The Sun. — London, England, 1860-10-08 00:00:00

TILE CII ARING-CROSS RAILWAY. the The exte - mien (F of rom the Sou Observer th-Eas .) tern line at Lon don-bridge to Charing-cross, which when com pleted, will render essential service to the public by relieving the crowded thoroughfares of the City of SO l'Arge a portion of their traffic, is now being pus'ned forward with great activity : Representa tions have been made by the Charing-cross Com pany to the South Eastern directors respecting the amount of assistance to be given to the undertaking by the latter, and it is understood that the South Eastern board are so fully convinced of the value of the line to their proprietors that they have come to the resolution of recommending that the remaining capital required to complete the work should be subscribed by their company. The estimated capi tal was originally £BOO,OOO, but this has since been increased to the extent of £60,000, by adopting the very wise suggestion of Mr. Hawkshaw, and con structing the bridge over the Thames with four lines of rails instead of two, as at first proposed. Of the amount of capital required £450,000 was fixed as the net cost of the land and property to be taken, and the experience already obtained shows that this extension will form the almost sole exception in the history of railways where the esti mates on this head have not been exceeded. It is highly creditable to Mr. Ryde, the surveyor of the company, and proves the careful manner in which his calculations were made, that the property will have been purchased within the amount which he had fixed. Of this £450,000 a sum of £40,000 was paid to the Hungerford-bridge Company for the landed property, including the existing piers of the bridge and the wharf on the Surrey side, for merly occupied by Mr. Eastwood; and £lBO,OOO for the purchase of the Hungerford-market Com pany's property. These purchases cover all demands for compensation so far as the railway company is concerned. The shopkeepers in Hungerford-mar ket are for the most part weekly tenants, but by a clause in the Charing-cross Bridge Act they are entitled to receive three months' notice, and will be permitted to take with them on their removal all trade or shop fixtures which they may wish to carry away. With respect to the bridge tolls, an arrangement has been made by the Hungerford bridge Company to purchase them for a sum of £85,000, being 20 years' purchase of the amount actually taken. When the railway bridge is com pleted there will be accommodation provided for foot passengers by overhanging ways upon each side of the bridge at the same rate of toll as at present. The station at Hungerford-market will be 140 feet in width, and the company are bound to provide at the entrance into the Strand an open courtyard of not less than 100 feet in depth and of the same width at the railway station. This will involve the removal of three or four houses which now have a frontage in the Strand, which are included in the purchases made of the Hungerford-market Com pany. The houses which will have to be taken down are those occupied by Mr. Marshall, the gro cer • Messrs. Allen, the trunkmakers, at the corner of Hungerford-street; and the adjoining house on the east side, now a confectioner's. The block of property purchased by the company is bounded on the east side for almost the whole distance by Villiers-street. A large portion of it will be surplus, and will not be required for the purposes of the station at present, but if, as no doubt will be the case, the South Western or Brighton Companies should obtain power to use the station, they will have to purchase some portions or the whole of this property for the purpose of enlarging the station. The first company which shall obtain admission after the present one will have by far the most ad vantageous bargain as respects purchase of property and those who may come after will have to acquire property on the Craven-street side, which will pro bably be of a much more expensive character. The chains and ironwork of the Hungerford Bridge have been sold to a company at Clifton for £5,000 subject to the cost of taking down and removal. The bridge over the Avon at Clifton is one that was commenced in 1832, under the superintendence of the late Mr. Brunel. The piers were constructed on the edge of the cliffs at a great expense, the chains were made and were lying on the spot for some years and were only recently removed to be used in the construction of the famous Saltash-bridge, also built . under r unnel, in Cornwall. The first com pany failed for want of funds to complete the work; the association just formed has purchased the piers for an almost nominal sum, and the iron work from Hungerford at less than one-tenth of its cost. The Clifton bridge ought to be one of the cheapest in the country. It will have one span of 700 feet in width, and will have a clear head way above high water of 200 feet. On the Surrey side the first property taken for the Charing-cross Railway is the coal wharf of Messrs. Coles, Child, and Co., west of the present Hungerford-bridge, the freehold of which belongs to the Archbishop of Canterbury. A portion only of this property, as well as of the wharf on the op posite side, will be required to be taken. The re mainder will still be available for sale or rental. Leaving this part, the railway will cross the Belve dere-road, Sutton-street, the York-road, Anne-street, Agnes -street, Frances-street, Vine-street, the Water loo-road, John-street, and the Commercial-road. The whole of the property purchased along this part of the route belonged to the Archbishop of Canter bury, and, with the exception of the York-road and Waterloo-road, it consists of small houses let out in tenements. In the York-road several of the houses have shops; the remainder are private houses; and in the Waterloo-road there are shops and small trade premises. The railway passes along this part in a curve of two furlongs radius, and will be, as through out the whole of its course, entirely on arches, except at the crossing of streets and thoroughfares, where it will be carried by flat girder bridges. At the Cornwall-road will be the junction with the Soutb. Western line, which will be effected by a short ex tension carried from the main line at the Waterloo Station across the Waterloo-road, so that direct access will be obtained to the London-bridge Sta tion, or by closing the points at the junction, the South Western trains may be reversed, and go on to Charing-cross. It is probable, how ever, that a small branch may be thrown out by the South-Western, over its own property in the York-road, for the purpose of the Charing-cross traffic, leaving the Cornwall-road junction entirely for that to and from London-bridge. Leaving Cornwall-road, where there will be a passenger station common to both companies, the line passes along the south side of Brad-street, crosses Windmill-street and Eaton-street. Here the property consists of small houses belonging en tirely to the Right Hon. Mr. Milner Gibson. The property between Eaton-street and Broadwall is of an exceedingly low character, and includes Mitre-place, Isibella•place, and Bates's-buildings— it belortes to several small proprietors. From Broadwall the line passes in the open space be tween the backs of Jane-street and Isabella -street, crosses Collingwood-street, and