Penang, Mrs. S. P. Van Doane?. At Serampore Wm. Ward, youngest son of the Rev. Gee H. Hough. May 18, at Loodeanah, Captain George Rodney amelgt Engineers, after an illness of nearly four months. l'lnids so valuable an officer, as well as accomplished and amiable' member of society, will be severely felt by the service, and W all his friends. His merits and virtues, both in public mil! vate life, have ever been most highly and justly es timated,* his abilities and principles met with their reward in kW* ployed where science, skill, and integrity were mat reld * , qualifications. In rivate life he was everything thst 10 amiable, and interesting, and it may be safely said that as was ever more universally and truly beloved and lamented. PRICE OF IRISH STOCKS. Bank Stock 299 k Ditto Stock • G. Deb. 3 and a half per C. 87 Gov. Deb. 5 per C. lei Ditto Stock 86% Ditto Stock 10 loi Gov. Deb. 4 per C Royal Canal Stock PRICES or FOREIGN STOCK lx LONDON , 'French 5 per Cent. Ann. with div. 891. 50c. Exchange, 30 days, 25f. 25c. Three months, 25f. 80c. Spanish 5 per Cents. ex. div. U. Exchange, (the hard Dollar, 41. Ed. Columbian Bonds, 48. MAILS sins Dar.--t sm. sum A ss.: l ' Dublin 1 0 Lisbon 0 Waterford 1 '1 France 0 0 0 $ Guernsey and Jersey 1 0 Hamburgh 0 $ Holland 1 0 Gottenburgh 0 Flanders 0 0 1 Leeward Islands 0 Malta 0 0 1 Jamaica ---- 4 O HIGH-WATER at LONDON BRIDGIZ TO-MORR Mcrning - - 34 tr.inutes after Afternoon - 57 ...._,.....7 John Murphy, John Osbornc, and Edward Kentish, were charged with stealing eight pounds and some odd shillings, the property of Mrs. Mary Jones. The prosecutriz had saved the money from time to time , L unknown to her husband, who is a gardener, in order LONDON ; rrinted and published by Lank race, "I:irplx-134:. WICK, composeu or mentisn rag-ma, tented as to require considerablekei i ron wedge, to break it to pieces:en : of the wall were also found threat. 1. arly parallel with the wall. Therm i s have been dug up in the same sid. • hese and other circumstances, and Ps tble mould, appears to have been fe :ed as a garden. The thoroughf Whitcombe-street, it will be re , •• a , :viously known by the name of lid, neighbouring Church still preservestri 1 1 st. Martin's-in- the I :fleids. DIED. - .... isp I n on board the ship Cochin, from Bengal cob 1 L year of his age, C. D. Grieve, Esq. cu tlcia ' _ rieve, of Sour.baya, in the island of Jars 1 moran, Martin Thomas Whisk Esq. oldie& 1 : East India Company. sacca, P. W. Pectic'', Esq. fourth Judged a and Circuit. jandeep, Frances, the infant daughter dt i the East India Company's Civil Service, 11° .1, fourteen days. tang, Mrs. S. F. Van Doane?. , Wm. Ward, youngest son of the Rev. Gesell •j, ..... b oodeanah, Captain George Rodney Ihde,g ,ll , an illness of nearly four months. Del! 115 , Seer, as well as accomplished and unable I .1' ty, will 1 be severely felt by the servic e, aol If His merits and virtues, both in public &alp' 8l rer been most highly and justly estimated, • principles met with their reward in being • al lence, skill, and integrity were most 11 1 1°1 In Ovate life he was everything that is Pit eresting, and it may be safely said that se • ' , iniversally and truly beloved and 1ame0t1d ..... , . I PRICE OF IRISH STOCKS. 1 1 Ditto Stock C. 01 . half per C. 87 Gov. Deb. 5 per -I . a I Ditto Stock 10 I o i `C. Royal Canal Stock —........, ' 4 or FOREIGN STOCK IN LONDON , ; per Cent. Ann. with div. 891. 50c. / e, 30 days, 25f. 25c. oaths, 25f. 80c. 5 per Cents. ex. div. 58i. 4 e, (the nd ha l :l B .i li Dollar,.. 4s. sd. an Bo )Alr.-.-AIIII. DIM \ Lisbon X" 1 0 ° 11 0 P 0 ° e: 1 - 1 France 0 / il 'ersey 1 0 Hamburgh 0 I IL 1 0 Gottenburgh 1 t O 0 1 Leeward Islands CI A. 1 i O 0 1 Jamaica 2---1 4 ER at LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORRO - 54 minutes after i .. _ _ Punt 41 b Ii lio• .....-.- . )10. 1 .....- • Capi Colo Afe Tl.l A D Jam Zr.j Fare • aur .Ckai not lir. WI" :sn Thai sea