The Sun. — London, England, 1859-12-26 00:00:00

LAW INTELLJIGENCE--Dec• 24• COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE. • (Before Sir C. Cresswell.) SOBWITIT V. SOPINITI-1. Dr. Phillimore,, Q.C., and Dr. Spinks appeared for the petitioner ; N. K. Macaulay, Q.C. , and Dr. Wamb ey for the respondent. Mrs. Natilda Sopwith, the petitioner, prayed for a judicial separation on the ground of, adultery. The 'respondent, Mr. Henry Lidsell Sopwith, denied the charge. The case for the petitioner appeared in The Sun of Friday. The case of the respondent was that there was no foundation for I:'he allegations in the petition, that the evidence by Ne f.eich they were supported was un worthy of credit, an d that it had been got up en tirely by the professiLenal detectives employed by the petitioner. Evide.e.ce was gi b ven a surgeon named Parker, who had att ended lea y rietta Pearce in her confinement, and by' other witnesses, which clearly established that she was not the sane per son as Mary Ann Prickett,aia_ eel for tit petitioner gave u p that d the le part case. learned conn- Mrs. Prickett and he r daughter Mary Ann were then called, and positively denied the statements of the witnesses for the petitioner as to improper familiarities having passed between Mary Ann and Mr. Sopwith. Tay stated that she had been in Mr. Sopwith's service for many years during the life of his first wife ; that he always attended her - par ents and her brothers and sisters, of whom she had a number ; that she left his ser vice in May, 1857, and came to London to assist her in carrying on a millinery beisiness at Islington ; that she remained in London about eight months, and went back to her family in conse quence of her father's illness ; that on the 11th of January, 1858, her father, who had been the bailiff to a gentleman of property near Tunbridge, died, and the family became reduced in circumstances; that the mother and the eldest daughters thence forth supported the rest of the family by needle work, and that Mr. Sopwith, being an old friend of the family, befriended them and procured them employment. Among other things that he em ployed Mary Ann to do was the copying of entries of vaccination from a book kept by himself into a large register, and this obliged her to make fre quent visits to his office. She asserted that no act of familiarity of any , kind had ever passed between her and her master, but she admitted that she went rather late to his house on the night of the meeting of the Odd Fellows' club, in 1858, to fetch some medicine for her grandmother, who was ill, but she only stayed while the medicine was being prepared. Since the separation she had returned to Mr. Sop with's setvice, and is still in it. Several questions were put to her in cross-examination with regard to communications she had made tan Miss Bott, with whom she was intimate when she was in Lon don, with regard to Mr. Sopwith, but she denied them all, and said she never saw Mr. Sopwith in London. and never had a letter from him except once, when she had written to ask after her father's health. As to the closing of the keyhole of Mr. Sopwith's room, it was snggested by the learned counsel that it was a natural precaution for a medi carman to take who had patients frequently call ing to consult him. At the clo&e of the respondent's case, Miss Bott was called in reply by Dr. Phillimore and said she was a milliner at Islington ; that she had worked for Mary Ann Prickett when she was in London in 1857, and that Mary Ann Prickett had shown her photographs of Mr. Sopwith ; that she frequently received letters from him, and some times went out in order, as she represented, to meet him, and that she were a gold watch and chain and a cameo brooch which she said Mr. Sopwith had given her. Mr. K. Macaulay summed up, and Dr. Philli more replied. Sir C. Cregtwell said he had last night examined the'evidence given in support of the petition care fully, and he hoped dispassionately; and, having now heard the evidence on the other side, and had the advantage of the very able speeches of counsel, he • had formed a very decided opinion upon the case, and he felt bound to express it at once. The case was a very unhappy one. Shortly after the marriage the husband and the parents of the wife became estranged, and it there had been a little more consideration and conciliation on the part of Mr. and Mrs. Deane, the discussion about a separa tion would probably never have taken place. But they appeared to have arrayed themselves hostilely against Mr. Sopwith, and after the separation they began to cast about to find some explanation of his apparent coldness towards his wife. Naturally enough, they hit on the stipposition that he pre ferred some other woman. They accordingly ap plied to Shaw, a professed discoverer of malprac tices of that sort, and employed him. to find out, if he-could, some delinquency of Mr. Sopwith. There was no suggestion from the beginning to the end of the case that up to that period there was the slightest foundation for any suspicion against him. Shaw was employed as early as August, 1858, and from that time down to May or June, 1859, he was at work without producing any result. I feel bonnd. his lordship continued, to make some ob servations upon the subject of the employment of men of the class to which Shaw belongs. They may sometimes be instrumental in discovering mal practices which would otherwise remain concealed, but—l say it advisedly—it is my opinion that they are very dangerous agents. Police detectives are most useful ; they are employed by a Government establishment, they are responsible to superior officers, they have no pecuniary interest in the result of their investigations, and they may be and are constantly employed safely and, with benefit to the public ; but when a man sets up as a hired dis coverer of supposed delinquencies, when the amount of his pay is dependent on the extent of his employ ment, and the extent of his employment depends on what he is able to discover, that man becomes a most dangerous agent. It appears that Shaw, not being sufficiently' clever or sufficiently vigilant, another person was set to work. That man, To pp, has been intrusted by the attorney for the petitioner to do that duty which properly belonged to the attorney. He has had the seeking out of all the witnesses, he has communicated with them again and again; and it is not until the last moment, after the briefs had been prepared, that they were examined by the at torney's clerk. I trust the time is far distant when professional men, regularly educated and entered on the rolls of the courts to which they aro respon sible for their conduct, will abandon their proper branch of the profession, and put 'it into the hands of such persons as those who appear to have been engaged in the conduct of this case. His lordship thew proceeded to examine minutely the evidence of the witnesses on both sides. Who was it suggested that Pearce, who was delivered of a child in Feb ruary, 1858, was the same person as Prickett ? What foundation was there for the surmise, and what inquiries were made as to its truth When Wilson hesitated in her identification of Pearce with Prickett, why was not her mother called either to confirm or contradict her? There was no proof of familiarities between Mr. Sopwith and Prickett ex cept in the evidence of Buss, a man of prurient ima gination, apt to look through keyholes, and desir ous of seeing indecency whenever he had an oppor tunity. Prickett herself gave her evidence as mo destly, as plainly, and as firmly as any witness he.had ever seen examined. Her appearance and her demeanour were singularly in her favour, and she and her mother denied the whole story. A witness, Miss Bott, had been called to contradict some parts of 'her testimony; but Miss Bott's evi dence was, in some particulars, incredible or ab surd. Whether she had made a mistake or wil fully sworn what was not true he could not tell. As to Bott's story about the shadows on the blind, he did not belicue it ; the dose was too strong for him to swallow. The discrepancies and improbabi lities in the statements of the neighbours of Prickett, and of the witnesses who had spoken to acts of adultery in the furze bushes and in the lodge, were too great for him to act upon them. The whole story was preposterous, and the character of a de cent man would be in much peril if on such testi mony, contraay to all probability, he could be found guilty. On these grounds he should dismiss Mr. Sopwith from the suit, and