reaches the Black friars-road. The property in this section consists of small tenements. The whole blocks have been purchased, but the carcases of the houses will re main intact, as only the small outhouses and yards of some of them will be taken. The arches of the railway will be so arranged as to afford all the re quisite accommodation for the tenants, and the houses will still be available for tenancy. In the Blackfriars-road a portion of the property consists of several shops, with business premises in the rear ; the remainder is of an inferior description. The principal proprietor is Mr. John King Lethbridge. On the east side of the Blackfriars-road several shops and some small tenements, on the south side of York-street, extending beyond Thurlow-street and William -street, have been purchased for the s tation to be provided at this point. The owners of the iddleo pro perty were the trustees of the late Mrs. station and Mary Bilke. The Blackfriars chapel,w a l i i .ll be on the north side of Rowland Hill's and the road will be crossed by a fiat girder which is %R' The property in Thurlow-street, is sm a ll among t he street running out of William street, a character that a e worst on the line. It is of such police time since it was con demned by the William -street to Orem. i unfit for tenancy. From lane there is a number of very low and wretehede tenementses which belong to the London and South-Western Railway Company. These have been purchased , down. A portion of the d and will be taken attached to the premises in the occupatio n of e l n lessrs. Jones, hat re m anufacturers, will b e required, and this is the property to asse ss first case in which a jury will be the amount to be given for the is yentaokren. l lt is stated that th e amo unt required a bove the real value ; and this is therefore jurnstosuusch a case a s a company like to go before a jury upon. At, Gravel -lane the e s tate of the Bishop o f Win chester co mmences, and extends as far as th e Borough Market. The property o n t h e estat e is, without exception, the vilest and the worst in London. It comprises, amongst others, p ump_ court, Ewer street , and Mary Ann-place. It was stated in the evidence given before the committee of the House of Commons that such is the charac ter of the spot that it is unsafe for a policeman to n; tat the trust himself alone there at houses swarm with vermin, and fight are filthy be yond description ; that, in hot weather, the poor wretches who occupy them ar e compelled to leave them, and lie in the streets . to avoid the foul stench, and th e attacks of the Vermin of all kinds, who claim and assert their right to undisputed possession. Until a few months since, and after attention had been directed to this nest of vice and misery, the streets and courts were not even paved. When th e surveyors were engaged in surveying thitt property they were compelled at the clove of ' l3 . day to change the whole of their clothing, and take measures for destroying the offen sive forms of animal life which swarmed over them, and purify themselves from the foulness and filth which they had acquired during the day. Leaving this hotbed of vice and crime, the rail way passes along the back of the houses on the north side of Union-street, without taking the houses in the front. The houses here are principally of a busi ness character, including hatmakers, chairmakers, and an ink manufacturer. The line then crosses Great Guildford-street, and here it will require a portion of the premises of the Globe iron foundry. The arches of the railway will, however, be avail able for restoring nearly as much of the space as will be taken, and it is not probable that any very serious demand for compensation may arise in dealing with the property. Much of the work that is carried on at the foundry can still be performed under the arches of the railway. The railway next crosses Bridge-street, leading to the Southwark-bridge, at the point where the road be gins to widen, and near what is called by the natives of this district " the triangular square," which con sists of a small three-sided plot of ground surrounded by iron railings, and in which a few shrubs struggle to live, and grass strives to look green and fresh. There are some hatmakers and a brazier's premises at this spot which will be taken at no very serious cost. From this point the railway passes a corner of the south side of Southwark-square, without, how ever, taking any of the house property; it then crosses Worcester-street, but without touching a large hop warehouse. Here the railway will intersect the new street in Southwark, which has been so long on the hands, or rather on the tongues, of the Board of Works. The point of intersection will be where Emmanuel-court and Angel-court come into Red cross-street. The new street will be 70 feet in width, and the property at this point is of no small value. Leaving the new street, the railway will touch some property owned by " the President and Governors of the College of the Poor of St. Saviour's, Southwark." It consists of a number of alms houses built around and enclosing a burial ground. These small houses have been erected with moneys left by various charitable individuals, such as Cure, Spratt, and others, and their windows look out only upon the burial ground, as though the donors wished always to keep before the tenants the salu tary lesson of their mortality. Leaving these abodes of cheerless poverty, the railway skirts along the backs of small houses in Park-street, and then tra verses the Borough-market. It will cross here at a considerable elevation, and will be supported en tirely upon iron columns. By way of compensation to the market, ite company are bound by their act to purchase and remove some house property, and add the land to the area of the market, which will then be much more convenient and commodious than at present. From the Borough-market the line will pass on to Wellington-street, taking several houses on the west side, and cross the street by a girder bridge. To reach this point a gradient of about 1 in 100 will be required, all the rest of the line being practically level. On the east side the suppprts of the bridge and of one or two arches will rest upon a piece of vacant ground at the cor ner of St. Thomas's Hospital. This is the point where the heaviest compensation has been demanded. Al though not taking any portion of the buildings, the company offered during the progress of the bill to purchase the whole of the land at a valuation, and to give to the hospital in addition a sufficient snm to build another hospital, at some distance out of town. This offer was refused. The committee offered to name a sum which they thought the company should give by way of compensation. The proposal was rejected. The company proposed to build another wing to the present hospital on the eastern side, which would afford accommodation to all the patients who occupy the north wing, near which the railway would pass, still leaving that wing for any purpose which the hospital authorities might require. This and various other proposals were also rejected. The act was finally obtained without spe cifying any compensation ; but stipulating only that 18 months' notice should be given of the in tention of the railway company to proceed with their works, and that a jury should assess