The Sun. — London, England, 1862-12-15 00:00:00

IRELAND. DUBLIN, DEC. 13. Mr. Justice Keogh this day passed sentence upon two paupers, Anne Daffy and Ellen Carey, sho picaded " Guilty' to the charge of setting fire to the South Dublin Union Workhouse. His lordship said the prisoners had been found guilty of a great offence, but as they gloried in their crime it would be a waste of words to address any observations to them in the way of remonstrance. He would, there fore, sentence them to four years' penal servitude. The prisoners were delighted, and immediately said, s‘ Thank your Lordship; we have got out of hell, at all events." Seventeen male paupers were then brought up for the same offence, and were sentenced to the same punishment. Several of them cried out, " Thank you, my lord and gentlemen of the jury, we have got out of a house of persecution." Four other paupers, found guilty of riotous con duct, got 12 months' imprisonment with hard labour. They seemed to have learnt from some of their associates in the workhouse, who had per son experience of prison life, that convicts are much better treated than paupers ; and it was for the express purpose of getting themselves trans ferred from the workhouse to the prison that they attempted to burn down the building. It is not un likely that many more will follow their example. It is a strange state of things when the prospect of penal servitnderis actually an inducement to the commission of the most atrocious crimes. One used to read of the " horrors of transportation," but we never hear of the " horrors of penal servitude." In fact, as a punishment, it has no terrors for the class which produces most of our criminals. They are sure of good board and lodging and the kindest possible treatment from the moment they get into gaol, and they are animated by the hope that by good behaviour—that i s , a quiet and respectful demeanour—they will bo able soon to rejoin their former associates in vice and crime. This hope has no reformatory influence whatever, but the reverse . Banishment to the opposite side of the globe would b, dreaded as a real punishment, giving no hope but in a real change of char ac t er , w hi c h use f u l e mployment in a strange count r y, f ree f rom o ld c orrupting associations, would assist powerfully in effecting. In the Commission Court yesterday, Frederick Caldwell Spear was placed at the bar charged with having uttered a forged check for £192 12s 6d on the Bank of Ireland in September last. He was tried at the last Commission, but the jury disagreed. The check was forged in the name of Mr. Du Bedat, a stockbroker in this city. The prisoner had written to him to the effect that, in the absence of his clerk, who was the prisoner's cousin, the latter had opened Mr. Du Bedat's desk and abstracted a blank check, which had been filled up and presented for payment at the bank by another person, and that his cousin, Satin deraon Spear, the clerk, knew nothing at all about it. The tatter was examined, and corroborated this testimony. He denied that he had any knowledge of the transaction, and stated that he was the first to inform Mr. Du Bedat of the forgery. The per son said to have got the money for the check was William Waldron, who hed kept an cffice at 18, Essex-quay. Acting Inspector Smith deposed that after the discovery of the forgery he made inquiries for this person, and could not find him. Re had reason to believe he had left the country and had nor returned. Among the papers found on the pri soner was the notice of a bill from the bank, directed " 'William Waldron," also a notice from the Hiber nian Bank to the effect that his draught on Waldron had been protested. Mr. Curran addressed the jury for the defence. They brought in a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was this day sentenced to four years' penal servitude. A jury was empannelled to assess damages in a breach of promise case before Mr. Hitchcock, one of the Masters in Chancery, yesterday The plain tiff was Isabella Rattle, 21 years of age, the daugh ter of a Dublin solicitor, who, in consequence of her father's decease, was obliged to take the situation of a governess in the family of Captain Graham, of Cashel. The defendant was the Captain's brother. He was 24 years of age, and held the appointment of medical officer in the Dundrum Dispensary, County Tipperary. From the correspondence pro duced, and other evidence, it appeared that he not only promised marriage to the young lady, but had formally proposed for her to her brother and her mother, but the match was broken off through the interference of his family, on the ground that he had an income of only £9O a year, on which it would be impossible for him to support a wife, two ser vants, and a horse. As to damages, counsel de clared that the defendant's brothers would not`pay them, and that he would have to go through the Insolvent Court, and perhaps lose his situation. On the other side, counsel stigmatised the defence put forward as highly dishonourable. The jury re tired, and, after an absence of a few minutes, re turned with a verdict for the plaintiff, with £250 damages. An important and curious will case came before another Master in Chancery, Mr. Litton, yester day. It appeared that Daniel Lyons, late a lieu tenant-colonel in the East India Company, by his will, made at Almorah, in,the:province of Kumaon, in the East Indies, and dated Sept. 10, 1819, be queathed all his personal estate to his nephews, Robert and Thomas Bell, and to two other persons, as his trustees, upon trust, in the first place to set apart a sum of £lO,OOO to pay several annuities of £lO each to different charitable institutions in the city of Dublin. The testator then proceeded to re cite that if his life should be prolonged for a few years he intended to purchase a small landed estate, to be inherited by his nephew, Thomas Bell (the petitioner) and his heirs, on condition of their assuming his surname and professing the Protes tant religion, with remainders over. The will then went on to state that he (the testator) having lately read Mr. Brougham's (now Lord Brougham's) let ter to the late Sir Samuel Romilly, describing an institution in Switzerland, on Mr. Fellenburgh's estate, he directed that 250 acres of the estate in tended to be purchased by him should be appropri ated for the establishment of a similar institution in Ireland; and then gave the most minute direc tions for the management of the institution and for the education of the boys and their maintenance; and concluded by directing that the neighbouring rnlgistrates shouid visit the institution, and that on such occasions they should be treated with Irish hospitality, without locking the doors to force the guests to drink. The testator then gave several annuiiies to different relatives, and directed that the estate intended to be purchased by him should de volve on his said nephew, Thanes Bell, to enable him to carry on the institution, The testator after wards made another will dated the sth of Nov., .1819, revoking all former wills, and simply be e.etathing annuities of the same amount to the i ela - II:" mentioned in his first will—but by a codicil to secondt will, and dated the same day, he di rected that there should be a benefit of survivorship between the annuitants, and then, after the decease of the Bum of th e annu it an t s , h e gave all his real and Per7nto his al estate to his said nephew, Thos. Bell, trustin g wibb, euntaie,e4 in perf ormance o f hi s (testator's) gnerl Almorah, in the rn province of Ku a „ , w o ill 8; if he livedn the 10th of Sept. 1819, and 'which he stated perfected by legal advice, he intended to be is-islastand will. The testator died in two days afterwards further tes'amentary docu C uac Wace whether the a w s e l rda of tip , q uestion in the the ik l e l in the trust ah prcesed on the devise on the sth of Nov., 1819, had iivic ipg all the trusts in the first will, or only of that or rtion there of relating to the educational Pu r - ftei Master, in an able judgment, reviewed nu'B o -'• the yrguiri ipo s of all the c ounsel, and stated that th e quest i on was one of grtat difficulty; but that he ca me to the eonetusiol con tended for by th e peti lie t h oug ht it would be inconsis tioner's counse l. of trust the meaning con tent to give the w ords - A t torn ey General, tended for by the co unsel for the as that would defeat all the purposes of the testator. fie thought the words of reference related only to the trust imposed on the