The Sun. — London, England, 1859-03-14 00:00:00

INNS OF COURT. The Council of Legal Education have issued the following rules for the public examination of the students in Trinity Term, 1859 :— " As an inducement to students to propose them- Selves for examination studentships shall be founded for 50 guineas per annum each, to continue for a period of three years, and one such studentship shall be conferred on the most distinguished student at each public examination ; and, further, the exami ners shall select and certify the names of three other students who shall have passed the next best exa minations ; and the inns of court to which such students belong may, if desired, dispense with any terms, not exceeding two, that may remain to be kept by such students previous to their being called to the Bar. Provided that the examiners shall not be obliged to confer or grant any studentship or dirtificate, unless they shall be of opinion that the examination of the students they select has been such as entitles them thereto. At every call to the bar those students who have passed a public examination, and either obtained a studentship or a certificate of honour, shall take rank in seniority over all other students who shall be called on the same day. " No students shall be eligible to be called to the bar who shall not either have attended during one ' whole year the Lectures of two of the Readers, or have satisfactorily passed a public examination." Rules for the Public Examination of Candidates for Honours or Certificates entitling Students to be called to the Bar. An examination will be held in Trinity Term next, to which a student of the Inns of Court who is desirous of becoming a candidate for a student ship or honour, or of obtaining a certificate of fit ness for being called to the Bar, will be admissible. Each' student proposing to submit himself for examination will be required to enter his name at the Treasurer's office of the Inn of Court to which he belongs on or before Monday the 16th day of May next, and he will further be required to state in writing whether his object in offering himself for examination is to compete for a studentship or other honourable distinction, or whether he is merely desirous of obtaining a certificate prelimi nary to a call to the Bar. The examination will commence on Monday the 23d of May next, and will be continued on the Tuesday and Wednesday following. It will take place in the Benchers' reading-room of Lincoln's-inn, and the doors will be closed 10 minutes after the time appointed for the commence ment of the examination. The examination by printed questions will be conducted in the following order :— Monday morning, the 23d of May, at half-past 9 o'clock, on Constitutional Law and Legal History ; in the afternoon, at half-past 1, on Equity. Tuesday morning, the 24th of May, at half-past 9, on Common Law; in the afternoon, at half-past 1, on the Law of Real Property, &c. Wednesday morning, the 25th of May, at half past 9, on Jurisprudence and the Civil Law ; in the afternoon, at half-past 1, a paper will be given to the students including questions bearing upon all the foregoing subjects of examination. The oral examination will be conducted in the same order, during the same hours, and on the same subjects as those already marked out for the exa mination by printed questions, except that on Wed nesday afternoon there will be no oral examination. The oral examination of such student will be conducted apart from the other students; and the character of that examination will vary according as the student is a candidate for honours or a stu dentship, or desires simply to obtain a certificate. The oral examination and printed questions will be founded on the books below mentioned; regard being had, however, to the particular object with a view to which the student presents himself for examination. In determining the question whether a student has passed the examination in such a manner as to entitle him to be called to the Bar, the examiners will principally have regard to the general know ledge of law and jurisprudence which he has dis played. A student may present himself at any number of examinations until he shall have obtained a certi ficate. Any student who shall obtain a certificate may present himself a second time for examination as a candidate for the studentship, but only at one of the three examinations immediately succeeding that at which he shall have obtained such certificate ; provided that if any student so presenting himself shall not succeed in obtaining the studentship his name shall not appear in the list. Students who have kept more than 11 terms shall not be admitted to an examination for the student- ship. The Reader on Constitutional Law and Legal History will examine on the following subjects :— He will expect the candidates for honours to be well acquainted with the early history of our Con stitution, which may be found in Hallam's Middle Ages, chap. 10, and with the chapters in Hallam's Vonstitutional History which ;give an account of the reigns of Elizabeth, the Stuarts, and Queen Anne. He will expect them to be well acquainted with the history of the Law of Real Property ; the history of the Law of Treason; and the his tory of the Laws relating to the Press. He will expect them, also, to be well acquainted with the most remarkable State Trials before the reign of George III. He will expect all who present themselves for examination to possess a competent knowledge of the leading events of English history. The candidates for a pass will be required to Sossess an accurate knowledge of the reigns of the tuart Kings ; of the Bill of Rights ; of the Act of Settlement ; and of the State Trials during the reigns of Charles and James II. The Reader on Equity proposes to examine in the following book :- 1. Hayne's Outlines of Equity ; Smith's Manual of Equity Jurisprudence ; Hunter's Elementary View of theProceedings in a Suit in Equity, part 1 . 2. The cases and notes contained in the first volume of White and Tudor's Leading Cases ; Mitford on the Pleadings in the Court of Chancery, Introduc tion ; chap. 1, sects. 1 and 2 ; chap. 1, sect. 3 (the first six pages) ; chap. 2, sect. 1 ; chap. 2, sect. 2, part 1 (the first three pages) ; chap. 2, sect. 2, part 2 (the first two pages) ; chap. 2, sect. 2, part 3; chap. 3. Candidates for certificates of having passed a satisfactory examination will be expected to be well acquainted with the books mentioned in the first of the above classes. Candidates for a studentship or honours will be examined hi the books mentioned in the two classes. The Reader on the Law of Real Property pro poses to examine in the following books and sub jects :- 1. Joshua Williams on the Law of Real Property, fifth edition. 2. Hayes on the Common Law Uses and Trusts. 3. The Charitable Trusts Act (9th of George II., cap. 36). Corbyn v. French (4 Ves., 418), and the notes to that in Tudor's Leading Cases in Conveyancing, 408. 4. The Order and Priority of Encumbrances upon Real and Personal Property; Fisher on Mortgages, chap. 7, pages 341-468. 5. Sugden on Powers, chaps. 1, 3, and 5, seventh edi tion. Candidates for honours will be examined in all the foregoing subjects ; candidates for certificates in those under heads 1, 2, and 3. The Reader on Jurisprudence and Civil Law proposes to examine candidates for honours in the following books :- 1. Phillimore's Introduction to the Study of the Roman Law, part 1, chapter 3, to the end of ch ap . ter 7—Praetor, Possession , Property, Contracts, and Inheritance. 2. The Institutes of Justinian, book 2, and book 3, from title 14, witlythe notes in Sandars's 3. The last two titles of the last book of the Digest —De Verborum Signcatione, De Regulis The Reader will examine candidates for a certifi cate in :- 1. The Institutes of Justinian, book 2 and book 3, from title 14, with notes in Sandar's edition. 2. The last title of the last Book of the Digest, .De Regulis The Reader on Common Law proposes to examine in the follawing books and subjects :— Candidates for a Pass Certificate willbe examined as to 1: The Ordinary Proceedings and Course of Pleading in an Action at Law. 2. The Law of Contracts, so far as treated of in Broom's Commentaries, book 2; in connection with which should be read the Mercantile Law Amend ment Act (19th and 20th Victoria, cap. 97). 3. Stephen's Commentaries (4th edition), book 6; of Civil Injuries, chaps, 1, 7, 8, and 9. 4. The l o aw of Simple Larceny, Assault, Homi cide, and Murder, as treated in the last edition of Archbold's Cr. Pl. (by Welsby). Note.