he must be indemnified against the costs. It was stated that a sum had been deposited in the registry as a security for the wife's costs,:and I His Lord s hip sa id-1 find cannot order costs to the respondent. It is very hard on Mr. Sopwith, but he must suffer. Petition dismissed. SCOTT V. SCOTT. Mr. W. Brandt conducted the petitione r' s This was a petition by John Scott for a aj judicial separation on the ground of his wir'e's cruelty. The parties were marred in 1840 ; they cohabited in Finsbury, and they had two children. The peti tioner was the foreman to a cigar maker. The re spoudent bee ime addicted to drinking, and when under the influence of liquor committed various acts of violence cgainst her hu;hand and the children, such as striking them with the poker and threat ening them with knives. In August last her hus band withdrew from cphabitation ; but the evidence did not establish that there was any act of gross violence immediately before the separation, although the wife's habits of intemperance continued. The Court took time to consider its decision. BUSINESS OF THE COURT. " On the 17th inst. there I~ere 110 cases ready for hearing betfore the full Court, and 171 in progress; 15 cases ware ready for hearing before the Judge Ordinary, and 108 in progress—making sl • alto gether 404. In the Probate Court there were 6 cases ready for hearing, and 109 in progress. The Court will not sit again until nett term. ASSIZE INTELLIGENOE. SOUTH WALES CIRCUIT—CARDIFF, Dec. 24. Upon this and the preceding day no less than three indictments for murder were tried before Mr. Baron Chann ell. Henry O'Connell, 23, mariner, one of the class known in Welsh seaports as " Irish Yankees," was indicted for the wilful murder of Antonio Tesme cher, a Bremen seaman, at Cardiff, on the 21st of November. Mr. T. Allen and Mr. Williams conducted the prosecution. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Giffard and Mr. Rees. The facts appeared to be as follows :—The pri soner and a mess-mate, named Rickards, lodged in a low and vicious locality in Frances-street, at the back of Bute-road, and were in the habit of fre quenting a brothel in Frederica-street. On the night named Rickardi sought admission into the house, and on being denied kicked the panels of the door in. The prisoner then came out, and the two men jsgan scuffling, though whether in joke or not is not e2<actly apparent. One of a number of prosti tutes attracted to the spot, upon laughing at the men, was threatened by the prisoner, and the 'quarrel was then taken up by several bullies, by one of whom Rickards was knocked down sense less. The deceased was stated to be a mere specta tor, standing by with his hands in his pockets, though others said he was fighting. He was, how ever, rushed upon by the prisoner with a knife, and received a stab in the left side, which penetrated to the heart, and also a wound in the left shoulder. They fell together, the deceased crying, " The knife ! the knife !" A bystander attempted to drag the prisoner away, but was near being stabbed in so doing. Ultimately the prisoner and the deceased rose together. The latter staggered a few yards and fell dead. The jury returned a verdict of manslau g hter, and the prisoner was sentenced to 15 years penal servi tude. Elizabeth Davies, 34 years of age, a married wo man, was charged with murdering her own child at Neath on the 21st of August. For the prosecution Messrs. Giffard and Hughes appeared. Prisoner was not defended by counsel. The prisoner was a most drunken character. On the night of the 24th of August she was seen by a policeman quite drunk with a baby in her arms. Attempting to enter a publichouse she fell upon the pavement, and the constable conveyed her home. A boy took the child home also. Next day the body of the child was brought to the station-house, having been found in a privy. A certificate by the surgeon of Swansea House of Correction declaring that the prisoner was paralyzed in the tongue, and unable to speak in consequence, was placed before the Court. ' The Judge said he should proceed with the trial, and represent the case to the Home Secretary. Mr. French, surgeon, said that the appearance of the corpse indicated that the child had been suf focated by feculent matter. The Jury returned a verdict of manslaughter against the prisoner, who was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment. This cloaed the business. POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Dec. 24. GUILDHALL.—Mr. Maximilian Gutkind, lately carrying on business as a merchant at 39, Noble street, in the city of London, was brought up before Alderman Salomons, having been apprehended by Bull, a detective officer, upon a warrant charging him with having obtained goods under the false colour and pretence of carrying on business iu the ordinary course of trade, with intent to cheat and defraud his creditors. Mr. Turner appeared for the prosecution ; and Mr. Sleigh, instructed by Mr. Jones, conducted the defence. Mr. Turner said—l am instructed by the assignees in the bankruptcy of the prisoner to prosecute under the 243 d section of the Bankrupt Law Consolida tion Act, and the specific charge against the prisoner is that of obtaining goods to the value of £2OO within three months of his bankruptcy with intent to defraud Mr.Krauss, the London agent of Messrs. Labard and Co., muslin manufacturers, of Switzer land. The bankrupt's liabilities are stated at about £6,000 or £7,000, against which he has assets amounting to not more than £2OO. At the bank rupt's examination on Wednesday last it was ascer tained he had been carrying on business as a mer chant in Noble-street, during the last five or six years, over which period his liabilities extended ; but the assig nees were naturally surprised that the liabilities s h ould be so heavy and the assets so small, knowing that theprisoner had very recently been buying largely in goods,?and that he should so soon after apply to the BankrUptcy Court for relief. They therefore instituted a most searching inquiry into the bankrupt's affairs, and discovered that he had been dealing with property purchased in No vember in a manner contrary to the representation he made at the time he obtained the goods, and the assignees, having reason to believe that he had also disposed of goods obtained of other creditors to a very large amount in a similar manner, deemed it their duty, as commercial men and upon public grounds, to prosecute the bankrupt for the frauds alleged against him. Mr. Stubbs, one of the messengers in the Court of Bankruptcy, produced the proceedings, and the evi dence he gave on the information upon which the warrant was founded having been read over, Mr. Sleigh said he would save the time of the Court by suggesting that all formal proofs should be'deferred until the whole of the evidence relative to the fraudulent acts alleged against the bankrupt should have been completed, and then, if the magis trate should think it a case that ought to be inquired into elsewhere, that evidence could then be taken. Mr. Krauss was then examined on oath, and said —I am agent to Messrs. Labard and Co., of Switzer land, manufacturers of muslins. I have known the bankrupt about two years. About the beginning of the month of October last the bankrupt came to my warehouse in Gresham-street, and I showed him some patterns of Swiss muslins, and asked him if they would suit his market. He said he believed they would, and I accordingly sent the samples to his office the same day. On the 7th October, three days after he had the patterns, he sent me an order in his own handwriting, and when I saw him shortly after he requested me to write to my principals in Switzerland to urge them to forward the goods without delay, so that they might be in London early in November, as he wanted them for the New York market. I wrote as he desired, and on the 12th November I received a letter from my house in Switzerland, enclosing an invoice, which I after wards handed to the bankrupt. The goods arrived on the 20th November, and I asked him if I should clear them, but he said he would clear them him self, as the goods had to go abroad. I sent him the draught of my house in Switzerland for £195, which he returned accepted. It was drawn at four months. On the 21st of the present month I at tended a meeting of the bankrupt's creditors, and asked him what he had done with the two cases of muslins which he had of me. Mr. Sleigh—Was there any other person present during the conversation ? Witness—Yes ; Mr. Turner and