The Sun. — London, England, 1860-10-05 00:00:00

711 E NA VY. We regret to learn that in consequence of con tinued and increasing illness, Vice-Admiral of the White Sir Arthur Fanshawe, K.C.8., recently Port Admiral at Plymouth, is obliged to resign that appointment. The gallant Admiral had a severe attack on Tuesday. On Wednesday he was visited by Staff-Surgeon Robert T. C. Scott, of the flagship Impregnable. The second in command, Rear-Admiral of the Red, Sir Thomas S. Pasley, is at present absent on leave, and his duties as Super intendent of the Dockyard are performed by Com mander James Brown, R.N., the master-attendant. At the present moment, the flagship Royal Albert being in the Sound, it is possible that the Lords of the Admiralty may appoint the Captain of th e Fleet, Rear-Admiral Robert F. Stopford, to under take the duties temporarily of the Port Admiral at Plymouth. Vice-Admiral of the White Sir Houston Stewart, K.C.8., is spoken of as successor to Admiral Fanshawe. ' It is expected that the screw steamship Aboukir, 90, Captain Douglas Curry, which arrived in Ply mouth Sound on Wednesday with the Royal Albert, the Conqueror, and the Centurion, will have t o go up Hamoaze to be repaired. During the recent cruise the fleet has been engaged in the usual routine of naval evolutions, and the discipline of the ships has been fully tested. Under canvas only the Edgar is said to be the best. The Con queror has been repeatedly complimented by Ad miral Fremantle for her smart appearance and efficiency. Complaint is made that the Commercial Code of signals which has been recently intro duced, and is of great value, appears to receive no proper attention from the merchant vessels met by the ships of the fleet. During the cruise Ward's night signals have been tested, and have proved very valuable. Admiral Bethune's signals were also tried ; they are useful only at short distances. The officers of the Steam Reserve Department of Woolwich Dockyard yesterday went down to Greenhithe for the purpose of accompanying her Majesty's screw steam gun-vessel Landrail, 5, Commander Wilson, down the measured mile, on a trial of her new engines, supplied by Mr. Hum phreys, of Deptford. The trial having been per fectly satisfactory, the Landrail proceeded on her way to Portsmouth to join the Channel Squadron, and.will ultimately proceed to the West Indies. The steam storeship Dee returned to Woolwich on Wednesday from Portsmouth, and was ordered into basin to reload with steam gear for the western yards. The Edgar, 91, screw, bearing the flag of Rear- Admiral Erskine, steamed into Portsmouth harbour yesterday from Spithead to make good defects. The following appointments have been made at the Admiralty :—Commander H. C. Glyn, to the Miranda; Lieut. L. A. Whimper, to the Impreg nable; Arthur Thomas, master, to the Miranda; H. A. Rigby, midshipman, to the Tartar; W. Sher brooke, naval cadet, to the Racoon ; W. Stacey, first class assist.-engineer, to the Mersey; John Snell, promoted to first-class assist.-engineer in the Colos sus; J. R. Agates, promoted to second-class assist.- engineer in the Landrail ; Hugh Duncan, promoted to second-class assist.-engineer in the Indus as supernumerary; and James Hansford, second-class assist.-engineer to the Ajax for service in the Rain bow. TILE ARMY. A review of the troops stationed in and around Portsmouth, with whom were brigaded the local Volunteer Artillery and Rifles and a troop of the Hampshire Yeomanry Cavalry, took place at Ports mouth yesterday, and concluded with a series of manoeuvres, in which the whole force were engaged in opposing the landing of a supposed enemy, and, failing in this, retiring within the town, covered by the guns of the fortress and its outworks. The weather was most favourable for the display, and a large number of people was present to witness the proceedings, some having come for the purpose from a considerable distance. The rather confined piece of ground upon which the review took place was swampy in parts, but not in so bad a state as might have been expected from the great quantity of rain which has lately fallen. The troops formed in line of contiguous columns of battalions on Southsea common at 2.30 p.m., with the mounted batteries on the right and the Royal Marine Light Infantry on the left. At 3 p.m. Major-Gen. Lord Paulet, C. 8., commanding the garrison and the south-west dis trict, arrived on the ground, accompanied by a bril liant mounted staff, and passed along the line of troops. Marching past in quick and slow time fol lowed. The bands of the various corps were amal gamated into one, and as each regiment passed by the march peculiar to each was played. First in order of march came the mounted batteries of Ar tillery, consisting of six officers, 104 non-commis sioned officers and men, 87 horses, 6 guns, and am munition waggons, with their attendant hospital - waggons, looking, as the field batteries always do, solid and servicelike. Next followed the F troop of the Hampshire Yeomanry Cavalry, under the command of Captain Beach, M.P. for North Hants, a remarkably well-mounted body of men. These were succeeded by the 2d Hants Artillery Volun teers, under the command of Major S. Hall, and remarkably well they looked as they marched steadily past—albeit they are not "show soldiers," merely meant for State occasions like the present. The 2d Hants were succeeded by the sth and 6th Hants Rifle Volunteers, under the respective com mands of Major Vallancey and Capt. Purvis. The grays and greens of the Volunteer .Rifles formed a pleasing contrast to the uniform of the corps which had preceded them. The men marched in capifal time, and the manner in which they afterwards performed the various movements which fell within their sphere of duty in the afterpart of the day's proceedings reflected credit alike on officers and men. The 10th Brigade of Royal Artillery, w ith their more gorgeous uniforms, followed the Rifle Volunteers, the whole of the Artillery on the ground being under the command of Cul. H. Dunlop. Next to the 10th Brigade came the Ist Battalion of the 11th Foot, under Col. Moore, who marched past like a wall. The 2d Battalion of the same regi ment followed, under Col. Jenner, who marched also exceedingly well. The Bedfordshire Light Infantry, under Col. Gilpin, followed next. Next came the 2d Battalion of the 19th Regiment, under Col. Warden, and the Royal Marine Light Infantry, under Col. Mitchell, who made an equally good appearance with their predecessors. In fact, as was remarked on the ground by competent judges, it was very possibly owing to the fact of the regular troops and the Volunteers being brigaded together that the whole body made such an appearance, each apparently endeavouring to emulate the other. At the conclusion of the marching past the 10th Bri gade of Royal Artillery and the 2d Hants Artillery Volunteer Corps marched off the ground and manned the guns mounted on the works of the town: The field operations then commenced, th e Rifl e Volunteers and the cavalry being thrown forward to the south-east of Southsea Castle, the cavalry afterwardsretiring ant the Rifles lining the seabeach and opening asmart fire upon the supposed advancing enemy,endeavearing to force a landing from his ship ping. Southsea Castle, which was manned by the Durham Militia Artillery, opened fire with shot and shell at the same time from its six and eight inch guns. The Royal m a rine Light Infantry sent as skirmishers to support up strong detachments the Rifles, and eventually relieve them, while the mounted batteries moved Up, and also opened fire on the advancing foe. The firing Was very heavy here, and prolonged for some time, and the mimic scene had an appearance of reality lent to it by th e rushing sound of the solid shot. through the air seawards and the bursting of the 8-inch shells fired from the batteries of Southsea Castle. The landing of the enemy, however, appeared to have been sue cessfully effected, as the whole force retreated, or rather retired in echelon battalions, towards the fortress, formi ng squares to res i st cava l ry , & c . To the 'westward of the castle line was reformed facing the sea, and a strong fire again opened, assisted by the glitz from the main lines of Portsmouth; and so fiercely Was this kept up that the whole of the ground, with the troops and spectators, was com pletely envelop e d in the " villanous vapour" of the smoke from the guns. The force then fell back by the left, forming two lines, coveredby skirmishers, and succeeded in gaining the shelter of the works of the town in tolerable