—Questions will be asked respecting lead ing cases'cited in the text-books above specified. Candidates for the Studentship or Honours will be examined in the abovementioned subjects, and as to :- 5. The following cases :—A. Law of Contracts. _it Dalby v. India and London Life Assurance Company,," 16, C.B., 365; " Morley v. Attenboro ug h,, 3 Exch., 500 ; , Hochster v. De la Tour," 2 E. and B 678. B. Law of Torts. — " Langridge v. Lev y:' 4 S. C., 2 Id., 519 ; " Barnes v. 111. and W., 337, Ward," 9 C. B., 3 9 2; " Coggs v. Bernard," 1 Smith, L. C., 147, with the note thereto. 6. " Euleos 'governing the Production of Teoti- mony ;" Taylor on Evidence, 3d edition, part 2, chapters 1:5, 7, 14, and 15. By order of the Council, RICHARD BETHELL, Chairman. Council Chamber, Lincoln's-inn, March 2. EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF DIVORCE. A somewhat remarkable action f n' divorce came before the First Division of the Court of Session at Edinburgh, last week, for judgment. Mr. John M'Iver, banker in Ding-wall,Ross-shire, and Provost of the burgh, is the pursuer (plaintiff) in the case, and seeks to obtain divorce from his wife on the ground of adultery. Suspicion against his wife was first presented to his mind by a letter written and placed in his hand by his wife's sister, Ellen O'Doherty, on the 25th of February, 1857, which, while professing deep sorrow and repentance for having aided her sister in corresponding and meeting with her alleged paramour, discloses cir cumstances of a painful nature, and leading to the assumption that, in a pre-arranged interview between Mrs. M'Iver and Dr. Goron, of Port Stewart, Ireland, in the Royal Hotel, Belfast, on the 12th of July, 1856, an act of adultery had been committed. It would appear that in early life Mrs. Diver, then Miss Eliza O'Doherty, became acquainted with Dr. Gordon, and that a strong and evidently pure attachment had arisen between them—an attachment which seemed on both sides to survive the separation of their fortunes caused by circumstances, and even the marriage of both the lovers to different part ners. Dr. Gordon, who first met Miss O'Doherty in 1837, addressed her under the romantic name of " Una," in songs and sonnets (one of which appeared at the time in the Dublin University Magazine), and also in highly romantic love letters. But the course of their true love did not run smooth. Dr. Gordon married another lady, whom he describes in his correspondence with the defender as his "loving, true, and faithful wife ;" and by her he had three children. Mrs. M'Iver marred the pur suer in 1843, and is the mother of five children. Twice during her married life she met Dr. Gordon, once a few months after marriage, and the second time on the occasion above referred to. Dr. Gordon, who had for:some years been in declining health, died in 1857, about a year after the alleged adul tery. The statement of Ellen O'Doherty is that, on her sister's account, and at her instigation, she kept up an occasional correspondence with Dr. Gordon, and was the medium of conveying love messages between him and her sister ' • that in May, 1856, Dr. Gordon, who then proposed to go abroad to recruit his failing health, expressed a wish to see Mrs. M'Iver before doing so ; that, on pretence of Ellen's illness, the two sisters went south to Edinburgh, professedly to consult Dr. Simpson, and that while there, they found that Dr. Gordon was unable to come so far, and that he appointed Belfast as the place of meeting. The following is Miss O'Doherty's description (given in the letter referred to) of the scene that took place in Belfast :— " We got there at four next morning (Saturday). Dr. Gordon arrived the night before, and slept at the Royal Hotel, where we went by appointment; he came to the room we occupied, and there they met. Eliza was not in the room when he came in, but she came in a few minutes, and immediately on entering they were locked in each other's arms ; soon after this I went to a bedroom, and re mained there nearly two hours. I was horrified at what I had done, and the conduct of both. Eliza came in, looking flushed, and she said, Poor Bob has gone out for a little ; it was very kind of you to leave us for such a length of time alone—we had much to say to each other ; poor darling Robert, how ill and thin he is.' I said to her, ' Where is your brooch ? Your chemisette is quite open.' She re plied, ' Bob does not like it, so he took it out.' . • Well, to continue, the day was wearing on, I saw her with him as I would be ashamed to be or see any one, and was there a long time. She was crying when she came out, and when I said, What is wrong P' she said,' Oh, poor Bob is in such a state about parting with me. Oh , if I had not been married. Oh dear, what will I do, my darling Robert ? I have a husband and five children, but I could desert them all for you in your loneliness, and his love for me now is proved.' This and much more she said, and I was thank ful when we got into the steamer that night for Glasgow again. . . . She cried the whole day, and talked of her darling Robert and her broken heart. She said to me there, what she afterwards repeated at Fortrose, that she left me every opportunity of making up to you, John, for the love she could not :give you—a pretty speech to a a youg girl of her husband—and that she had never em braced you, or 'slept in your arms, but with the thought for ever in her heart that you were Gordon." A miniature of Dr. Gordon belonging to Mrs. M'Iver was conveyed by Miss O'Doherty in the same pac ket with the above letter, and various other infe rential proofs of her sister's guilt vere pointed out. The above letter was the groundwork of the present action, and evidence was taken by commission in the case, and was laid before the court in a volu minous record. The Judge-Ordinary in the case (Lord Benholme) found Mrs. M'Iver guilty of adultery, and granted divorce, but the case being brought under review of the Judges of the First Division, they decided by three to one that not only was there no legal proof of the wife's guilt, but that the evidence did not even amount to moral proof. Lord Ivory stated his opinion at some length"' pointing out that several of the witnesses, including Ellen, appeared to be animated by a strong feeling of hostility to the defender, and that a very unusual intimacy appeared to subsist between the pursuer and Ellen, and that Ellen had actually abstracted from the custody of others some of the proofs she now offered of her sister's guilt. After reviewing the circumstances of the previous history of the defender and Dr. Gordon, his lordship referred to the interview of 1856, and said he was never more convinced of anything than that that visit was un dertaken without any unchaste purpose, whatever might have taken place afterwards. It was a visit of friendship, of old regard—not an ordinary assig nation ; more like a passage in an extravagant novel than a matter of real life. She went, believing she was never to see him again. In the hotel their conduct did not excite suspicion. The chambermaid thought the defender was courting him for the young lady, and she did not observe that the bed had been used, though she would not have re marked it much, as he was so delicate. One waiter saw her in the doctor's bed room—the two stand ing together looking out of the window, and half an hour after he looked through the keyhole and saw them at the window still, Gordon standing with his arms behind his back. This was very inexcusable on the part of Mrs. M'Iver, but it was not proof of guilt. That was the whole case without the evi dence of Ellen O'Doherty. It was artful, self-pos sessed, very clever ; but, on analysis, it was not sound, and it did not agree with her letter. She was for years an accomplice, and latterly a betrayer; and her letter, which she professed to have writ ten in a fit of repentance, was a clever memorial of the whole case, and it was marked by a strong spirit of hostility to the defender, whose jealousy of her with her husband had given her offence. She had unduly possessed herself of the minia ture and documents ; she had destroyed some and preserved others, and she ;had given up to the pursuer those things which she had received from the defender to keep from his sight. He had no confidence in a single word this witness spoke, and would not use it against her sister on so heavy a charge. She professed great purity, and was shocked at what she saw pass between her sister and Dr. Gordon, but she was equally free with the pursuer, her brother-in-law. When in Edinburgh, even on the business of the present suit, he was constantly kissing her, and calling her " dearest Nelly," and she was calling him " dearest John." They were seen together in the theatre, and, in short, the conduct of the two sisters was remarkably alike, and they helped to explain each other. He was casting no imputation upon the chastity of Miss Ellen. He entertained no such notion, but he