Mr. Reid, my co-assignees, and Mr. Turner, the solicitor. Mr. Sleigh—Was the bankrupt told it would be better for him to tell the truth ? _ _ Alderman Salomons—l really must stop you, Mr. Sleigh, as I do not think the question a proper one. Mr. Turner—l submit that Mr. Sleigh must re serve the question for his cross-examination. Mr. Sleigh—l contend lam entitled to interpose the question to ascertain what inducement, if any, was held out to the bankrupt to make admissions which might militate against him hereafter. If anything like a promise of forgiveness or favour were made to him, then any communication which followed would not be evidence. Witness—l never said any such thing. I made no promise of any kind, nor did any one else in my presence. He said the two cases of muslin had gone to Mr. St. Losky, of Basinghall-street. Some further conversation took place between him and the others who were there, and he said he had £2,000 of Mr. St. Losky in March last, to whom he had given goods to the value of about £3,000 and more. He believed Mr. St. Losky's place of business was in Basinghall-street, but he did not then know where ho was to be found. I went to the bankrupt's premises on Thursday, and I do not think the assets 1 saw there will realise more than £2OO. Cross-examined —I have not been doing business for the prisoner. during the whole of the two years I have known him: The muslins was the first transaction I had with him, as I had no goods suited for him. Mr. Sleigh—Did you deal with him in mouey, , or is this the only t ransact i on you had with him of any kind ? IVitness—Well, I had a little transaction with him two years since. It was for 100 almanacks, which I sold to him fur £35, and he paid me the money for them. Mr. Sleigh—Had you any other little transaction with him prior to that of the muslins ? Witness--Only friendly transactions. Mr. Sleigh—Were those friendly transactions loans of money made by the bankrupt to you ? Witness—No, sir. Ido not call it lending money when I had a check from him one day and gave 12,m THE SUN, LON1)ON, MONDAY EVENING, the matey for it the next. I asked him for a check for £5O, one afternoon,and told him he should have the money the following day. Ido not call that lending money, for the check was not made out for the same day. I sent that check to Manchester. Mr. Sleigh—Was that the only money or check transaction you had with him ? Witness-Z-No. There were two bills for £ll5 discounted by him about the end of October last. They were drawn and accepted by people in Man chester, and endorsed to me. He paid me part of the money at the time, and about £3O or £4O shortly after. I have received all the money for those two bills from him, and they are not yet due. This was after the muslin transaction. Mr. Sleigh—Has he not refused goods which you have offered to him ? Witness—No, sir. lam in business for myself, and I sold him three parcels of goods on my own account in October and November. Mr. Sleigh—You appear to complain very bit terly about the bankrupt's failing and having few assets, but will you tell the Court if you were ever a bankrupt ? Witness—l was a bankrupt about a year ago, through a heavy loss of nearly £2,000 which I sus tained. My liabilities were £3,700. There were very few assets, because it was at the time of the crisis. Ido not know what dividend I paid my creditors, but I gave up everything. I received a third-class certificate immediately. I had a partner and was taken in. (Laughter.) Re-examined—l had'every confidence in the bank rupt, and I took him with me to Manchester, where I introduced him to several houses. I became agent to the house in Switzerland about a year since. The £2OO worth of muslins which I sold to the bankrupt were not sold on my own account. Mr. Turner—That is all the evidence I am pre pared with at present, and have therefore to ask for a remand. Mr. Sleigh—l submit, sir, that the prosecutor has utterly failed in making out a case for a remand. The bankrupt was apprehended late at night, and has not had time to prepare his answer to the charge. The only evidence against him is that he failed for a large amount and with very small assets, the per son complaining having been in a precisely similar position, with only this difference—this witness has been " taken in" and my client has been " taken up." (Laughter.) These are the only facts in evidence, and I ask, sir, if there is anything in the ease to justify you in remanding the bankrupt on this charge. Alderman Salomons—l think it is a case for a remand. The witness has given his evidence very fairly and very creditably. Mr. Sleigh—Then I contend that, under existing circumstances, it is - a case in which the bankrupt should be admitted to bail. Alderman Salomons—l see no objection to that, but it must be good bail—two sureties in £250 eech, and the bankrupt's recognisances in £5OO. Mr. Turner—When the bankrupt was arrested, Bull, the officer, found upon him a quantity of papers relating to his business which ought to have been given up when the bankrupt surrendered. I have therefore to ask you for your order that they shall be given up to the messenger of the Bank ruptcy Court. Alderman Salomons—There is no objection to your having them, I suppose ? Bull—l hold the papers and am bound to let either of the solicitors for the prosecution and for the de fence see them, but until I receive an order from you, sir, I cannot part with them. Mr. Turner—lt is customary for the officer to retain in his possession all property and documents be finds upon a prisoner, and that is the reason I ask for an order. Alderman Salomons—There will be no difficulty about that. The bankrupt was then remanded till Thursday next. BOW-STREET.—Isaac Lowe, policeman, F 149, was brought before Mr. Jardine for violating his duty by . being drunk on his beat. Superintendent Durkin observed that the case was brought before the magistrate by order of the Commissioners of Police. Sergeant Holmes, of the F division, stated that the prisoner was a constable in his section and lived at the station-house in Bow-street. At a little before 10. o'clock on the previous night witness paraded the relief, of whom the prisoner was one. He was then quite sober, and went en duty at 10. His beat was in Clement's-lane, and he should have remained on duty till six o'clock in the morning. At half-past one o'clock witness found him in Clement's-lane, standing outside the door of a public-house, quite drunk and helpless. A number of persons of bad character, living about that spot, had assembled round him, and were making jesting remarks on his condition. After in vain request ing him to return to the station, witness called two other constables to his aid, and proceeded to re , move the prisoner, who, however, resisted so much that they were obliged to send for the stretcher and strap him down upon it. In this manner he was conveyed to the station-house. Superintendent Durkin said he feared the pri soner was a confirmed drunkard. He had been four times punished by the Commissioners, but it ap peared to have no effect on him. It was the more to be regretted because, so long as he kept sober he was - an excellent constable. The prisoner said he was very sorry. Mr. Jardine—l am very sorry to see at that bar a young man like you, apparently able to do his duty well but for drunkenness. But it is no Ise my saying anything to you, for once a man gets con firmed habits of drunkenness remonstrance and advice have no effect upon him, his fate is sealed. Still, it is a very imp ortant matter that you should not be allowed with impunity to set so bad an example to other constables. Considering that you have done this before and have been punished by the Commissioners. I cannot do less than imprison you for one month in the House of Correction. The prisoner was then removed. SOUTHWARK.—BURGLARY BY A RETURNED TRANSPORT.