petitioner f or education allal purposes, and that the petit ioner was entitled. to ~ the testator's property, subject to the obligation parchas'ng '250 acres for the support of the insti tution mentioned in the Almorah will. Another will case has been before the Court of Probate for the lastfew days. It was a suit broaght to establish the 'validity of a paper writi g pur porting to be the will of Ann Kenny, deceased. who resided at Kingstown. The defendant pleaded that the said will was re s oked by a übsequent instrument, dated the 12th of Februar 1862, and containing an express clause of revocation. The plaintiff resisted this latter will on the ground of its not being executed in accordance with the statute, and also that the deceased was not of testa mentary capacity at the time. The issue was whether the will relied on by the defendant, of the 12th of February, 1862, was the last will of the deceased, and whether it contained an express clause of revocation. The deceased died 13th February, 1862, in Wexford, but left assets to the extent of £2,000, and a bill in the hands of Messrs. Cathcart for £5,000. The defendant was maternal aunt and next of kin of deceased. On the 30th of April, 1860, she executed a will, bequeathing all her pro perty to the plaintiff's wife, " in trust, to apply and dispose of it for the use of such poor persons, and for such charitable uses and purposes as she shall see fit," and, in case any residue remained after the death of Jane Daly, then to descend to the plain tiff for the same purpose. Subsequently, however, the deceased expressed her dissatisfaction with this will, and executed another, by which she bequeathed her property to Mr. M'Carthy, a barrister, and his w if e , with these words—" Trusting to their chari table and pious recollection of the spiritual wants of me and mine." This will, which contained an express clause of revocation, revoking all former wills, was subsequently destroyed by Mr. M'Carthy, who thought that it was not a valid instrument. Mr. Dennis F. M'Carthy, barrister, was one of the witnesses examined. He deposed that he knew deceased. On the day previous to her death he was sent for by her. He went to her house, and she told him she wanted him to prepare her will. He asked her what had become of the will she had pre viously made. She said it was in a box. Witness called the housekeeper, searched for it, and got it. Deceased then LictEtted a will to witness. She made it in favour of witness and his wife, "in the hope that they would attend to the spiritual necessities of me and mine." The will disposed of property to the extent of about £B,OOO. Deceased first signed " Miss Kenny," but subsequently signed it "Ann Kenny." Witness subsequently, from a conversa tion he had with Messrs. Cathcart, came to the con clusion that the will of 1860 was the one in which her wishes were expressed, and acting on that con clusion he buret the other will. To the Court—His impression of the will of 1862 was that the intention of the deceased was to leave the property to him in trust for charitable purposes. The jury found a verdict that the will of Feb., 1862, containing the revocation clause, was the last wilt and testament of deceased. It is worthy of remark that in this case two Roman Catholic clergymen, the Rev. Thomas Hore, County of Wexford, and the Rev. John O'Rourke, Kingstown, deposed that they advised the testator to leave her property to be distributed among her poor relations. THE LATE ALLEGED INFANTICIDE 1N ST. P.ANC.RAB. On Saturday Dr. Lankester resumed an inquiry at the Elephant and Castle, King's-road, Camden town, touching the death of a newly-born child, the supposed illegitimate offspring of Elizabeth Day, which was found in a box, with its throat most severely cut, at 42, Windmill-street, Tottenham court-road. Mr. Randall, solicitor, appeared for the suspected young woman. The Coroher, in continuing the case, said they on the last meeting adjourned for the appearance of the supposed mother of the infant, in order that she might hear the evidence adduced against her. He wished to know if she was present. Mr. Randall answered in the affirmative, but hoped it would not be necessary to have her before the jury, as he wished to spare her feelings as much as possible. The Jury considered it necessary, whereupon she was brought into court and accommodated with a seat. The Coroner then read over the evidence taken on the last occasion, and called Margaret O'Connell, a monthly nurse, who said that on Saturday, the 22d Tilt., she was sent for to 42, Windmill-street, and saw a young lady (Eliza beth Day) ill in bed. She did not see the baby until the Thursday following, when she gave witness the key of a box which was under the bed, and which contained the child. She opened the box and found the child there, with its throat cut. Witness did not say anything to her about the child. She said the child was born on the Thursday morning pre vious, and was born dead. On the following Satur day witness saw a baby's cap in a parcel, but she had seen no baby's linen on any previous occasion. She said Mrs. Henderson, her landlady, was aware that she had some baby linen. Mr. Henderson said that witness was telling an untruth. His wife knew nothing whatever about it. Witness said that all she had said was true, and she had been allowed to eat her dinner for three days with the knife which had been used to cut the baby's throat. Mr. Henry Obre, surgeon, who had made the post mortem examination,on being re-examined, said the injuries to the head were quite sufficient to cause death, without the cut throat, which latter he be lieved was inflicted after death. The bones of the head were completely dislodged, as though by squeezing in the hand, and under the scalp, over the whole of the head, it was covered with extravasated blood. The injuries to the head might have been in flicted by an unskilful midwife, or by the mother herself unintentionally, The Coroner then summed up, after which the jury requested to be allowed to consult alone, and after a short deliberation they returned a verdict, " That deceased died from injuries before or after birth; but by whom those injuries were inflicted there was not sufficient evidence to show." SAD END OF Aiv UNFOR7U.NATE." Dr. Lankester held an inquest on Saturday at the Elephant and Castle Tavern, Camden Town, or, the body of Naomi Bailey, aged 27, who committed sui cide by throwing herself in to the waterfrom a bridge in the Aldany-road, Regent's-park. The body was identified by the mother of the de ceased, from Kilby, in Lincolnshire. She said her daughter was doing machine work in London, and that six weeks ago she wrote home stating that she had received a wound on the head, from which she was fearful she would not recover. On Monday, the Ist inst., however, an:ther was received, stating that she was better, and would he with them the day after Cnristznas. John Foot, of 49, Ordnance-road, St. John's-wood, said at about half-past 12 on Monday night last ha was passing along the Albert-road, on the opposite side to the Regent's-park, when he heard some quarrelling between parties, and about 50 yards in front of him he saw a young woman, who, hearing him approach, called out " Help !" three times. He crossed over and saw a man run away. He asked the young woman, who was intoxicated, if they had been attempting to rob her. She replied —" They might have done so if you had not come up." He offered•to see her a little way, but think ing it might be a plot to rob him, on reaching the bridge he walked on for about 200 yards, when he heard a scream and a splash, and on running back to the bridge, he saw the Young woman floating on the top of the water. He called for the assistance of the police, which having been obtained, he left. Police-constable Cook, 250 S, also proved seeing the deceased floating, and ran for the drags. but on his return the deceased had di-appeared. The body was recovered in about half an hour with the line drags, and a medical gentleman attended. kept wbhayasdi np 1)r. Clarke deposed to finding the body dead, death being the result of suffocation from drowning. There was an old wound at the back of the head, which might have set up cerebral excitement. Police -constable Harris, 1845, said he had known tine haa d o e c c e c a a s s i c o d na f l o l r y t b h e e en la o st n seven the s streets, e e t i s g , h a t nyd'eaarts. times She ~e ntlern an gentlemen. Two months ago she told him iTacdom.o .table circumstances, put t