thought that she might excuse in her sister what she innocently practised herself. The letter of Dr. Gordon to the defendant, of which so much has been made, was exceedingly Irish, and exceed ingly absurd. It read like a chapter from the " Sorrows of Werther," and, with all its bombast, was far from an i ncen ti ve to lust. On the whole, he thought there was proof enough of much bad taste, but he woman considered moral delinquency very doubt ful, and. it was not u p on ev id ence like this that a thrown 1:7:tiiettiom of be divorced from her husband and the o w r o d rl e d u . poverty and helplessness upon rriehill took the opposite view. He would not have considered the retirement to the bedroom of h c i i s la ih if it had a e d entertained i de fendereonclus been proved that the rapure feelings towards Dr. Gordon. That glowing and amorous lan sensuality, and it was in answer to one fr I o t m wa h s er a , was character. tainted with which had no doubt the same from , m i a n rri s e u d ch weman could receive • compro mised a lc u t a t letter that couched o any man but her husband without being by it, or feeling her virtue insulted. They went to the hotel in Belfast on the understanding that they were to pass as brother and sister, and conceal their intended conduct by that falsehood. Her confessions to more than one witness, th a t she never embraced her husband but in the imagination that it was Dr. Gordon, and her admission to her sister that she had permitted the removal of her brooch and the manipulation of her person, together with the whole character of the written clandestine correspondence, led him to be clearly of opinion that the retirement to the bedroom took place to consummate their guilt. Lord Dees expressed the same opinion as Lord Ivory, and even in stronger terms, and stated that , within his own knowledge he knew of a case in which an early attachment, which had ceased to be a passion, had remained a deep-seated feeling; and he believed that had a like meeting taken place, as for 40 years it was wished for, no meeting could be more free from sensual thoughts, nor could the nature of the sentiment still subsisting be better described than in Dr. Gordon's letter, in which lie said, " My heart is my only priest, and it sanctifies to me the remembrance of my love, and makes Eliza holy." A meeting of such a kind—and there was proof of no other—was far more con ceivable than that a married lady, who for 13 years had led an irreproachable life, should dedicate a single day of her life to adultery, and never seek a repetition of it. This was not the usual history of an adulterous connexion, but savoured more, to say the least of it, of a farewell meeting, sought in the belief—which the defender entertained, and which she expressed to her stepmother at the time —that Dr. Gordon " was dying," and under the impression, however d elusiv e , which the witness Ellen make a eaxpdressed to her, that " s h e wou ld affectionate wife to her h us band says dutiful t she ifu l n when she came back," and " that, although he had not the first place in her heart, still she would do the best she could to make up for it." He was far from denying either the folly or the impropriety of the meetinF. These were sufficient to give it an unsatisfactory character. But, on the other hand, the consciousness of these features in it sufficiently accounted for the cloak of relation ship said to have been cast over it, and many of its other incidents, without the necessity of supposing adultery. His lordship then referred to the evi dence as showing that still greater freedoms ap peared to have subsisted between the pursuer and Ellen than even between the defender andDr. Gor don. The pursuer and Ellen slept habitually in adjoining rooms with the door open between. When he was ill she lay in the same bed with him, when she was ill he kissed her and cried over her from morning to night, and the very flannel chemise next her skin was taken off and replaced by his very paternal hands. He was not disposed to think that there was any guilt in all this. He did not believe there was ; but surely one must pause before leaping to the con clusion of guilt in the one case any more than in the other. His lordship concluded by referring to the correspondence and evidence as showing the high character of Dr. Gordon, and as showing that his were not the letters of a man writing for the ear of a wife whom he wished to debauch. On the whole, he was not, on moral grounds, prepared to affirm the defender's guilt, and certainly he could not do so as matter of legal evidence. The Lord President also gave his opinion at some length in favour of the defender ; and The Court, by a majority, recalled the interlocu tor of the Lord Ordinary and refused the divorce. and contended that there was not a particle of evidence of expressed malice on the part of the prisoner against the deceased, nor was any sug. gested. He did not appear to have ever known or seen him before. As to the evidence in support of implied and general malice the exhibiting of the dagger to the policeman and to the woman before he met the deceased rather contradicted the proposition, for had he brandished about his dagger and threatened the policeman it would have been the policeman's duty to take him into custody, but the policeman's conduct showed plainly that no such construction could be placed on the prisoner's acts, and the woman accosted by him never pre tended that the prisoner had threatened her with the dagger, or that she was alarmed at what he had done. The evidence in support of the charge of murder therefore failed. The learned counsel then contended that the facts proved showed that the deceased in his half-drunken state had stopped the prisoner, who, being a stranger to him, was probably alarmed ; other two men, Norton and Hawksworth, having come up at the same time, coupled with the fact of the vicinity of a number of narrow streets and passages close to the place where the prisoner had met the deceased, where people might be concealed, and the time being past midnight, gave reasonable ground for such alarm. These circumstances and his fear of garotte rob beries might have led him to suppose that he was about to be attacked, and have caused him to draw his dagger-knife for protection, and if, in the con flict which afterwards occurred, the deceased received a stab which unhappily had resulted in death, the homicide fell rather under the law which excused and justified homicide when committed under the apprehension of a felony being committed, and in necessary self-defence, than under the legal decisions which made homicide manslaughter. He submitted that the circumstances warranted this view, and if the jury were of that opinion they ought to acquit the prisoner altogether ; but if they were of opinion that the knife had been used while in the hot blood of a contest under circumstances such as had been proved, then he submitted that at most the offence was manslaughter, and not murder. The learned Judge then summed up. He in formed the jury that the life of the prisoner was in their hands, and if they returned a verdict of guilty, he would have to be left for execution. His lordship then read over the evidence. From the evi dence of the first witness it appeared the deceased was a quiet industrious man, but fond of shaking hands when a little elevated by drink with persons with whom he came into contact, a habit which might be obnoxious to persons who did not know him. All homicide is murder, for precious is the life of a man in the sight of the law. If life is lost r n a quarrel then the offence is manslaughter. If the prisoner had killed the deceased by a kick while scuffling, he would be guilty of manslaughter ; and what distinguished this case from one of that de scription was, that he used a deadly weapon. If the prisoner drew out the knife before the scuffle, intending to use it in the scuffle, then the crime would amount to murder. He thought it would only be fair for the jury to assume that the knife was shut up in the pocket of the prisoner when he came into contact with the deceased, and the only ques tion left for them to decide was the circumstances under which he drew it out, whether with malice aforethought, or whether in the heat of blood. If under the former circumstances, it would be their duty to find him guilty of murder ; and if under the latter circumstances, of manslaughter. The jury then retired, and, after an absence of about fifteen minutes returned a verdict of guilty of manslaughter. Several previous convictions for felony have been proved against the prisoner. The learned judge proceeded to pass sentence. He said the prisoner's offences sank into nothing ness when compared with his present heinous offence. He had had a very narrow escape with his life, for if the jury had brought in a verdict of guilty, he would most certainly have been left for execution. The prisoner was guilty of manslaughter of the most aggravated character, if not of murder, and it was absolutely necessary that the carrying and using of daggers and bowie knives, which he had hoped were almost unknown in this part of the country, should be punished with the severest penalties of the law. He should therefore sentence the pri soner to penal servitude for the natural term of his life. OXFORD CIRCUIT.