—John Davie, a rough-looking fellow, a retina d. transport, was brought before Mr. Combe for final examination, charged with breaking into the warehouse of Mr. Olney, wool merchant and factor, Market-street, Bermondsey, and stealing therefrom a quantity of wool worth upwards of £lO. Mr. Wm. Scotcher, manager to Mr. Olney, stated that on Friday morning, the 16th inst., about four o'clock, he was roused up by the police, who in ' formed him that there were thieves in the ware house. He immediately dressed himself and pro ceeded to the place, when he found that the ware house door by the loading platform had been broken open, and on the platform he saw two strange sacks filled with wool. On entering he perceived another sack full of wool ready to be carried away. The whole of it had been taken from the bulk in the warehouse, and was worth upwards of £lO. Mr. Combo asked who fastened the warehouse up. Mr. Scotcher replied that he did, at eight o'clock on Thursday night, and then everything was safe. James Curran, police-constable 107 M, said that on Friday morning, the 16th inst., about 3 o'clock, he was passing Mr. Olney's warehouse, when he heard a noise inside the fence. He looked up, and saw the prisoner on the platform, and as soon as he did that he called out, and instead of receiving an answer, the prisoner stooped down between the two sacks of wool. Witness called another constable to the spot, and then he saw the prisoner jump off the platform into the yard, and a minute afterwards he took him into custody. There was another man inside the premises with the prisoner, but he ma naged to make his escape. Mr. Combo asked him where he apprehended the prisoner. Witness replied that as the prisoner was climb inr, over the fence he cadght hold of him, and then they had a struggle together; but the other con stable came to his assistance, and they secured him. Dennis Clark, .108 M, said he was called by last witness to Mr. Olney's warehouse, and on being lifted over the fence by him, he saw the prisoner and another man jump off the landing platform. While endeavouring to secure one or both, witness fell through a trap door, consequently they got away ; but he soon recovered himself, and assisted the other constable in securing the prisoner. Mr. Edwin said that he was instructed to say that the officers must be mistaken. llis client denied being on the premises at all. He was merely pass ing, when 107 M seized hold of him and charged him with the burglary. Both constables swore most positively as to his identity, and Mr. Combo committed him for trial. SINGULAR AFFILIATION CASE.—MT. Jonathan Brandon, a dapper little young gentleman, who put on rather consequential airs, and who carries on business as a shippin ,, agent, at No. 4, Abchurch lane, City, was charged' with refusing and neglect ing to support the illegitimate offspring of Amelia Bradley, of which he was the reputed fither. The complainant, a very pretty and interesting 4aoking young woman, who had a bouncing bady in her arms, said that in April last she was in the ser vice of the defendant's mother, at 9, Calton-road, hisb.if birth Nlaida-hill, and the defendant used to come fre quently on a visit to his mother. During one of to N h i c s ot i of t b s tchr h e e lians s ft e a. d n u t e ss e hh d ee h h me, e al r ds , and the result was the situation . compelledi n hc r. arm to oon leave the 14th r c h ila. consequence The in August complainantla ls t ,as common Defendant, rather rudely—l deny ' being the fatherOf in te to anybody, and she told me her former master had taken liberties with her. Complainant—l deny that. I said that an elderly gentleman in your house had attempted to do so, but I prevented him, and I am sorry I did not pre vent you. Defendant (impudently)—You gave me a noxious disease, did you not ? Complainant (in tears)—No, I did not, you gave it to me, and I was compelled to go to the hospital. You know that. Mr. Combe (to defendant)—Then you do not deny your intimacy with her ? Defendant—Oh no, sir; and I am willing to pay her like any other gay woman, but I shall not sup port her bastard. Mr. Combe asked the complainant whether she had any corroborative testimony. She replied that she had, and called Mr. Chapman, a coffee-housekeeper, and a rela tive. He said that on the 23d of October he called on the defendant, and asked him to do something for Amelia Bradley rather than go to a police court. He admitted his familiarity with her, and did not deny being the father of the child. Defendant—l did not admit it, but I said I would assist her out of her difficulties and send her what money she required, if she wrote to me. I wish to behave in an honourable way towards her. Mr. Conibe—Then I order you to pay her 2s. 6d. a-week and costs. Defendant—Well, if I must; I must, that's all. (Laughter.) ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE.—George Arch, a powerful-looking fellow, of very repulsive appear ance, was brought before Mr. Combe, charged with being concerned, with others not in custody, in violently assaulting John Grose, and, robbing him of two sovereigns and 19s. in silver, besides a jacket, worth 30s. The prosecutor, whose face was literally covered with cuts and bruises, resembling a tattooed Indian fore than anything else, said that on Thursday evening last he had been enjoying himself with some friends, and about twelve o'clock, as he was going home, he fell in with a female, and foolishly accompanied her to a house in Westcott-street, Kent-street. He was a little under the influence of liquor at the time, but he knew that he had two sovereigns and 19s. in his pocket, as a few minutes before he had changed a sovereign. Soon after he got into the house he fell asleep, but was roused up by several persons pulling him about. He endeavoured to defend himself, but some of the parties gave him three tremendous blows on the face and eyes, which completely stunned him. When he recovered his senses blood was pouring down his face from cuts on his forehead, nose, and eyes. He then found that his jacket had been stolen, and that all his money was gone. He immediately went into the street and gave information to the police, but all the parties had absconded. He recollected seeing the prisoner among the parties, but he could not say whether he assaulted him or robbed him. Witness identified the jacket found on him as his property: Georr , Harson, police-constable 37 M, said he took the prisoner into custody that morning with the prosetutor's jacket on his back. He admitted that it was the prosecutor's, and said that he had it to take care of for him. In answer to the charge, prisoner said that was quite true. He had nothing whatever to with the assault and robbery. Mr. Come told him that, luckily for him, there was no evidence of that, but he must be imprisoned in the House of Correction for two months. WORSHIP-STREET. SINGULAR CASE. William Cetts, 29, years of age, was charged before Mr. Hammill with forging a signature on a mar riage certificate, and thereby procuring a marriage. Mr. Lewis, sen., of Ely-place, Holborn, appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Beard, defended. Mr. Joseph Gashier said—l am the prosecutor in this case. I carry on business in Brick-lane. Spital fields. I have a brother named Lewis Gashier, who is between 15 and 16 years of age; he has not any guardian except myself. When he is of age he will be in possession of a considerable amount of money In the middle of August he resided with me. I had then a servant named Alibe. She left a short time previously to my brother quitting my roof. I was not aware that they were about to contract a mar riage. I know the prisoner, but never authorised him to give my brother away in marriage. The signature of the marriage register produced is in my brother's handwriting; but the signature, " Wm. Gashier," is not mine. There is no such person. Mr. Ralph St. Leger Brockna, called—l am minister and assistant curate of St. Leonard's Shoreditch I recollect .solemnising on the 11th of September, 1859, a marriage between Lewis Gashier and Alice Betts ; It was by banns. The youthful appearance of the bridegroom par ticularly attracted my attention, and I observed that as he was manifestly under age, I should re quire the sanction of his parents and guardians. The bridegroom then sent for the prisoner. I asked prisoner if he was uncle of Lewis °ashler's, and he replied " I am," or " Yes," I do not recollect which. I then asked, " Has Lewis Gashier a father or mother ?" and he replied, "He has not." I asked, " Are you his natural guardian ?" and prisoner re replied, "I am." I expressed my extreme disgust at such a marriage, the bride being also under age, and asked prisoner, "Are you Rot: acting very foolishly to allow these children to marry ?" to which he replied, " He is 18 years of age, and there are particular circumstances in the case which counsel it as the better course to take." The father of the bride was not present, and prisoner went for him. I commenced the ceremony, and the father arrived before I completed it. Lewis Gashier and his wife signed first to the same, then Thomas and Eliza Betts. The prisoner appeared to wish to back out, but