er her ness met a female and that a N : h trade. Two nights since wit trt money in the bank for her, Monday told him she wa in deceased's She d h ay night, about two hours be forecompany portmonnaie containing On the a r, d then a gold watch and a her death. _ efi ,_about £lO about her, and she left with two pocket, they found no watch when the body was recovered Witness said that or portmonnaie in her The Coroner said he that morning had visited the bridge in question, for on the pr one day he had THE SUN' !AN DO! 7 held an an inquest on a woman who had destroyed'i herself from the same bridge two hours previously to Naomi Bailey. That woman was walking and quarrelling with her husband, and in a moment she threw herself from the bridge, leaving a child in his arms. The bridge was not three feet high, and therefore was a temptation to parsons suicidally inclined. After a long conversation respecting the unavail ing attempts that had been made to induce the authorities to make such alterations as would pre vent facilities to suicide, the jury returned a verdict of ," Suicide under temporary insanity," passing a r t e ie s s ol b u y tio th n e , etoorboneefi, with o . rwarde a d v t i o ew th t e o tphreopaedropatuitohnoroif measures for the public safety. LAW IN7ELLIGENC'E, Dec. 13. COURT OF DIVORCE. (Before Sir C. Cresswell and a Common Jury.) WITT V. WITT AND KLINDWORTII. The hearing of this cause, which commenced on Friday, was resumed, and additional evidence on behalf of the petitioner was adduced. Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Keane appeared for the petitioner ; Mr. Kerslake, Q.C., and Dr. Tristram for the respondent ; and the Queen's Advocate and Mr. Holl for the co-respondent. Mary Hazel, a nursemaid to Mr. and Mrs. Witt, said that when she was first in their service Mr. Klindworth used to call three or four times a week while Mrs. Witt was ill. This was after her husband had left for business in the morning. He used to go up into the bedroom, and she was desired to leave. When she got well audcame down stairs, which was at Christmas time, she used to go out with Mr. Klindworth in a cab, and they were out about an hour or two. She had received letters to post from Mrs. Witt to Mr. Klindworth, and she told her to put them in her pocket and not let Mr. Witt or any one see them. She went with the family to Ton bridge Wells in February. They went to Stetting burgh House, kept by Mrs. Cox. They remained six weeks. Mr. Witt used to come on Saturday night and stay till Monday. Mr. Ktindworth came down two or three times a week, but never while Mr. Witt was there. He generally came by the last train at night and stayed till next morning. He used to sleep in the bed-room upstairs, and Mrs. Witt's bed-room was adjoining to the parlour, with fold ing- doors. On one occasion Mrs. Witt told her to go and sleep in Mr. Klindworth's room, for he was going to sit up with her as she was not very well. Her mistress and Mr. Klindworth were in the din ing-room when she went to bed. When she came down next morning Mr. Kliddworth was in Mrs. Witt's bed-room. He unlocked the door and let her into the bed-room. The following week Mr. Klindworth was again at Tonbridge-wells, and her mistress then told her to sleep in Mr. Klindworth's room, as he was reading some pretty books to her, and he would like to sit up and finish them, and the next morning Mr. Klind worth was in her mistress's bed-room. The following week Mr. Klindworth came again, and she was again sent to Mr. Klind worth's room. She was told not to go up till Mrs. Cox, the landlady, was in bed, and all the lights were out. She said Mr. Klindworth would lie on the sofa, because he was afraid of oversleeping him self, and being too late for the eight o'clock train. The next morning Mr. Klindworth was washing his hands when she first saw him in her mistress's bed room. He went off by the train, and gave her half a-sovereign before he left. She had seen them kiss each other twice. She heard her mistress say before they went to Tonbridge that if it bad not been for the persuasion of her friends she should have married Mr. Klindworth, for she liked him better than Mr. Witt: Cross-examined—Witness went away from Ton bridge, and did not return to London. Her mis tress discharged her because she had been talking to Mrs. Cox about Mr. Klindworth. She told her also that Mrs. Cox said she had beaten the child, and for that reason she discharged witness. Witness was now living at home with her mother at Sudbury, in Suffolk. She had been in Sudbury workhouse confined with an illegitimate child. That was last November. She had also been in Westminster workhouse, from whence she was passed down to Sudbury. While she was living at Mrs. Frost's, Mr. Witt came to her. That was in November, 1861. She went out with Mr. Witt in a cab to his attorney's and came back at twelve o'clock at night. At Tonbridge witness used to sleep with Mrs. Witt, except when Mr. Klindworth came. Mr. Witt slept upstairs when he came down. Mrs. Witt's little child used to sleep in her mother's room in a bed by her side. Mrs. Cox, the landlady of the house at Ton b ridge Weis, recollected Mr. Witt taking lodg ings at her house. It was about February, 1861. He afterwards came with Mrs. Witt and the nurse and child. Mr. Witt always came down on Sa turday, and remained till Monday. He slept in the bedroom on the second floor, not with his wife. Mr. Klindworth came altogether six or eight times to sleep, and once he came when he did not sleep there. He used to sleep on the second floor. One morning she placed herself opposite Mrs. Witt's door about half-past seven. She heard Mr. Klindworth unlock Mrs. Witt's bedroom door and go upstairs. He was dressed, and had his slip pers on. He saw witness in the hall. The nurse was in the bedroom which was taken for Mr. Klind worth. She spoke to Mrs. Witt about the matter, and said it was very unpleasant to have such a thing going on in the house. She said Mr. Klindworth had only been sitting up to have some music. Wit ness told her on one occasion that she thought she had heard the servant slap the child. She was very angry, and said that in consequence of what the servant had said about Mr. Klindworth she should go out of the house directly. Mrs. Witt said Mr. Klindworth bad given her half a sovereign to say nothing about his being there. Mrs. Witt told her afterwards that she had telegraphed for Mr. Klind worth to come down, and he did so. Cross-examined—Witness allowed her daughter to go to town with Mrs. Witt, and she went and stayed six weeks with her. She used occasionally to sit with Mrs. Witt. Mrs. Witt used to complain and appeared unwell whenever Mr. Witt was there; but she was well enough when Mr. Klindworth was there. George Lee, the servant boy in Mr. Witt's ser vice, said he went there about two years ago and remained a year. He had seen Mr. Klindworth dozen times and more at his master's house. He had been sent by Mrs. Witt to Mr. Klindworth's house with letters several times. Mrs. Witt had told him not to say he had been there with letters. H© was sent once to the Hare and Hounds at Hampstead for a comb which had been left there by Mrs. Witt. He was told to remind the people that it belonged to the two persons who had dined in the private room upon steaks. When Mrs. Witt used to go out with Mr. Klindworth, wit ness was told to say she was gone to Mrs. Church's. Witness had received money once or twice from Mr. Klindwoah. The afternoon when Mr. Klindworth came there, after the trip to Tonbridge Wells, Mr. Witt came home, and he had to let Mr. Klindworth out by a side door. Another time, Mr. Witt. was in, and Mrs. Witt expected a visit from Mr. Klindworth, so she told witness to go and watch for Mr. Klindworth. He got over the wall, and saw Mr. Klindworth and told him; where upon he went to the York and Albany to wait, and when his master was gone he went and told Mr. Klindworth, who then came in, and he gave wit ness a shilling. Miss Cox, daughter of the landlady, said she re collected Mr. Klindworth coming to the house, but not when Mr. Witt was there. She confirmed her mother's account. She afterwards went to stay in London with Mrs. Witt ; Mr. Klindworth used then to come three or four times a week, but not when Mr. Witt was at home. They used to go out together sometimes. She said that she had once been to an hotel at. Hampstead to lunch with Mr. Klindworth. Mary Slade—Was formerly a servant with Mr. and Mrs_ Witt. She remembers their going to Ger