The Sun. — London, England, 1859-03-03 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMNIONS—(YEsT ERDAY. The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after 12 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. On the motion of Mr. CHARLES FORSTER, the order of the day for the committal of the Liverpool Corparation Water Bill was discharged, and the bill was withdrawn. PETITIONS. Petitions were presented in favour of placing post-office officials in the provinces on the same footing as those in the metropolis ; and that any inquiry into the working of the Licensing Act in Scotland should be conducted by Royal commission. REAL ESTATE INTESTACY BILL. Mr. LOCKE KING, in moving the second reading of this bill, said there was a great deal of misstatement and misapprehension. existing. The effect of the bill would materially relieve a large number of small proprietors from the operation of the present system, which affected them most injuriously. It had been asserted that the present law was in harmony with the feelings of the great body of landed proprietors in the country. That he entirely denied ; because, as he had already stated, it was opposed to their interests, and consequently not congenial to their feelings. He had been accused of a desire to introduce the French law on this subject into this country ; but he did not know what was meant by the French law, as there could be no division by testament of property in that country. The more experience he acquired, the more con vinced he was of the utility of moving the law uniform in regard t o every description of property. Lord W. G RAHAM moved as an amendment that the bill be read a second time that day six months. He con sidered that the effect of the bill would be most disastrous. It was said that the measure did not attack the law of primogeniture, but though it did not do so directly it did so indirectly, and they might rest assured that any attempt to abrogate or restrict that law in the slightest degree would eventually lead to enactments that would terminate in its total abolition. If such a result took place they had no guarantee for the permanence of the constitution of the country. That constitution, he contended, was maintained by the continuance of large properties, and any alteration in the present system could not fail to work most injuriously. He believed that the minute division of land in France led to revolution in that country, and it had also proved detri- mental to the interests of agriculture. Mr. MELLOR supported the second reading of the lie contended that the existing law had its source the subject days, and was opposed to the ancient laws . on subject of division of property. At present the wife_ ar e younger children were placed entirely at the mercy _ f eldest child, and such a state of things to morality, religion, justice, and even common sense. was opposed' alike 'Hear, hear.) The reason why the table was not covered ivith petitions on this subject was that the ces . of o injustice under the present system were not sufficiently or so su ffi c i en tly numerous as to excite a g eneral feeling on the subject ; but that system was net the less unjustbecause its operation was not more extended. it had been said that the number of small proprietors who died intestate was conclusive in favour of the present law, be cause it showed they did not wish to avail themselves o making a distribution of their property amongst their chil dren. But it was a fact that so many of the class alluded to dying intestate was in consequence of their delaying their wills until they were surprised by death. Mr. HENLEY supported the amendment, and argued that the present bill would be very detrimental to the lower class of small proprietors. Sir G. LEWIS said he understood the object of the bill was to assimilate the law between the division of real estate and personal estate. He thought such a measure was not only unnecessary, but would be most injurious, and that it was not demanded by the very class for whose benefit it was introduced. Hon. members must be aware that the present law was closely identified with the constitution of the country, and such being the case, and there being no expression of the public opinion in favour of the bill, he would vote against the second reading. Mr. M. MILNES said that he had heard no argument to alter his opinion, which was that the bill of the hon. member would be beneficial to the class for whom it was intended—namely, the middle class of society. He came to the consideration of the subject quite independent, and he would, as he had done on a former occasion, support the measure. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said his objections to the bill were not founded simply upon any technical view of its provisions. He believed the hon. member for Surrey would be surprised at many of the consequences which would be produced by his bill. It was by no means an un common occurrence that a testator might have made a will devising his real property, and yet have died intestate with regard to his personal property ; and the effect of the bill would be this—there would be an administration, under which his real estate would be distributed among his next of kin in defiance of his will. He could multiply instances of that kind, for their name was legion. The view taken of the bill by the right hon. hart. the member for Radnor was Ipurhotly eorreot as to its effect upon the law of dement with regard to real property. Every real estate in the Idairdom would pass to an administrator, and would be liable to be sold by the administrator for payment of the debts of the trustee. (Hear, hear.) Take the case of a man possessing an estate which he had acquired by descent through his mother. Suppose he had one cousin upon his mother's side and 19 cousins upon his father's side. Under this bill 1-20th of that estate would go to the cousin on the mother's side, and the other 19-20ths would go to the cousins on the father's side. (Hear, hear.) Take the ease of a large family estate descending to a married woman who had more sons than one. She had no power to de vise. And, if this bill—which was said to be for the pro tection of children—passed, that estate would be taken away from the sons and given to the husband, who had a statutory right to administer to his wife's property. These were some of the consequences flowing from a bill of this kind; and yet the house was now seriously asked to give a second reading to it. If these consequences had flowed merely from some defects in the bill which could have been remedied in committee, the hon. member for Surrey would have had a better claim to ask the house to read his bill a second time; but they flowed from the principle of the bill, and to a bill based on such a principle the house ought not to give a second reading. Certainly, in intro ducing the bill, the hon. gentleman had mentioned one case which really was one of great hardship. Suppose a man contracted for the purchase of an estate, and had got toge ther say £.50,000 to compete the purchase, but died before it was completed, intestate, the heir-at-law might require that £50,000 to be applied to the completion of the pur chase, and then he would take the land so purchased, to the detriment of the other members of the family. That was the law if the country, and he agreed with the hon. gentleman that it was a discredit to us, and that it ought to be remedied. But surely it was not wise to change the whole policy which regulated descent in this country sim ply because such a grievance as that existed. It would be about as reasonable to prohibit men from buying land alto gether. (Cheers.) Of all men in the world the honourable member for Surrey ought to be the last to use such an ar gument, for it was but a few years ago that he had carried a bill to remedy the injustice of the law which au thorised an heir-at-law to compel the payment of the mortgage money upon an estate out of the personal property of a testator. He had not been able to understand clearly at the time why the hon. gentleman had not included this case, which was identical in principle, in that bill. If he wished to remedy the hardship the best way would be for him to introduce a bill to amend his for mer Act, but Parliament ought not to be asked to convulse the country and alter the rules by which the descent of land was regulated for that simple purpose. But, coming now to the discussion of the general question, these three things ought to be shown by all those who proposed to Parliament so grave an alteration in the law of descent in this country —First, that there was a strong desire entertained for legis lation on the subject ; next, that the present law occasioned hardship ; and lastly, that the change which they proposed was consistent with expediency and sound policy. (Hear, hear.) Who was it that desired this change ? Some of them he knew and their motives also. The hon. member for Sheffield, for instance, supported the introduction of the bill on the ground that it put an end to all difference between land and money. The hon. member thought that, if carried, it would enable.the State to levy probate duty on land, and to treat it altogether as if it were so much money. His reasons for supporting the bill were not so much that it remedied a hardship as that it squared with a theory of his own, that there ought to be no difference for any purpose between land and money. But what were the reasons of the hon member for Surrey in desiring this change ? In intro ducing the bill his argument was that it would no t touch the g reat proprietors of land that it would no t meddle with e ntails and settlements, but merely effect the simple object which was announced on the back of the bill. But the hon. member had unfortunately written a book hva on ethe this su bject, and it was alwa y s of great advanta g e detailed and considered opinions of the person who proposed a change on a point of this gravity. In that book the hon. gentleman lie Ivas altogether again st the pri en n; h 'pl it • gen tl ema n said of entails and the principle of settlements, and th 1- e had been suggest ed that this bill would affect entails and the distribution of landed property, he did not think it would directly ; yet if it did, it would only make him like his own bill better. (Hear, hear.) In laying his bill bef9re hon. „ the house the o.entlernan used those arguments v in his . ducy he thought most likely to stave off opposition, but book he avowed that his desire went beyond the bill, and that he looked for the abolition of the law of entail and settlement in this country. (Hear, hear.) Mr. LOCKE KING—WiII the Solicitor -General quote the passage ? I don't know that I have said an y thing agaiainnsst settlements, though I may have said something ag entails. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would quote the passage -willingly, but would the hon. gentleman say what he meant by entails if they were not settlements, or by settlements if they were not entails ? (Hear.) This was the passage— " I feel that there is no reason to object to this measure lesrit should tend tc increase the number of landed pro prietors. If it should do so, if it should cause a decrease in the size of some of the already overgrown estates, it will confer a gre-tter benefit than even I expect from it. I have already shown that it cannot interfere with entails ; that entails are an evil, and that this measure ought not to be refused from an imaginary fear it might tend to correct - what seems to me so great an evil." (Hear, hear.) That was the hon. gentleman's desire, there fore, in passing this bill. But who desired this bill out of doors ? The question concerned all the owners of land in the country; and, in considering what the State ought to do for the owners of land when they died intestate, the very - first object ought to be to ascertain what the owners of land -would do themselves, for everybody admitted that they would have a perfect right to dispose of their land as they pleased. No petitions had been Pre sen t e d from them on the subject, so that it was impossible to learn their opinions at in that mode, and it was only left therefore t o 100 their practice. Settlements - were just as much the expression of the wishes of owners of land for the dis position of their property as wills. There was no dif ference between the two, and the wishes of the great body of the landowners of the country on this subject wereaul fested by the habit and custom of settling their p roperty. (Hear.) The supporters. of this bill argued the question of ' the hardship of the law in a very inconclusive and unsound manner. They began by assuming that w henev er a man -who had several children died intestate he did not mean that his property should go to his eldest son, and that, tterefore, he was a sufferer by the present law, But what ground was there for such an assumption ? (Hear, hear.) In some single instance it might, perhaps, be known or in ferred from certain facts that a man had intended to make a will leaving his land among his several childre , but was Parliament to legislate for the case of this man 0 that man ? On the contrary, they were bound to look at the broad question as it affected the great mass of land wners of the country—(hear, hear)—and there was no ground for the assumption that it was the desire of all of them that their land should be divided among all their children. (Hear, hear.) They were satisfied wits the law as it now stood, and they did not choose, or did not think it desirable to interfere with the disposition which that law made of their property. (Hear.) If any proof were wanted of this there could not be better than some of the informa tion which had been given the house by the hon. and learned member for Yarmouth. He read a letter from a solicitor in considerable practice in the Midland counties, who thought he knew sufficient about the feelings of the middle classes on this subject to be able to give the House of Commons some information. In the last two years he had made sixty wills, and, with one single exception, all had been made for the purpose of interfering with the rule of law and of divid ing the property among all the children. In the exceptional instance, when the would-be testator heard from the solici tor that the heir-at-law was his sister, he said, " In that case I am quite satisfied with the law, and I won't put you to the trouble of making a will." This was the logical assump tion in the majority of cases to which the bill was intended to apply. The state of the law being as well known in this country as any law could be, those who did net interfere with the rule of law, and did not put themselves to the trouble of making a will, were perfectly satisfied to let the law take its course. (Hear, hear.) For every case of injus tice done by the present state of the law he would under take to produce cases in which what any man who viewed the moral duties of a parent to his family in the same light as the hon. member for Surreyviewed them must call great hardship, was inflicted upon families by the provisions of wills. Such wills as these were everyday matters, and yet it would be just as reaso nable for the Legislature to step in to remedy hardships which were inflicted on children by the provisions of their father's will as it would be to inter fere with hardship which might be caused by there being no will at all. (Hear, hear.) When the question came to be viewed on the assuption that there were no children, and the next heirs were distant relations—say cousins—the ar gument which he had been laying before the house became still more irresistible. By what process of reasoning could it be assumed that it was the intention of a man who died without a will, knowing the state of the law, that his estate should not go to the one whom he had been accus tomed all his life to look on as his heir-at-law, but be divided among all his cousins. (Hear hear.) It was absurd for any one to take upon himself to , affirm that it must have been pure accident which allowed this owner of land, with a number of distant relatives, to die intestate, and not to give his land among all those relatives. (Hear.) The last question, whether this change was expedient, was one which ought to be considered dispassionately, and perfectly apart from any of those moving appeals about distressed widows and portionless younger children. The policy of the law assumed it to be the duty of the Legislature to provide the freest possible power of disposition of landed and all other property, whether by will or in the lifetime of the owner. The Legislature was bound to simplify conveyances, settle ments, and wills in every possible manner ; and for years past it had been doing that with more or less success. Endeavours had been made to remedy the defects which had been from time to time suggested, but the question now to be discussed was, what, in this country, in which the freest possible power of distribution was given, was to be the doctrine and policy of the law where no disposition was made ? Hon. gentlemen opposite contended that the present policy of the law had been intro duced with feudal tenures ; but, granting that, there could be no objection to it if it could be shown that it was in con sonance with the present feeling of the country, accom panied as it was by what we had not under the feudal sys tem, the freest power of disposition of property. No doubt, unaccompanied by that free power of disposition, a law which passed real property to the eldest son was a heavy grievance. (Hear, hear.) But along with this law there had grown up two circumstances which entirely changed its character, this free power of disposition, and the accu mulation of a mass of personal property, which was un known in the feudal times, by which provision could be made, and by which the law made provision, for younger children. (Hear, hear.) The consequence was, that what ever might have been the origin of the law, it had begun by justifying the dispositions made in conformity with it, and these dispositions in turn had engendered habits and pro duced a state of circumstances which had become in turn the justification of the law. (Hear.) Like everything else in nature, one thing had reacted upon another. The law had produced a certain state of feeling in society, and that state of feeling so produced had become in turn the justi fication of the law. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, the law harmonised with an hereditary monarchy and an here ditary peerage. (Hear.) In the next place—speaking of the principle of the law, not merely as it affected the dis position of the estates of intestates, but as manifested in the habits of the country with regard to entails and settle ments—it tended to keep up a class essentially distinct from the aristocracy of mere wealth—an aristocracy produced, and rightly produced, by successful commercial enterprise. In the next place, the law was favourable to the agricul ture of the country ; its tendency had always been to encourage production on a large scale ; and as Mr. Mill had justly observed, whenever a people had been accustomed to production, either agricultural or manu facturing, on a large scale, they would not willingly relinquish the advantages of it. Again, the law was most important in a social point of view. It kept fami lies together by preservinr , the headship of families. (Hear, hear.) The certain effect of a division of property such as that recommended was in the second generation to dwarf a family down to the rank of petty squires, and in the next generation to dwarf it to the condition of mere peasants. (Hear, hear.) In the next place, while it preserved to them their social station and position, the law excited younger brothers to ambition and emulation in a manner that no other system in any country was ever known to do before— (hear) ; and it stimulated the parents of families also to make provision by frugality and economy and industry also for the younger branches ; while at the same time it gave them the certainty that the importance of the family would be preserved by the headship of the eldest son. (Hear.) These were the conclusions at which he had himself arrived, and, without desiring to dwell on them or to enlarge on them, he begged the house to take them into its serious consideration. (Hear, hear.) They were the views which had been supported by the best authorities and the most eminent writers in all times. If ever there was a man deeply penetrated with an abhorrence of all injustice it was Sir M. Hale. He was not a member of the aristocracy ; he was the architect of his own fortune, he had little connection with land, and he was far removed from the sphere of party in fluence. Speaking of that system which prevailed just be fore and after the Norman conquest, when we had allodial tenures, under which, there being no power of free distri bution, the custom of the law was to divide landed property equally among all the sons, Sir M. Hale said : " It weakened the strength of the kingdom; for, by fre quent parcelling and subdividing of inheritances, in process of time they became so divided and crumbled that there were few persons of able estates left to undergo public charges or offices. Secondly, it did by degrees bring the inhabitants to a low kind of country living; and families were broken ; and the younger sons, which, had they not had these little parcels of land to apply themselves to, would have betaken themselves to trades, or to military or civil or ecclesiastical employments, neglecting those oppor tunities, wholly applied themselves to those small divisions of land, whereby they neglected the opportunities of greater advantage, of enriching themselves and the kingdom." Take another instance. Sir John Davis wrote a book on the state of Ireland, and anybody who had read that book must acknowledge that he was a clear-sighted man, and that he had written with as little bias one way or the other as it was possible for a man to have. Speaking of the effects of the law of gavelkind, by which landed property was divided equally among all the sons, Sir J. Davis wrote : "This Irish custom of gavelkind did breed another mis chief ; for, every man being bonito land, they all held them selves to be gentlemen. And, though their portions were ever so small, and themselves ever so poor (for gavelkind must needs in the end make a poor gentility), yet they scorned to descend to husbandry or merchandise, or to learn any mechanical art or science. That was the state of things in a time and country where no free disposition of property existed, and the bill which the hon. member for Surrey wished to pass into a law would bring about a similar state of things in this country. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned member for Yarmouth used an argument of convenience which certainly was not to be expected from him. He professed to know something of wills. He told the house that as the heir-at-law knew that if he could upset the will he would get the whole property - , where there was the slightest pretext for disputing the will he would be sure to do it. That was true as far as it went, but what did the argument amount to ? The hon. and learned gentleman wished to deprive the heir-at-law of his motives for litigation, and his proposition came to this, that whereas the inducement was now confined to the heir-at law, in future if any member of the family were disappointed in any way with the will, if the testator did not, in fact divide his property perfectly equally, he might dispute the will in the same manner. The inducement would be dis tributed all over the family, and instead of one suit there would be 20. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman who spoke last said he had no desire to interfere with the free distribution of property in this country. Take the two ar guments together. From the argument of the hon. and learned member for Yarmouth, any man who wished to avoid litigation must divide his property perfectly equally —and what became then of the free distribution of property? The argument of the right hon. member for Radnor was irresistible. At present we had a state of things with which there was perfect content throughout the country. To pass this law would be a legislative declaration that all the settlements of this country were based upon a false prin ciple, and, although no restriction would be imposed on them, they would be branded with the imputation of injus tice. (Cheers.) It was true this bill would not touch them, but in a short time an agitation would be got up on the part of those who felt that they were treated with in justice ; they would come to Parliament and ask to deal with country and curb all the settlements and entails in the count 011 the same principle, and then would be lost that which 8. power of fmdiernstaibebrustm of fess p e r d op n e o r t ty to . d T es hi ire s twoasdinstoutrattform o he free f the law. A proposal of this kind, launched in the Houseof Commons, with all its defects, and tending in its operation to produce the results which he had stated, brought, if he might use the expression the term " the reformofth e all respect, discredit upon to alter the position of landealasZn2; It Ws a e it c i h n of l t t h w e a go s c a ia lll i e e l r e e m it e t n te t lll s p in t this country, and to destr oy atlnugeoncwehiaonhd the e po oo r u ta n n try ce which belonged to it. hear)—no sound one justified by no did not desire—(hear, hardship and warranted by policy , w th as e r a r w e a d to show member for Pontefract had said ia h w e The hon. that, as compared with our own the partition established in France had worked of compulsory at exposed. (A should (A in fact, cited as a conservative element du r i ng that re volutions It to wua h s ic a h sto t n h i a s t hi c o o g un t t h ry ot h su a o d h brn doc e t x rui po . laugh.) have proceeded from so miiheflicehctivalle a wh P:ra h a a n d az hon. member. No doubt the hon. gentleman had w ur o e rk of that eminent authority, M. Perused it must st wi h t a h vo th fe e lt, p t l h ea e s de Montalembert, on "The Future of England. In a very interesting chapter the author treated of the effects of the law of settlement and entail and the right of inheritance i n this country, as contrasted with the contrary s y s t em in France, and pointed out with singular felicity the operation of our law in preventing on the one side the impulse of democracy, and in checking the influence of despotism on the other. M. de Montalembert wound up his chapter in these words : " The tempest will pass harmless over England until the day arrives when the force of public opinion shall declare itself against this system. Then, and not till then, she will have taken the first step on that incline which precipitates a nation through the shocks of revolution into the abyss of despotism. (Cheers.) Up to the present time there has been but one premonitory symptom of this—the proposal made in the House of Commons in 1854 by the hon. mem ber for Surrey—(laughter)—for an inquiry into the law of descent. Rejected by a considerable majority, this proposal appears neither to have found an echo nor to have left a trace. (Cheers.) But it is an omen which far-seeing men —which all true friends of liberty—(renewed cheers)—will THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENLNIG, MARCH 3, 1859. do well not to forget, for it is through this approach that the enemy will penetrate the fortress." (Loud cheers.) Mr. LOWE considered that the question before the house had been much magnified beyond its proper propor tions by hon. members on both sides, and was not a ques tion of public policy at all. He considered that the will which was to be made for a man failing to do so for him self was such as what they might suppose a good and up right man would execute ; but, according to the present law, they made for him such a will as a man certainly would not make except under peculiar circumstances. He concluded by voting for the second reading of the bill. Lord H. VANE said if they determined on making wills in a particular way, they would startle the landed proprie tary interest, and any legislation an the subject would not come into operation for some years, so far as the great body of landed proprietors were concerned. He admitted that there might be some hardships under the existing law, but th e y were not to legislate for particular cases, and were to proceed on considerations of general policy. He would therefore oppose the second reading of the bill. Mr. A. B. HOPE supported the amendment. The effect of the proposed alteration would be to reduce the descend ants of landed proprietors to the state of an Irish " squireen" or 8440 freeholder, with a right to vote, and starvation staring him in the face. On the ground of economy he objected to the measure of the honourable mem ber for the subdivision of land to which it would necessarily lead. Nobody required, asked for, or dreamt of it, and it was a mere crotchet or theory of the hon. member for Surrey. General THOMPSON said he believed there was an erroneous impression on the part of hon. members on the opposite side as to the state of public feeling on this sub ject, but he could assure them that he had heard the sub ject frequently discussed at popular assemblies under the title of the law of primogeniture. It was with some diffi culty that he could, on some occasions, calm those present, by assuring the gi that they could dispose of their property, they being and 6t a conviction that they would be obliged to leave their property to their eldest sons. It was sup posed that the present law was maintained by influential families in order that they might have a substantial head, who would provide for the younger sons by getting them situations in public offices. (Laughter.) Mr. EWART supported the second reading of the bill, and asserted that both public feeling and public reason had gradually become in favour of the principle of the bill. Mr. WHITESIDE denied that the public feeling was in favour of the bill, and condemned the practice that pre vailed in France. The present law was founded on the good sense of their forefathers, and with respect to any fear of wives being left unprovided for, they well knew the desire that prevailed on the part of husbands not to leave their wives without necessary provision. Mr. WALTER opposed, and Air. GREER supported the second reading. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, with reference to the effect of the law in France, that no sooner was the law of primogeniture abolished, than that country was con vulsed with anarchy, and if the legislature were to pass a bill like the present, the same result might, before many years had elapsed, be realised in this country. The effect of the bill would be to impose on the family of a poor man the task and expense of administering to effects that per haps were not worth £2O. Lord PALMERSTON said he objected to the bill on every possible ground. (Laughter.) The proposition of the hon. member for Surrey was against the feelings of the people, and entirely incompatible with the maintenance of a constitutional monarchy. It was opposed to the habits of the people of this country, because, as every one knew, there was a disposition generally among landed proprietors to make what was called an eldest son. There was also a pride on the part of some small proprietors to have retained in their families the land which they inherited ; there was one man who possessed only a few acres in the New Forest, which descended to him from his ancestor, who carried the body of Rufus to Winchester, and who was as proud of his pos session as if it was of considerable value. How could it be expected that a man with a few pounds would go to the ex pense of making a will ? He held that the existence of a constitutional monarchy required a landed aristocracy, by which he meant a landed gentry, whether titled or not. (Hear, hear.) The moment that that intermediate body ceased to interpose between the Crown and the people,. the constitution would undergo an alteration, for its continu ance was essential to the present system. (Hear, hear.) In those countries where the law of primogeniture was abolished it was found that the aristocracy were impo verished, and quite unfitted to exercise such functions as would be necessary. Mr, LOCKE KING having replied, The house divided, For the second reading.. Against it Majority against NEWSPAPERS, &c., BILL. Mr. AYRTON, in moving the second reading of this bill, said there was no need to occupy the attention of the house, as the details of the bill would be fully discussed in committee. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he did not in tend to oppose the bill, but he reserved to himself the right of moving certain amendments in committee. The bill was then read a second time. CONVEYANCE OF VOTERS BILL. Mr. COLLIER moved the second reading of this bill. Mr. HUNT moved the adjournment of the debate, as the whole subject must necessarily be discussed when the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer's bill was under discussion. Mr. HEA_DLAM strongly objected to postponement. Mr. COLLIER said the present bill was to prevent the continuance of a bill which would expire in July. It had been said that the present bill should not be proceeded with, because the subject would be dealt with in another bill. But the reason he wished the present bill to be proceeded with was, that he believed that bill would not pass. (Hear, hear.) Lord PALMERSTON thought the bill ought to be pro ceeded with. The motion for the adjournment was then withdrawn, and the discussion on the bill proceeded. Mr. EDWIN JAMES thought that the expenses at pre sent entailed upon candidates for metropolitan boroughs prevented men of eminence and talent from coming forward to contest these boroughs. The cab hire was enormous. At the late elections for Finsbury and Lambeth there was a phalanx of cabs, and every description of vehicularity— (laughter)—engaged in conveying voters to the poll, and if these proceedings continued to be legal, the ultimate result would be that the successful candidate in any case would be the one who had the longest purse. He thought members of Parliament should be returned free of all expense. (Hear.) During a contest that he had lately taken part in in allu sion to the great expense of cab hire, some of his most in fluential supporters had said that they were sorry to put him to such an outlay for cab hire ; but the other side did the same. The practice had been legalised by Act of Par liament, and without he did the same he would stand no chance. He again said electioneering expenses were a scandal and a disgrace. In a contest he had had in Marylebone he had paid about £4OO for the erection of polling booths, yet in all the booths erected there was not one which would not have been a disgrace to a gingerbread stall. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr. P. O'BRIEN opposed the bill. Mr. STEWART thought sufficient reason had not been shown for repealing a measure which had been passed after considerable discussion. Mr. WHITE thought the bill had been introduced into Parliament merely to secure the omnibus and cab interest in elections. He hoped the hon. gentleman would be suc cessful in his endeavour to repeal the law. Mr. DEEDES said he opposed the bill last session, and he should now give his vote in favour of its repeal. Mr. NEWDEGATE opposed the bill, as he considered it one of disfranchisement to the poorer out voters of all the county constituencies of England Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that last year he was of opinion that the house had no right to disfrancise those poorer voters who could not convey themselves to the poll. The bill of last year was merely a temporary measure, and it was open to repeal immediately more polling-booths were erected. By his bill his hon. friend had removed this ob jection, as he found he had largely increased the number of polling places, and he did not see why the practice of conveying voters to the poll should continue, as it was nearly akin to bribery. He should, therefore, seeing that the bill increased the number of polling places at no great distance from the residence of the voters, give his vote for the second reading of the bill. Mr. HUNT thought the bill highly objectionable. He thought a voter whose residence was eleven miles from a polling place had a right to a conveyance to the poll. An infirm voter had also the same right ; he should therefore move that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Sir J. PAKINGTON thought the present a very inconvenient time to proceed with the bill, although at the same time ho had no strong feeling on the matter one way or the other. He thought the present law ought not to be repealed before extra polling places had been pro vided. The new Reform Bill did this, and he therefore should vote against the bill. Mr. AYRTON said, when the bill of last session was passed, the Government said the bill could be fully discussed during the present session, and now, when it was proposed to remedy the effect of hasty legislation, his hon. friend was met with strong opposition. He thought he had a right to insist that the bill should be allowed to go into committee. The house then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading 172 Against it 153 Majority l9 The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed this day week. The Recreation Grounds Bill was read a second time. MEDICAL ACT (1858) AMENDMENT BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. METROPOLITAN GAS. Mr. BYNG nominated the select committee on the supply of gas, as follows :—Mr. Byng, Sir John Shelley, Mr. Ayrton, Mr. John Locke, Mr. John Abel Smith, the Judge Advocate, Mr. Alderman Cubitt, Mr. Adams, Mr. Barrow, Sir William Dunbar, Sir William Hayter, Mr. F. Russell, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Thomas Mills, and Mr. Whitbread. SCOTCH COUNTIES AND BOROUGHS. Mr. BLACKBTfRN moved for a return of the number of proprietors on the valuation roll of each county or burgh, or Parliamentary combination of counties or burghs, in Scotland, having property under £lO but not under £5 of annual value.—Agreed to. SUNDAY OBSERVANCE. Mr. T. copies of all informa tions, summonses, and convictions, with the amount of fine and costs paid in each case, under the Act 29 Charles 11., intituled, 'An Act for the better Observation of the Lords' Day, commonly called Sunday," before her Majesty's jus tices of the peace for the county of Southampton, from 25th day of December, 1858, to the Ist day of March, 1859 ; to gether with a copy of a memorial recently presented by the inhabitants of the district to the magistrates, complaining of the conduct of the police, with their reply thereto.— Agreed to. The house then adjourned. A sharp urchin derided the dignity of the sun, because the latter is only a day labourer.—.Kelly's Railway Guide. TRIAL BY JURY IN SCOTLAND.—A Bill of Mr. Dunlop, M.P., and Mr. Moncrieff, M.P., proposes to e nact that if, after three hours' deliberation, nine of a jury in Scotland agree, a verdict may be returned by these nine. This bill amends an act now on the statute-book, which requires a pri or deliberation of six, instead of three, hours. [ADvrieristmmNz.]