the value of the property taken, and the amount of compensa tion. This claim is still undecided. The best thing which could be done would be to remove the hos pital altogether—for there is surely no necessity for two establishments of the kind adjoining each other, as St. Thomas's and Guy's now do—and re build it in Lambeth, or in some part of the suburbs of the metropolis which does not at present possess the advantage of a hospital in its neighbourhood. Leaving the hospital, the railway will traverse, with but one small exception, the property of the South-Eastern Railway Company, as far as Ber mondsey-street, where the Charing-cross branch will effect a junction with the main line. From Tooley-street to the point of junction the main line will be widened by three lines of rails, to accom modate the West End extension, the company being the owners of the property required for the purpose of this widening. The bridge, which is the heaviest portion of the work, is now being proceeded with rapidly, under the direction of Mr. Hawkshaw, the railway engi neer. The line will, it is expected, be ready for opening by the end of the next year. STREET RAILROADS IN 7HE METROPOLIS. Saturday was specially appointed by the Maryle bone Representative Council for the consideration of two important public questions. The first as to the appropriation of the site of ground or enclo sure known as the Oval, situate at the northern extremity of the Portland-road, facing Trinity Church, as a station for the use of the Metropolitan (Underground) Railway, upon condition that they gave up certain land for the widening of the Mary lebone•road at and near Stafford-street and the Yorkshire Stingo ; and the second as to the adop tion of a report recommending the sanctioning of a plan of street railways by Mr. Train, the invva tor of street tram-roads in New York and other places in America. Mr. Churchwarden CHARLES CARR occupied the chair, and the report recommending the granting the site of the Oval at the northern end of the Port land-road to the Metropolitan (Under-ground) Rail way for a station, on the conditions above referred to, having been read by Mr. Green well, the vestry clerk, Mr. HODGES moved the adoption of the report, which had been voted unanimously in a very large committee. He believed that that board had full power to make this grant, although there was some doubt as to the actual ownership of the land which had been enclosed by that parish. As an equiva lent for giving up this site the directors had agreed to surrender certain portions of the ground which they purchased between Stafford-street and Chapel street, so as to enable the Marylebone-road to be widened as well as straightened at that point, where, as they well knew, there was at present a most awkward turn. The engineer and solicitor of the company had met the committee in an exceed• ingly good and fair spirit ; and Mr. Burchell, the solicitor, had stated that he had no doubt of the directors assenting to this arrangement, provided the vestry should agree to it. The committee looked upon it as being most advantageous to the parish, and therefore they recommended the plan for adop tion. Mr. C. FREETII seconded this resolution. Mr. GREENWELL, the vestry clerk, said—By the 3d of Geo. IV , cap. 84, sec. 55—the Marylebone Local Act—the piece of land at the Portland-road being then a nuisance, was placed under the control of the vestry upon condition that they should put a railing round it and plant a shrubbery therein. They did so, and there was a subsequent agreement that they should purchase it wasticoft henleVveorodeasrrainedd of Forests for the sum£4o, which out. e t, The would railway under their act of par liament, larigh to purchase this land a n have company, if they thought proper. All that the vestry was i r r e o q n ui r r a e i d lin. to do was to give up the g round and the The t resolution report withreference i was t pu t to carriedtshte tramway unanimously. John's-wood, 0n h pro jected by Mr. Train, to run from through Baker-street, Portman-square, fo tc. Oxford-street, and a return line up L into Oxford-street wo o d to the fronißege New-road,nt-stree nadndsothornougtoh St. John's-wood, Gloucester-place n,s being brought up for consideration, A letter was read from Mr. Curtis, of Crown court, Old Broad-street, claiming a far superior in vention as to street railways, in the shape of a car riage capable of carrying 60 persons, with the wheels so constructed that in the event of any ob structions the flanges would shut up in such a way that the carriage would at once run on the ordinary road like any other conveyance. The letter urged the vestry to give his plan the advantage of con sideration before deciding the question. A com munication was also read from the directors of the London and General Omnibus Company, stating that, through the reports in the public journals, they had observed that a committee of the Vestry of St. Marylebone had been appointed and that they had reported favourably, and had adopte-J, or were about to adopt, a proposal made by Mr. Train, for laying down a street tramway, and that a full discussion was to be held upon the subject. The directors of the London General Omnibus Company state that in 1837-8 an applica tion was made to Parliament and to the Maryle bone vestry by that company to sanction a scheme similar, but which they consider superior to that of Mr. Train's, but which was opposed in Parlia ment by the Marylebone Vestry, through the then hon. member for the borough, Sir Benjamin Hall. On that occasion the directors alleged that Mr. Hodges, as chairman of the committee upon the rnE SUN, 7 LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 8, 1860 subject, expressed a very strong opinion against the scheme before the Chief Commissioner of Pub lic Works, on account of danger to the public, and obstruction of traffic. The directors state that they have, therefore, seen with surprise the favourable reception given to the project of Mr. Train to lay down an experimental line in Oxford-street, of much greater extent than that formerly proposed by the London General Omnibus Company in the New-road. They, therefore, relied upon the jus tice of the vestry not to injure their commercial enterprise by granting to another party the privi lege which had been refused to them, especially after the expense they had been put to. The di rectors were in a position to enter upon the work as soon as the required sanction should be granted to them. They, therefore, requested the board to defer their decision on the plan of Mr. Train until the directors of the London General Omnibus Com pany had an opportunity of submitting their plans, and trusted that some consideration would be ex tended to them as the first promoters of street railways. A letter was also read from the West Middlesex Water Company, inquiring if the vestry had consi dered what damage was likely to accrue, or how the company were to get at water mains requiring repairs in the line of route of the proposed street railways. The CHAIRMAN said that a deputation from the London General Omnibus Company, consisting of Messrs. Law, Armani, and M'Namara, directors ; Mr. Wilkinson, solicitor, and Mr. Church, secre tary, were in attendance. The deputation were admitted, and having made a statement as to their claims, embodying those contained