order, the guns on the lines meanwhile keeping up a furious cannonade. This concluded the day's proceedings —a day on which the regular troops displayed their trained skill and the Volunteer forces proved the Tselves to be not unworthy to stand alongside th 2r more expe rienced brethren. Yesterday detachments of troops belonging to the Ist battalion, 19th Regiment, 75th, 81st, 91st, and 94th Regiments, arrived at Chatham garrison from Eastbourne, where they have been stationed for some time, in order to go through a course of long range rifle-firing previously to embarking for India. Detachments of non-commissioned officers and men belonging to the several East India depots at Chat ham were yesterday selected to proceed to Eastbourne to relieve those troops who have completed their course of rifle instruction at that station. The new steel gun (rifled), invented by Mr. Lynet Thomas, recently forwarded to Woolwich Arsenal, from the Mersey Steelworks, for experi ments at Shocburyness, has been fired in the long range, the result of which is as follows :—The gun, charged with 281 b. of powder and a shot weighing 1601b5., obtained a flight of 10,000 yards, or 51 m il e s. Arrangements are being made to carry out a course of trials and experiments with the gun which are ordered to take place shortly, in the pre sence of the Select Committee of Woolwich Arsenal. A couple of skeleton 68-pounder guns, cast at the contract works of Lowmoor, and received at Woolwich Arsenal, were yesterday completed, with a view of testing the efficacy of strengthening east iron guns, according to Sir W. Armstrong's experi mental principle, suggested as a means of convert ing the old guns into rifled ordnance. The breech of the gun is thoroughly enveloped in a coating of brass three inches thick, applied to the gun heated to an equal temperature, so as to insure the per manent adhesion of the two metals as one insepar able substance. The guns are smooth-bored, and will undergo a severe preliminary test preparatory to an extension of the system, if found successful. THE ROAD CHILD MURDER. TROWBRIDGE, OCT. 4. Elizabeth Gough was this morning again placed at the bar charged with the Murder of Francis Sa ville Kent, at Road, on the 29th of June last. The magistrates took their seats on the bench at 11 o'clock. Sir John W. Awdry, presided. The attendance of the public was even larger than it was on the three previous days, and a number of ladies were also present. Mr. Saunders conducted the prosecution ; Mr. Ribton appeared for the prisoner ; and Mr. Edlin watched the case for Mr. Kent and his family. The prisoner looked anxious and careworn, but there was no change in her demeanour, which was firm and composed. Mrs. Dallimore was recalled and examined by Mr. Saunders—On the 9th of July the prisoner was at my house. She was sitting down by the fire, and she said, " Mrs. Dallimore, do you know there is a nightgown missing ?" The Chairman wished to know in what capacity the prisoner was staying at the house of the witness. Witness--She was at my house under my sur veillance. I told her I had not heard of the mis sing nightgown. She said it was Miss Constance's, and she added, " Depend upon it that nightgown will lead to the discovery of the murder." I asked her what she thought about Miss Constance doing the murder, and she replied, " I can't say any• thing about that; but I saw the nightgown put in the basket." • Cross-examined by Mr. Ribton—l remembered this last night, but I was not asked about it. I mentioned it to Mr. Slack on my examination be fore him. I was not aware that the nightgown was missed on the Monday after the murder; the prisoner had come back to my house on the day when this conversation took place, from an exami nation before the magistrates, at which I suppose the missing nightgown had been mentioned. My husband was present during the conversation, but he was not the first who mentioned the missing night gown. He came in while the prisoner and I were talk ing about it. When he came in,hearing the nurse and I talking about the nightgown, he said, " So, nurse, then you saw the nightgown put into the basket as well as Cox, the housemaid?" That was the first thing he said on his coming in. The nurse said, "No. I shall have nothing to say about that. I have enough of my own to contend with ;" and she went to bed. I swear that was the answer made by the nurse. My husband said before she went to bed, " But you have just said that you saw the nightgown put into the basket." She made no an swer to that; but had the candle and went to bed. I think that was all that passed in my husband's presence. I said yesterday, in the course of my examination, that Fricker came into the kitchen at Road hill House on the day of the murder and said he had found nothing in the privy, and that the nurse said, " You won't find anything there." I did not see any one but Fricker. Mr. Ribton here requested a young man in the court to step forward, and pointing to him, he asked the witness whether she saw that person in the kitchen with Fricker? Witness—No, I did not. I did not hear any men in the kitchen say that they had got out all from the privy except about 6 or 8 inches of water from the bottom. I did not hear any one asked if they had found anything. I did not hear any one say that they had carefully felt with their hands over the bottom, and searched with cans, but had found nothing. I did not hear the prisoner say after this, " Then you won't find anything." I pledge myself that the questions and answers now put to me were not put in my hearing. I know nothing of Mr. Kent and his family. I was never at the house till that day. I did not see two mem in the kitchen ; two men might have come in without my seeing them. I did not swear positively there was only one. I only knew it was Fricker by hearing the nurse say, " Fricker, what have you done ?" I did not see his face ; I only saw his head and part of his body as he opened the door in part. I saw his face when I turned round and looked towards the door. Which is true—that you saw his face or that you did not P—Of course I saw his face. Then it was a positive untruth when you said you did not see his face P—No, it was not. He stood in the doorway. Re-examined—l was sitting in a position so that I could not see the whole of the man's body. I concluded there was only one man from only hear ing Fricker's name mentioned. William Dallimore, police constable, said—On the 9th of July the prisoner was at my house; she was staying there for convenience. I had no orders to keep her in custody. When I came home in the evening, on the 9th of July, I found my wife and the prisoner there, talking together about Miss Constance Kent's nightdress being lost. I heard the nurse say that the nightgown was lost, and that she thought it must have been lost from the wash. My wife said, " Did you see the nightdress put into the basket ?" and she said " Yes." I said, " Then you saw the nightdress put in as well as Cox ?" She said, "Oh no, I did not." I said, " But yo u have just said so." She said, "Oh no, I did not." I repeated that she had just said so, but she again denied it. No more was said about it. I consulted my wife about this conversation the next morning, and I am quite certain that the nurse did say she saw the nightgown put into the basket. Cross-examined by Mr. Ribton—l don't recollect any of the conversation that took place afterwards. I and my wife and the prisoner were in the kitchen together for half or three-quarters of an hour after wards. I went out and left my wife and the prisoner sitting in the kitchen. I was away for about 10 1 minutes, and when I returned they were just pre paring to eo to bed, and they wont almost immedi ately. I afterward went out on duty. I was at Roadhill-house on Saturday, the 20th of June. I know that two men ware sent there to search tho privy. I did not hear them say in the kitchen that they had searched to the bottom, with their hands and had found nothing. I was not in the kitchen. My wife slept with the prisoner to prevent her leaving or escaping. I always mid erstood that she was at my house for safe keeping., but not to be treated as a prisoner. The Chairman intimated that he understood from Mr. Ludlow that the fact was the - nurse was in ac tual custody upon one occasion 'when she was at Dallimore's house, and that upon ;the second occa sion she returned there at her own desire and at the request of her father. Mr. Ribton said he was satisS ed with the ex planation, and put no further questions to the wit ness. The Chairman said that before `Mr. Ribt on pro -88 ceeded with hi s addres s he should be glad to know what applicati on was m ade as to, commitment on the part of th e prosecution. Mr. Saunders apprehended it w$ j2se sfor the Ben c h to determine wheth er any case had.: prznesetrabslihsohneldd, and to say upon what cha rge t h e , be committed. The Chairman was quite awaro that the charge on which a prisoner was commit to d was in the dis cretion of the Court ; but, at the sal ne time, looking at the grave consequences of a co 44,1,uittal to a young person whose previous antecedents were known to be respectable, he asked whether it was intended to charge the prisoner as principal, accomplice, or accessory after the fact ? Mr. Saunders was not instructed to make any special application, as to the form of commitment, supposing the magistrates to come to the conclusion that such a step should be taken, as the chairman was quite aware that in the event of a committal the prosecutor was not bound to prefer his bill be fore the grand jury on that particular charge. Mr. Ribton then proceeded to address the magis trates for the prisoner. He could not, he said, enter upon a discussion of the facts which had been proved in evidence without returning his thanks to the Bench for the great kindness and courtesy he had experienced during the course of this inves tigation, for the untiring patience with which their minds had been directed to the various statements which had been laid before them, and for the spirit of fairness and impartiality which had characterised their conduct at every stage of the inquiry. He entertained the most perfect confidence that the same spirit and love of justice which had animated the Bench heretofore would prevail with them to the end, and that when they came to consider what their decision ought to be, acting as they did in the face of the country, they would take care that it was such a decision as would be conformable to truth, and in strict accordance with the principles of jus tice. Mr. Saunders had said in his opening speech that the tragedy enacted at Road had sent a thrill of horror through every home in the country. Unquestionably, this dreadful crime, if wilful crime it was, stood out alone is the annals of atro city. To murder a poor innocent, unoffending, and unprotected child under such circumstances, was indeed a crime which it would be impossible to de scribe in fitting language. It was a crime which might be said to " -- blue the eye of day, " And cast a deeper shade upon the dusky brow of night." But he was afraid that one fact was painfully pro minent in this protracted inquiry —viz., that they were not now any nearer the truth than they were immediately after the perpetration of the dreadful act at Road. The exertions of the prosecutors— conducted in a manner to which he would pre sently allude—had, unfortunately for them, unfor tunately for the public, unfortunately for the inte- rests of truth, been turned into a wrong channel, The bench, however, had not now to consider by what fiend in human shape the frightful deed was perpetrated. The question before them was, had any evidence been adduced which would warrant them in sending the accused for trial ? He would at the outset direct their attention to one or two points which, though discussed by Mr. Saunders in his opening speech, had really no immediate bearing upon the present case. The first had reference to the time at which the murder was committed. He sub mitted that whether it was committed early in the night or towards the approach of morning had nothing to do with the prisoner at the bar. The question of time could no more affect her than it could any other person who might be charged with the crime. So with respect to the wound inflicted after death. Whether it was inflicted after death, or whether the child was alive and breathing, had nothing to do with the prisoner. It was a specu lation foreign to the present inquiry. Mr. Saunders had made a great deal of the Newfoundland dog, and of the fact that it was not heard barking on the night of the murder. It appeared, however, that that circumstance was of no importance whatever as regarded either the prisoner or anybody else, whether an inmate of the house or a stranger; be cause the evidence had proved beyond question that the dog was enclosed in a yard, and that any per son might have passed from the drawing-room window, or even from the front door if the drawing room window were a "blind," without being seen by the dog at all. Mr. Saunders had indulged in various ingenious speculations. He had said, in the first place, that nobody could have broken into the house. That was the only part of the case with re spect to which there was anything approximating to satisfactory proof. But Mr. Saunders had also dwelt upon the improbability, if not the absolute impossibility, of anybody having been secreted in the house. In the attempt to prove that proposition he had entirely failed. There were unoccupied rooms in the house, and in the unoccupied bedrooms especi ally, anybody might have been secreted during even the whole of the day on which the murder was com mitted. It was a curious faet that Superintendent Wolfe, when he examined the house, was not shown into any of the unoccupied bedrooms. He was shown into the lumber room and another room, and ho had told the Court that he did not think anybody could have been concealed in:either ; but so careless was the manner in which he took his observations of those rooms that he was unable to say whether in one or the other there was a cupboard or not. His evidence might be passed over as utterly valueless, even if the rooms he examined were the only un occupied apartments of the house ; but it had been proved beyond doubt that there were unoccupied bedrooms, and that anybody might have been con cealed in one of them without being seen by any of the inmates. Such being the case, was it not possible, was it not even within the range of pro bability, that the murder was committed by a stranger ? Mr. Kent had himself stated that a dis e,arged servant left his house vowing vengeance upon the children. The matter with respect to that particular servant had been to some - extent cleared up; but Mr. Kent held an office entailing upon him the discharge of duties which might have the effect of rendering him unpopular among many persons ; and, at all events, the expressions used by the prisoner, " Oh ! ma'am, it is revenge," and " Oh ! it is jealousy," might have been, and nadoubt were, suggested by the violent and threatening language attributed by Mr. Kent himself to at least one per son. It might be said that nobody would have concealed himself or herself in the house and taken revenge on Mr. Kent by the murder of his child. But it did not necessarily follow that murder was contemplated in the first instance. Perhaps all that was intended was to take away the child. That ke was not indulging in an altogether improbable hypothesis was clear from the manner in which the child was removed. If murder had been contem plated from the first, why was the child wrapped up in a blanket ? Anything, even the piece of flannel which was found in the ewatercloset, would have sufficed if put into the mouth to stifle a cry, so as to enable the person, whoever he or she might be, to remove the child without killing it ; but the fact that the child was wrapped up in a blanket seemed to warrant the supposition that if a stranger were secreted in the house—a probability which was not excluded by the evidence—he might have intended simply to steal the child, and thus to wreak his vengeance upon Mr. Kent. Supposing that, when the child was removed from the house, it was found that the stifling process had been carried too far, how did the remaining facts accord with his speculation that the deed was done by a stranger ? The throat was cut, a stab was given in the side, and the body was thrown down a watercloset. It was unquestionably put there for secrecy • but an inmate of the house must have known that, owing to the construction of the watercloset, the body could not pass the splash-board. Besides, if the murder had been com mitted by one of the inmates, some traces of blood must have been discovered ; for, although the evi dence of the surgeon went to show that the blood did not spurt outof the wounds, yet blood was found on the floor of the water-closet, and nobody could have handled the child without having his clothes in some degree stained with blood. But there was no evidence of anything of the sort. The crime, again, must have been perpetrated with some instru