many. The day before they went Mrs Witt sent her with some of the plate to the pawnbrokers. Mr. Witt did not know of it. A ring was afterwards pawned, and witness was sent to take it out of pawn. Mr. and Mrs. Witt used to live very happy and comfortably together. Several letters were then put in and read. They were written by Mrs. Witt to .her husband while she was residing at Brighton and Tonbridge Wells. The language was of the most affectionate descrip tion, and the terms most endearing. Mr. Karslake then addressed the Court on behalf of Mrs. Witt, and said he should bo able to prove that at the time of the alleged adulterous intercourse Mrs. Witt was in such a state of health as to render such an occurrence most improbable, if not impos sible. He should also show that Mr. Witt'a conduct had been unjustifiable towards his wife •, that he had been in the habit of associating with bad women, and had kept very late hours. He could not deny that the conduct of Mrs. Witt and Mr. Klindworth had been of a mere familiar character than was ju dicious. but there was nothing to prove that any criminal act had taken place between them. It would be shown that during Mrs. Witt's illness her husband was in the habit of taking his male friends, including Mr. Klindworth, into her bedroom while she was in bed, and there they used to smoke and play cards. Such conduct was not at all what you would expect amongst English people. These were all Germans, and very possible it might be no more than was customary among them. At any rate, it showed a laxity of manners that would in a great measure account for the familiarity that had existed between Mrs. Witt and Mr. Klindworth. He then proceeded to call evidence. Mr. Sopwitb, a surgeon at Tonbridge Wells, said MON9AY EVENING, DECEMBER 15, 1862. he remembered attending Mrs. Witt while'she was living at Mrs. Cox's. That was in February, 1861 ; it was the first time he, had ever seen her. He attended her six times. She wis suffering from gre debility. She said she had had a miscar riage, She was in great nervous excitement. Her general health was very weak. The urgent symp toms were relieved in the first two or three days of his attendance. Mr. Clover, a surgeon in London, said he did not knbw Mr. or Mrs. Witt before their marriage. On the 11th of January, 1859, he was first called in. That was four days after her confinement. She was naturally delicate, and she continued weak, and had been so ever since. He was in attendance upon her every mouth in 1859, except in July and Octo ber. She was very seldom able to leave her sofa. In August and September she was delicate, and in the last month she had a miscarriage. She was then fin ther debilitated, but she subsequently got better for a short time. He attended her again in December. In the early part of 1860 she was still very delicate, and on the 25th of June she again mis carried. The child was ill in October, and a nurse was engaged. That was the first week in December. He again attended her in Jan., 1861. She was then pale, with a very weak pulse. He had given his advice that Mrs. Witt should not sleep with her husband, and he spoke to her husband about it. He afterwards gave him to understand that his advice would be acted upon. Mrs. Witt went to Ton bridge Wells at his tidvice. She was then very weak and could hardly walk without assistance. When she returned from Tonbridge "Wells she was better than when she left, but was still delicate. Mrs. Elizabeth Green, a nurse, who attended upon Mrs. Witt in 1859, said she attended her for a month and two days. Mr. Witt kept very bad hours. The further hearing of the case was adjourned to Wednesday next. ASSIZE IN7ELLIGENCE. NORTHERN CIRCUIT—LivmtrooL, Dec. 13. (Before Mr. Commissioner Gurney.) THE CHARGE OF WILFUL DESTRUCTION OF SHIPS. The trial was resumed to-day before Mr. Com missioner Gurney, by Mr. Overend, Q.C., address ing the jury for the defence, The learned gentle man said that he felt keenly the great responsi bility which he incurred in defending a case of so much magnitude, and of such importance to the commercial interests of the country. Bat important as it was in this view, it was also of the greatest possible importance to the administration of justice that persons should not be found guilty of enormous crimes unless npon the safest and most conclusive evidence. Mr. Overend then complained of the disadvantage at which counsel for the defence had been paced by the production yesterday of an over whelming mass of evidence as to insurances and other matters of which they had not received the slightest notice, and which they had not the means of refuting from the books and papers of Ruston, which had been swept away by the police when the prisoner was apprehended, and since retained in the possession of the police. Thus everything that could explain the transactions as to insurances had been taken out of the hands of the defence, while Ruxton's mouth was closed from explanations from the fact of his being a prisoner. Was there ever a grosser case of injustice and tyranny ? Not withstanding these difficulties, however, Mr. Over end hoped to be able to show that all the imputa tions of fraud which had been cast upon the prisoner were delusive. With regard to the question of insur ance, Mr. Overend did not dispute the amounts for which the Roscoe had been insured, but he denied the correctness of Mr. Ellis's calculations, and said that the calls, commissions, and other allowances, would reduce the actual amount which would be received by Buxton to much less than £4,000, and, in fact, not much more than the actual value of the ship. He (Mr. Overend) took the amount of insurance at £3,000. The value of the ship was stated at £l,BOO ; but by what evidence ? It might be worth much more ; in reality was worth more, for only nine months previously Ruxton had himself paid £2,100 for the ship, which had since been repaired at very considerable cost, and was almost converted into a new ship. Of course Ruxton looked at what the vessel had cost in his books, took her at that value, and insured her accordingly; so that if she was worth £2,103, and the subsequent repairs had greatly increased her value, the insurance couid not be excessive. Nor (the learned counsel contended) was the freight over insured. Buxton's freight was £l,OOO, and he had a perfect right to insure for the whole amount of freight which the vessel would earn for the whole round, including the voyage to and from Quebec. With regard to effects not actu ally on board having been insured, Mr. Overend urged that the testimony adduced upon this point was most loose and unreliable, and totally unworthy of being acted upon by the jury. Next was the accusation that the vessel was insufficiently found for a voyage which included Quebec in its round ; but it was admitted by James, the mate, that the vessel was well found for a voyage to Smyrna, both in provisions and spa, s. The prosecution assumed that this evidently showed an intention not to pro ceed to Quebec at all, else the vessel would have been provisioned at Liverpool for the round ; but in thp absence of evidence to the contrary, Mr, Over end asked the jury to believe that provisions of all kinds could be obtained more cheaply at Smyrna than at Liverpool, and that had the ship suriived to reach Smyrna she would have been reprovisioned accordingly. Thus, then, the premises upon which the prosecution built their case, viz., that the pri soner in the large amount of over-insurance had an inducement to the alleged crime, fell to the ground. Coining next to the charge of setting fire to the ship, the learned counsel asked if it was possible to suppose that a greater scoundrel could exist than Jamieson, the chief witness for the prosecution—the man who had sunk the ship and imperilled the lives of those on board in order to deceive the under writers, and who had admitted that in the statement made at Smyrna, as to the loss of the vessel, he had perjured himself. Jamieson, in fact, had covered himself with eternal infamy, and his evidence was not worthy of the slightest credit. If Ruxton had ordered him to commit such a deed, and he had ac tually perpetrated it, was it likely he would do so for nothing ? But did he claim any reward from Rux ton on his return from Smyrna? Did he come back and claim, and receive £2OOO, half the profits of the viilan- ? No ; he came back, made no claim, actu ally entered again into Ruston's service as captain, had even disputes and a lawsuit with him about wages, but