in their letter, and answered a number of questions, Mr. HODGES moved the adoption of the report. Mt. GRIFFITHS seconded the adoption of the re port. Mr. FILMER moved an amendment'to the effect, " That this board does not consider it expedient at present to give permission for a line of street rail way to be laid down on the proposed route, and that the further consideration of the matter be postponed until after the opening of the projected railway in Victoria-street, Westminster." Mr. HUTCHEONS seconded the amendment. Mr. WINGFIELD supported the amendment, be cause he thought improvements upon Mr. Train's plan might be brought forward. After long discussion, the question was put, and the amendment negatived. On which Mr. HERRING moved, and Mr. WINGFIELD seconded a further amendment—" That the report be referred back to the committee, and that such committee consider the other plans of street rail ways that may be brought before it, and report thereon." This amendment was carried by a large majority, and the meeting adjourned after a long sitting. bench under Mr. Rising's guidance, and come to the facts, which, as he was instructed, were briefly these :—A child of Mrs.:, Webster, of Horsey, about three quarters of a year old, died. The me ther went to the clergyman and asked for burial, but the clergymen refused, the child being unbap- ' tised. She then obtained leave for the grave to be dug, and he was instructed positively that there was no understanding at all as to not singing. Whether that was so or not did not, however, enter into the facts, for whatever understanding there was could hardly govern the law of the case. The grave was dug, and Mrs. Webster requested Mr. Fish, one of the defendants, knowing him to be a God-serving man, to attend at the church, that the child might not be thrown into the grave as a dog, but might have some funeral celebration as far as could be done consistently with the feelings of Mr. Neale. There was no wish on the part of his clients in any way to annoy Mr. Neale. They were reli gious, God-serving people, and would just as little wish to annoy Mr. Neale as Mr. Neale to annoy them. They carried the child to the churchyard, and feeling it hard that they should not be allowed to go in, not understanding Mr. Neale's reasons, they knelt down outside in the road and there offered up prayer. They then rose and in orderly procession walked to the grave, when they sang this hymn:—_ Alas I how soon the body dies, 'Tis but an earthy clod ; Each passing moment loudly crios— " Prepare to meat thy God." Behold he comes in yonder cloud, All nature feels his nod ; The whole creation cries aloud— " Prepare to meet thy God." And then the clergyman came and protested against what was being done. Not a word was said by any person present to annoy him. If there had been any feeling in their breasts against him some word would have escaped the bystanders ; but the occa sion was too solmn, there was nothing of the spirit of annoyance, nothing there, one would think, to vex a minister of Christ. Everything was solemn, and yet this information, laid on the 29th August, stated that these parties were guilty of " indecent behaviour in the churchyard of the said parish, by then and there singing on the way to and at the grave of an unbaptised child." Really it almost reminded one of the Popish days of Mary to hear that people singing a hymn were guilty of indecent behaviour. Words can scarcely express the indig nation one felt that the singing of a hymn like this, which, to say the least, was done purely with reli gious emotion, should be accounted a crime, and these parties branded as criminals. Persons singing a hymn thought guilty of indecent behaviour ! One could scarcely help feeling that to refuse to bury an innocent babe was much more like indecent be- haviour. The Rev. Mr. Wilkins—l am no bigot in these matters, but, according to the rubric, a Christian clergyman cannot bury an unbaptised child. We have no power. Mr. Tillett—l merely give that as my feeling. Mr. Wilkins—But if not contradicted it would go forth as submitted to, and I wish therefore to state that as a clergyman I have no earthly power to - read the service over an unbaptised person. Whatever feelings I may entertain, the rubric spe cially forbids such being done, and I have no option. Mr. Tillett--Well, I simply urge that these par ties were not within the meaning of the act in sing ing that hymn, guilty of indecent behaviour. I leave it in your hanas. Before the court was cleared, Mr. Neale said he wished to say that if there should be a penalty, he asked that it might be the smallest possible. Even now, if these parties would promise that such a thing should never occur again, he would quash the affair at once. The Chairman asked the reverend gentleman whether he was willing to do so at that moment, but Mr. Neale declined. After nearly an hour's deliberation, the court was re-opened, and The Chairman said—We consider an offence has been committed against the law by these parties, in singing a hymn in the churchyard, and the fine we impose is merely nominal to show that it was an offence. We fine the defendants ls., and ex penses 13s. in each case, or in default, three days, imprisonment. Mr. Tillett said he considered it his duty, under the 4th section of the act, to appeal to the quarter sessions. The room was again cleared for deliberation, and after a considerable interval, the bench announced that they would require the parties to to give sureties, themselves In £4O, and two sureties each in £2O, to prosecute the appeal. The sureties were then offered, and, after a minute examination of the parties by the bench as to their worldly possessions, were accepted, and the proceedings then closed. partial and dignified manner in which the onerous daties of chairman were performed by Sir John Awdry, who, although not a magistrate of the county, undertook the office. We are unable to learn that any further steps are, at all events for the present, in contemplation. Road hill House has been removed from more par ticular police surveillance. As illustrating the curious reaction which so commonly follows in the public mind, we may men tion that a Manchester paper states, and we believe with truth, that since her discharge Miss Constance Kent has received more than one offer of marriage. We know also that invitations to visit all parts of the country have been received from many total strangers, and among them several of the aristocracy. Doubtless a similar revulsion of feeling will follow the release of Elizabeth Gough. (Front Ins _Morning Post.) Three days of searching public investigation have added nothing to our previous information re specting the Road murder. The same mystery that hung over it at first enshrouds it still, in spite of indefatigable perseverance and accumulated efforts to bring the truth to light. Our readers have by this time sifted, with mingled curiosity and vexa tion, the extraordinary investigation before the magistrates at the instance of Mr. Slack, with the sanction of the Home-offioe, and they will have shared with us an intense disappointment at the impotence of the result. The nursemaid has been arraigned, a barrister has been specially retained by the Crown for the prosecution, counsel has been heard for the defence, 24 witnesses have been exa mined and cross-examined, every