—Holloway's Ointment and Pills.— Rheumatism and Gout.—No diseases affecting mankind harass more than these ; none excite less pity, none exceed them in severity of suffering. In - the blood lies the poi sonous cause of both distempers, which fortunately may be constitutional and locall y expelled by Holloway's soothing Ointment and Purifying 'Pills the former speedily re lieves the pungent shooting pain and acute inflammation of the affected joint ; these Pills cast out from the whole s y s tem all noxious substances with which gout; rheuma tism, and disease disappear, and for a long time remain absent. Holloway's preparations purify and cleanse by filtering out the elements of all disorders whereby present com fort is ensured, happiness and cheer fulness are secured, and lasting benefit is conferred. THE ENGLIS. LTI" GARRISON AT CANTOLV. CANTON, JAN. 12. The troops in Canton, just sinking into the slum ber of an ordinary garrison life, were very roughly roused up in the course of last week. One of the chief evils to be guarded against in a garrison and climate like that of Canton is that listless ennui that enervates both mind and body, and leaves the soldier, with few resources in himself and none of the sanctifying influences of o home, to take refuge in drink and other sensual vices. Com manding officers have worked well and successfully to meet this evil. Athletic games and other amuse• ments have been got up in the different corps and battalions, while the General issued an order that each brigade should march once a week into the country, taking their dinners, cooked, with them, and returning home before dark. The men rightly regarded this as a great boon. It varied the monotony of their life within the lines, and all felt the better for turning their backs for the day on mouldering joss houses and dingy yamums, and inhaling the fresh breeze of the country. Several of those marches took place, and nothing could exceed the good conduct of our men or the apparent good-will of the Chinese. The poor flocked in crowds to share the remnants of our soldiers' dinners, while, to avoid the very appear ance of evil, we refrained from entering their populous villages. On Tuesday, the 4th inst., Colonel Holloway went out with his brigade for their usual weekly march. The friendly Chin-chins greeted them along the way, and when they sat down to dinner the average hundreds of hungry and eager expec tants watched for the scraps or scrambled for the cash that was scattered among them by the officers. But a sudden change came over this busy scene. The beggars, young and old, cast from them the untasted tidbits, and rushed in a fright past hun dreds of ungathered cash, for they saw the many coloured flags of the Quatttuug Braves cresting the top of a neighbouring hill ; and though this was a pretty sight in itself, and much admired by the soldiers as they reclined after dinner, it convinced those poor people, who were up to the customs of the country, that the sooner they got out of the way the better for their personal safety. Oolonel Holloway, strong in his own good inten tions, believed (as any reasonable man well might) that this was only a deputation from the surround ing villages to welcome us, and so we rode forward with a few mounted officers to meet them half way and cement the friendly bond. His reception was indeed warm enough, though I can't call it friendly, for ere he could carry his kind intentions into exe cution a storm of rockets and gingal bullets burst around the astonished picknickers, and compelled them to make use of more deadly weapons than knives and forks. I need scarcely state with what result. The Braves, though plucky enough at long bowls, have a wholesome dread of British cold steel, and a few well-directed shots, with a dash forward by two companies, ended the affair, and drove the Braves flying in all directions, but not before some of them paid at the cost of their lives for this act of foul treachery. The escape of our people was most providential. A rocket passed between the body and arm of one of our officers (Mr. O'Grady), merely drawing a few drops of blood; had it gone two inches on one side it would have cost him his life, while an inch on the other would have cost him his arm. One of our men had the strap of his water-barrel cut from his back ; another had the sole shot from under his boot ; while the call to arms was suddenly cut short, and the bugle, squashed with a ball, flew from the hand and mouth of the astonished bugler who was blowing it. Those marches into the country had taken place with the full concurrence of Teh-Qui. He had given notice throughout the towns and villages of the district of the friendly nature of them, and there fore satisfaction was required, through him, for this gross outrage. However, those refractory subjects of the Emperor rejected alike the threats and coax ings of the Governor, and when Capt. M'Cleverty attempted a direct communication with them they fired on the flag of truce. It was now apparent that we had to deal, not with an isolated case of a few ignorant and discon tented villagers, but with an opposition to the Im perial treaty and the presence of Europeans in the province, well organised and widely extended. The league of the Quantung gentry was up and at work with its old bitter hostility, collecting mu nitions of war at Shek-tseng, preparing to make the next summer hotter for us than even the last, and no doubt resolved to pay their last year's prices for Englishmen's heads. A triumvirate sitting in Shek-tseng, directed the operations of the league. The Chinese pride of those provincial magnates had quite got over the fall of Canton, and attributed it to cowardice and treachery on the part of the Tartar garrison, but there was Shek-tseng within nine miles of Canton, defended by true Chinese Braves. No European had ever crossed over its beautiful bridge, nor ever should in their day, for they had placed 20 pieces of heavy ordnance in position to guard it. All this was to be kept quiet until the summer had set in, when Europeans could not stand the sun, and then the League would teach the outside Barbarians and cowardly Tartars in Canton such a lesson. Such was the information brought in after the outrage of the 4th. The intemperate zeal of one of the leaders in attacking our Marines gave timely notice of the storm that was brewing against us in Shek-tseng, and so it was wisely determined not to waste our strength on outlying villages, but to advance direct on this Gibraltar of the league, and cut away the fountain of the evil. The expedition thus planned was most success fully executed. On Saturday last, at 7 a.m.,1,700 picked men started from the north gate, while a naval brigade of 400 men, under Capt. M'Cleverty, R.N., went round in gunboats. Had our people the pick of the entire year, they could not have lighted on a more propitious day— dry, cold, and bracing. You felt the buoyancy of home as you marched over the Chinese paddy-fields Two hours brought the troops to a village within 1,000 yards of Shek-tseng, and the gunboats to the mouth of the river that runs by it, and then the work began. The enemy had got the range of this village and the mouth of the river. They opened a well-directed fire, and sustained it for a short time with very great vigour. Of the first four shots they fired two hulled ab le thedw lln fromn gunboats, while in the village the leaves the trees and the old walls to such a w a y as t o warn those who tumble uemgn too f a valued their safety to move forward as fast as pos sible, for within 800 yards of the place you were much more secure than at 1,000 or 1,200. The position of Shek-tseng looked no joke from this village. There was the deep unfordable river between us, while the beautiful bridge we wanted to cross abutted on an island that growled upon us with twelve well worked guns, while this island was connected to our side of the water by a narrow wooden causeway. The attacking party consisted of 200 French on the right, 150 Ist Royals in the centre, and the same number of Royal Engineers on the left. All these were thrown out in skirmishing order, and supported by the Ist battalion of Royal Marines, under Col. Lemon. The rest of the troops formed a corps of reserve. Three of our rocket tubes, with seven English and one French howitzer, tooliup a position between the skirmishers and opened a very telling fire. The French, with their usual promptness, rushed for ward, determined to be first up, but as they at tempted to pass a little hamlet with a thick hedge in front of it, they were met from behind the hedge with a fire of gingals that wounded two of the party and compelled them to retreat a little and gather together to make a full sweep through the place. The General, noticing this, ordered the 65th Bengal Native Infantry up in support. Meantime the Ist Royals and Engineers were advancing steadily, the former making beautiful practice on the Chinese gunners in the island (I noticed afterwards the side stones of the embrasures dotted with the marks of their bullets and trickling blood round more than one of their guns), while the Engineers, up to their knees in thick mud, worked on to the front and reserved their fire for the final rush. At this critical moment the naval brigade topped the hill omi the Shek-tseng side of the river. Cap tain M'Cleverty had made short work of the inner side batteries, and arrived at the nick of time to turn the position. The Chinese, who up to this time behaved with great pluck, now fled for their lives. In rushed the Engineers, followed by:Royals and Royal Marines, and Shek-tseng lay at our mercy. The place was full of munitions of