never mentioned the destruction of the ship, and the charge against Ruxton, until five years afterwards, and when the reward and free pardon were offered by the Home-office. But was it to be supposed that if the story now told by Jamie son were true, and Ruxton had thus become Jamie son's sl ive for life, he would not have been bled both by Jamieson and by James to the uttermost ; whereas, on the contrary, neither of the men had asked him for a farthing of " hush money" during the several years which had elapsed ? They had, in fact, gained nothing by their knowledge of the pri soner's guilt, though they had everything to gain by coming forward before and impeaching him. The fr et th, , t they did not do so was, Mr. Overend urged, the strongest possible proof that the story told by Jamieson and his confederates was a con cocted one, and that the prot e st w hi c h th e y ma d e a t Smyrna shortly after the destruction of the ship was the true version of that destruction. With regard to James, if he did hear the conversations which he had described, was it not his bounden duty to have re monstrated, and made some inquiry into the matter? Pee might certainly have told the crew, and it was unreasonable to suppose that out of regard for his own safety alone he would not have done so, and ac cused Ruxton before the world, instead of allowing five years to elapse. Besides, the story of the de struction of the ship was improbable on other grounds. Was it likely that if fire was to be the mode edopted the prisoner would have spent £ll7 upon brandy and other spirits, whereas ss. worth of turpentine would have done the work better? The whole of the circumstances of the case were consis tent with the view of the fire having arisen from accidental or spontaneous combustion of the coals. If water'got amongst coal, stored as that was on board the Roscoe, the coal would become ignited, and it was most natural that with a head wind, and straining as she was, water would find its eiay into the hold, while the opening of the hatch which com munieeted with the sail room would tend to aggra vate the fire. It was proved that the hatch had been opened for the men to get at the sails to mend them, and by the air thus introduced, Mr. Overend contended, the smouldering fire had been awakened. In conclusion, the learned counsel commented upon the evdence of Bickley, which he said deserved no more credit than that of Jamieson and James. They were all in the same boat, and Bickley had confessed himself to be a scoundrel and a villain by the ad mission that he had listened to the contemplated fraud upon the underwriters and had shared in the plunder. No witnesses being called for the defence, The learned Judge summed up, analysing the evidence with great care, and pointing out the por tions which were of the most importance for the jury to consider. With regard to the value of the ship, it would have been more satisfactory to have had evidence from persons who had surveyed the ship at the time she set out on her voyage. The jury. therefore, must form the best judgment they could of that value. Almost the only direct evi dence against the prisoner was that of Jamieson, an accomplice (supposing the prisoner to be guilty), and whose evidence was tainted in every possible way. Having commented upon Jamieson's and James's evidence, and shown some contradictions, his lordship did not attach so mach importance to the words " Be back soon," which Ruston was heard to say to Jamieson on parting in the Channel, nor to the fact that James did not expose the con versation immediately atter he h<•:d heard it in the cabin. There was, his lordship thought, more im portance attaching to the declaration which James had made at Smyrna, that the vessel was acci dentally destroyed ; and to tne strangeness of the eircumstr, nce that James, when he had known the ltocoe to have been purposely destroyed, should have entered on board another ship, of which the prisoner was the owner and Jamieson the captain. It was only fair to suppose that unless James was utterly unable to obtain employment in another way he would have preferred sailing in a ship owned and commanded by other persons. The evidence of I3iekley, his lordship thought, was fairly open to most of the objections made to it by th© learned counsel. He (the learned judge) could have no opinion of the honesty of a man who, having heard the statements which I3ickley had described, could not only remain silent and not inform the underwriters, but who, according to his own account, was to receive a portion of the proceeds of the fraud in the payment of his own debt.. The jury then retired to consider their verdict. After several hours' absence they returned with a verdict of not guilty. 4 The prisoner, however, on leaving the court, was arrested on another charge, which will be preferred hereafter. The arrest was made by detective officer Carlisle under a warrant from the Lord Mayor of London. The warrant charged Ruxton with con spiring with others to defraud en insurance company of the sum of £6OO. OXFORD CIRCUIT.—WORCESTER, DEC. 13. (Before Mr. Justice Mellor.) _ MURDER. Ochold, an old man, whose age was stated at 69, was indicted for the wilful murder of his wife, Sophia Ochold, at Oldbury, in this county, on the Bth November last. Mr. Richards and Mr. Griffiths conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Benson, at the request of the learned judge, defended the prisoner. The prisoner and the deceased had been married just half a century, and the old man carried on the business of a tailor, in which his wife assisted him. They did not live very happily together; the pri soner accusing his wife of intemperance, and fre quently beating her. The deceased had for soma time past suffered from disease of the kidneys, and on Friday, the 7th November, was ill from that cause. On that evening a young woman named Maria Grazebrook, a servant at a public-house near, who was very intimate with the Ocholds, called in to see the old people (whom she called her grand father and grandmother, although not related to them), and found the prisoner seated on a table at work at his trade, and the deceased lying on the ground apparently in great pain. The young wo man offered to get the deceased some tea, but she declined, and the prisoner also said" No; she wants to go to bed and groan, and keep me awake all night as she did last night, but she shall not keep me awake again to-night." Soon after the son and daughter of the deceased came in, and after giving her some tea, put her to bcd. She was unable to walk, and her son carried her upstairs. About 3 o'clock on the following morning, as policeman Hutchins was passing the house, he heard a noise which he thus described in his evidence : Police-constable Daniel Hutchins deposed—l was on duty between 3 and 4 o'clock on the morning of Nov. 8, and passed the prisoner's house. Heard the prisoner down stairs cursing and swearing and making a great noise. He seemed to be cursing at some one up stairs. Herd groans up stairs. 1 went away and in about 10 minutes returned, when I heard some one whom I believed to be the prisoner go to the foot of the stairs. I listened and heard the prisoner mock at the groans. He said " You -- old cat, you're very bad, I dare say, but I never knew you when you were good." He also said " -- your old eyes, if you don't come down stairs I'll ' Did not hear the rest of the sentence. Remained in the street till 4 o'clock, and heard the prisoner repeat his mocking and swearing. Had often heard it before. Jeremiah Bradley was in the stables, about 10 yards from the prisoner's house, about 4 o'clock on the same morning, and heard the prisoner use very bad language to his wife. Heard the deceased say " Oh, Bill, don't kill me ; my head is ready to split." It did not strike him that he ought to interfere. Maria Grazebrook deposed that on going again to the prisoner's house on the morning of the Bth, and asking after his wife, the prisoner said she had been drinking with one Jack Hadley on the previous night. (This statement was afterwards disproved.", He objected to her going upstairs to see her, but she persi ted in going, and then found her lying dead on the floor with her face covered with blood. There was a broken mopsti,l in the prisoner's room down stairs. There was also blood upon the stairs, and witness picked up a quantity of the deceased's hair. Mr. Cooper, surgeon, of Oldbury, made a post mortem examination, and found several bruises on the body, but