member of Mr. Kent's family and every servant of his household have been produced ; but, in spite of all, the prose cution has entirely failed to bring home to her the crime, or any participation in it, or guilty know ledge of it ; and she was very properly set at liberty on nominal recognisances to appear when she should be wanted. The result is that justice is still baulked, and the perpetrator of that despe rate crime still walks undetected amongst honest men. And yet, however unsatisfactory in its results, this examination is a contribution towards the ulti mate detection of the murderer. It helps to nar row the ground and limit the number of suspected persons. We insist now, as we did from the first, that the inmates of the house on the night of the murder are responsible for the crime, and that it is amongst them that the murderer will ultimately be found. It will not do to throw dust in people's eyes by saying that certain servants vowed ven geance against the children, or that some one must have been concealed in the house, and the like. There has not been a shadow of evidence that any body was concealed ; or would have any motive for being concealed; while there is evidence to show that the house was properly secured, and had not been forcibly broken into. It is impossible to re lease the household from the responsibility. That household consisted of nine persons, any of whom might have committed the murder. The effect of two public examinations—the first, however, a most unsatisfactory one—has been to acquit two of the family—viz., Constance Kent and Elizabeth Gough. There now remain seven others,of whom one must be presumed to be guilty ; while there are five out of the seven, viz., Mrs,Kent, the two elder Misses Kent,and the cook and housemaid, who may claim to be above suspicion. It remains for the other two to clear themselves ; for however legal evidence may for the present be at fault, the public will not put aside its suspicions in the fa ce o f cer t a i n pro b a biliti es which must occur to every one who has weighed the case, or has read what we have said about it in previous articles. In reviewing the whole of the circumstances, who can help a feeling of astonishment at the course it has taken, at the conduct and demeanour of the family, and the unaccountable proceedings of some of the lawyers ! The murder was committed savagely on a helpless child in the dead of night. In the morning he was missed as early as 5 o'clock, and it was eight before he was discovered. Although the household, including the outdoor servants, con sisted of 13 grown or nearly grown persons, not one of then thought of going to the closet where the child was found; and when it was found it was by strangers ! There seems, indeed, to have been no hearty search by anybody except by Bengal. and Nutt. The nurse was standing on the lawn when the child was brought in ; the other servants were about their work. It is perfectly wonderful the sang froid with which some of the parties con duoted themselves. The deadly deed of blood, that ought to have filled 'every soul with horror, and stirred up every feeling of indignation, and stimu lated every energy in the anxious search, seems to have made but little disturbance in the ordinary proceedings of the establishment. There is a ghastly stolidity in the conduct of Mr. Kent. He was in bed when the news of the child being missing was brought to him. He did not get up. His distracted wife was, to use her own words, " here, there, and everywhere" looking for the little boy, but it was not till he was told that the drawing-room windows had been found open that he got up ; and when up, his conduct was moat unaccountable. He does not seem to have searched the house; he did not go and scrutinise the very place where, if there had been foul play, the child was most likely to be found, and where, indeed, he was found ; but he started off to Trow bridge, assuming, without a moment's thought, that his child had been stolen and had been carried thither. When on his return he found out the crushing truth, the same strangeness marked all his conduct ; he gave the key of the laundry to the doctor, but did not himself go to confer with him or examine the child. He questioned the other ser vants ; but, strangest of all, according to his own evidence, he did not question the nurse. He suffered the -very person primarily responsible for the safe custody of the child during the night to be ques tioned only by his wife. Afterwards he admits that he asked a question now and then. When the police came to his house at night he locked them in the kitchen ; when they knocked he did not open the door for 20 minutes. Is it too much to ask for some evidence as to what he was doing all this time ? The nurse, it seems, did not go to bed that night at the same time as the other servants. Why not ? What was she doing? Mr. Kent's conduct in not attending the inquest is in keeping with all the rest. Indeed, we have no words to describe our astonishment at his proceedings throughout. He could scarcely have done other than he did had he been a party to the murder. In all the subsequent stages he has rather obstructed than aided inquiry. He is the real prosecutor, but he has acted as if he wished to stifle rather than assist the prosecution. The strong expressions of the chairman of the bench of magistrates in regard to the locking up the po licemen, and the refusal to have a plan of the house made, might with equal propriety be applied to several other portions of Mr. Kent's conduct in this harrowing business. Passing from Mr. Kent to the nurse, it is true that the evidence fails to establish the charge against her, muc:i neglect of duty, much prevarica tion, much that is in every way the reverse of satis factory or reassuring. There can be little doubt that she has a well founded suspicion who the murderer is. Her answers to questions about Constance Kent's night gown, as well as many other observations all point to a determined reserve, which indicates the possession of know ledge, or at least suspicion, which she does not wish to show. _ We have intimated before, that in the absence of any other motive the child's death might have been sought with the design of preventing his telling anything he might happen to know respect ing the behaviour of any persons in the household, and this is supported by the evidence of Mrs. Dal limore, who declared the nurse to have said that " the murder was done through jealousy; the little boy goes into his mamma's room and tells every thing." Now, we ask again, was there anything that it would be dangerous for him to tell : had lie seen anything in the nurse's room that would bring discredit on her or anyone else ? We ask the ques tion ; we cannot suggest an answer. The question is forced upon us by the circumstances. If anything took place in the nurse's room—if anyone were there who ought not to have been there, then there may have been a motive not otherwise presumable for silencing the child. It is important that the child is believed to have been smothered, or in some way strangled. This rather strengthens than weakens what we have said. However this may be, we ad here to the belief we have before expressed—that the murder was committed by two persons, pro bably actively by one, with the knowledge and as sistance of the other. There are only four persons who could be open to suspicion, Constance Kent and her brother William, both of whom Lad acted strangely before, and Mr. Kent and the nurse, both of whom have acted so unaccountably since. Of these four, Consthnce Kent and the nurse have been examined and acquitted. Whether either of the remaining two is guilty, God alone knows. A lengthened inquiry has left us only where we were, and we must for some time longer be patient under the temporary suspension of justice ; but we may hope that all clue is not vet lost, and that even out of this depth of dark crime and mystery the truth may be discovered, to the vindication of the inno cent before the world, and the just execution of the guilty. A MAD LEAP FROM A TRAlN.