war, even to waterproof coats and hats for the Braves next summer. So besotted were these people that they utterly disbelieved in our power to take this town, and though . they had ample notice of our approach the wives of the chief men remained in the place, and were found all together in the women's quarter of the town, utterly paralysed with terror. Everything was done to save them from ill treatment. Guards were set to prevent any male entering that part of the city, and when on leaving we burnt the rest of the town, the General not only spared that quarter, but humanely caused several houses between to be gutted to prevent the possibility of the fire extending. • The next day we made a march of some 20 miles :through 'one of the richest and most beautiful Countries I ever passed over. The whole of it was cultivated like a garden. A great part of our road was arched over by trees that would grace the noblest of our parks at home, while a river, 350 yards wide, clear as crystal, with a white sand beach on each side, tempted you to jump in and luxuriate in a bath. At this time of year this river is fordable in seve ral places. A part of the force crossed the opposite bank and went to Kong Soon, a town of consider able commercial importance. Here we found a large Chinese fair in full operation, and the natives went on buying their fat pigs, oxen, and buffaloes with the greatest sang froid, while the great men of the place, in a neighbouring joss -house, were making their humble submission to General Von Straubenzee. About a mile from Kong Soon is the Parliament House of the League. We found the clearest proofs in the house that it was the same place where the European and sepoy prisoners were either killed or died, and that it was also here the stipulated price for the heads and hands of the murdered victims was paid to their assassins by those worse than assassins. The elders of the various towns and villages on our route waited on the General with the greatest humility. There was no end to their " chin chining" and " kotowing," and they all held in their hands as well as covered their house doors with long strips of pink and red paper. This is the very acme of Chinese compliment. As the knight of old always displayed the favourite colour of his lady-love, so the Chinese elders by those long strips of red paper would show to the whole of the Chinese their love and respect for the honoured Taipans who rejoice in scarlet coats. Such is the effect which the taking of Shek-tseng has produced on the surrounding country. A town of 40,000 inhabitants, looked upon and boasted of as the impregnable fortress of the province, fell before us in an hour's fighting. Its capture has struck terror into the heart of the province, and given those people a far greater idea of British prowess than even the fall of Canton itself. When our Consul some months since applied to Teh Qui for a residence, the latter told him he would not answer for his life an hour after the troops left if he came to reside within the city. Teh Qui in this stated the truth, but the fall of Shek-tseng puts a seal to the Elgin Treaty that will be rebpeeted. It has quashed a confederation based on the principle of undying hostility to everything European, which gloried in the assas sination of unoffending foreigners, and was hard at work preparing for an offensive war with us in the coming summer. The old, proud, implacable, un tractable spirit of Yeh survived in the league of the Quan-Tung gentry—that spirit which, as Mr. Cooke has well and truly set forth, must be crushed out of her before China can take her place among civilised nations. The same spirit which last year filled the houses of Canton with slaughtered women and children was equally manifest in the crowds of women and children left at the mercy of our soldiers in this town, but our soldiers did not tarnish their valour by acts of brutal licentiousness; they did not dis grace the holy name they bear—even the name of Him who came to do good to all men. With towns and villages lying at their mer3y, with the strongest temptations and opportunities for those sins that have special power with soldiers, our men behaved in a manner beyond all praise, and, if ever a hostile invasion directly tended to promote the interests of true religion, such will be the result of the Shek tseng expedition. LAW INTELLIGENCE.—March 2. COURT FOR DIVORCE AND MATRI MONIAL CAUSES. (Before Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, Mr. Justice Wightman and the Judge-Ordinary.) ROBINSON V. ROBINSON AND LANE.-JUDGMENT, At the sitting of the Court, The Lord Chief Justice delivered judgment in this case. His lordship said,—This was a suit for a divorce a vinculo, on the ground of adultery. The evidence consisted entirely of admissions made by Mrs. Robinson herself. In the majority of instances the diary, in describing the private interviews of Mrs. Robinson and Dr. Lane, spoke of acts which, though no doubt of a most guilty character, yet did not amount to actual adultery. In other in stances the language was ambiguous. It might be taken to import actual consummation or to refer only to indecent familiarities and caresses, such as the Court had already referred to, and which, how ever criminal, would not justify it in decreeing a divorce. In one instance language of this sort, which might be construed into a complete confession of adultery, was afterwards used under circum stances in which it was plain that no such meaning could attach to it. In no instance could they find a clear and unequivocal admission of adultery having taken place. The strongest passage was that in which the respondent stated, that after one of these interviews Dr. Lane desired her to take care to "obviate consequences ;" but even there the " consequences" referred to might have been those of discovery or detection, and not those resulting from an adulterous connection. It was true that where they were dealing with admissions by a wife of criminal and indecent familiarities, bordering upon and, morally speaking, partaking of adultery, the disposition of the Court would, for obvious reasons, be to give the fullest effect to the language of those admissions. But in this case there were con siderations which led the Court to think that the lan guage of Mrs. Robinson in her diary must be con strued by a different rule. The Court was dealing with one whom an ardent imagination and a pas sionate nature too often led away beyond the bounds of reason and truth, and who, in all relating to her intercourse with men for whom she had conceived a partiality, was prone to exaggerate and over•colour every circumstance which tended to her wratifica tion. There was a striking instance of this in her interview with Mr. Thom, where she magnified into the most serious importance circumstances which were proved to have been of the most ordinary and trivial character. In the present instance this tendency would be more strongly brought into play by the strength and ardour of her passion for Dr. Lane. It was plain that she dwelt with impure gratification on the portraiture of these scenes, and on the details of the guilty endearments and caresses which she narrated. It was impossible to say how much of all this might not be the work of an imagination corrupted by sensuality and dwelling with morbid satisfaction on its own impure crea tions, or how far any ground work of fact might be distorted or overcharged by the fanciful additions of the writer. The Court was, at all events, of opinion that all that came from such a quarter on such a subject, far from being taken as a ground for drawing further inferences of criminality, must be received with very great allowance and distrust. Having no other evidence than the statements of a writer in whose judgment and fidelity to truth in the particular matter the Court could place no re liance, and whom it believed capable of distorting and discolouring facts to gratify her disordered fancy and morbid passion, it would have had great doubt whether, if the admissions had amounted to a clear acknowledgment of adultery, it could have given effect to them ; but, looking to the ambiguous character of the expressions, coupled with the reite rated complaints of the writer of the absence of equal ardour on the part of Dr. Lane, it could not, under all the circumstances of the case, come to the conclusion that there was any admission of adultery upon which it would be justified in acting. Enter , taming this opinion of the evidence derived from the journal, it would be unnecessary to enter into the consideration of the evidence given by Dr. Lane, and therefore the only course open to the Court was to dismiss the petition. At the conclusion of the judgment the Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Wightman retired, and Sir C. Cresswell proceeded to hear the motions on the paper. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. WESTERN CIRCUIT.