I called upon him to sign as the natu ral guardian of Lewis Gashier, and he wrote the signature produced, " Wm. Gashier," in the pre sence of all the contracting parties. Cross-examined by Mr. Beard—The marriages at Shoreditch Church are numerous, and it is cus tomary to merely make out the forms and fill them up a day or two afterwards, Sergeant Brannon, 21 G, said—l apprehended the prisoner on this charge at Messrs. Davis a n d Co.'s, Aligate. The prosecutor called me into the premises. Prisoner, on hearing tho accusation, asked permission to go upstairs. I followed him, and while there some person asked, " What is the matter ?" To that question I heard prisoner reply, " I was foolish enough to sign the name of William or David Gashier to my sister's certificate, but I only did it to save her from disgrace, she being in the family way." On the road to the station he added, "I hope you will be lenient with me, for I had not any idea of making money out of it. Mr. Beard—That is precisely the case, and, as lam instructed, the only motive that induced the prisoner -to this act wa s th e p ecu li ar pos i t i on of his 'female relative. The strong impulse of feeling impelled him to the commission of an act, the consequences of which he was then ignorant of, but which he now greatly regrets. I trust the magistrate will accept bail for a future appearance. Mr. Hammill declined to accede to this sugges tion, and the prisoner was remanded. WESTMINSTER—A DESPERATE FELLOW.— James Abbott was charged with three assaults, as follows : He went home to Manor-buildings at ten o'clock on Friday night, and entering the room of a lodger named 11'aison, he ferociously attacked him, cover ing him with blood, and cutting him about the face and head. Milligan, 252 V, was called, when he assaulted him very severely, kicking him and striking him with his fist about the body. De fendant, who was under the influence of liquor, the* went in doors and came out again armed with a pair of tongs, with which he struck at the con stable three times, but fortunately failed in harm ing him. He next ran in doors and endeavouredto strike his mother with the tongs. Here he fortu nately failed in his murderous object, but struck the door-post with such violence as to show that he would probably have killed his mother had he struck her instead. He was so violent that the constable found it necessary to call in the assistance of Lewcock, 108 V, who had no sooner arrived than the defendant struck him twice on the head with the tongs, kicked him and tried to bite him, and it was found necessary to send for a stretcher before be could be conveyed to the station. Defendant pleaded that he was intoxicated. The police having intimated thrt he had been frequently charged with violent assaults, and was a very bad character, Mr. Paynter fined him £5, and, ix default, com mitted him for two months for the assault upon the civilian, and further ordered him to be imprisoned for one month for the assault upon Milligan, and another month for that upon Lc wcoek. GREENWICI - I.—eharles Covill, aged 18, of 40, Griffin-street, Deptford, and William Janes, aged 21, of eoldbath, Blackheath-hill, Greenwich, dust collectors, were placed in the dock before Mr. Seeker, charged with being on the premises of Mr. IL G. Noyes, a gentleman residing at Lee, and at tempting to steal a quantity of plated articles under the following daring circumstances : Elizabeth Wakefield, a servant in the employ of the prosecutor, deposed that about half-past one on the previous afternoon she was about proceed ing to the coal-cellar when she saw the figure of a man standing in ,the front garden, near one of the room windows. Tier thoughts immediately recur red to the fact that the plate was lying on ad r r l e y s a s r e d r in the pantry, and at the same moment she heard a noise, as if a stone had been thrown at the pantry window. She immediately ran thither, and then saw that the window had been raised, the prisoner Janes having his body throughfo and leaniwp -DECEMBER 26, 1859 . to possess himself of the plate. The prisoner Covill was at that time standing in the front garden, with a basket. As soon as the prisoners saw her they ran away. Witness subsequently examined the pantry window, and then discovered that the fasten ing had been forced back, a piece of the window frame being broken away. In reply to the magistrate, the witness said sbe could distinctly identify both prisoners, and a few days previously Covill had called at her master's house and requested permission to take away the dust, when, on being refused, he became very im pudent. Thomas Smee, potman at the Dacre Arms Ta vern, Lee, deposed that about half-past one on the previous afternoon, he saw the prisoner Janes run ning away at the top of his speed from the direc tion of the prosecutor's house. Witness then saw him jump through the fencing of some enclosed ground, and continue running until he got into the high road. When he got into the road, wit ness observed him turn round and apparently look to ascertain if any person was following him. He immediately afterwards saw the last witness, who informed him of what had occirred, and knowing Janes by sight, he (witness) told her it was the dustman. Witness then saw the prisoner Covill with a mule and cart, and there being no policeman near, he followed him and the cart for a distance of about half a mile, when the prisoner Janes, joined him. He afterwards obtained the assistance of a constable, and Covill was secured, but Janes contrived to escape. Witness had seen both prisoners together with the mule and cart about two hours previously. Police-constable Deer, 187 R, deposed to taking the prisoner Covill into custody in consequence of information received from the last witness. On telling the prisoner what he was charged with, he denied having had a companion with him that day or having been near the prosecutor's house. Wit ness afterwards examined the premises and saw footmarks on the grass facing the pantry window, a piece being broken from the framework. On searching the prisoner he found in his possession a large clasp knife. Police-Constable 306 R, said he took the prisoner Janes into custody about two hours after the occur rence. When told that he was charged with attempting to commit a robbery of plate with a per son, named Covill, he made no denial, but said if witness would let him walk to the station he would accompany him, but he would not do so without. Witness took him to the station, and on the first witness identifying him he did not say anything. Detective-officer Brown, 98 R, proved a previous conviction against Janes at the Old Bailey Sessions in 1857, when he was !'sentenced to two years' im prisonment for a robbery at a house which he had visited to collect dust. The prisoner Covill had also been summarily convicted of felony. The prisoners, in answer to the charge, said, it was no use asking the witnesses any questions, and they were then fully committed for trial. H AM MERSMITH.—THE YOUNG WOMAN WITH THE " HEART."—Harriet Spooner, a young woman who stated that she lived at Lisson-grove, was brought before Mr. Dayman on remand, charged on suspicion of stealing a silver watch. The prisoner; was first examined on Tuesday with another young woman named Eliza Wood. The evidence against them was to the effect that on Tuesday morning police-constable Wilcocks of the T division saw them walking •up and down in front of a pawnbroker's shop in High-street, Kensington, and. looking in at the window as they passed. He suspected something, was wrong and watched their movements. Pre sently they walked to the corner of Palace-gardens, and the wind blew Spooner's shawl on 0116 side and the constable then saw a watch in her hand. Subsequently she gave the watch to the other pri soners, and they both went into the shop of Mr. Wells, a pawnbroker. The constable followed them in and questioned theca about the watch, upon which Spooner said it belonged to her brother, who lived at Lisson-grove, but at the station she repre sented that her brother had gone to New Zealand. Upon Spooner's left arm they found the representa tion of a heart marked in a very singular manner in blue ink. The heart formed a scroll, in the centre of which were the initials, " W. E," and underneath " No. 1," and a small heart. The pri soner said it did not relate to her brother, but to a young man with whom she had been keeping com pany. Mr. Dayman discharged Wood, and remanded the other for the purpose of obtaining an owner for the watch. On