ment. Mr. Saunders had, strangely enough, pro duced no one to tell the magistrates that all the knives were safe ; but there was an entire absence, as far as stains of blood and !an instrument were concerned, of anything to connect anybody in the house with the murder. How did the culprit get away ? It was a remarkable fact that it was stated by the prisoner, in some of the many conversations which she had with the otherinmates, police officers, and others, that she saw the marks of two feet upon ta t i he liseom c o a ba r ss p e e r t in theved who pointingby d r i\ a i w r s i . n drawing-room. . s h e ad marks N e described ver iodr n l d eb o as t oo t ss.upipi havingoow madecame such those os boots oot st;flo apparently rr skhso by L e n rafiei twithlled shoeswas sebteelaleamnitil the direction of the window, a nails—were worn by the prisoner ; but had the prosecution made any inquiry with the view of dis covering by whom the marks were made ? If they had not, was it because they had not been actuated ' by a general desire to arrive at the truth, and be cause their exertions had been directed towards the attainment of one object, viz., to prove the guilt of one particular person ? Footmarks were also found on the tall grass outside. The assistant gardener, Alloway, had explained that they were made by himself the night before; but if a stranger was leaving the house after having cut the throat of the child in the water-closet, would not those marks of feet in the tall grass at once suggest to him a mode of taking his depar ture without leaving a trace behind ? There must have been a heavy fall of dew on the night of the murder, for it was the middle of summer, and yet as far as he knew no marks of dew were found on the boots or shoes of the inmates, if, indeed, they were examined. Mr. Sau n ders had stated in his opening speech that the drawing-room window could not ;. have been put in the state in which it was found except by some person who returned into the house ; but he had utterly failed to prove his assertion. The prosecutor had never thought it worth while to make the experiment, It had been left to rerslake an d Cox, the cook and housemaid, to make the ex periment for themselves, which they didon thesecond morning of the present inquiry, when they found ' THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 5, 1860 that it was perfectly easy from the outside to put the window in the condition in which it was discovered on the morning after the murder. He did not mean to assert that the crime was perpetrated by a stranger, but he had thought it his duty to show that the hypothesis of this being an accidental murder, the original intention going no further than the stealing of the child, and of its having been perpetrated by a stranger, and not by any of the inmates of the house, was not inconsistent with the facts which had been proved in evidence. Another speculation in which Mr. Saunders had indulged was that the murder must have been done by more than one person. There was no reasonable proof of that. Surely it was possible for a strong and active man or woman to take a child of four years of age from a cot, and, having first stifled its cries, to take it away without being heard. But Mr. Saunders, having laid down the proposition that the murder could not have been done by one person, had very illogically jumped to the conclusion that of the two persons engaged in the act the prisoner must have been one, whoever the other might have been. In the dark ages, when judges were corrupt, when witnesses were perjured, when oppression in every shape found its way into our criminal courts, the characters and lives of aceused parties were not al lowed, in theory at all events, to be reasoned away after such an ingenious fashion. Coke, alluding Co high treason, said, the guilt of a person was not to be proved by reasoning, or by inferences, or by flashes of wit, but by plain, clear, and satisfactory testimony ; yet Mr. S aun d ers -h a d ventured to ask • the bench to take ingenious speculations for proof, • but— Such reasoning falls like an inverted cone, Wanting the proper base to rest upon." The learned gentleman proceeded to direct attention to the facts of the case. He referred to the charge which had been made against Miss Constance Kent, and expressed his opinion that the magistrates wisely and justly discharged that young lady from custody, although the evidence against her was con siderably stronger than that against the poor girl now at the bar. That prosecution having failed, it was then, he said, that directions came down from the Home office, that the Attorney-General was con sulted, and that Mr, Slack was imported into the case and commenced those inquiries at Road and elsewhere which, he believed, would be reprobated and denounced by everybody capable of forming an opinion on the subject as alike alien to the spirit of English law and subversive of every known princi ple of English justice. There was a time when accused parties were placed upon the rack and sub-. jected to every species of torture. There had oven been cases of persons tortured to death in order that some confession might be extorted from them. What was the difference between the investigation con- Bunted by Mr. Slack and the inquiry of a Grand Inquisitor surrounded by his familiars, with the rack in the next room, except that instead of physical torture it was a species of mental torture which he applied to every witness called before him ? How had the prisoner at the bar been treated ? While Mr. Kent and his family had from first to last en joyed the assistance of an attorney, who during the examinations conducted by Mr. Slack not only put questions, but interposed to prevent other questions being put—while Mr. Slack had listened to the state ments of every inmate of the house, collating and comparing them with one another, and drawing in ferences from them simply and in combination—the poor, girl at the bar was not examined at all. She was at home with her father, the police knew where to find her, but she was never called upon to give her ac count of the transaction. In her absence, by means of statements collected from other parties interrogated by Mr. Slack, the conclusion was finally reached that a warrant should be issued for her apprehen sion upon the charge of murder. When it was known to the bench, as it now was, that the only evidence against her consisted of some contradic tory statements made by the poor girl herself, he fearlessly asked whether it would not have been fairer and in more strict accordance with every rule of law as well as every principle of justice if Mr. Slack had examined her in the same way as the other servants, and given her an opportunity of explaining what was now said to be inconsistent and contradictory in her testimony ? It looked as if there were a preconceived determination to do something or other by means of which somebody not upon the spot should somehow or other be made a victim. The police had been bellied in one in quiry. Mr. Slack was called in. Public indigna tion was aroused by the thought that an atrocious crime could have been perpetrated and no clue dis covered to the perpetrator. Was he wrong in sup posing that an inquiry was instituted, not for the purpose of eliciting the truth, but for the purpose of collecting evidence against a particular person ? He very much mistook the tribunal which he had the honour of addressing if they would consent to allow themselves to be made the instruments of this terrible injustice. He believed they would tell the prosecutors that before they could ask them to commit the prisoner for trial they must prove two things—first, that they had conducted the preliminary inquiry fairly; and, secondly, that there was really some substantial evidence against the accused. The present was no ordinary case. A committal would not only condemn his client to an unjust imprisonment, but would cast a stigma upon her for ever. What were the facts which had been proved against her? There were only three points which had the slightest bearing upon the case, and they were all well known before they were put into the crucible of Mr. Slack and came out with a different stamp. These three points were the statements made by the prisoner about the blanket, the piece of flannel found underneath the body, and the kneeling up in the bed on the morning of the murder. As to the first point, the learned counsel contended chat the alleged contra dictions were known to the prosecution long before she left her situation at Road. But if this were