—STAFFORD, March 12 CIVIL COURT. (Before Mr. Justice Crompton and Common Juries, EARP V. TOMKINSON. Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. Davis appeared for plaintiff; and Mr. H. James for the defendant. The plaintiff in this action, Mary Ann Earp, was the eldest daughter of a respectable police-constable in this county, formerly residing at Audley. The defendant, George Tomkinson, was a wheelwright and joiner by trade, living with his father, who was a small farmer and malster, in the same neighbour hood, having eight children. The present action was brought against him by the plaintiff to recover damages for the breach of a p rom i s e of mar r i age ; in answer to which he pleaded, first, that he did not make the promise, and, secondly, that a reason a bl e time for f ulfiling it had not elapsed before the action was brought. It appeared from the evidence of Mrs. Earp, the plaintiff's mother, that the defendant had made the acquaintance of her daughter at one of those " tea parties" for which the neighbourhood of Audley and other parts of this county are noted. It was in the month of October, 1855, that the defendant first saw " Mary Ann." At that time he was about 30 years of age, and, in the opinion of his intended mother-in-law, " not very bright." Mrs. Earp was also of opinion that the defendant was "father soft," and, she added, that he was " a bigger fool than a rogue," expressions of opinion at which, of course, everybody laughed. The defendant, being then 30 years of age, "rather soft," and a joiner by trade, fell in love with Mary Ann, who was said to be very pretty, and the latter, being only 20, naturally fell in love with him. All this having taken place at the " tea party," and the defendant having, at his own request, been introduced to the plain tiff, he became her admitted suitor. Another young man, whose name we spare to mention, was rejected by the plaintiff in favour of the suitor who was " rather soft," and " a bigger fool than a rogue." The defendant continued his atten tions to the plaintiff, particularly at the " tea par ties" given at the National School for charitable purposes ; and he also made it his practice to visit her at the house of the police constable, her father, every Sunday night. It was not long, under these circumstances, before " George, the joiner," and " Mary Ann, the policeman's daughter," entered into what is termed a " contract of marriage." This was clearly proved, not only by the mother of the young lady, but also by her sister Eliza, who seemed to have a special insight into the nature of the contract, arising from the circumstances that she was also being courted by . another young man, and all four were in the habit of walking out and going to tea meetings together. It was soon arranged that the defendant was to marry Mary Ann " at the next Audley wakes ;" but the deceitful joiner broke his promise. " The Audley wakes" came, " but the joiner, false was he." The contract was again renewed, and Christmas was appointed for the wedding ; but Christmas worked no charm, and again the marriage was fixed for " the Audley wakes." Thus matters went on till, it was said, Mary Ann became ill.. The reason was that the defendant had given her up, and two nights after he came again, and said he had promised not to call any more, but he had called that once to bid her good bye for ever. Mary Ann became ill, and a change of air was recommended, and tried. This seemed to touch the " joiner's" heart. He came to Eliza, who told him how ill her sister was, and that it was all through him, because he would not keep his promise. The defendant seemed quite touched at the recital of the mischief he had caused to Mary Ann's health, and faithfully promised Eliza that, if her sister would but come home, he would marry her forthwith. On this assurance Mary Ann re turned to her father's house, and the four lovers took another walk. On their return home, Eliza was talking to her lover in one room, and ob served to him that she could hear the plaintiff and defendant "making it up" in the adjoining room. The defendant was now, for the first time, entertained at dinner at Mrs. Earp's, and dined there off " cod's head and shoulders." • Still the joiner would not marry, though, of course, everything had been got ready. At length the plaintiff's father, a powerful-looking member of the Staffordshire constabulary force, was called in to assist in getting the fatal knot tied. The policeman being thus called in, defendant began to make ex cuses, and said he had got no house. He said he meant to take a publichouse, but he meant to have a good one ; and none of those which were men tioned to him were good enough. The constable found three houses, all in good situations, and told the defendant plainly, by letter, that he must de cide, and marry. But as the vacillating joiner would not, and the policeman could produce no impression where Mary Ann herself had failed, the constable applied to an attorney, and directed him to write to the defendant, and to say that, if he would not marry the plaintiff without delay, he would be visited with all the penalties of the law." This brought the matter to a crisis, and this action was brought on the 15th of January, 1859, after more than three years of courtship. It was stated that defendant had £300 in the savings bank, but no specific evidence was given on this point, his power to pay damages being inferred from his being a joiner by trade and the son of a maltster. It ap peared that on Wednesday, the 24 Wit., defendant called on Mary Ann, and tried to settle the action for £50 ; and that failing, he proposed to her to go away with him to Australia, and thus to cheat both the lawyers out of their costs. This piece of evidence was relied upon by the plaintiff's counsel as show ing that Mrs. Earp meant to have said that the defendant was " a bigger rogue than a fool." It appeared on cross-examination that during the three years of courtship the defendant had never introduced his love to his father, mother, or sister ; and suggestions were made that Mary Ann had gone out at night to meet defendant, and had even danced with him at the Red Lion, but these sug gestions were indignantly denied by Mrs. Earp, who said she had never heard of such a thing. Mr. James's defence was that a reasonable time had not elapsed for performing the promise before the action was brought ; but that defence was scarcely relied upon, and the learned counsel con tended that his client was only a half-witted idiot, and the plaintiff's only object was to get the defen dant's money. He hoped, therefore, the jury would give her the smallest possible portion of it. Mr. Justice Crompton, in summing up the evi dence, divested the case of the solemnity and importance which had been attached to it by the speeches of counsel. His Lordship said the parties were persons in a very humble position in life, the plaintiff being a policeman's daughter, and the defendant a journeyman wheelwright and joiner, and he told the jury that they ought to give the plaintiff temperate damages for the loss she had sustained by the defendant's breach of promise. The jury found for the plaintiff—Damages £50. DOC.KYARD EXPENDITURE. The debate and division upon Lord Clarence Paget's resolution on Friday last may be taken as a fair demonstration of public feeling on the subject of our dockyard expenditure. Notwithstanding that the proposal itself was conceived to be ineffec tually framed, and that attempts were made to avert the conclusion by representing the professional merits of Sir Baldwin Walker as involved in the matter, a majority of 20, in a house of more than 200, was all that could be mustered against the motion. This is a most significant fact, and we entirely concur, if not with the terms of the resolu tion, at any rate with the purport of the arguments on which it was based. It is absurd to maintain that the question carries any attack upon Sir Baldwin Walker's reputation. That reputation was acknowledged in language of uniform praise, and we believe with perfect justice, on all sides of the house ; and, in fact, if such inquiries as these implied any reproach, the reproach would have been conveyed already by the investigations