—Richard Buckle, of Clifton, an ex-policeman of the Middlesborough force , a f ow mornings ago had a most miraculous escape for his life. Ile was riding in the train of the Great Northern between allington Station and Essendine junction, when ina state jumped out stupor with liquor he rose opened the door, and out of the carriage into midnight darkness. The train was running nearly 60 miles an hour at the time. He was a little hurt when found. The passengers naturally expected to hear n ex t d ay o f hi s b e i ng dashed to piec e s.—.Nittvcast/f Chrafif44, THE WAKEFIFLO rorsoNING GASE. TERMINATION OF THZ• INQUIRY. AGBRIGG, S AT URDAY. The adjourned inquiry into this myste.'ious affair was resumed at one o' c l oc k this afternoon,• „at the Graziers' Arms, Agbrigg, before T. Taylor, E, s q" Honorary Coroner. The following fresh evicts 9 nc e was produced.— The Rev. Father Young—l produce the followin, 9 ; two letters written by me for Miss Adamson. " Sandal, Aug. 14. " Sir,—As Miss Francis Adamson may now be considered to be on her death-bed, she desires me to write and ask you if it would be ,onvenient to send £5O immediately, and, in the remittance, to _ state what money remains in your hands. She also requests you, in case of her death, to send the re mainder to the Reformatory, Loughborough. Mr. J. Golding, Liverpool." The second letter referred to some family arrange ments. Sarah Stringer, mother of the prisoner, exa mined—l am a widow, and reside at Dirtcar. My daughter Emma resided with the deceased for above two years in the capacity of domestic servant. On the morning of Miss Adamson's death I went to her house with a cart and box, containing clean clothes. I occasionally washed for the deceased. The box in question contained clean clothes for my daughters, Emma and Matilda. Prior to it I had never been at Miss Adamson's since last winter, with one single exception, when I called at the door a fortnight ago, but I only saw my daughters upon that occa sion. Upon the day of deceased's death both my sons were at her house, but I saw neither of them writing. William cannot write, but James can a little. I heard no comments made respecting the property of the deceased. I saw a written paper lying on one of the tables, which I took up and threw into the fire, upon learning from Emma that she had been with it to the priest for his signa ture, which had been refused. I will swear that I was never in aoy room any day when Mrs. Bateson was requested to write her name on any document whatever. All that went away in the cart was our own property. I do not remember telling Mr. Fernandes, the attor ney, that the deceased had left a will prepared by proper attorneys. Matilda Stringer, one of the sisters who were ac cused of aiding and abetting in the capital charge, was next examined, but nothing particular elicited, except the admissiou that she (the witness) drew up the document purporting to he a will of Miss Adamson's. It will be recollected that at a previous examination a witness, named Hannah Bateson, distinctly swore that one of the prisoner's brothers drew up the document. James Stringer, the brother alluded to, was also examined, but he positively declared that he first saw the document in his sister Emma's hands. He did ask Bateson to sign it, but that was all. Edward Hoyle, broker's assistant, proved remov ing all the goods from off the shelf in the kitchen the day before the sale of Miss Adamson's effects, but saw no packet of any kind. This is the shelf on which a man found a packet of arsenic on the first day of the sale. The Coroner then briefly summed up the evidence, pointing out the distinction between murderers of the first and second degrees, and also between cir cumstantial and direct evidence In the present case it was Blear that the deceased had been poisoned, and the only question was who administered it ? The jury returned a verdict of wilful murder. PROSECUTION BY A CLERGYMAN FOR SINGING AT A FUNERAL. At the petty sessions at Smallburgh, Norfolk, on Tuesday, a charge was preferred by the Rev. Edward Pote Neale, vicar of Horsey, against Joseph Fish and Ann Nockolds, two of his parishioners, and parties in humble condition, of having, on the 29th of August last, been " guilty of indecent behaviour in the churchyard of the said parish of Horsey, by then and there singing on the way to and at the grave of an unbaptised child, by which singing the said Edward Pot Neale was then and there vexed and troubled, he being then and there the vicar of the said parish, and the only person duly authorised to perform the burial service in the churchyard of the said parish, con trary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided." _ There was a full bench of magistrates, viz. :—Sir J. Preston (chairman), Captain Cubitt, R. Rising, Esq., Rev. E. Wilkins, Rev. T. J. Blofeld. Several clergymen were present to witness the proceedings. Mr. Fisher (of London) appeared for the prosecu tion ; and Mr. W. H. Tillett (Norwich) for the de fence. Mr. Fisher, having addressed the bench, called The Rev. E. P. Neale, who deposed—On Monday, the 27th August, I called on Mrs. Webster, having heard that her child was dead and unbaptised, and in as gentle and kindly a manner as I could, I told her I should be unable to perform the burial service over the child, and that I was sorry she had ne glected to have it baptised. She said, "Then I shall have prayer and singing over it," to which I replied that such a thing would he illegal, and I hoped she would not think of it. She chose the spot where she would wish the child to be buried, and we then parted. Next night, having heard that she intended to have singing over the grave, I went to her with my wife, and in the kindest manner begged her not, saying that if she would give up the idea, I was quite willing that she should have the child buried on the spot she had selected, and that I trusted we should continue to live in love and kindness as heretofore. After a great deal of abuse from her. I asked her as a favour to myself to have no singing, and she promised distinctly that there should be none. I then appointed the funeral to take place at 1 o'clock the next day. On the Wednesday, I heard praying outside the church gate (which I had told her could be done), and shortly afterwards I was informed that singing was going on inside, and on going, I found Joseph Fish, Mrs. Nockolds, and several others, singing over the grave. I said, " Joseph Fish, and all here present I most solemnly protest against what you are now doing," which I repeated three times, but they did not desist. I felt very much vexed and