not so, would the Bench attach any great importance to any slight discrepancies in statements made by the prisoner or any other inmate of the hoe , on that melancholy morning ? Surely not. Why had she never been asked to give an explanation of these discrepancies—if discrepancies they were—and why had not her explanation been allowed to find its way into that mysterious writing-case of Mr. Slack, which probably might contain the materials for some future charge against some other person ? With regard to the piece of flannel, the learned counsel commented severely on the evidence of the woman Dallimore, who, he said, if she had not com mitted perjury, had shown such an indifference to truth as to render her evidence utterly worthless. Yet this was the woman who was introduced at the close of the prosecution to strengthen the weak parts of the case. After the intimation which had fallen from the bench as to this piece of flannel, he would say very little more on the point, except to regret that a woman who had manifested such reck less indifference to the fate of the poor girl at the bar and to the interests of justice had been called as a witness in the case. What did the conversa tions which this woman to-day had been called upon to detail imply ? Absolutely nothing as indieating the prisoner's guilt. The witness was contradicted in the particulars 'she gave by her own husband, and her testimony was entirely unworthy of credence. With regard to the first point, the statement of the prisoner as to her first missing the child from the cot by kneel ing up in her bed, he would not believe that any importance would be attached to the experiments which had been made behind the back of the pri soner, in order to manufacture evidence against her. Would it not have been fair to ask her to show in what position she was when she first missed the child ? Why fasten her to the expression that she knelt in the 'bed, and then employ Sergeant Wolfe and Mrs. Dallimore to make experiments to shoW that it was impossible her statement could be true? If the intention had really been to ascertain the truth, why was not the same measure of justice meted out to the prisoner which was afforded to the other inmates of the house, and why had this poor girl alone been denied the opportunity of demon strating the position from which she said she had missed the child ? These were the only three points in the evidence which had been adduced on which he thought it necessary to offer any observations. He might express the hope that the magistrates were not going to commit the prisoner for trial, not because they helievedthere was evidence enough to warrant them in doing so, but because it was a kind of tentative process to which they were invited by the prosecution, in the hope that something else might turn up. He could not suppose that whether the prosecution was or was not, encouraged by the law officers of the Crown, they would allow them selves to be made the instruments of such a dirty proceeding—a proceeding which could not fail to be detrimental to the cause of truth, and subversive at once of every rule of law and every principle of justice, natural as well as legal. God forbid that he should attempt to cast suspicion upon any in dividual, but he could not help saying that if Mr. Kent were to be placed at the bar the evi dence against him would ba far stronger than that which had been produced against this poor girl. There could be no doubt, at all events, that the testimony adduced when Miss Constance Kent was charged was more com plete than anything which bad been laid before the bench on the present occasion, and, as the magis trates had most justly refused to commit that young lady, so h e h o p e d they would not hesitate to adopt the same course with respect to his unfortunate client. The magistrates then withdrew to deliberate in private, a n d were a b sent f or a b ou t half an hour. On their return, The Chairman said,—We do 'not think that a sufficient prima facie case has been established for committing young person the at the bar to gaol for a period Of some months, and thus cast a certain stigma upon the character of one who has previously borne an unblemished reputation, and whose con duct, as far as it has come before us in this matter, with the exception of one or two facts to which need not allude at length, is without reproach. Considering how much curiosity has been exhibited relative to th is dreadful affair—the anxiety naturally evinced by everybody connected with the family, the officious inquiries of those who are merely curi ous, and the official investigations of the authorities —it is remarkable that we should see no appear ance, even if we could suppose her to be guilty, either of a sullen reserve on the one hand, or of an affected frankness on the other. When so many persons have expressed opinions as to the modem which this murder was don e an d th e motives which suggested it, I am not surprised that the young per son at the bar should have followed the general ex ample and framed a hypothesis of her own. Ido not say that there is no material evidence before us which may hereafter, perhaps with additions, be in some way or other acted u p on . Th ere f ore , the decision of the magistrates is that, although they will not commit her for trial, they will bind her to appear if she should be wanted again. Sureties to a moderate amount will be required. Some observations have been made by Mr. Rib ton, perhaps not unnaturally, reflecting strongly upon the mode in which Mr. Slack has conducted his inquiries. We think it our duty to say that, judging from what has come before us, we do not think anything like misconduct can be attributed to that gentleman. The decision of the magistrates was received with some cheering from the part occupied by the public._.. Mr. Ribton—As far as Mr. Slack personally is concerned, I did not mean to say anything offen sive to him, because I have no doubt he discharged the painfukluty intrusted to him with ability and discretion. My remarks applied to the inquiry itself. Mr. Dunn denied having put questions to any of the persons examined by Mr. Slack. He had sim ply suggested, on one or two occasions, that such and such a piece of information could be got from a particular witness. The Chairman said that, when he considered the refusal to allow a plan of the house to be taken and the locking up of thelp o li cemen i n th e kit c he n , he found it impossible to say that Mr. Kent had been well advised. Mr. Edlin remarked that he was instructed by Mr. Dunn, on the part of Mr. Kent, to afford every facility to the magistrates and the police in the prosecution of their inquiries. The police, indeed, had had the run of the house for weeks. When the plan was spoken of, Mr. Kent had no information as to the parties against whom it was- intended to proceed, and for anything he knew the unjust pro secution of his daughter, which had been con demned by high legal authority, might have been followed by some other proceeding equally ground less. The prisonei was then discharged, a verbal bond being taken from a relative to produce her, if re quired, under . a penalty of £lOO. THE WAKEFIELD POISONING CASE. WAKEFIELD, OCT. 3. This morning Emma Stringer, a young woman about 26 years of age, and her two sisters, Matilda, about 22, and Abigail Stringer, 16 years of age, were brought before the magistrates at the Wake field Court-house, the elder prisoner charged with murder of Miss Adamson, by the administration, in small doses, of arsenic, and the two younger pri soners as being accessories. The magistrates present were Mr. E. Tew (chair man), Mr. W. Tew, Mr. Foljambe, and Mr. Barff. The court was crowded during the proceedings, the greatest interest being manifested. Mr. Shaw, barrister, of Wakefield, instructed by Mr. Fernandez, appeared to prosecute, and Mr. Wheelhouse, barrister, of Leeds, instructed by Mr. Stringer, for the defence. On the prisoners being called up Mr. Shaw said that, after reading the whole of the evidence which had been taken, the prosebution had come to the conclusion that there was no case against the two younger sisters, and they were discharged on un dertaking to appear if called on. Emma Stringer was then placed at the bar, and formally charged with the murder. Mr. Shaw, in opening the case, called the attention of the Court to the fact that Mr. Waddington, the surgeon who attended Miss Adamson for some years before the prisoner went to live with Miss Adamson, was not called in during the repeated ill nesses of the deceased, and which illness the