which Ministers have instituted after their own fashion, and which they pleaded in bar of Lord Clarence Paget's proposal. The more sensible course, how ever, by far is to disconnect the question from all personal imputations, and to regard the system alone as put upon its defence. If the reader, after perusing what we now subjoin, does not think it high time this system was reformed we shall be very much mistaken. This point of the discussion, briefly stated, is this, — that - whereas we spend upwards of £1,500,000 a-year in the construction and repair of ships of war, exclusive of steam machinery, we do not get an equivalent return in the standing efficiency of our fleet. This assertion Lord Clarence Paget endeavoured to substantiate by an elaborate analysis of Dockyard accounts for the 11 years which have elapsed since 1848. According to the figures he produced, the aggregate sum voted during this period for the purposes in question was £19,399,944, while the aggregate cost of the work actually turned out could not be estimated at more than £14,000,000, so that in the short space of 11 years as much as £5,000,000 had vanished without consideration or return. He did not pretend to say that malversation had been going on. On the con trary, he gave the Dockyard officials all credit for honesty and zeal, and proceeded presently to ex plain what he meant in saying that this money— more than 25 per cent of the whole amount voted —had been sunk and lost. He traced the deficit to the capricious and incessant changes of con struction which every vessel underwent—to the in terminable transformations through which a ship was carried before she was finished, and to the absence of definite responsibility by which the system was characterized. The money for all this work being voted in a lump, without any specification or dis crimination of objets, Boards of Admiralty were enabled to do just what they pleased, and vessels were accordingly shortened, lengthened, split, ex panded, and converted until their cost became twice what they ought to have been. This was done, too, not with old standards alone but with perfectly new ships. The Howe, for instance, was only laid down the other day, and yet " the dockyard people were now pulling her down to put a new bow upon her." Sometimes vessels com menced to measure 400 tons arrived at 700 tons before they were launched. One frigate, he declared —a real model for symmetery and beauty—had positively passed away by transmigration or other wise into some state of existence where she could no longer be identified, and Sir John Pakington was fain to, confess that he could give no account of her. This makes a case against something or somebody. Lord C. Paget thinks it is against the dockyard system ; Sir C. Napier against the Board of Admiralty. Sir J. Pakington attributes the result, or at least so much of it as he admits, to the rapid progress of naval architecture. The public, we suspect, will be disposed to take a verybroad view of the question, and to require money's worth for its money, without much attention to small items of recrimination or exuse. We believe the complaint thus made to bd substan tially well grounded. That Lord Clarence Paget's figures should admit of correction is extremely probable, for anything like absolute accuracy in such calculations would be out of the question ; but we need not go further than Sir J. Pakington's own reply and Sir C. Wood's commentary to dis cover that there must be truth at the bottom of the argument. The First Lord on this occasion intro duced us to a definite principle or two. " The theory," said he, " of our Dockyard expenditure is, that you can launch every year three line-of-battle ships, three frigates, six sloops and smaller vessels. The rest of the Dockyard labour is devoted to fit ting ships and accidental expenditure." Here, therefore, is a piece of official information from which we may draw some pertinent conclusions. As it wits stated in this very debate that a line-of battle ship costs about £115,000, a frigate about £90,000, and a corvette about £40,000, all being first-rate specimens of their class, we find that three line-of-battle ships, three frigates, and six corvettes could be built for about £250,000, or about half our annual vote for these purposes. It is also plain from these statistics that in the space of 11 years there should have been added to the Navy, over and above the fleet existing in 1848, as many . as 33 line-of-battle ships, 33 frigates, and 66 cor vettes ; whereas Sir C. Wood's return gives as the actual addition only 24 line•of-battle ships, 21 frigates, 35 corvettes and sloops, and 22 other vessels. Moreover, we know that at this moment, or at least a few weeks ago, our entire strength in ships of the line was less than that which since 1848 should have been gained by fresh additions. This leads us to another inference. It will be observed that, according to the official statement, little more than one-half of the annual vote for the construc tion and repair of ships is allotted to new vessels, even supposing this programme to be always fully carried out. What, then, becomes of all the rest ? Lord Clarence Paget thought it went for chopping and changing ; Sir John Pakington says it goes to " fitting for sea and commissson," or, as he else where phrased it, " fitting ships and accidental' expenditure." We humbly conceive that this ex planation is about as little satisfactory as the other. Knowing, as we do, the nature of the system under which a ship is pulled to pieces as soon as she gets into good condition, in order that another ship may be got into condition and pulled to pieces in her turn, we are fully prepared to believe that " fitting for sea and accidental expenses" do indeed, as the First Lord now frankly admitted, " run away with the greatest portion of the labour of our dockyard." But even this is not all. Sir J. Pakington first, and Sir C. Wood after him, .plainly declared that the programme or " theory" of dockyard expendi ture, as regarded shipbuilding, never was carried out, and the chief argument, indeed, against Lord C. Paget's proposition for a stricter regula tion in future was 'that such regulation would never be carried out either. Perhaps this is the truth ; but we can only say that if " accidental expenses" are understood to swallow tho conclusion is just as bad as if all Lord es fact w for swallow i n u t p e n m a o n r c e e t o h f a n the h a n l f a , v y o f o u ti p r h a a l a a n l d vo in t Clarence Paget's assertions had been allowed to stand. On behalf of tb e public, however, we must look at the matter more broadly still. Here is the plain fact that in 11 years we have provided just about £20,000,000 for ship-building, and this, be it re membered, is entirely independent of all vacs for machinery. It represents simply and purely our expenditure during this period upon timber, masts, deals, and stores, the wear and tear of these com modities, and the labour of artificers employed upon them. It does not take into account any percentage upon the dockyard plant, upon those " works, &c.," which figure so heavily in the estimates,—it is solely the eost of materials and labour. In return for this what have we obtained? Look at th successive emergencies since 1848. When we wanted to send troops to the Cape what was the condition of our transports . ? When India was in a flame how 'man ships were at hand to do what vms done by the S hannon? Our fleets in conjunc tion with those of France held the seas, it is true, in the Russian war, but it was by default of the enemy. We are now told that many of these ships were of such inferior quality as scarcely to be fit for action, while our deficiency in smaller vessels was such that we had to build a whole fleet of gunboats out of hand. Finally, when all the war is over, and we are quietly taking stock of our effects, it is discovered that we are so terribly deficient in line-of-battle ships as to be driven to extraordinary efforts to make up the arrear, though not an excuse can be made for the fact, except that in one year out of the 11 we built small vessels to a large extent. We must needs think that a system which, after 11 years of such expense, leaves the Navy in need of " complete reconstruction," is a bad one. We are quite ready to admit, what everybody declared, that Sir Baldwin Walker is as good a Surveyor of the Navy as we can have ; in fact, it appeared from Sir S. Pakington's statement at the introduction of the Estimates, that this officer was one of the first to detect the shortcomings recently announced, and to press urgently for reform. All this, however, only makes the matter worse ; for, if even a most efficient Superintendent cannot keep the system in order, it is clear that this system must be radically wrong.