this occasion, Charles Allen, a sawyer, living in John-street, Edgware-road, identified the watch as his property, and it was worth about £5. He stated that on Monday evening last he was in the company of his brother•in-law, and they went from one public-house to another, and drank rather freely. Ultimately they went to the Green Man, in the Edgware-road, where they met the prisoner and another female. They treated them with some drink, and between seven and eight o'clock in the morning they accompanied the females to their home. The other female, who talked to his brother in-law, went for something to drink. She after wards gave him what he thought was gin, in a tea cup, and directly he drank it he fell off to sleep, ar,d did not recollect anything more until he awo)'e at three o'clock in the afternoon of Tuesday, Team he found himself lying on the floor quite alone. He then missed his watch, wh2,ch was quite safe when he entered the room. The brother-in -l iaw was called, and he stated that he did not rt - main in the room 20 minutes, nor did he drink out of the tea-cup. When he went away he left the prisoner sitting on his brother-in-law's knee, and he then had his watch quite safe. The prisoner declared the witness Allen gate her the watch to pawn, but he denied that positively. Mr. Dayman told the prisoner if anything had been known against her h e s h ou ld h ave comm itted her for trial. Under the circumstances he com mitted her for one month, with hard labour, for the unlawful possession. WAND S WORTH.,--A VIOLENT SON. —John Tegg, a young men about 30 years of age, was placed in the dock before Mr. Dayman, charged with assaulting Mr. William Tegg, his father, who is head gardener at Lady Dover's, in Roehampton. The complainant, who appeared very much affected at the position in which he was placed, stated that the prisoner was his eldest son, and had been acting as under-gardener during the last five months, when he left his last situation. For some time he had been behaving very badly from a disappointment in love, and on Friday evening he conducted himself like a madman. He was exceed ingly violent, and threw a stocking into the fire. His sister got up to interfere, when he pushed her and witness against the fire. He was obliged to throw the prisoner down on a sofa, and hold him there till a constable arrived. He scratched witness's eye, and also struck him. The prisoner had threat ened to destroy himself several times, and he really did not think he was quite right in his mind. Mr. Dayman inquired where the complainant lived. The witness stated at the lodge of Lady Dover's, and his son had a room with him. He had the control and charge of the place, and it was a serious matter to him to have these disturbances. Mr. Dayman thought the father should have called in some medical man if his son was not right in his mind. He then asked the prisoner if he had been drinking. The father said ho might have had a little. He behaved in a most violent manner last Wednesday night, and he went in fear of him. The prisoner, who appeared perfectly calm and collected at first, answered that he had nothing to say, but seeing that there was a disposition to com mit him he promised to behave better in future. Mr. Dayman told him he should have thought of that before. The prisoner said, if they had left him alone nothing would have occurred. It was only on Friday and the Wednesday before that anything had happened. A brother stepped forward and said he could prove contrary to that statement. The prisoner had frequently behaved in a very unkind manner to his parents. Mr. Daymam said he should call upon the pri soner to find a surety in £lO to keep the peace for six months. The prisoner was locked up in default. NEWS OF DONALD CAMERON.—In a paragraph last week we noticed the freaks of a lunatic, named Donald Cameron, a native of Ross-shire, who broke into the Earl of Morton's residence at Dahnahoy—was afterwards dis covered in the dining-room of Riccarton—comfortably helping himself to a glass of port—then committed to Mor ningside Lunatic Asylum, from which he escaped; and anon apprehended for theft in Lanarkshire, from the penal ties of which charge he freed himself by giving his jailer the slip. Yesterday's Perth journals continue the narra tive of Donald's exploits. On the 16th he was found in tently examining the well -stored library of Lord Gray, in Kinfauns Castle, at present tenanted by Lord Stratford de Itedcliffe. On being asked what he wanted, he replied, with great simplicity, that he only wanted to get the way out, but could not find it. Tue servants, perceiving they had a madman to deal with, went quietly to work, and suc ceeded in bringing him to Perth, but had nearly lost him on the road, for, complaining. that a small stone was hurt ing his foot, he was permitted to take off his shoe; 'out while unloosing one, he unloosed both, and dashing them from him, bounded away like a deer. However, although a llighlandman and six feet in his shoes, he was, after a smart chase, overtaken, and ultimately marched to the office of the County Constabulary. On going back to re covor his shoes, a pocket Bible, belonging to Lord Gray, was found beside them, which he had carried way, t ear i ng off the coron e t and name in two places, Cameron was con veyed to Morning:.ide Asylum on Wednesday by two war- O's IdeloAdiaig to that ostabliamoht.—Scotsman. WAKEFIELD ELECTION COMMISSION. WAKEFIELD, SATURDAY. The Commissioners met this morning at 10 o'clock in the Sessions-house. The first witness called was Mr. Henry Edmund Gurney, one of the firm of Overend and Gurney, who said—l am brother-in law to Mr. W. H. Leatham. Just before the last election for Wakefield I received a letter from Mr. Leatham stating that he was about to stand for Wakefield. I have only half the letter by me, for I tore off the sheet which relates to business matters and destroyed the other. It is headed " Confiden tial," and after mentioning that he was going to stand a contest, it goes on thus : " I shall want some moneyfor ways and means, and rather than draw it from the bank, where there are some clerks who might talk, I have been thinking that you would not mind ins askinc , you—that is, 0., G. and Co., lending me £l,OOO for a short p time, so as not to q known at Leatham, Tow, and Co. If you see no objection to meet my wishes I would thank you to send the money in four divisions in registered covers, waiting the acknowledgment of each. Let it be in Bank of England notes of small amount—fives, tens, and twenties. The money is wanted for legitimate purpose. 4, as ray agent is not a moneyed man, as well as for some —. There the half-sheet st o p s; What there was on the other side I can't recollect. I sent this half of the letter into the office, and directed the clerks to for ward £l,OOO as requested. It was sent down in four packets of £250 each, addressed to " Mr. Wainwright, solicitor, Wakefield." Shortly after wards my brother-in-law wrote to me for another £5OO, which was sent, and in a little time after for £l,OOO, which was also sent to Mr. Wainwright. I have not kept the two last letters ; the first, to the best of my recollection, merely contained a request to send another £5OO, and in the second I think Mr. Leatham remarked that he found the contest more expensive than he expected. That was all the money we sent down, and all the correspondence I had about the Wakefield election with anybody. I never wrote to Mr. Leathern, sen., on the subject. Mr. Wainwright sent us receipts for each parcel as it reached him—for £2,500 in all. He generally sent them in a roundabout way, enclosing them to a friend of his in London, who posted them to us there. Mr. Sergeant Pigott—Can't you supply the con tents of the missing half-sheet? Mr. Gurney—l haven't the least idea what it was —some indifferent personal matter or other. Mr. Sergeant Pigott—What word followed the " some " at the end of the sheet here ; was it a cant word for bribery—" sugar," for instance, or any thing else like that ? Mr. Gurney—Certainly not. Mr. Willes—You see the language of the note, " for legitimate purposes, and for some —," im plies that a contrast of some sort followed ? Mr. Gurney—l see that, of course, but lam quite sure there was nothing suggestive of bribery in the note. Mr. Leatham may have said that the other side were not likely to lose for want of spending money, and he should like to be prepared for them. I think he did say something of that sort, but that was all. Mr. Willes—What did you understand by