evi dence of the witnesses would prove exhibited all the symptoms of poisoning, such as vomiting and purging, and that Mr. Hirst, the medical attendant of Emma Stringer, was only called in a short time before the death of the deceased. The medical tes timony of the analyzation of the contents of the stomach and viscera showed distinctly that the de ceased had been poisoned a short time before she died, and not only that, but the appearance of the intestines and other parts of the body was conclu sive as to the fact that small doses of poison had been administered at intervals during two or three years. Having proved that the old lady was poisoned, he should connect the prisoner with the poisoning by proving that she alone prepared the food of the deceased, and a variety of other circum stances indicative of the motives which actuated the prisoner. He would also mention the fact that the deceased kept a medicine chest, but no arsenic had been fcund in it ; so that it was extremely im probable that the- old lady had poisoned herself, and there was the additional fact that a packet of powder alleged to be arsenic was found in the kitchen. Dr. E. Waddington, of Wakefield, deposed that he was formerly the medical attendant of Miss Adamson, and after her death he made a post mor tem examination of the body. He saw . Dr. Nun neley take away a portion of the contents of the body for analyzation. Cross•examined by Mr. Wheelhouse—l have my degree of M.D. from the Royal College of Physi cians in Edinburgh, not from the University. Some time before portions of the brain, the heart, the liver and_the diaphragm were taken away by Dr. Nunneley, I had myself analyzed a portion of the contents of the viscera for the discovery of arsenic, and I then discovered none. lam a member of the College of Surgeon's, in Lincoln's inn•fields, London. It is not more than the duty of a surgeon to make analytical examinations than that of a physician, but it is more his duty to make a post mortem, to do the work of the knife. If arsenic had been given in small doses for some time, I should not have expected to find a residium of arsenic in that portion of the stomach which I examined, or in any portion of the stomach, but I should have expected to find traces. I employed Reinkhe's tests and the liquid tests. I found by Reinkhe's test a suspicious appearance on the copper, but I would not undertake to swear it was arsenic. I did not use Marsh's test, because I could not rely upon my zinc being pure, and it might contain arsenic itself in an insoluble form. I did not boil the copper in muriatic acid before using it to test the presence of poison, but rubbed it bright and made it perfectly clean. I met Dr. Nunneley at my own house some time in September; the day the body was exhumed. This was on the 20th of September, and it was the second time the body had been taken up. The coffin was taken into the chapel of the cemetery, and the lid taken off. The body had been sewn up with a steel needle after the post mortem examination. Mr. Nunneley took away , from the body what he wanted for an analysis. I did not see him make the analysis, and I had no orders for interfering with any analysis that he might make. I did not reserve any portion of the viscera when Mr. Nunneley took away a portion of the region of the stomach. I had reserved a jar of a portion of the stomach which I had analysed; that jar was analysed by Mr. Nunne ley, and I myself examined it. I saw no arsenic. We found traces on the metal. By the Chairman—We found suspicious appear ances on the metal. I staid till nearly 10 o'clock on Satarday night, and I resumed it on Sunday. We found suspicious traces on the copper. Mr. T. Nunneley said—On the 19th September last I was present at the exhumation of the body of the late Miss Frances Adamson. I assisted in open ing the coffin. The body had apparently lain in the grave some time and was partially decomposed. The body had been previously opened as far as the abdomen was concerned. The greater portion of the stomach had been removed with a portion of the liver and the right kidney. There was no effu sion or adfiesion of any of the parts together. There was no sign of disease in the parts I saw. The intestines were empty, with the exception of about half an ounce of solid matter. The state of the peritonmal surface was quite healthful ; the bladder was quite contracted. The intestines were very little changed. I took away some portions of the body. I removed nearly the whole of the vis cera, with the chest and the brain. I subsequently made an analysis of the whole of the'parts. I found the lining surface of the gullet and a portion of the membrane thickened and covered with mucus. On one portion was a white thick patch. Mr. Nunneley was proceeding with his evidence when our parcel was despatched. OCTOBER 4. The prisoner Emma Stringer, charged with hav ing caused the death of her mistress, at Aggbrigg, by the administration of arsenic in small doses, was again brought before the county magistrates of the West Riding this morning. The prisoner looked pale and dejected, and a marked change seemed to km taken Flue m he appearance since the discharge of her two sisters. She seemed to listen-with the ❑tmost attention and anxiety to the evidence, especially that of Mr. Nunneley. The same magistrates were present to-day, Mr. E. Tew presiding. Mr. Shaw again appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Wheelhouse for the defence. • _ _ After the despatch of our Parcelyesterday, Mr. Nunneley's examination was resumed, and he de posed, in the strongest and most positive manner, to the finding of poison —arsenic—in the portions of the viscera which he had analyzed, and he was fully convinced that Miss Adamson had died from the administration of arsenic. The symptoms which usually attended poisoning by arsenic did not always take place. Mr. Wheelhouse subjected the witness to a search ing cross-examination, but did not succeed in shak- ing his evidence in the smallest particular. • 1 Mr. Nunneley said he was a witness for Palmer, and in his opinion Palmer was hanged improperly, for he did not believe now that strychnine was found in the bodies of the persons whom it was alleged he had poisoned. When he made the analysis of the viscera of Miss Adamson he found poison, and pointed it out to Mr. Waddington, who was present. He was assisted in his analysis by Mr. Reynolds, of Leeds. The Court then adjourned, and on reassembling this morning, Mary Link was called, and, in reply to Mr. Shaw stated that she was a dressmaker, and used to work" occasionally for Miss Adamson. On the 2d August, which was Mr. Wood's birthday, she dined with Emma Stringer in the kitchen. Mr. 'Wood dined with Miss Adamson. Emma Stringer cooked the dinner and prepared the tea and supper. Witness stopped in the house all night, and slept with Emma Stringer. There is a room between the ser vants' room and the . room Miss Adamson slept in. The witness continued—ln the night I was awakened in consequence of Miss Adamson being taken poorly. She vomited violently, and Emma Stringer went into her room, and on her return she told me Miss Adamson was taken sick. I remained till the morning, and Miss Adamson was again taken sick early in the morning, and vomited. I can't remember the hour at which she was taken sick. I got up a little before 7 o'clock. I saw Miss Adamson during the day. I went home to break fast, and returned again to the house to inquire how Miss Adamson was. Emma Stringer told me she - was going to make the breakfast for Miss Adamson. I asked her how she was, and she said she was a little better. On the Sunday after the birthday I saw Miss Adamson going to chapel, and asked her how she was, and she said she was well then. I saw Miss Adamson again on the Bth of August, and she said she was ill—her stomach was oat of order. Emma Stringer sent for me, and told me that I was to write for Dr. Hirst ; that Miss Adamson wished it. I did not see Miss 'Addison that dik=she was in bed. I slept there on the -flight of the Bth of August with Emma Stringer. / On that night again Miss Adamson was taken poorly, and Emma Stringer again got up and went to her twice during the night. Miss Ad mson appeared, from the noise I heard, to be vomiting. Emma Stringer, on her return to e, said, " Miss Adamson is taken sick, and her stomach is out of order." She' added that Miss Adamson was subject to such attacks. I staid in the house that day, and helped to make Miss Adamson's bed. She sat in a chair folded in a blan ket. She appeared very ill. She had her eyes closed at