troubled, particularly as it was against a decided promise given to me, and on which promise I had allowed the grave to be dug where it was. Several of my parishioners were pre- sent, and saw my authority set at defiance. The family had only lately come into the parish, or, had I known the child was unbaptised, I should have asked the parents to have the rite performed. One thing (continued the witness) I wish to add—my earnest desire that this should not be considered as proceeding from an unkind feeling. My wish has been from the beginning to do what was kind to these parties, in proof of which I saw Fish a day or two ago, when he said, " Oh sir, I regret exceed ingly ever having done this, I will never do it again," and I replied, " If you will come and sign to that effect, I should be happy to forego the pro secution." The Chairman thought they could hardly go into that. Cross-examined—l have known Mr. Fish about 30 years, and he has borne a good moral character. Mr. Tillett—You have said, " after a great deal of abuse from Mrs. Webster." Can you favour the magistrates with the words she used ? Witness (after reflecting)—She said, " Now you may talk about this sort of thing and the other as to the burial of this child, but I tell you what—l shall bury it in any part of the churchyard I like, and I shall have a minister there, aid he shall come as they have a right to come in spite of you or anyone." After further examination, Mr. Tillett addressed the court for the defence. He said the information was laid under a recent act, which was framed to meet certain disturbances in the parish of St. George's-in-the-East, with which everybody was familiar. It was passed in consequence of the inability of a previous act to suppress disorderly conduct in churches. The law as it previously stood rested mainly on a statute of the Ist Mary, cap. 3, which was an act against of fenders in the church, and in the sth and 6th clauses of the new act it was declared that nothing therein was to be construed as repealing or in any way al tering the old act. The preamble of the old act stated that, "forasmuch as it is necessary in every Christian commonwealth to provide that tranquil lity and peace may be preserved and contiaued amongst the people, and especially in Holy Church in the time of Divine service and administration of the sacrament and sacramentals, as before this time it hath been accustomed in holy communion within this realm, and that all things being contrary there unto, or that are or may be in disturbance thereof, may by foresight be eschewed and avoided, and re medy therefore in due time provided, as well for the preservation of the Queen's Highness' peace as for an universal quietness and order to be used within this realm." This act, they would observe, was made in the reign of the Roman Catholic Mary. It enacted in the 2d section that " if any person or persons of their own power or authority at any time or times do, or shall willingly or of purpose by open and overt word, fact, act, or deed, maliciously or con temptuously molest, let, disturb, vex, or trouble, or by any other unlawful ways or means disquiet or misuse any preacher or preachers allowed or autho rised to preach, &c., in any of his or their open ser mon, preaching, or collation, that he or they shall make, declare, preach, or pronounce in any c h urc h , chapel, churchyard," &c. He wished them espe cially to notice that it was a disturbance of any clergyman in " open sermon, preaching, or colla tion," and the same words were introduced into the recent act. It was not the mere vexing of a clergyman which rendered a man liable to pro secution, it was the disturbance of the worship of God which that act was made to meet. The next section clearly showed the spirit in which the act was framed, for it was directed against any celebrating preparing, saying,person N d v o h in o g: h s a in ll gi d n i g st , u m rb ini a s n te y ri p n r g ie , st or " the mass," or other Divine service. Moreover, the sth clause of itself would be sufficient to upset this information. Mr. Rising—Your are speaking of an act which merely applies to offenders in the church. The new act applies to further cases. After some further discussion as to the meaning of the act, Mr. Tillett said he would lease the law to the THE _ROAD 3IU.RDEB. THE LATE EXAMINATION AT TROWBRIDGE. The fruitless conclusion of the public examination at Trowbridge, from which so much was hoped, and which caused such intense excitement throughout the country, as well as in this neighbourhood, seems to have thrown a gloom over the locality from which the satisfaction derived from reading for the first time the evidence of Mr. and. Mrs. and the Misses Kent scarcely relieves it. While both the press and the public all over the country regard the decision of the magistrates as just, yet the failure to produce a great amount of evidence appears to occasion a deep and universal disappointment. The recognisances of Elizabeth Gough were taken in one sum of £lOO by Mr. Arthur John Spack man, of Blackheath, her uncle, who offered volun tarily to increase the amount to £5OO if he might be allowed. This, however, was deemed unneces sary. Another uncle of the prisoner was present, a respectable tradesman of Oxford, who likewise offered to be bail for any amount. Elizabeth Gough, when discharged from custody did not leave the station for some hours, but re turned to London by the last train at night. She expressed her thanks for the kindness she had re ceived from the police superintendent before leav ing. As was to be expected the intense excitement of those four days' trial has resulted in a reaction, and she is now, we learn, exceedingly unwell at her home at Isleworth. It will be remembered that at the close of the examination of Mrs. Kent, that lady, who had given her evidence in so clear and straigtforward a manner as to secure even from Mr. Ribton, the pri soner's counsel, a high compliment, volunteered a statement, which the bench, on the solicitation both of the prosecution and the defence, did not permit her to make. We learn that the statement she was about to make was this—that not having been permitted by the examining counsel to express herself on the point, she begged to be allowed to state most emphatically that her husband was not away from her side for a quarter of an hour during the whole night, and that the state of her health at the time enabled her to swear positively to this fact. Our readers will recollect also that at the close of the evidence of Mr. Parsons, surgeon, he handed a written communication to the bench, the contents of which were not allowed to transpire at the time. We find that his statement was, that having exa mined Mr. Kent subsequent to his having given evidence the previous day, he was opinion that his mind was so affected by intense excitement, and by persecution he had undergone, that no amount of reliance ought to be placed on any statements, which, under such circumstances, he might make. Subsequent to the examination on Thursday even ing some severe remarks were made by Sir John Awdry, whiCh time did not permit us to report, on the fact of Mr. Kent's having locked up the police on the night after the murder, and on his having refused, through his attorney, to allow a plan of the premises to be taken, which last step Sir John pro nounced to have