—WINCIIESTER, March 2. NISI PRIUS COURT. .Before Mr. Justice Crowder and a Common Jury.) SLATTERIE V. MOODY. Mr. Slade and Mr. Karslake were counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Smith and Mr. Coleridge for the defendant. This was an action of trover to recover certain goods. The defence set up was a bill of sale, but which the plaintiff alleged was counteracted by two bills of exchange. After a trial which lasted the whole day, the jury, at a late hour, returned a verdiet for the plaintiff for £4O. RICHARDSON V. STOREY. Mr. Slade and Mr. Karslake were counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Phinn and Mr. Poulden for the defendant. This was an action for false imprisonment. The defendant pleaded Not Guilty. Mr. Slade said this was an action brought by Arthur Richardson (by his father), a young man 16 years of age, who was an apprentice to Mr. Mumby, a chemist at Gosport, to recover damages for false imprisonment under circumstances which were completely unparalleled. The defendant was a lady who kept an establishment for young ladies about two miles from Gosport. She had three assis tants, or pupils, of considerable attractions—Miss Caroline Lampard, Miss Eliza Goodram, and Miss Mary Clarke. Mr. Mumby had also another ap prentice named Dyer, and they had a friend named Rix. Of course the three young ladies were very natural attractions to these young men of enter prising habits, and they were sure to come together. They frequented the same chapel, and at a tca meeting there had been introduced to each other, and they had gone home to Mrs. Storey's with the young ladies, and Mrs. Storey had given them a general invitation. In the course of time it would seem that the young gentlemen did not visit the young ladies so often as they wished, and they commenced a correspondence of rather a warm character, and they sent the young gentle men some beautifully worked book-markers, having on each the motto, "Lovest thou me ?" An invita tion of this sort was irresistible ; they must have been unworthy the name of men if they had not responded to such an appeal; their visits became more frequent. The young ladies used to point out certain verses in the Songs of Solomon. The result of all this was inevitable. The young gentlemen were constant in their attendance, but anxious that Mrs. Storey, who had passed the heyday of youth, should not know it. One of the young ladies was a great French scholar, and she wrote some French couplets apostrophising the moon. On some occa sions they were obliged to hide behind the laurels. Rix in a very foolish manner wrote a paragraph to the Southampton paper stating that a burglary had been attempted at Mrs. Storey's ; he also wrote a second paragraph of the same nature. This put the police on the qui vive, and a communication took place between them and Mrs. Storey, and it was determined to lay a trap. Mrs. Storey called on Mrs. Mumby and told her she was going to her sister's and should not be home until ten o'clock at night. In the course of the afternoon Richardson was sent out with a parcel to be delivered at Albert cottage, near Mrs. Storey's. On the way he saw Rix, and asked him to accompany him. They went on, and had to pass Mrs. Storey's house. They saw a servant at the door, and asked her where Albert cottage was. The servant said she did not know, but would go in and inquire. She went in, but of course nothing was said about Albert-cottage, but the servant returned with a request that the young gentlemen would walk in. Miss Clarke was then away. Richardson and Rix went into the house, where they foundMissLampard and Miss Goodram, but almost before they had time for a mutual salute a policeman made his appearance, and said, " You are the young gentlemen I am in search of ; you must come along with me ;" and he proceeded to handcuff these respectable young men, and walked them two miles to Gosport, locked them up in the station-house, refused bail, and kept them there all night. The next morning they were taken before a magistrate, but, no one appearing against them, they were discharged. On Mrs. Storey's return that evening she asked if the young men had been there, and if they had been taken, and expressed a hope that they would be locked up all night. The plaintiff did not seek for damages, but if the defendant would make an apology for the outrage he would be satisfied ; but if she would not, then they must ask for damages. The plaintiff was called, and stated the facts before detailed. In cross-examination he said he was not paying his addresses to any one of the young ladies in par ticular, but he made love to them all. They had not had time to settle down. There had been some idea of sending Mrs. Storey a dead cat, but the young ladies had recommended them not to do it. Rix said he wrote his own love letters, some times to one of the girls, sometimes to another. He wrote the paragraphs for the newspaper. They sometimes threw gravel up at the windows at the suggestion of the girls. In cross•examination, he said he had also brought an action ; the attorney was Richardson's brother. Had gone in different costumes ; sometimes like a troubadour. The next day Mrs. Storey was asked why she had done this, and she said they had no right in her house. Miss Lampard was called—My father lives at University-street, London. I was a teacher at Mrs, Storey's. Miss Clarke and Miss Goodram came. I first made the acquaintance of Richardson at the tea-meetings. We were introduced there. He es corted us home. He left us at the gate. The next time he came to fetch Mrs. Mumby, he came into the room for a few minutes. He came again, ac companied by Rix. There was music. A greater intimacy arose, and the two, with Dyer, used to come and see us. We never paired off. When I saw the paragraphs I thought they were a hoax, It was all a joke about sending the dead cat. On the day in question I don't know exactly what brought them in. We had not begun to play on the piano when the policeman came in. He hand cuffed the young gentlemen. We did not go off in a faint. The policeman took them away. It was about nine o'clock in the evening. Mrs. Storey had told us she should not be home till ten o'clock. j had communicated this by note to the young gentlemen. Mrs. Storey returned a little after ten, and asked if any one had been. I said, " Yes, Mr. Richardson and Mr. Rix." She said, " And I hope the policeman has taken them off." I told her he had, and they were handcuffed. She said she was very much obliged to him, and rubbed her hands. Before we went to bed the policeman called again, and Mrs. Storey told him to be shown in. She said to him, "So you have taken those boys off my premises ?" He said he had. She said she hoped they would enjoy their night's rest. The policeman said he hoped they would, for he had locked them up himself. My father came down and took me away. He told me had written to me to say he was coming. Mrs. Storey then pro duced the letter. Before he came Mrs. Storey desired me to write a statement. I silently resisted for same time, but Mrs. Storey told me I must write it quickly, as the magistrate would be there shortly. I wrote a statement at Mrs. Storey's dictation. I was had in before two policemen, who asked me several questions. My father was in the drawing room above. I went away in two days after. Cross-examined—l was a teacher. Mrs. Storey had spoken to me some time before this about the correspondence, and threatened to write to my father. She made us promise not to speak to them again. We saw them seven or eight times after, about 9in the evening. They never stayed longer than half an hour. We have met them at half-past 6in the morning. There was no promise of mar riage that I know of. There was no particular attachment that I know of. I wrote to Dyer, but he was not a particular favourite. They came just inside the door. The servants were in the secret, and posted the letters for us. I went out with Mrs. Storey with a candle to look for them. I knew which side of the garden they were on, and I took her to the other side, as I did not wish to show them up. We had no one else sighing for us. Stones were thrown up at the windows, but my window was too far off. I did not tell Mrs. Storey of it. I worked a book marker and sent it to Richardson. There had been grapes stolen from the garden, but the young gentlemen were after something sweeter than grapes. (The court was convulsed with laughter during this examination, in which the witness mast heartily joined.) Miss Clarke heard the policeman tell Mrs. Storey that he had her orders for taking the young men into custody. Mrs. Storey said Mr. Mumby was raging and foaming like a little dog chained up, and was trying to Injure the policeman. She did not deny that sh e h a d given the order. Cross-examined—l left because I would not pro mise not to renew the acquaintance henceforth and or ever. I had not been in the garden with them so often as the others. I have renewed the acquaint ance, with my father's perfect knowledge and consent. Mr. Phinn then addressed the jury for the de fendant. His friend had attempted to bring a great deal of ridicule into the ease, but he thought it ono of a most serious nature. This lady had been put to the &deal of having two actions brought against her, and it was attempted to visit her with costs that would prove her ruin. They had all been young, it was true, and knew the pranks of boys, but he would ask them whether what they had suffered had not served them right ? They would hardly like to intrust their daughters to the care of a lady in whose establishment were young ladies who, had given way to such giddy conduct. Mrs. Storey had remonstrated with them, but still these boys continued their conduct of coming to the house to see these girls. When the statements as to the sup posed burglary were seen in the papers the rate payer's would naturally be asking what the police were about ; and thus it was necessary that some steps should be taken. Mrs. Storey sought the as sistance of Captain Purvis, and it was that gentle man who had given instructions to the police, and it was in consequence of those instructions that the police had acted. He submitted that Mrs. Storey was not responsible, for she had only asked that the police might apprehend unknown persons who were found wandering about her premises. If the police had exceeded their duty Mrs. Storey was flat answerable. Mrs. Storey said she was a widow. Some of her pupils had informed her of the corre spondence between the young ladies and these boys, and of one meeting in the garden. She also • heard of her teachers waving pocket-handkerchiefs on a Sunday afternoon from the upper windows to these boys in a field. She mentioned the circum stance to Mrs. Mumby, who said she knew nothing of it, but would certainly find out. 