the time. When Dr. Hirst had gone I asked Emma Stringer what the doctor said, and she said that the doctor said Miss Adamson was suffering from gas tric fever and bronchitis. Emma took up Miss Adam son's breakfast. It consisted of tea and dry toast. At the request of Emma I went to Dirtcar for her sister Abigail, and returned with her. The only time after that that I saw Miss Adamson was the night before she died. I called several times to in quire after deceased, and Emma said Miss Adamson did not wish to see any one. When I saw her the day before her death .Miss Adamson told nee she was going to die, and she wished me to go for Father Young. I asked her how she was, and she put her hand up to her throat and said, " Oh, my throat; it is very bad!" I asked Emma why Miss Adamson was going to have Father Young, and not Father Baron, who had been used to come. Emma said merely that Miss Adamson did not wish for Father Baron. At that time Mrs. Bateson and Abi gail Stringer were in the house with Emma, and I had seen Matilda Stringer in the morning. I carried the message to Father Young. I saw Miss Adamson after she was dead. Matilda Stringer came to our house and told us that Miss Adamson was dead, and they wanted mother to lay her out. I went there about sin the evening. There were then in the house Emma and her sisters, and Mrs. Bateson. I saw a cart when I was there in the evening, and James Stringer was putting in two boxes and a bandbox. One of the boxes was a hair trunk. Cross-examined by Mr. Wheelhouse—During the time I was there Emma appeared to behave kindly and dutifully towards Miss Adamson. By the Bench—On the evening of the 2d August I believe Mr. Wood took tea out of the same teapot. Miss Adamson was purged on that night as well as being attacked with vomiting. The Rev. Mr. Young, Roman Catholic priest, was then examined, and repeated in the same terms the evidence which he had given before the coroner. Cross-examined by Mr. Wheelhouse—l admini stered extreme unction to Miss Adamson before her death. I used to attend Miss Adamson in conjunc tion with Father Baron, who occupies with me the priests' house at Wentworth-street, Wakefield.- I had visited Miss Adamson as her spiritual adviser conjointly with my confrere Father Barou for ahout 11 months. By Mr. Shaw—Father Baron and myself are in charge of this district as Roman Catholic pastors, and Miss Adamson was one of our communicants, and we attend our communicants indifferently, but in the matter of confession our communicants choose their own confessors, and I was generally chosen as the confessor of the deceased. Mary Bateson, daughter-in-law of the old woman examined at the inquest, deposed that she was in Miss Adamson's bedroom on the night when she died. Emma Stringer was there, and Miss Adam son said in her presence "My tongue and throat are so hot that I cannot bear to talk." She also said " The pains of death are very hard." The witness left about 11 o'clock. Hannan Denton and three other witnesses deposed to seeing goods removed by Emma Stringer and her brothdr after the death of Miss Adamson. Mr. Fernandes, solicitor, of Wakefield, said—l am the attorney fee the administrator to the pro perty of the deceased. That _gentleman is the Rev. Mr. Adamson, of Padiham, near Burnley. By his direction I took possession of the house. Emma Stringer left it on August 20. Before going she accounted to me for the expenditure of £5O received by her after Miss Adamson's death. By Mr. Wheelhouse—Letters of administration were taken out five days after Miss Adamson's death, but I had been to the house before that, under the authority of Mr. Cartwright, who was the landlord. I did not tell. Emma Stringer to leave the premises. This being the whole of the evidence, • Mr. Wheelhouse addressed the bench, comment ing in strong terms upon the animus which had been manifested by the counsel and the gentlemen engaged in the prosecution against the prisoner, and contended that there was not a tittle of evidence to show that if she did die of poison the prisoner at the bar administered it to her. Mr. Shaw having summed up the evidence, the magistrates fully com mitted the prisoner to take her trial at tha next York assizes. EXTRAORDINARY SAFE OF POTATOES.—Yester day Mr. Wallace, North Berwick Mains, sold all the pota toes upon his farm, comprising 73 Scotch acres, at the high price of £57 10s. per acre. He will realise for potatoes alone the handsome sum of £4,197 10s. The purchaser is an East Lothian potatoe merchant—Scotsman. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Among the numerous extraordi nary cures without medicine of indigestion, (dyspepsia) flatulency, constipation, nervous, bilious and liver com plaints' cough, asthma, consumption and debility, ,effected by Du Barry's delicious health restoring Revalenta Ara. bica Food, the following are not t he least remarkable : Cure No. 47,121.—" Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, of Nazing Vicarage, Waltham-cross, Herta ; a cure of extreme ner vousness, indigestion, gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies." Cure No. 48,314.—" Miss Elizabeth Yeoman, Gateacre, near Liverpool ;. cure of ten years' dyspepsia a n d aggravate and all the horrors of nervous irritability." Cure No. 3,906. Thirteen Thirteen years .cough, indigestion, and general debility has been removed by Du Barry's excellent Revalenta using Du Barr Arabica Food. James Porter, Athol-street, Perth. by using 50 times its pAevrpoiedtuPatilles ad n is d ea M ee e a drin t e h s e i r th a e m y o in y v a Ti ee a , bl d y isa p b e L:v p o e i r d avoided day,b God and which, expense a t may ew. cost in ' other remedies, removing effectually, without constipation, indigestion (dyspepsia) nervous, bilpurging, Andrew tire, liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate c a a n t d e Shorland, Dr. 9 u l2l;: ciangers of spu n,. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy, io N us er im in i,t e a i t re io i n t s ati o e ff i e a re a d re c M a D m . p , e F II .R . . L t D iu r vHalairdvseayv,eDtdr. tWheufrzeaerrf under a variety of prohibited by the high Court of Chancery under a pena lty f ri a ° ls u e s p an ret d en i c n e i s ur . Alfred Hnoper Nevill and his of £5,000 against that Nevill has a patent for Aragent s; and the pretences Barry's are connected with such Ica Food and that Du No canister is genuine without the name are utterly fats:. and Co., 77, Regent-street, i n full name Barry Du Barry Shopkeepers who attempt , on tha seal and wra pp er . imposition expect to be distrusted i n all in one article must 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; 51b. 1 others. Packed in tins lib. 121 b. and 241 b. canister Is.; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The of Post-office order by canisters sent carriage free on receipt gent-street, London; k Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re. 60, Gracechurch-street • Fortnum Mason, and Co.; Abbis. Ox ford-street ; 330 and 45 4, Cheapside; 63 and 150, Ox street ; Batty, 16, 1, Strand ;49 and 60, Bishopsgate- tea-dealers • , Finsbury Pavement; Phillips and Co, City; at Petty, Wood, and Co., King William-street.. 127,high Holborn • sic , all grocers. • POST-OFFICE _ROBBERIES IN CARLISLE. James Ormisten, letter-sorter in the post-office at Carlisle, was brought before the magistrates of that city on Wednesday, on remand, charged with stealing a post-letter containing two half sovereigns and seven penny postage stamps ; also with stealin g another post letter containing 18 pieces of jewellery. The court was crowded at an early hour, much interest being taken in the case from the fact that a great deal of money sent through the Carlisle post office lat e ly h as never reac h e d it s destination ; and much valuable property, besides that included into the charges brought against the prisoner, has been lost in the same way. The first charge arose out of a " trap" which had been set by the post office authorities to catch the prisoner, who had before been suspected of dishonesty. On the 25th of September Mr. Jeffery, inspector of the missing-letter department of the General Post-office, posted a letter at Carlisle, containing two half sovereigns and seven penny postage stamps, all of which he had previously marked, to Mr. Blanchard, Southampton. The letter was posted at 1 p m., and the prisoner was alone in the post office during part of the afternoon. The chief clerk, before going out at half-past 2, examined the London forward box and saw the letter there and felt the coin ; but when he