the chief injuries were in the head. There was an extravasation of blood on the brain. The right temporal muscle was reduced to the con sistency of a piece of liver by recent violence • and on dissecting it down to the cheek b one h e found the arch of the cheek bone broken. The other cheek bone was healthy. This injury could not have been caused by a fall, but might have been produced by blows from some hard substance, not the fist. Mr. Benson, for the prisoner, made a powerful defence, and urged that the crime was one of man slaughter, not murder. His lordship carefully summed up, and rather favoured the same view. The jury, however, after being locked up for an hour, found the prisoner Guilty. His lordship then proceeded to pass sentence of death upon the prisoner in the usual form, and in reference to a recommendation of mercy made by the jury on account of his advanced age, said that recommendation should be forwarded to the proper quarter, 711 E POWER OF A 111AG1STRA7E 70 RECEIVE BAIL IN CASES OF FELONY. Mr. Beard, the solicitor for the plaintiff in the case "Ricketts v. Stone," which was an action for false imprisonment tried on Wednesday last before Lord Chief Baron Pollock, and who also gave evi dence in the case, happening to be present in the Lambeth Police-court on Saturday, to defend an omnibus summons, was addressed by Mr. Norton, who remarked that from what he read in the papers of the trial, there must be some misconception in the minds of the Lord Chief Baron and jury respecting his (Mr. Beard's) application for bail, and what took place on that occasion. In the first place, he (Mr. Beard) must have known that he (Mr. Norton) had not the power to accept bail at all—a fact which seemed to have been lost sight of altogether—while in his (Mr. Beard's) evi dence, it appeared that be (Mr. N.) " declined to entertain the application," without going into any reasons for his refusal, Ho could not charge his memory with recollecting what passed when the application was made, but he could venture to assert that he had given some reason for his refusal— such as that he had not heard the case, or that he bad not the legal power to accept bail, and he t ought it was but lair that the reason given for his refusal should have been stated to the Court. Mr. Beard was free to confess his igorance of the fact that while prisoners were under examination on thr commitment of one magistrate they could not be admitted to bail by another until he read his worship's explanation in print, and he might add that his opinion in this particular was not singular,as it was the opinion of a popularmetropo litan magistrate, who was set right also by his (Mr. Norton's) statement. He (Mr. Beard) did not re collect what had taken place on the occasion of his application to his worship, but he did recollect that his reply was substantially a refusal to enter tain his application for bail. He begged further io say that the question as to the refusal of bail did not originate with the counsel engaged by the plaintiff or himself, but in giving her evidence the plaintiff herself said she had been in prison for a week, whereupon the judge made some remarks, and he (Mr. Beard) was called into the witness-box to ex plain the matter. Mr. Norton—On referring to the case, I find that the examination of the parties took place on Tuesday. Now, if they were so respectable as de scribed, why had you not made your application on the Wednesday, when you would have found Mr. Elliot sitting, and that magistrate would, I feel satisfied, have been most happy to release your clients, if you could have shown anything favour able to them. Mr. Beard--The fact was that • the parties had been locked up at Norwood on the Monday night, and had therefore no opportunity of communication with their friends. On 'luesday they were re- manded to Horsemonger-lane, and I received no in structions in the case until late on Wednesday, or on the Thursday morning. Mr. Norton—lt is really hard that my name should have been called in question, and that I should be held up to the public as one who acted not only harshly, but illegally, in a case where the liberty of the subject was concerned; that a whole jury should step out of their province to denounce the practice of this court, of which they can know nothing. From a very lengthened experience I am prepared to say that, as regards the liberty of the subject and the formal business of the court, there cannot be a bett er regulation than that of one magis trate sitting the first three days of the week, and the other the last three days. Mr. Beard—That, I am bound to say, is also the opinion of Mr. Selfe and other magistrates. Mr. , Norton -- I lAye not hiul an opportunity or seeing Mr. Elliott on the subject, but I have read over the depositions in the case, and I am bound to.say that it was not one in which I should have accepted hail, and that a week was as little time as could be given to trace out the property alleged to have been stolen. The magistrates are always as accessible as the judges. I myself have frequently attended at this court to receive bail in doubtful cases, and should not at any time have the slightest objection to receive at my residence an application for bail for persons under remand, or committed, where anything favourable to them could be shown, and I feel satisfied Mr. Elliott would do the same. Mr. Beard—l should not feel justified in troubling a magistrate at his private residence. Mr. Norton—l cannot see why you should not, where the liberty of the subject is concerned. I re peat, that I feel my name has been most unfairly called in question in a matter in which I only acted in strict accordance with the law, and I cannot sub mit to rest under an unjust imputation while I feel I am right. IHE SISTERS OF JeSSI2 111,LACHLAN. The following has been transmitted to the Glas gow Herald by a lady in Edinburgh, distinguished for her benevolent spirit and literary abilities : " Sir,—l had a most affecting interview yesterday with tha unfortunate sister of the notorious Mrs. M'Lachlan, who is utterly ruined by the bad fame of that wretched cul prit, and is now emigrating to Australia, having been dis missed from the family in which she had been hitherto a respectable servant. The case seemed so hard, of visiting the sins of one sister on another, that I subscribed 30s. to assist in the poor girl's outfit, but lamented not being able to do more. I never saw any one suffering under such in tense despair—not loud but deep. She is to be accompanied by a sister equally destitute. They have got a passage from the Emigration Society ; but it occurs to me that among the numerous admirers of Mrs. M'Lachlan in Glasgow there may be some who would humanely extend their sympathy to the innocent as well as to the guilty, and bestow some pecuniary assistance on those poor outcasts, who are driven from their respectable homes as servants into a banishment as distressing as if they had been themselves culprits. I had their papers carefully examined and their story tested by a clergyman, who is convinced of the truthfulness of their calamity. Therefore, I now appeal to the enthusiasm of Glasgow for generous help to those whom no judge or jury ever condemned, and who would desire to share in some of the interest felt in Mrs. M'Lachlan, as they are ruined by her disgrace. I enclose my card, and shall convey to the sufferers any donations. They sail in a few days, banished for life from friends and country, to struggle in a distant land.—Yours, " C. S." The editor of the Herald will take charge of and remit any sums which may be committed to his charge in behalf of those innocent and unfortunate girls. The following pert epistle appears in Tuesday's Glasgow Herald, from one of the sisters of the con vict M‘Lacillan : " Edinburgh, 7th December, 1862. " Sir,—l take the trouble of writing these few lines to inform you that I want no subscriptions gathered for me, and I advise you for your own sako not to publish my name in your Herald again.—l remain, yours, "ANN WINTosH." 