— Times. NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YoRK, March 11. CROWN COURT. (Before Mr. Justice Byles.) George Plant, aged 32, was charged with the wilful murder of William Wilson, of Sheffield, on the 26th of January last. Mr. Blanshard and the Hon. F. S. Wortley pro secuted, and Mr. C. Foster defended the prisoner. The prisoner in this case, it appeared, is a brewer's traveller in the employ of Messrs. Bradley and Son, of the Soho Brewery, Sheffield, and living in Towncross-lane in that town. The deceased was a brass-fitter, and on the night of the 26th of Ja nuary he went to the Red Lion public-house, in the Hartshead, Sheffield, at about 12 o'clock. There he asked the landlord if there was anything to do at the pumps. He was told that two required clean ing. He did his work and got some drink, and afterwards left at about one o'clock. When he left it was evident that he had had some liquor, but this generally made him good-natured and desirous of shaking hands with persons with whom he came in contact. Nothing was seen of him from the time he left the public-house until a little after one o'clock, when a man named George Norton, who was in company with another named Hawksworth, were passing down the market place, and heard some quarrelling between two men at the bottom of the Hartshead. They crossed the road to the two men, when Norton asked the prisoner, who was one of the men, if he had been stopped. The prisoner replied that he had, and the deceased, who was the other person, then ran off the footpath into the road, and said he had taken the prisoner for a friend of his—a cabman. The plaintiff then said he could have taken the stick from Plant's right hand, upon which the prisoner replied that in return he would have given him the knife. The deceased then took hold of the stick as if to show how he could have taken it from him, upon which the prisoner put his hand back, which contained a dagger, and gave the deceased what appeared to be a slight stab. On being stabbed, the deceased reeled a little and fell down. He afterwards got up, walked to the kerb stone and sat down. Norton then advised the pri soner not to leave the deceased, and he and his friend then left. They had not, however, got more than 15 paces from the spot where these circum stances had taken place, before the prisoner passed them, when, as he was doing so, Norton noticed Plant put a dagger into his pocket. Norton and Hawksworth proceeded up Watson's-walk, while the prisoner went down Angel-street. The deceased remained sitting on the causeway edge until he at tracted the attention of two men who were passing, and who, on finding his condition, carried him out of the rain, which was pouring down at the time, under the cover of the post-office passage, which is just opposite. The deceased was eventually taken down to the Town-hall, and attended to by Mr. Booth, surgeon, who, on examination, found upon his body a small wound, which appeared as though it might have been made by a knife or dagger. The deceased's bowels were protruding from the wound to the'size of a man's hat. The bowels were replaced, but inflammation shortly set in, and the man died. The learned counsel, in opening the case to the jury for the prosecution, stated that every homicide was a murder, and that it lay with the party accused to reduce the offence by evidence to the less crime of manslaughter. To constitute a murder, malice, expressed or im plied, must be shown. As against the deceased the prisoner probably had no particular malice ; but he should show that he had recklessly conducted him self with the dagger, and had shown it to the peo ple and brandished it about in such a manner as to indicate general malice to all who came in his way, and it was contended that if death resulted from his act while so conducting himself, it was murder. The prisoner had drawn out his dagger to a policeman shortly before he was with the deceased, and asked him if he wanted his number. The policemen replied " Oh no, sir," and walked on. Very shortly after this he accosted a woman in the street, and said he was not afraid of any one insult ing him, drawing out and exhibiting his dagger knife at the same time. These facts showed areck lessness in dealing with such a weapon with which his subsequent conduct to the deceased was in keep ing, and if the wounds on the deceased were so in flicted it was murder. These facts having been proved, it was elicited on cross-examination that the deceased when drunk would run up and shake hands with every stranger, and force himself on those who did mot want his company; that when taken into custody the pri soner had concealed nothing, but had at once ad mitted that he had a dagger-knife at home, where it was found, and then stated that he had got into a conflict with a man who had stopped him as he was going home past midnight on the night in question ; that he had purchased the knife for his protection, having frequently to go home late with large sums of money upon him, which he had col lected in the outskirts of Sheffield as traveller for Messrs. Bradley and Son, who had a great business as brewers, and that he had bought the knife be • cause he had been alarmed at the numerous garotte robberies which had taken place in the neighbour hood of Sheffield. It was elicited that this was not a foolish fancy, or fear, as there had been many such robberies. The prisoner's statement before the magistrates was then rcad, and was as follows :—" My name is George Plant, formerly of Doncaster. Late last Wednesday night I was going home, and when I had got down High-street, against Richard's, the draper, I met a man named Wilson, coming rushing out of a passage. He took hold of me, and without saying a word, knocked me down. I kept him off while I was down with a small stick I had in my hand. When I got up again, I said, What have you done that for ? If you don't be quiet I will give you:something ? ' He replied, ' I'll let you see what I have done it for.' During that conver sation the two gentlemen, Norton and Hawksworth, who have given evidence, came up. I said to them, " You see this man has attacked me.' While I was saying so, he ran round at me again, and tried again to get hold of me. In doing so he made a rush at me, and fell upon the knife which I held before me. He screamed out' Police, and I replied, ' I will stay until the policeman comes. I stood up in my de fence ; it was your own fault.' I then said to the two witnesses,' I have only stood in my defence, as you see ; I will stop until the police come, and go with him.' They walked away, and I, thinking it was no use staying by myself, went direct home. I communicated to my wife what had happened. I had next morning to go to Manchester on business, and did n o t h ear anyt hi ng o f th e occurrence un til I saw an account of it on Friday morning in the Manchester Guardian. I returned from the jour ney at half-past eight o'clock on Saturday evening. My wife told me them I a a n was dead. I had been in Mr. Bradley' s serv i ce dagger the day before carried it with on the Bar ns l ey - road. me for protection,entered . 0 fortnight.n having I service, bought e no andnthe ee stopped . b Mondaybought ht themorn ing I went to my work as usual knife for protection, as I have to travel in country places for money." Mr. Foster then addressed the jury for the de fence. lie adopted the definition of the learned counsel for the Prosecution of the crime of murder, • (From the Derbyshire Courier.) " The finance of a country," said Mr. Bright, in the important debate of Monday night, on the Indian Loan, " is almost everything of a country ; for it means public order, it means the industry of he people, it refers to the economy or extravagance, to the goodness or evil of the Government." The financial state of British India is, according to Mr. Bright, as bad as possible. We have there " a con stantly increasing debt, a constantly increasing ex penditure, and a constantly diminishing revenue." The National Debt of British India, Mr, Wilson tells us, must become £90,000,000 before peace is fully established. It would. be impossible for Mr. Bright to make a speech without a little abuse of his country and his own countrymen. " The native princes," says Mr. Bright, " somehow or other managed financial matters better than we do, They always contrived to keep up their revenue, and had a pretty little surplus of a few lacs of rupees in the Treasury." The liberal and patriotic member for Birmingham has never heard, or having heard has remembered to forget, the brutal system of exaction, torture, and plunder by which the cruel and degraded sensualists who tyrannised over the various principalities of India, wrung from the wretched natives the utmost