returned about 5 the letter was missing. Information was sent to Mr. Jeffery, who went to the post office, took the prisoner into a private room, and in the presence of the chief clerk requested him • to show his money. The prisoner did so, and among it were the two marked half sovereigns with pieces of the adhesive paper with which they had been strapped on a card still adhering to them. There were also in the prisoner's purse two sovereigns and 34 penny postage stamps in five lots. The prisoner was given into custody ; his lodgings were searched 4 , and there a gold ring, a lady's gold guard chain, and other articles of jewellery were found. The particulars of the second case against the prisoner were that on the 9th of August last a packet con taining 18 pieces of jewellery, seven pairs of gold ear-rings and four gold- necklet pendants, all set with stones, were posted at Penrith by Mr. Moore, traveller for Mr. Deakin, jeweller, Birmingham, addressed to Messrs. "Reid and Sons, jewellers, New castle-on-Tyne. A letter of advice was sent by the same post, which arrived at its destination in due course; but Messrs. Reid and Son never received the packet of jewellery, The packet having been posted at Penrith about 9 o'clock in the evening, would arrive at Carlisle Post-office in due course at 4 41, on the following morning, and should have re mained there till 10 o'clock, when it would be de spatched to Newcastle. The prisoner came on duty at the Post-office at 4 35 that morning, as appeared. from an entry in the attendanco-bcok in his own handwriting, and remained till 8 o'clock. Of that period he was alone in the office from 7 35 till 8, during which time a packet posted at Pearith the previous night for Newcastle would be in a box, to which he would have access. °it'd:tat same day the prisoner went to a dressmaker in Carlisle, who was making a dress for hii sister to wear at the marriage of their brother, which was to take place on the 23d of August. He told her he wished to make his intended sister-in-law a present of a pair of bracelets; and drew from his pocket a packet, containing 18 pieces of jewelry, and said he wished part of them sewed on white silk velvet for brace lets for the bride. Six of the pieces, earrings and pendants, were selected for that purpose, six more for bracelets for his sister, and the other six he divided equally between the dressmaker, who was to be present at the wedding, and the brides sister. The recipients of the prisoner's bounty, however, being in humble though respectable circumstances, afterwards got most of them exchanged by jewellers in Carlisle for articles of a more useful character. They were all recovered by the police, and were produced in court. Mr. Moore said they were similar in every respect to those he had posted at Penrith to Messrs. Reid and Sons, although he could not swear to their identity by any mark. After hearing evidence at length, the case lasting three hours, the magistrates committed the prisoner to take his trial at the assizes upon both charges. The prisoner, who is about 19 years of age, had been two or three years in the post-office, where he had been receiving 18s. a week. CO UNT.RY MARKETS. BIRMINGHAM—OcT. 4. There was a moderate attendance to-day, with .a fair supply of wheat. Prime dry English sorts sold at an ad vance of 2s to 3s per qr, and is on damp qualities. Barley 6d to is advance. Oats dull, but no cheaper in price. Beans 6d to is per qr dearer. Peas firm. MANCHESTER-OCT. 4. An inactive business was done in wheat to-day, with a fair supply. English dry wheat has advanced is to 2s per qr, and foreign is per qr over former prices. Flour at late rates, with a slow trade. Oats and oatmeal a slow sale, and unaltered in value. Egyptian beans and Indian. rather dearer. MELTON MOWBRAY—OcT. 2. There was a middling show of wheat to-day, with a firm demand, at the following quotations :—White wheat, 644 Od to 69s Od ; 'red, 62s Od to 67s per 36 stone ; barley in less supply, at 38s to 43s for malting, and 32s to 36s per qr. for grinding oats, 30s to 36s Od per 24 stone; beans, 48s to 64s for old; new, 49s per 38 st. EDINBURGH GRAIN—Ocr. 3. Wheat on the top 4s Od up ..... .....average Os Od Barley on the top is Od down .average is 5d up. Oats on the top is Od down average is 10d down. Beans on the top Gs Od down average 2s lld down. Averages per Imperial quarter. Wheat.... Barley 1 17 10 10-12 the Oats 1 9 11 10-12 the Beans Total Supply and Sales. Wheat 872 qrs Sold 499 qrs 8ar1ey........ 2146 qrs Sold 1961 qrs Beans 64 qrs Sold 5 qrs Oats .1511 qrs Sold 828 qrs DERBY SMITHFIELD—Oct 2. There was a good supply of fat beasts to-day, with a fair attendance of buyers; the demand was rather flat. The supply of sheep was large, with a heavy sale at late rater. Fat and store calves were not numerous, and in good sale. Pigs were a good show, and demand quiet. Beef 6d to 61d Veal lid to 8d Mutton 7d to 71d Pork .. 6 dto 6il Lamb _ --d to --d Rough fat, ss Od per stone. Hides, 34d to 4id ; calf akin, gd u tO -6cl. [ADVERTISEMENT.] Pills and medicine invariably ag gravate and perpet ua t e d i seases; th e i r annoyance,Oß appointment, and expense may be avoided by persons in indifferent h ea lth sen di ng on ly their address to E. S. Barry, E sq., 77, Regent-street, AT., London , and they will receive gratis a nd free by post the "'swaps' Owr GurnE," or Natural Thotorer, without medicine or ex pense, of perfect digestion, strong nerves , sound l ungs , and refreshing steep, to the most enfeebled , insur i ng the removal paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitation, n ef aus in e dig a, e e pi st i i e o p n sy ( , dyspepsia), constipation , liver complaints, cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, flatulency, diarrhoea, dysentery, biliousness, fevers, sore throats, catarrhs, colds noises in the ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions. hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, acidity, palps, tation, heartburn, headache, despondency, cr am p s , spainni. sinking, its. ronchitis.—"Unquestienably the safest Guide to health." -- ------ tu Ch ang e of Tempera re—Rh t* . euma ism, neuralgia, sore throat, coughs, and colds constantly occur at the change of sea sons. When treated in their early stages they on e an d all give way malady, relieve pain, an d before this cooling and purifying oi n t men t. T place the patient out o f danger, nothing further is requi re d than rubbing this arrest the ointment very well upon the skin near the affected part. It will penetrate, reach, and r ec tif y any organ which may be disordered, or whose functions limy be indifferently per formed. It is generally advisable to take Holloway's pills while rubbing in the ointment, as the one materially assists the other. No diseaw can long resist their conjoint curative powers. B I R T:H S. CIIRTIS.—On the 26th ult., at Aldershot, the wife of Capt. Curtis, the Carabineers, of a daughter. NORREYS.—On the 3d inst., Lady Norreys, of a son. PAINTER. —.On the 3d inst., at Ilford, Essex, the wife of Mr. George Painter, of Leadenhall.street, of a daugh ter. WE STMORELAND.—On the 3d inst., at Apethorpe Hall, d N a o u r g th h a te m r ptonshire, the Countess of Westmoreland, of a MARRIAGES. SIMrSON—BAKER.—On the 3d inst., at Oundle, Mr. J. G. Simpson, of the Stock Exchange, and 2, Chester-villas, Canonbury-park, London, to Mary Ann Lucy, the eldeet daughter of Win. Baker, Esq., of Oundle. - - TIIIINER—DENNYS.—On the 3d inst., t'at St. Pancras Church, Henry J. Turner, Esq., youngest surviving son of the late Lieut. Charles F. Turner, R.N., to Fanny .A., second daughter of Commander Lardner Dennys, R.N. DEATHS. CHALON.—On the 3d inst., at El Retiro, Camden-hill, Kensington, Alfred Edward Chalon, R.A., portrait painter to her Majesty, aged 80. _ CORNISH.—On the 3d inst., at the Vicarage, Old Windsor, the Rev. Arthur Athelstan Cornish, vicar of the parish, aged 45. CLUTTERBUCK.—On the 2d inst., at St. Mary's, -Minchin • hampton, Gloucestershire, Samuel Clutterbuck, Es q ., aged 76. • DURNFORD.—On the 27th ult., at Bath, Major Durnford late 39th Regt. ) PROWSE.—On the Ist inst., at Enham House, near An dover, Captain W. J. Prowse, R.N., aged 70. STEWART.—On :the 26th ult., James Stewart, Esq., late S ec ret a ry to the Copyhold Commission, and formerly M.P. for Honiton, aged 55. P r inted and Published by MURD O YOUNG, Lo o N f D IsTO N . 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Jffice, No. 117, Strand, in th e Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of giailoosiAs fri4 6 ll October 5, 1860,