7HE WORK OF REFORMA7ORIES. The value of the reformatory system for the diminution and prevention of crime may to some extent be estimated by observing first, the reduction effected in the number of young offenders committed to prison since the establish ment of reformatories, and secondly, the proportion of those placed under reformatory treatment , who have relapsed into criminal courses after their discharge from the institutions to which I hey were sent. The results under the first head are very satisfactory so far as they can be ascertained :—the number of commit ments of offenders under sixteen years of age has fallen in England and Wales from 13,981 in 1856 to 8,801 in 1862, showing a decrease for 1861 as compared with 1856 of 37 per cent., or, allowing for the increase of p opulation, of 43 per cent. These figures are not strictly accurate, inasmuch as our criminal returns give only the total commitments to each prison in each year, without noticing how many of these belong to each individual, but as the same plan was in use in each of the years under notice, the amount of error is inconsiderable. The number of young offenders com mitted to prison after steadily decreasing in each year from 1856 to 1860, rose in 1861 about 9 per cent. on the preced ing year. One cause which has tended to bring about this reaction, is to be found in the exceptional circumstances under which our labouring poor, especially in the manu facturing districts, have been suffering during the year. The inspector remarks that scarcity of employment and dearness of food affect more especially the discharged criminals, "a class which is every year considerably augmenting, and whose increase tells very seriously on the amount of juvenile delinquency." He also gives his opi nion that some of the increase in juvenile commitments in 1861 must be attributed to the mis-use and over-use of re formatories. Out of the 1,545 young offenders sent to reformatories in 1861, 976, or over 60 per cent., were sentenced on a first commitment, and nearly one -fourth were under twelve years of ago. The commitments, in many instances, were for very light offences, and the sentence was awarded rather in anticipation of what the child might become, than for its actual criminality of viciousness. From the reformatories in England and Scotland, 1,866 persons have been discharged up to December 31st, 1860. Of these, at the time of the Inspector's inquiry, 1,140 were " doing well," 186 had been "again convicted" of crime, 161 were " of doubtful character," 43 were since dead, and 336 were reported as " unknown." These figures give the following percentage of success and failure, taking the numbers of these known to be doing well, and of those again convicte d We do not clearly see the connection between creed and crime, but as the report denotes the religious denominations —so far at least as to distinguish between Protestants and Roman Catholics—wo give the per-centages under the same headings. Doing well. Re-convicted. English Protestant Boys 65 per cent. 10.6 per cent. „ Catholic „ 49 2, 11.5 )7 2/ Protestant Girls 42 „ 6 /9 „ Catholic „ 54 „ 4 1/ Scotch Protestant Boys 74 „ 9 ~ Girls 42 // 7 1 , ) 2 9 Dependence 3 is most to be placed upon the numbers which aro known to be doing well, which the figures above show to be 54 per cent., or rather more than one half of the total number discharged, This result is rather below our anti cipations, and it is also below the estimate given by the in spector in another part of the report, where he states the amount of success to be at least 70 per cent.—Social Science Review. VIC7OR _HUGO AND HIS "INDIGENT LITILE FRIENDS." In a letter to the Paris publisher, Victor Hugo says : " I have lately established in my house in Guernsey, a little institution or practical fraternity which I should be glad to see developed, and yet more, imitated. It is so slight an affair that I may venture to mention it. It is a weekly meal given to indigent children. Every week the mothers of these poor children do me the honour to bring them to dine at my house. At first I had eight of them, then fifteen ; now I have twenty .three, All these childien dine together—English, French, Irish, Catholics, Protes tants—all are mingled together, without distinction of re ligion or of nation. I invite them that they may be happy and merry. I say to them, 'be free.' They begin and end their respect with a thanksgiving to God, perfectly simple, and apart from anything dogmatic, or that could be construed into the profession of anything sectarian. My wife, my sister, my sister-in-law, my sons, and my ser vants, all wait upon these children. They eat meat and drink wine, both necessary elements of the food of child hood. AftEr dinner they play, and then go to school. Catholic priests, Protestant ministers, men addicted to philosophical speculation, and exiled democrats some times assist at this modest communion; and I do not see that anyone looks dissatisfied on quitting us. I cut short my recital, but it appears to me that I have said enough to show that this idea, the introduction of poor families into families lets poor than themselves—an introduction of equa lity in which all stand for the moment on the same level— if developed by better men than myself—by the heart of women, above all—might not be a bad thing. I believe it to be practicable and likely to bear good fruit; and this is why a speak of it in the hope that those who can and will imitate it may do so. It is not almsgiving, but fraternisation. This bringing of the families of the indigent into our midst is as profitable to ourselves as to them. It gives, as it were, a first outline of solidarity ; it bring before us, into play and int') action, as a living fact, the holy democratic formula— liberty, equality, fraternity. It is a communion with our less fortunate brethren. We learn to serve them and they learn to love us." He gives his consent to a proposal for the inquiry and publication of "certain sketches done by him in those dreamy hours when one is scarcely conscious of what one is doing, with the drops of ink remaining in his pen, on the margins or c vers of manuscripts"—the pro ceeds to constitute the civil lists of little indigent friends. " Winter," he says, " is at hand ; I shall not be sorry to give clothes to those who come to us in rags, and shoes to those who are going barefoot." [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Ointment and Pills.-- Indisputable Remedies.—ln the use of these medicaments there need be no hesitation or doubt of their cooling, heal ing, and purifying properties. Holloway's preparations must always do good—both should find a place in every household. The Ointment stands unrivalled for the faci lity it displays in relieving, healing, and thoroughly curing the most inveterate sores, ulcers, and in cases of bad lets th e y act as a charm, as tholsands will t es tif y w h o tried ' them, and would have lost their limbs by amputation but for this wonderful medicine. The p• sti mulating, and regulating every orgainll,s remedial virtues of this excellent Ointm,gebrnyeta,PtllltyhriefayYsislacisgat: cannot will always do good when the possibly do any harm, wo Mimed. WILLS AND BEQUESTS. (From the Illustrated London .4. l lrews.) The will of Sir James Francis Doughty Tichborne, Bart., of Tichborne Park, near Alresford, Hants, was proved in Loudon by the executors and trustees, William Motyn, Esq,, of Cork-street, Burlington-gardens, and Vincen t Gosford, Esq., of Tan-y-Ilan, Flintshire. The personalty was sworn under £lB,OOO. The testator bequeaths to his relict, Dowager Lady Tichborne, a life interest in a certain portion of the properly, together with a legacy of £l,OOO, a carriage, and the plate bearing the Tichborne crest, which was purchased in France, and is principally of French manufacture (the rest of the family plate, furniture, articles of virtu, paintings, statuary, &c., are to be retained as heirlooms with the title and estate), and appoints his se a and successor to the baronetcy residuary legatee. There are legacies to his executors, and to some personal friends, a nd others; also, to his butler, bailiff, gardener, and other servants, as well as to the poor Catholics of Tichborne an d to St, Elizabeth's Hospital, Great Ormond-street, Londo n ' and the Reformatory, Mount St. Bernard, Leicester. Th ° will bears date the 6th of February, 1861, being two months prior to the marriage of his (the testator's) son an d only surviving child, now in his 22d year. The testator died at the age of 77. I The will of John Corrie, Esq., of Southington, South ampton, was proved in London under £lOO,OOO personalth the executors nominated being the relict, together With John Akers Hankey, Esq., of Westbourne -terrace, UP ° , Park, and Henry Rutt, Esq., of Upper Clapton. The W i s, was executed in 1855. To his relict, who enjoysa life inters t over £30,000 under marriage settlement, the testator makes some further provision; and, after