that ! Mr. Gurney—Well, from my experience in county elections, I knew that a good deal of money is spent in bringing up voters from the country and the like, when the contest is close, which would not be spent under ordinary circumstances, an I thought it might be for something of that sort. If I had thought the money was for bribery of course I should not have sent it. Mr. Willes—Had you no suspicions, when' all this large sum of money was sent for, that some of it was to be applied to illegitimate purposes ? Mr. Gurney—With the two first sums I had not the slightest suspicion. When the third applica tion came I did make the remark that " Wakefield seemed an expensive place. I had no knowledge of Wakefield, and I had such complete confidesice in my brother-in-law that it never entered my mind that the money was for bribery. Mr. - Wainwright (Leatham's agent) was recalled, and said—After hearing Mr. Gurney's evidence, of course I cara have no further doubt that the sum which I ric from London was 12,500. (Mr. Wain wright's original statement was that Messrs. Ove rend and Gurney had only sent down £2,000, and he accounted only for the expenditure of that sum.) Ts have heard since giving my former evidence that Messrs. Overend had r_ay receipts for the larger amount, and I have tried to remember how the ad ditional £5OO was spent, but I can't. I have talked it over with Gilbert, but he is positive that he only received £2,0(;0. I have no money myself. My impression is that I gave Gilbert all the money I received as it (same in, though I won't undertake to swear it. The accounts were loosely kept —pur posely, of course, but I expected Gilbert to account for all the money spent. The receipts for £2,500, which Mr. Gurney has handed in are in my hand writing. There can be no doubt that £2,500 was the amount I received. Mr. Wines—Have you that £5OO in your posses sion now? Mr. Wainwright —Certainly not, and I have no recollection of having paid it into my bankers' at any time. During the election I employed a clerk named. Bigg. He was a good deal in communica tio:A with Gilbert, but I don't think that Gilbert lover employed him in bribery. About the time of the petition I received a letter from Bigg, telling , me that the other side had offered him £5O to give evidence before the committee, but that if I would give him some money he would prefer to assist me. I took no notice of him. Benjamin Watson acted as stakeholder during the election for a voter named Lang. He was to have £35 for voting for Leatham, and witness kept the money for him and gave hiim a promissory note for the amount until he had voted. Lang, however, did not vote at all. John Lang, landlord of the Bay Horse, said ho had arranged to vote for Leatham for £35, which was put into Watson's hands. He gave me a pro missory note for the amount. After that bargain was concluded the " Man in the Moon" offered me £5O to vote for Charlesworth. I took the £5O and promised my vote, but on reflection I found I should offend a great many of my friends if I voted that way, so I determined to stand neutral. My wife was offered £lOO for a warming-pan ii I would vote for Leathern, but I was in bed at the time, and don't know who made the offer. I didn't particularly want any money for my vote from either side, but it was difficult to refuse it when it was almost cram med down one's throat. (Laughter.) Thomas Haigh said,—All that I had to do with the last election was suggesting that a voter named Harrison should keep out of the way. I said I would guarantee that he could have £3O for stopping away. I didn't know where the money was to come from. I knew, of course, that bribery was going on in the town, as everybody else did. It was as commonly talked of in the town as the price of wheat or the state of the weather. The prices were quoted at all figures, from the highest to the lowest. There was not a gentleman in the town who didn't know that bribery was going on with both parties. I often talked about it myself, but I certainly did not know that it was going on to the extent which has been disclosed here. Wm. Shaw, farmer, said—l bought Benjamin Johnson's vote for Mr. Charlesworth; £lO was the price paid. I got £2O from Joe Brear to do the job with ; £lO I gave to Johnson ' • £2 10s. to Wm. Johnson, who• wen t w ith me • £7 10s. was spent in expenses, treating, and the like. Edwin Link was examined as to offers said to have been made by him to a voter named Arundel on behalf of the Liberal party. Mr. Sergeant Pigott—You are described to us as a " mesmerizer." Do you answer to that descrip tion ? "Witness—Well, if folk are susceptible to the "influence" I can manage it. (Laughter.) Mr. Sergeant Pigott Did you "mesmerise" Arundel ? Witness—All I did was to promise Arundel that he should have some money if he would vote for Leathern. He had pledged for us, and I was sent to find out -whether he was sticking firm or whether the other side had tampered with him. I gave him a general assurance that we would cover whatever the Conservatives offered. I did that with several voters. William Armstrong (one of the Liberal bribery agents), recalled, said—£so was the highest sum I ever gave a voter. It is not true that I over gave £75 to one voter. George Smith, butcher, said—l voted for Lea tham and got £3O for it. William Osterfield gave it me. I had £l5 in hand. £l5 was given me on the Monday after the poll. William Osterfield--I bribed tho last witness, as he has said. I got the money from Gilbert at Wainwright's office. Nobody directed me to go there—it was entirely of my own accord that I went there. I had heard that there was money to be got there. I saw Mr. Wainwright and asked him how much money he w ou ld g i ve if I go t a man to vote for them. He said, " I h ave n othing to do with find a ; you must go i n t o th a t roo m and you will found illfind a gentleman there who will talk to you. Gilbert there. Nobody s et me on Smith t vote anldhaaspkpeedn him e d t o h m o Nevethhe meantimju before thet gethis He elec tion,d said he had not mad e u p his mind, but he intended to vote for those who would give himmost money. st to vote. o That was what made me go to Wainwright. Gil bert gave £1 los. besides the £3o—to spend in liquor at one or two public-houses where the land lords belonged to our own side. Mr. W. L. Sellars said--I paid £4O to Newsome, to give to her who keeps the White House,. to vote for Leatham —at least I gave it to his daughter father. I got the money from Gilbert. The bargain had been made before by Woodhead. Sarah Newsome said—l am the daughter of ' the landlord of the 'White House. After the last polling-day Mr. Slars gave me £4O to give to my father, and Mr. Woodhead gave me £lO. I didn't know what it was for. I never gave it rt?y . father ; nor did I ever tell him that I had got it. I put it in my own drawer, and used it as I wanted it. I told my mother of it, and I gave her some whenever she asked for it. lam not aware that my father ever knew of the money being in the house. It is all spent now. Mrs. Newsome, mother of the last witness, was also examined, and gave the same account of the transaction. Her husband never knew that the £5O had been left at the house. She and her daughter had kept it secret from him, for he was very angry whenever people bothered him about the election. Mr. Woodhead had told her beforehand that if her husband would vote for Leatham he would have £4O, but she wo u ld no t ma ke any promise for him. Charles Jameson said—l voted for Leatham, and got £35 for it. William Oakes gave it to me. Several other witnesses were examined, but they were mostly confirmatory of previous evidence , and. of little interest. At the close of the day, Mr. Sergeant Pi go tt sa id—A s f ar as we are aware thisinquiry is terminated, and we therefore adjourn. now to London. The Commission accordingly was adjourned sine die. C'OUNTRY MA.RKBTS. CAMBRIDGE—DEc. 24. There was a fair supply of wheat, and, w ith a rather steady demand in the trade, white moved off at 46s to 48!; red, 40s to 46s per 36 stone. There was not much doing barley to-day ; malting 40s to'42s • grinding, 248 to 3 0 8 per 30 stone. Oat s at 18s to 26s for new ; old oats, — 4 2 ° —s. Beans in limited supply, and a good sale—newt '" to 40s ; old, —s to —s per 38 stone; peas, 38s to 410 Per 36 stone. NOTTINGHAM—Dm. 24. - We had a small attendance at to-day's market, and ANT. supply of grain. An advance of is per quarter on vilms" was maintained, with a rather steady demand in the tra4* • Malting barley a fair supply, at former prices ; inferior sorts a fair show, and heavy. Oats a small show, an t s dull dull sale, at previous rates. Beans a small supply, at th extreme prices of last week. Super. flour, 35s to 39s ; fine, 31s to 33s per 20 steno LEICESTER—Dm. 24. There was a moderate supply of wheat to-day, • for ha s "g ir attendance, and prices is up. White wheat, 44s to —red, 40s to 45s per 36 stone; a very fair inquiry barley, grinding, 27s to 30s; malting, 38s to 42s per,,ci r ,' the oat trade was slow, at quotations ranging fromfrom34s. per 24 stone. Beans a moderato sale, at 4 2 s to 62s per'3B stone. Fine flour, 34s f Seconds, 32s j Thirds, 30s per 20 OW' NORWICH—DEc. 24. Here, to-day, there was rather a fair attendance of t il ; trade, and an inactive market. There was a small sho w wheat, prices forboth old and new were generally is AllYg t r on former rates. The supply of malting barley W 9O fa . n ir a at fully the currencies of last market. In oats, beam'' — peas little or no change. White wheat 47s to 50s Red wheat ........ 