possible amount of taxes. These monsters of oppression, Mr. Bright reminds us, " had generally a surplus." The Eng lish Government, which has, of late years at least, been constantly moving in the direction of justice, moderation, and improvement, is sneered at by Mr. Bright for not taking better care of its money. Now, we agree with Mr. Bright that the finance of a country is " almost everything " for that country's welfare. We also agree with him that the financial state of India is such as to deserve the most serious consideration of our rulers. But having found fault with everybody and everything English, having shown us all the worst side of India's present state, what remedy does Mr. Bright himself propound? Absolutely nothing worthy of a moment's consideration. He thinks the salaries of the civil officers of the Government in India may be reduced, though Lord Stanley completely re. futed his assertion that they were at all overpaid. This is about equivalent to advising a great cotton spinner, in a monetary crisis, when his mills and 500 pair of hands are working at a loss, to reduce the salary of Adolphus, his wife's page, a shilling a week, and put his cook upon board wages. Mr. Bright thinks, as most other people think, that the military service in India has cost a good deal. He can tell us of no help for that. He thinks that rail ways, and irrigation, and improved roads do not go on so fast as could be wished. We all agree about that also. A mutiny is not exactly the best time for the material progress of a nation. And for all these projects money is the first, money is the second, and money is the third thing necessary. Not one practical suggestion, however, does Mr. Bright make for the improvement of the financial position of India. Having blamed everybody, and made everything as bad as possible, holding out no present encouragement and no hope of future im provement, the honourable and impracticable mem ber for Birmingham sat down satisfied with the delivery of his customary anti-British growl. Sir G. C. Lewis was as feeble and futile as usual in his attempt to propound any remedy. He thought, however, that the British Government should pay for the extra forces engaged in the suppression of the mutiny. Not a very pleasant prospect this for English tax-payers, under the existing circum stances of the country. Lord Stanley affirmed that though the Home Government could not be held liable for the Indian debt, yet the Indian creditors have the first charge on the Indian revenve. We can see to what all this tends. The mutiny has cost an immense sum. The finances of India are in a most unsatisfactory state. We want money for India immediately, and all our hope of future improvement is dependent on the development of the undoubtedly great resources of the county, for which development more money is required. Unless, therefore, we can rapidly improve the condition of India, we must, in some shape or other, find money in England to pay for the Government of India. We unhesitatingly affirm that much might, in skilful hands, be done for the rapid and extensive commercial and material improvement of the British Empire in India. The finances of the country re ' quire raising. Money is immediately necessary. We beg to refer our readers to an article which appeared in the City Intelligence of the Times, of November 6, 1857. The writer suggests the inquiry " whether a country which for a long time has been absorbing silver at the rate of six millions per an num cannot be made to provide in some degree for the cost of its disturbances." After proposing that the natives of India should receive their dividends and other claims, in "an interest-bearing,:but tempo rarily inconvertible paper," this writer proceeds to say,—" We have supplied men and munitions, and India is rich enough to find money. There is no reason to assume that the issue of a note circulation even on a large scale—supposing it requisite as a last resource, a circumstance far from certain— would be attended with difficulty. The natives would be found sufficiently keen to estimate the value of a Government note, carrying 6 or 7 per cent. in terest, and receivable at par in the course of six or twelve months for revenues due, and at the same time we should have the satisfaction of know ing that every one with paper of this description in his pocket would feel an access of loyalty and a proportionate desire for the maintenance of order." Does the Times come forward now to suggest any such plan for meeting our great and increasing financial difficulties in India? No. And why not? Because this proposal was made during the panic, under a feeling of anxiety to bolster up the Bank Charter Act, and the broken-down monetary system of Peel, and that crisis having been got over, the Times has returned to its self-condemned, and con temptible currency crotchets, and would now, pro bably, repudiate the notion of Exchequer notes for India such•as it then proposed. We need not say that we go much further than the Times. We wish to see the national notes issued by the British Government in India inconvertible, except at the market price of silver, made a legal tender, and receivable for all taxes. these notes might, for convenience, be made of very small amounts. We see see no reason why they should not be issued for a rupee. The good effects of such a measure would, as it appears to us, be these. It would tend to diminish the hoarding of silver. It would provide a domestic circulation for India, and diminish the drain of silver from Europe. It would, as the Times' writer observes, increase the loyalty of the native population by making it their interest to assist in preserving order. And as certainly as the issue of paper money by William Pitt enabled that minister to an 1d theilrataxes in England, without detriment to th e work ing to raise taxes in India. As i n E ng l an d f rom 1797 to 85e classes,wt Nothing theresources saswouldrunc such Em app b l iaerne as rapidlyt wouldhs and surprisingly devel o p e d un d er suc h a sys t em , react on that of th e mo th er coun t ry. prosperityt st fonau d of stands il i facility of bI the n a uway unprecedented dathe of t e Indian d amount Government of but the absurd currency theories of Peel and Over stone, which the English people, in sheer ignorance of monetary science, have adopted, and which have in 1847 and 1857, ignominiously and ridiculously failed when put to the trial. We care nothing about our own opinion. We speak for the good of the millions in India, and our own countrymen at home. Reject our proposition. Take that of the Times. Issue interest bearing Exchequer bills, receivable for taxes, for the pro motion of publi c works in India, and the payment of dividends. If the system work well, extend it. If it fail, discontinue it. We commend this to the consideration of Lord Stanley, who ought to emancipate himself from the bondage of financial red tape. And we tell Mr. Bright that if he desire to be an honest poli tician, and to do real good to the working classes of his fellow-countrymen, he must not only say that " the finance of a country is almost everything of a country," but acting on that conviction he must study the currency question—the great ques tion of the working men throughout the civilised world. ie I T MARRIAGE 'EARS. --- itecently ac a, marriage in Leeds, after the ceremony, the b r id e b urs t i n t o t ears: whereupon the bridegroom, a stout six-foot fellow, follow ing the example, blubbered like a calf, and on being remon strated with, roared out, " Let me alone I I feel as Dad about it as she dm," THE ACCIDEA T 'ro THE (JEIN" N A1V. - ----..... ---- TO THE ED [TOR OF TILE T M Es. Sir, — Tinges l e erf . m 'which appearei in the i days of Wt. tlue accident of the 2d ult., headed " I)CS tr uctio] t of tho Crinan Canal," was copied into me; of ti Le prcevincial papers of e s tt a ic r N o v .ochgilp head England, and has left a ye ry general impression that the line of traffic •oin Li to head of Lochfine to Lochcrinan is annihilate d. I _II consequence of nu morons inquiries addrtl& 3ed 1 ,o me from all parts of the country by touri, st s v rho have visited the Western Highlands undo 'rip: T arrangements, I have made a special journey to this district, with the view of satisfying myseLc s is to the extent of the damage caused by the irru p1 ion, and the reality of the supposed obstruction c f the summer tourist traffic. My observations an d inquiries on the spot suggest the despatch of a st tort letter, which may, if you will kindly give it int. iertion in the Times, at once allay public anxiety r ; to the continuance of passenger traffic over this c el ebrated " Royal route." Whatever may be th. a i iltinuate issue of the rivalry that appears to l e sprin i ging up betwixt es itwice a week each be the friends of th e estab dished 11 ne of communi cation and the stiggestt ship canal across the isthmus from East to 1 Nest Ta rbert , it will be satisfactory at least to th e " thou: iands of tourists l a nd the sporting publir :" that a nnually visit the Hebridean district to be :assurednt Highland summer.s steamers B e u r s t no suspension of transit e rom Ardr ispaig to Crinan. he The spirited proprietors )f the w ar a e y al b r e e t a w dy ix c t onzy sg in o g w p a t s engr to hat there will I Oban, tile journey being performed in a day, as is usual i it is proposed to improv, e, upon the present mode of conveyance by runn , t1 ng trat li-boats between Ardispaig and Cairn-ban, e bud bet . 