leaving legacies to a feW friends, to his executors, and to his servants, directs ths entire residue of his property to be divided into three parts' bequeathing to each of his two nieces a third, and the re • maining third to the three daughters of his niece Caroline by her former husband, in equal proportions. The will of William Kentish, of Grove Villa, Belmont' hill, Lee, Kent, was proved in the London Court on t he 15th ult. The personalty was sworn under £lOO,OOO. Tile testator was of that highly-established firm, Rowe, Ne w tish, and Osborne, 16, Change-alley, Cornhill, engravers of bankers' security cheques' and bank notes. The will bear o date April 15, 1861, and is contained in a few lines, whereby the testator disposes of the whole of his property, real And personal, to his relict absolutely. LABO U.RERS' COTTAGES. Never let us be deceived by the ignis fatuus of ans . mental cottages, where the principal element, good drain' age, is neglected. Your cottages or nee, where architecture gives place to every o,ther consideration, aro mere " solem n shams"—traps to catch the unwary. A. well-drain ed roomy cottage, with fire-places in every room (a feat ure oftentimes overlooked), and a good supply of pure Wat er/ are the three primary essentials. Although condemning the ornamental to the partial ° I ; total exclusion of the useful, we are by no means of th class who consider cottage impnvements consist only looking after the internal condition ; something mus t b ! done for the external. The ro man ti c co tt age o f Curabs' .. land has its own peculiar charm, as well as the humb l y : thatched one of Hampshire, or the half- woo d en one ofi el t . We must not cast all our cottages in the same mo uld, lr a the houses in some of our London squares, or much r turesqueness would vanish from the land. We m ust 10' vide for the pig and the small poult r y-y ar d, as we ll as a le a rustic vase and the climbers and patch of vegetables 101. flowers. In this case each family must be the judge 0f .. . 1 1 own peculiar wants and capacities, a ccor di ng t o the aln ° ,7,, of space, labour, or capital which eac h can i nv est. ".'" rule can be laid down except the necess it y o f providl sufficient space. A cottage, with a si m pl e ra ili ng round 1 . 0 is not of half the value to the labouring man that one 0 which has adjacent space for a pig and poultry, an d M a ny few vegetables and flowers. an industrious l a ': with a good helpmate, will earn enough to pay hi s rent P i such means. His manure heap also sh ou ld no t be kePt of view, as there are many things at p resen t discarded ell useless which may be utilised, such as roa d scra pings,d it il bottoms, the excreta of fowls, offal, fi s h, an d night 15 ° which latter may be rendered innocuous by the addition % a little quicklime. It should not be left reeking outside th dwelling, but as far removed as possible from it. The system of garden allotments has al so b een found!, be another powerful incentive t o w ar d s i mpro ving 1 ; 0 status of the agricultural cl asses . S ma ll mon ey Pti% given for the best vegetables, flowers, and fruit, fo rm source of incentive to i n di v id ua l exertion' which canno t Da too highly praised. " The glorious flower that bore the prize awe d is not to be deemed unsuitable as one of the constituents cottage improvement, although we ar e not admirers 0.: "statute-coloured tulips, and act-of-parliament P° l : gail h t thuses." The " gadding vine" is another tree which (Mg. to be in every cottage garden, wheth e r trained over. tn; house, or the trellis-work and arbours.—Social Sct en Review. COUNTRY MA RILL 2 I- , LEICESTER—SATURDAY. r 3 6 Old white wheat, 58s to 665; new, 46s to 50s per a , stone. Old red, 54s to 57s per 36 stone. Barl e y, rnalti ll ; new, 34s to 38s per qr.; grinding, 28s to 30s ; old oa 28s to 32s ; new oats, 22s to 25s per 24 stone. B e ' w°f new, —s to —s ; old, 42s to 44s per 38 stone. NORTHAMPTON—SATURDAY. New wheat, 46s to 51s ; o ld, 50 s t o 56 5. Barley, Ito to 39s per qr. New oat s q uo t e d a t 24 s to 28 e ; 01t,,, to to 32s,per 24 stone. Bean s , o ld, 39 s t o 42 5; n ew, b" 38s. Peas, 36s to 44s per qr. NOTTINGHAM—SATURDAY. 56° 4 White wheat, from 42s t o 63 8 ; re d w h ea t, 41s to o os Barley—malting, 34s to 42s ; grinding, 288 to 30s. 3 49 old, at 258 to 31s Od; new, 23s to 275. Beans sold at to 45s per qr, Flour, 41s to 445. YORK-- SATURDAY. to 240 ' 0 Wheat, red 44s to 48 s O a t s.... ........ 40 22 , to 42,0 ..... 0 'White do Ns to 66s Bean s . ...., s to 404 Barley .30s to 36s Pe as Malt, 64s to 6Gs per qr. ; r y e , 39 s per qr. ii .fl°lll.' to 42s per sack. NORW ICH—SATURDAY. best oril There was a tolerable supply of wheat, and the sl'o were fully as dear. Sales proceeded slowly. Other g unaltered. White wheat. 46s to 50- Red wheat 430 to 354: I Malting barley ... 36s to 37s Chevalier barley 2 3 4 3 6 t FA o 0 4 , g.•• Distilling d 0.... • 28s to 30s I Oats.. Flour, 34s Od to —s Od per sack from the miller' -FRIDAY. rl ' Irish grain to-day , an- t s qll' reral buyers of foreign and flour slow. •s• (11 0 s. d• Beans.. .240 L0 , 6 0 Bere . l5 3 to 0 . Rapeseed -- oto 1. 6 6 Oat mea l l5 oto , 0 6 Bakers' flour Indian corn 31 0 to DUBLIN• There was a fair supply of dition poor. Sales slow. Se' at 6d lower in pica. Maize -s. cl. s. d. Wheat, white 30 0 to 34 0 Do., red 27 0 to 32 0 Do., new - 0 Barley Oats Do., black l4 6 to 16 6 CORK—FRIDAY. Rea . The following were th e quo t a ti ons thi s mor ning•• ,1 1 ° wheat, 16s Od to 23s 6d ; w hit e , 22 s Od t o 27 s Od, bar Od to 15s Od ; oats, 75 Od to 14s Od. ; new here, - -15 —a Od. FOREIGN MAIL PACKET LIST. MAILS DUE. Top 0. 1 .; 9. Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton. ...... — e . 1-' via Marseilles ... ...... ' O . 4 ' Brazil and Cape Verds, by British packet. ....... j o . 2. 0. Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St, Helena.. iv ,. I ', China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton..;„ la• via Marseilles .. !! 0 , 4. Falkland Islands .. .. ....... pee. -n, Gibraltar, via Southampton India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Marseilles... ve , 1 . India (Bombay), via Southampton ............ Dec. via Marseilles ..... 4. .... .W. l l, Portuga 1.... Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton ..... pee. 10, via Marseilles ....... Deo. ' Newfoundland via S:o . u . t . h . a . m . p .. to : n : ..................... ............... .0. Oporto and Vigo ....... ~' ... .. Deo. ' U. S. and British N. Amarica, by Brit. Pa c t e ",... O. by 'U.S. Pa ci " 3 ")Deo• 10. by Canadian pac ke t . Dec._,, W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe ......... „ eo . i,. Bahamas, via New York .......... ............ D ec .- P Mexico•• • l s' All parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru, !DO' California, an d B r iti s h C o l um bi a.. .......... ____.........ed-- BIRTHS. the Pal FOTHRTNOHAM.—On the 12th inst., at Algiers, Charlotte Fothringham, of a son, n Itf i* GRIFFITHS —On the 11t11 inst., at Croydon.cotao l°' W. V. Griffiths, of a daughter. 130 , ROGER B . On t un h gN e .T l .A 3 l t A h oß i ri n i s tz t hl . bury, Mrs. F. Rogers, of ;win daughters. id ha lf SETON.—On the 9th inst., at Randolph House, g a " g. • the Hon. Mrs. Scton, of a son. JtA ilieti Chadwick, P. ClT H A o n u N s v e :x it — e : di eldest daughter of William ' of C h°l° _sq., of Ararat, Australia to Su sa elei Hunt, Esq., 0 199'° ' EVANS—B n Th e ° ttSg e ' - —CjWN E. —Oa the 12th inst., at St. inst. ,at EarleY , the Portman • bquare, Edward Evans, Esq., Newton „-- ( Lane, Chester, to Agnes, youngest daughter of Robt. 1)1 " Esq., Gloucester-place, Portman-square. DEATII S. Can ter' CLARKE.--011 the 11th inst., at Westboro, near bury, R. F. Clarke, Esq., aged GO. 00 1 . 112. IREDELL —On the Bth inst., at Blenheim House, slow, Lieut.-Col. Iredell. • t R ill JEFFERYES.—On the 7th inst., at Dublin, St un Jefferyes, Esq., Blarney Castle, Cork. „ A d I t doww" - . MATHEW.— On the 12th inst., at 35, POT s . of 0 . 0 Maida-vale, Edmund P. L. Mathow, Esq.) l at° 34th Regt , aged 32. se,ot t f William wt. SCOTT. —On the 12th inst., at Edinburgh, 1 stock ' Esq., of Blackheath-park, Kent, and of the change, London, aged 75. ---------------‹ eAlaGtli,thl:jArundel-piace, - - - LONDON: Printed and Publishe d by JO HN Cll.O o.11'111,! of No. 112, Strand, I'rinter, at THE Slav Office, NOl Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the CountY AliddleseL—Monclay, Pecanber 10, 1861