'Witness said she could not allow anything so improper. She then spoke to her teachers, and asked if it was true about the letters and book-markers. Th'l were very much confused and hesitated, and then admitted it, and promised not to repeat it. She threatened to write to their fathers. Had known the three young men from their having served her in their shops. Never asked them to her house, a said she should be glad to see them. She spoke to Mr. Mumby, who said he should not interfere, and that it was capital fun for the boys, and he liked it too much when a boy to interfere with others ; but ' that, of course, witness could not allow it. Wit: ness said the means she should take to stop it would be to discharge her teachers immediately. Heard noises at night and stones thrown against the windows, and her grapes had been stolen. Went to Captain Purvis, the magistrate, who said she should not be annoyed any longer, and he sent a policeman to Superintendent Grant. Did not mention the names of these young men to Captain Purvis or the police. A policeman afterwards called to know the reason she had not given notice of the attempted burglary, as it had appeared ill the Hampshire Telegraph. The paragraph was entirely false. MissGoodram, a teacher in the defendant's school , who said she was 19 years old, and was still in her employment, gave evidence as to the meetings between herself and other teachers, and the plaintiff and his friends, but denied some of the statements made by the plaintiff's witnesses. White, a county policeman, stationed at Alver stoke, proved the apprehension of the plaintiff and Rix, but denied that he did so by the instructions of the defendant, although he admitted having been desired by her to apprehend any person he found unlawfully upon her premises. Mr. Slade having replied upon the whole case, The learned Judge was left summing up when our report was sent off. CROWN COURT. THE ANDOVER MURDER. The grand jury have thrown out the bill against Banks and his wife for this murder. COUNTRY MARK.ETB. DICKENS V. DICKENS. This was a petition by a wife for judicial sepa ration on the ground of her husband's adultery. The cause has not yet been heard, but a rule nisi was obtained on Wednesday last to review the registrar's taxation of the wife's costs. Two ob jections were raised against the taxation—first, that all the costs incurred previous to the petition had been disallowed ; and, secondly, that the costs of certain interviews with the petitioner's father, rendered necessary by the petitioner's illness, had been disallowed. _ _ vv Cause was shown against the rule by Dr. Swabey, and it was supported by Dr. Phillimore, Q.C. Sir C. Cresswell took time to consider his deci sion. STOATE T. STOATE. Dr. Swabey appeared for the petitioner, Mrs. Stoate ; the respondent appeared in person. A decree of judicial separation having been pro nounced on the ground of the husband's cruelty, the wife now appeared for permanent alimony. Mr. Stoate opposed the application, on the ground that he had commenced a suit against his wife for a dissolution of marriage by reason of adultery. His lordship, however, thought that was no answer to the petition for alimony, and, estimating the respondent's income at £320, awarded the peti tioner £BO per annum. VICARS V. VICARS. In this case the full Court had decreed a dissolu tion of the marriage of Mr. and Mrs. Vicars on the ground of the husband's incestuous adultery. The wife had since presented a petition for permanent alimony in the name of " Mrs. Vicars." Dr. Swabey, for the respondent, moved that the petition be dismissed, on the ground that the decree of dissolution having been pronounced, the Court had no further jurisdiction over either of the parties. Dr. Addams, Q.C., appeared for the petitioner. Sir C. Cresswell said it was a point ofgreat nicety, and he should defer giiting an opinion upon it. MARKET HARBOROUGH—MAnoa 2. There was a good quantity of wheat on offer, and prices for all descriptions were about maintained. Barley a veil fair demand, and at last week's extreme rates. Beaus were a small supply, but fully as dear. Oats a fair sale, at late rates. Wheat ...38s to 42s Oats.... 2Bs to 33 0 White do .40s to 42s Beans —8 to Barley .38s to 40s Ditto, old .4os to 40 NEWARK. •MA RCH 2. This day's market was bul only a retail inquiry for an written nominally unaltered. White wheat, new, 42s to 48s Red do. 3Bs to 42s Old white 42s to 48s Red do. 3Bs to 408 Barley, malting 38s to 44s thinly attended, and with article. Prices have to be Barley, grinding 28s to 320 Oats, old, .. 3oe to 34g. New do 268 to 28 4 Beans. 44s to 480 Peas . to ---0 MELTON MOWBRAY—MARcit 2. There was a fair show of wheat and a tolerable attend' ance. White samples realised 40s to 44s ; red, 40s to 4 20 ; Barley of superior quality made high rates, malting of the best description selling at 38s to 40s per qr. • in grinding little doing. In oats there was very little change, pnce! ranging from 29s to 36s per 24 stone. Beans scarce a n , at easier rates, namely, 40s to 48s per 38 stone. CORK—MAncu 1. The following were the quotations this morning :-10 41 wheat, 21s to 22s Od; white, 22s Od to 23a 9d; barley 12s yd to 15s Od; oats, Ils 6d to 13s 4d. DUBLIN—MARCH 1. There was a small supply of wheat and oats of pron e . quality to-day, for which Friday's prices were scarce ly obtained. Trade dull. s. d. s. d. Wheat, white.. 22 6 to 25 6 Do., red .. 21 6 to 23 0 Do., new 21 6 to 24 6 Barley . 11 oto 17 0 Oats • ll 0 to 13 0 Do., black.... 10 6to 11 0 s. d. s. Do., new II 6 t,o 13 v Bere Rapeseed 26 0t029 0 Oatmeal l2 6 to 14 0 Bakers' flour Indian corn • COAL MARK (Prices of Coal per Ton at a. d. .ET—MAnon 2. t the close of the market.) Walla End. Lambert's West Hart ley 14 0 Tanfield Moor 11 6 Tanfield Moor Butes-11 6 Walker Primrose 12 0 Wylam l4 6 Davison's West Hart ley l4 6 Buddle's West Hartleyl4 0 I . ( 1 . Byron l5 6 Cassop l6 3 5 6' Eden. Acorn Close 15 Braddyll's Hetten 1 6 Hough 6 Whitworth ..1 4 Kepler Grange.... ...16 A P Hetton •• • • • ..17 6 Benson.... 14 South Hartlepool...... 15 6 South Kelloe l6 4 Trimdon Hartlepool 16 ; South Hetton 17 „" Fothergill's Aberdare.,2 l '„; Powell' s Duirryn St e am 21 v ;,120 —Sold, 49. Walls End. Oaradoc ---- 16 0 Trimdon Thornley 14 0 Hunwick l4 3 Harton Bell West Hetton... 16 6 Framwellgate l5 3 Ships at market VARIORUM EDITION OF LEVY (Livy ?)—LerP Levison, Lewis, Lewison, Lawson, Leivy, Leivin, Lewin son, Lewson, Leveson, Levien, Levine, Levinson, Lavy.--' Kelly's Railway Guide. In addition to the 3 companies of Royal Artillery which arrived at Woolwich by the steam transport ship Melbourne, Capt. joliffe, from the West Indies, as enumerated in The Sun of yesterday, the Mel' bourne brought Lieutenants Richardson, Wardell, Hendcock, and Cameron, Royal Artillery; Lieut. Dugmore and Assistant-Surgeon Moore, 3d West India Regiment • 22 men of the 4th Regiment ; and 40 invalids of different corps, in charge of Captain Calcott, 26th Cameronians. The Melbourne likewise brought home, to be handed over to the civil authe" rities, No. 5,013, Gunner Alex. M'Culloch, R.A.. who was tried at a general court-martial held at St; George's, Bermuda, on the 26th Aug., 1858, and convicted of havin g en d eavoure d t o shoot Gunner George Garner, R.A., when in the execution of hie duty as sentry over the Royal Artillery Camp at Fort Victoria. He was consequently sentenced, 1 1 the court-martial to suffer a punishment of four years' penal servitude, and was ordered home by Col. Hemphill, in command of the forces in Bev' muda, for the purpose of carrying out the sentence' The Melbourne, as appears from the Bermuda Royal Gazette, dated Feb. 8, was enabled to pre: vide for the safety of the Emperor Soulouque and his family and attendants, whom she conveyed to Jamaica immediately after signing his abdication. BIRTHS. BEAUMONT.—On the Ist inst., at theßectory, Butterleight near Collurapton, the wife of the Rev. T. G. Beaumont/ of a daughter. GALTON.—On the 2d inst. at 12, Chester-place, Grosvenor' place, the wife of Captain: Douglas Galton, R.E., of daughter. RIDEn.—On the Ist inst., at 14, Bartholomew-close, gr* J. W. Rider, of a daughter. It.trrsom.—On the Ist inst., at St. Leonard's-on-Sea, the wife of R. Ransom, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIAGES Gouununx—MlLES.—On the Ist inst., at St. James% Piccadilly, Frederick Vroulburn, Esq., third son of thf late Right Hon. Henry Goulburn, to the Hon. Jemiln . • 'nshend Miles, third daughter of Lord Sondes. Gu NEY — SCANTLEBURY.—On the 2d inst., at St. James sr 'kr 'estbourne-terrace, Paddington, Thomas Gurney, E 0 1:1 of 61, Baker-street, Portman-square, to Jane, the thir" daughter of W m . Scantlebury, Esq., of 4, Perohester" terrace N., Paddington. DEATHS. BATLY.—On the 28th ult., Mrs. Kitty Bayly, of Spencer' place, North Brixton, aged 70. BAYFIELD.—On the Ist inst., at Porchester, Mrs. Bayfie aged 76. BRAZIER.—On the 27th ult., in Broad-street-building * Samuel Brazier, Esq., aged 76. BURNABY.—On the Ist inst., at Manchester-street, 1 1 1. chester-square, Emma, relict of the late Captain B. A. Burnaby, R.N., aged 6.5. HOLMAN.—On the 2d inst., Mr. John Holman, wine w et. chant, Wapping, aged 65. LEDIARD.—On the Ist inst., at the Rectory, Chelsea, the Rev. R. Lediard, curate of St. Luke's. v 0 0 RICHA RDS.—On the 28th ult., at Sampfo r d Courtaleo Rev. G. P. Richards, rector, aged 74. a pt, TRAVERS.—On the 27th ult., at Clevedon, Torquay, C J. S. Travers, late of the 11th Regt., aged 31. 9 LONDON : Printed and Published by MURD() of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun 01E ce, I ' l° ' o f Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in ti 4 ° WI ' Middlesex, Thursday, Ma f reh, 3, 1859, ~.. .