42s t 0 440 Malting barley 42s to 48s chevalier barley .. 3 " tij 'ne 4" Distilling do 25s io 27s Oats.. * 24s to IA Flour, 30s to 30s 6d per sack from the miller. YORK—DEc. 24. A small show of wheat, with a fair sale, in small a t fully a l° rates of last market day. Malting barley was ply at former rates ; grinding qualities the tur n in faysuPoe! of the buyer. Beans were at high prices. A very fillr business was transacted in oats, at former rate s. Malt, 68s to 70s per qr.; rye, 3 0 s per qr. STAMFORD—DEC. 24. At our market yesterday wheat went at an advance o f I I is on last week's prices, with a tolerable supply'. Bolsi demand, realising the extreme prices of last week for flaw qualities. In oats not much doing, and late rates Wel/ maintained. Beans still in favour of the seller. 9,4 s to Vig Wheat 42s to 46's I Oats.. .......... -- 520 White do .. 45s to 5 1 s I Beans .......... 4Ss to o Barley 2Bs to 45s 1 Ditto, old ........- -4 t .:CORK —DEC. 23. g e d The following were the quo t a ti o ns this morning wheat, 23s 6d to 27s 03; white, 26s Od to 28s Od; barley Od to 19s Od ; oats, 12s 6d to 13s 6d. DUBLIN—DEC. 23. Our market was pretty well attended this morning, al, there was a moderate sapply a t about the quotatio Wore ns oz last week. In Indian corn little doing, and prices unaltered. s. d. s. d. \ • DDV:l:. „ eab r t ed ck. d. s. white.... 28 oto 30 0 Do., new ..... 11 oto 14 DB Barley ey new 2 21 0 0 t t o o 2 2 4 9 00 R Be a r p e e . se .. ed ._... • 2103 0 . to o 2 1 3 4 Oats 12 6t074 0 Bakers' flour 16 otol9 0 • 12 otol2 6 Indian corn .. 31 oto 28 FOREIGN MAIL PACKET LIST. ....---.........----"-- fn the following table E signifies that letters are despatehel by eYening mails from London. and M by morning raalU' 122: .__ :__ . evening mails from London, and aa. ery """-- /feat DESTINATIONS. D ----- Australia and Mauritius, via of Mails. E, P e o p rt atah of . , - I Z . I . Southampton Ditto, via Marseilles Bahamas and Havana via New Deo. 22 York Cape of Good Ilope, Dec. 23, E Liverpool. • j j a an n. . 1 1 8 2, , M E S . ..... t.h.a.m..p.... jJast• duo Canada, &c. (by Canadn. pckt.),Dec. 28 , E Liverpool.. over Ascen- I China, Penang and Singa-ljan. 5, aeon, and St. Helena pore, via Southampton ... • !Jan. 4 311 Southamp. • l e Jan. - Ditto, via Marseilles E Devonport AU- 1 Gibraltar, via Southampton Honduras and Bien fields - India (Calcutta) and Ceylon, via Southampton India (Bombay), via South - Ditto, via Marseilles Lisbon, Ditto, B v r i a a z 3 i 1 - s a , Ls u e e i I n ! Jan. pec. 2 4 6, , 3 E I S . . o u . t . h . a . m . . p . . . . i r i tl , .• & pee. 2 6 ampton Dec. 27, 31 Senthamp• d i r rU. oe:Ayres, Jan. 3 2 ............ ° e sp. 1 and F. Islands Lisbon, Vigo, and Oporto Dec. 27,11 . Sbuthamp. "''''' Halts, Egypt, and Aden, via Ditto, via Marseilles 2 2 6 7, , MS..o.u. . th . a. . m . p .. . . o ° y ec er • d 2 a s Southampton Dec. . _.. 0 . Mexico and B avana Ja n. 2, 31 Sou thamp. ""`..... Newfoundland Dec. 31, E Liverpool•• C A States (by B-ri and British N. Dee• 28 America tish packet) Dec. 2 3 , E Liverpool.. - ...... Ditto (by U. S. packet) „„ Dec. 27,E SouthamP. est Coast of A ica, Ma- Jon. 10 W deira, and Teneri fr ffe Dec. 23 E Liverpoo l.. West India, California, Vene zuela, Chili, Peru, Grey - Jan. 1 town, New Granada, &c. POEMS. By the Author 'of "John Halifax, Gentle dde man: - We discover in these poems a ll the firmness, vigour, an licacy of touch characterise the autr's prose nor“' and, in addition, an which ineffable grace and tenderness, such as VI a find in few poetical compositions besides those of Tennyson. Thelauthor has produced a volume of p oems which will ass n. e dly take its place with those of Golds mith, Gray, and CO' per on thefavourite shelf of every Englishman Librark" Illustrated News of the World. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—EPPS'S (Horncoopatbic Chorale CocoA.—This esteemed preparation is sold by the pal e) cipal grocers at ls. 6d. per lb , in llb., ilb., and 1 • ' packets. Each packet is labelled . " James Epps, lionieen • pathic chemist, London." PROFE SfiIot I MPORTA NT TO THE THEATRIC AL —ABRAHAMS V. COLLINS.—This was an action, (tried T.: the Whitechapel County Court on Saturday) brought by Mr. Abrahams, the proprietor and lessee of the Efling b .. lllll -A Theatre, Whitechapel, against Mr. Collins, the celebqt7 singer and Irish comedian, of the Marylebone Music IT: to recover damages for loss occasioned by the non-aPP'- ance of the defendant at a benefit at the Effingham TheVl under the following eireumstsuices :—Counsel was eng 4 .0 for the occasion, and a great number of the muse. g . a i , theatrical profession were present to hear the ease. - 11 'IA peared from the evidence that the defendant was ongsts_73- to sing for the benefit of Mr. Emanuels, a well-known p_:: singer, and bills were immediately circulated in the vicn" fr t i o to the effect that Mr. Collins would appear in a ddition. ..,. other attractions, and the plaintiff received no n otice tut' the defendant could not attend. An announcernenirt wo uld made by the plaintiff to the effect that Mr. Ceilin't su t d e . make his appearance in the course of the evening', . °tura fendant never attended, whereby the plaint iff b a d to r the money to a portion of the audience, and a gre at •r a r rion was occasioned in the theatre. In the cross-ex/00.d' aro blo it was shown that the plaintiff had suffered a cover 1, °lead ed loss by the non-attendance of the defendant, Nv.. ° - oe was indisposition for his absence. The Judge said theic very clear, the defendant had made himself Lißb e t :4 T t o h a . jury, after a brief con s u ltation, unanimously are oats. verdict for the plaintiff —damages £5, with flu' e- --- BIRTHS. • CA.THCART.—On the 23 d inst., at Thornton -le s treet, th Countess Cathcart, of a son . gli EVANS.—On the 2 4 th inst. , at 40, Bloomsbury-square, w Evans, of a daughter. ~e sv ;f6 of M AR RIOTT.—On the 23 d in st., at Hasleraere, E. H. Marriott, Esq. , of a son. l a of PROBYN.—On the 19th inst., at Esher-place, the iv i • ;the Rev. Julian Probyn, of a son. MARRIAGES. REVEL—VILL/ofautx l . — o ll the 12th' inst., at Pori!! Thaon de Revel , Mar q uis do St. Andre, to Mademoiselle. " Isabella, daug hter of the Marquis do Villamarina, SO"' nian Minister at Paris. SAMPSON—STALE.—On the 23d inst., at All Souls', Lang' ham-place, Mr. Samuel Sampson, of Crown Hill, 11PP er Norwood, Surrey, and 18, Little Tower-street, to Eiure* , fifth daughter of Mr. A. Stace, of Langhara-street. , ' , A , DEATHS. BoYDELL. —On the 23d inst. , a t Gloucester-crescent, Rs' gent's-park, James Boydell, E s q . near C A RTER.—On the 21st inst., at E dnani House Chel. tenham, Harriet Jane, wifo of Rear-Adnliral T. We Carter, C. 8., aged 59. DEATH.--On the 22d inst., a t Oxford -terrace, Gideon NEDeath, sq. aged 54. LSON.— E On , the 20th inst., at Bedicote Ag ed Gra, neir Banbury, Oxon, the Rev. G. B. Nelson, 8.D., 66. OLIPHANT.—On the 17 th inst., at Blackheath, Xentt T. H. Oliphant, Esq. , ag ed 53. PRATT.—On the 1 3 th inst. , Mr. Daniel Pratt, of Ilill-sido Farm, Odiham, aged 64. VllN,i}n:se.s7aoguedth2e9.l7th inst., at Aldersgato-street, Robt. G. Wvonerselsitrl.voOrltihp,o E2lsscit.,inasgte.d, aBt6 20rea t Yarmouth, Harr, LONDON : Printod and Published by MURDO YOUG, of No. 112, Strand, Printel at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in tie Precinct of the Savoy, in the coun of Middlesex, Monday, December 26, 1869. A 0 09 tit, tt h t li e3 v t,Wa GA Lir e GA the