1 ,vixt Crinan and the chain of locks at t ,he other end of the sum mit level of the canal. Eight c rut of the nine miles of the canal are u ninjured by the disaster, and it will only be a ple asant wal k, or for invalid; a very short drive, betw een the t TWO track boats. Indeed, it has generally • been the custom to walk while the track boat paasi throng 1 i the nine locks, rising to and falling from the sur emit level in the middle of the canal. The time of ;ranker from one track boat to the other wil I be mu eh less than was occupied in passing througl i the lr ocks. It is not the object of thi s note to enter into any details or incidents of the act tideni ;, or much hitherto unpublished information mi t Je given. I under stand that the commissioner .1 of the canal have re tained the services of an e Iminc )nt scientific gen tleman to investigate and repo )rt on the whole matter, and, pending that rei 'tort , all rumours about the restoration of the canal, o r a deviation of route, are premature ; but one thing ; I was assured by a scientific and practical gentle In an whom I met on the debris last evening, viz., tht it with about £12,000 at his disposal he would have a boat through the canal again in three months. Very respectfully soliciting y - our kind attention to this note, I am, sir, yours VE my obediently, THOMAS COOK. Cairn-ban Inn, March 9. COUNTRY 117.1 LRKETS. LIVERPOOL-ME I. RCH 12. No alteration to•day in the price , from Tuesday could' St made in either wheat, barley, flour, oats, beans or peas. OXFORD—Meir.• ni 12. We had small supplies of all descri iptions of grain to-day, and wheat met a slow sale at about ate rates. No change is made in the prices of any other art icle, and little business doing. The supply of wheat to-day was Er mall, but the demand was heavy, and sales could not be frE 'ely effected without a decline of is per qr., which was not submitted to by the farmers generally. In flour and oti 'ler articles there was rather a better sale. Wheat, white 428 to 46s Peas, l'artridge..44s to 46s red 38s to 41s Wb ite 41s to 43s Barley 34s to 41s Boil inir, 42s to 48s Chevalier ....37s to 45s Dun . .. 44s to 46s Grinding 27s to 33s Beans, Tick ....388 to 40s Malt 70s to 73s Han .ow Ticks 38s to 42s Chevalier 72s to 73s Man sgan 36s to 39s Oats .... 25s to 35s There was a limited quantity of whe at on offer, and prices for all descriptions were about maintai !med. Barley a very fair show, and sales flat at last week's rates. Beans were in moderate supply, and prices easier. C►: ats a fair hale, at late rates. White wheat, new, 44s to 50s Barley., grinding.. 28s to 29s Red do. 38s to 42s Oats, .o ld, .. 30s to 34s Old white 44s to 48s New d `n 29s to 30s Red do. ..37s to 42s Beans 498 to 525 Barley, malting.— 38s to 45s Peas . . ..—s to —s Super. flour, 33s to 36s ; fine, —s I to 30s per 20 atone. There was a good show of wheat l tore today, much of it, however, of better quality, but tirade remained as quiet as it has been for some weeks pas t. Barley, peists, and beans quite as dear. Wheat 38s to 43s 1 Oats.. 26s to 32s White do 44s to 46s Bean$ i, new 40s to 453 Barley .. .. 36s to 40s Peas . ... 403 to 44s Flour, 26s Od to --s per sack :from the miller. We continue to be fairly supplied with wheat ; there 18 no great activity in the trade, still IL fair business passing at about previous rates. Fine barley - fully as dear. Beans in limited demand. Oats and other articles as before. Wheat ...38s to 42s Oath.... 28s to 32s White do .42s to 46s Ditt o, old ........32s to 36i Barley .34s to 44s Bea na 49s to —s Fine flour, 31s j Seconds, 29s j Thirds, 27s per sack. There was a small supply of mrheat to-day, for wild& Tuesday's full prices were obtained. There was A good supply of oats and barley, and a great degree of dttlnctil prevailed. A rather better demand; for Indian corn, bu no change in quotations. s. d. s. d. s. d. I. it Wheat, White 22 6 to 25 6 Do., new ..... 11 6 to 13 0 Do., red 21 6 to 23 0 I Bere ... 10 0 to 12 0 Do., new .... 21 6 to 24 6 Rapeseed .... 26 0 to 29 0 Barley 11 0 to 17 0 Oatmeal 12 6 to 14 0 Oats 11 0 to 13 0 Bakers' flour .. 13 0 to 17 6 Do., black 10 6 to 11 0 Indian corn .. 28 0 to 30 0 THE CIVIL SERVICE.—Lo rd Lovaine, Vice-Pke sident of the Board of Trade, has appointed Mr. W. W. E. Tannent to be his Private Secretary. General Post-office. —Mr. George Lupton has resigned his appointment in the Money Order-offie, St. Martin's -le-Grand. Committee of Council on Education.—An Inspectorship of Schools for Scotland has become vacant by the death of Mr. Daniel Scrymgeour. Foreign Department. —The Vice-Consulship at Caen, France, has become vacant by the promotion of Mr. C. P. Hodgson to the Consulship ef Hakodadi, Japan. East India Department—Messrs. Austin Robert Lord, Thomas Henly Baird, Robert Thomas Hampton, George Crowdy, Henry Hill, Edmund Peel, Edward George Clarke, Michael Pope, and Arthur N. Wollaston have been appointed writers in the India-office. Customs—There are vacancies in the Custom-house for 15 junior clerks ; commencing salary £75 per annum. Appointments—Mr. John M. Bamford has been appointed a clerk in the Controller- General's office, London. Mr. William Hugh Falloon has been appointed a supernumerary clerk in ditto. Mr. George M. Tait has been appointed a supernumerary clerk in ditto. Mr. William Denne has been appointed a clerk in the Examiner's office, London. Mr. Matthew Mawson has been appointed a clerk in the Long-room, London.—Civil Service Gazette. ' [ADVERTISEMENT.] - 110110Way'SPills.—A cold.--There is no disorder so common as this is in the moist and va riable climate of England, and, therefore, no medicine, which will cure it speedily and permanently, when once known, can fail to meet with a most extensive sale. Such is literally the case with these pills. The demand for them is extraordinary. To neglect a cold is often a fatal error. If at the first symptoms of a cold these pills be taken freely they will stop its further progress, and at every stage of the disorder they will be more or less beneficial. They en courage perspiration, clear away injurious obstructions in the bowels, and purify and give tone to the whole system. The cure is then certain. BIRTHS. BAKER.—On the 10th inst., at 66, Finchley New-road, the wife of the Hen. John Baker, M.L.C. of South Austra lia, of a son. _ _ BRADISH.—On the 11th inst., at Kemp-town, Brighton, the wife of Wm. Bradish, Esq., of a daughter. HARKNESS.—On the 10th inst., at Clevedon, Somerset, the wife of the Rev. G. L. Harkness, of a son. SPOONER.—On the 9th inst., at Wellow, Nottinghamshire, the wife of Louis IL Spooner, Esq., of a daughter. dtahueghltOetrhofint., Georgeat Queen's-road Inglis,ue s E - r is o q ad ., MARRIAGES Margaret, daughter Alfred Phillips, Ivy Cottage, Dalston. t P -Anur n o : INWCatilmaips-0n LIMLEY—SPAIGHT.—On the" 8th inst., at Kilmastulla, Frederick D. Lumley, Esq., Lieut.-Colonel, unattached, to Agnes, second daughter of Francis Spaight, Esq,, Derry Castle, Tipperary. HINDE.-021 the Gth inst., - atEastdon Cottage, Starcross, W. G. Hinde, aged 60. LAMBERT.—At Ealing, Middlesex, the Rev. W. Lambert, incumbent of Christchurch, Ealing. LLOYD.—On the 11th inst., Mary Keith, wife of Morgan Lloyd, Esq., and daughter of the late Admiral the Hon. C. E. Fleming. MONR0.—On the 10th inst., at Craiglockhart House, Alex ander Monro, Esq., of Craiglockhart, M.D., F.R.C.P., F . R. S., Emeritus Professor of Anatomy in the University of Edinburgh, aged 86. TURNOR.—On the 11th inst., at Stoke Rockford, Constance Evelyn, the second daughter of Mr. and Lady Caroline Tumor, aged 12. WENBORN.—On the 11th inst., at 35, Trevor-square, Robt. Wenborn, Esq., aged 77. YooL.—On the 12th inst., at 51, Gloucester-place, Hyde. park-gardens, Wm. Yool, Esq., aged 73. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No, 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of WiGia 14,1859. • the al Plaint and ea sent& For Medic PP,1 COPA ,, 4 2',reef uopail same in a trial °nee a their 1 138.) Street, feetercr arid d and I tong At : istrcei