been very ill-advised. Protesta tions were made at the time by Mr. Edlin and Mr. Dunn, and since we have ascertained the facts to be as follows :—On Mr. Slack's leaving Roadhill House after the examination, he requested to be allowed to return " for a purpose." Conceiving that he could only wish to revisit the premises for one of three purposes—viz., to have the deposition signed, to examine the nurse in the nursery, or to take a plan of the premises —Mr. Dunn advised that he be per mitted to do as he pleased, but Mrs. Kent was so indignant at the treatment she had received from Mr. Slack, and the surveillance under which she had been placed by him, that she vehemently op posed his being permitted again to enter the house. The point was submitted to Mr. Kent's counsel, Mr. Edlin, of Bristol, who advised that the permis sion should be withheld until Mr. Slack stated his object. The next heard of the matter was, Mr. Kent's being asked in court if he had ever refused the prosecution a correct plan of the premises Fearing that his general refusal, as above, might be so construed, he replied that he had, which was im mediately denied by Mr. Dunn. On Tuesday, how ever, a plan was taken, and put in in evidence, and Mr. Kent himself took one end of the measuring tape in assisting to make it. An instance of the eccentric and unjust character of the working of legal regulations is shown in this case. The prisoner not being committed for trial, not only do th e w it nesse s receive no expenses, but Mr. Cla r k, th e i n d e f a ti ga bl e magistrate's clerk, will receive not one f ar thi ng r emuneration for all his exertions, includi ng the copying of 84 folios of depositions. After the inquiry on Thursday the 24 witnesses were collected, some being fetched from Road for the purpose, an d th e ev idence read over to and signed by ea c h. Admiration is expressed on all hands at the iDi. 17IE POPE'S ALLOCUTION. The Pope's Allocution, which we lay before our readers this morning, is a prolonged shriek. It is with heartfelt compassion that we offer the follow ing observations for the consideration of the Holy Father, in the hope that they may tend to reconcile him to the altered position of the Papacy. When Lamennais 30 years ago called upon the Pope to cast off his temporalities, and throw himself into the arms of the Democracy of Europe, that was a challenge which it was perfectly open to the Pope, in consistency with the whole theory of the Roman Church, to decline. The Church of Christ is not a partisan. She does not concern herself with forms of government; she does not favour this or that faction; she knows no difference between democrat and aristocrat ; she has no political prejudices, and looks on men only as Cnristians and spiritual beings. To accept Lamenvais' challenge would have been to adopt a new and gratuitous policy, by which the Church would have handed herself over to one side, instead of embracing and comprehending all sides ; because Lamennais' idea was not simply that of the Pope giving up his temporalities, but giving up his alliance with crowned beads. That was the sin of the temporal Crown of the Papacy, that it gave its wearer monarchical and aristocratical sympathies, whereas he ought to have only democratical sympathies, and there fore the abandonment of that course on such a ground as this would have been a political act—a party act. The event has shown that it would not have succeeded. This or something like it was once the dream of Pio Nono himself. He did not give up his crown, indeed, but he announced himself a democrat, and was the momentary idol of the Ita lian democracy. Sanguine hearts even in this coun try were swelling at the prospect, and we were told that we should see what we should see—something that would astonish us soon—a new order of things, a new combination of parties and principles that the world had not yet witnessed. That was the talk of the day. But the combination was tried, and it would not work. The bubble burst, and the old regime returned. And so ended the democratical era of the Papacy, because such an idea was a flash idea, and nothing more. There was a swagger about it, an intellectual bravado, a defiance of old heads. It was one of those combinations which people create simply because they wish for it; it had a grand new look about it, surprising everybody and making everybody stare—old dogma modernising itself into a nineteenth century discovery, the very last invention of the age, and the newest pheno menon of the intellect. It was a glorious hit, a magnificent stroke of speculation, to effect this identity of the old and new, and to put the Papacy at the head of the intellect of the day as the repre sentative of march of mind. It came to nothing, however, because it was, in reality, a piece of fop pish, empty flash and speculative coxcombry, knocked off by the sellsprung inspiration of con ceited brains, and that transcendental kind of genius which, from the foundation of the world, has never thought for one moment of what was true, but only of what was " fine," and has there fore never been without some gaudy bubble. But the present call upon the Papacy, the chal lenge which lies in the present course of events, is a totally different one from that which was given it by the enthusiasts of thirty years ago. The call upon the Papacy now is not to throw up its tempo ralities, because they connect it with one political party instead of with another, and therefore to throw them up as a party act, but to give them up in plain obedience to a course of events ; nor does any one tell the Pope to throw himself upon the European democracy as a substitute for his temporal crown, but to throw himself upon his spiritual supremacy in exchange for it. The ideas of the two plans and lines of action are entirely different, and must not be confounded. The question now is, what is the Pope to do when it is quite clear that he is going to be deprived of one ground of his authority and left only another to go upon ? The answer is, that if the one which is still about to be left him is the early and original ground of the Papacy, whereas the other is of later growth and the creature of events—if the one is its essen tial ground, all that, according to its own theory, it wants, the other a mere accident, which it pro fesses itself quite able to do without, —its natural and manly course is to give up the accidental ap pendage which it s own communion gru d g es it, and throw itself at once upon its spiritual ities. Nobod y wishes the Papacy to try a new gr ound, and make a grand experiment, as Lamennai s did, but only to go back to an old ground, and assume the position which it professes to have had T a h n e te ß ce n d m en a t n ly ch to ur a e l n l accession of temporal powe r. is i only pi es . l u f n s d h e e r undergoing cannot t g overn trial vern of f all a the rec Christianallto rs t.wporri world which tha t belongs originalt o therhe theory, a t l lh that te e ri an o r hbeassaisidanids by that the is an impostor and her theory a lie, n o t by any proof from opponents, but by her own confession. To cling, then, with the desperation with which she is now doing to a confessedly merely accidental appendage to her spiritual power, a s if all were going with it, is to betray a practical dis trust in her own theory. The Church had neither crown nor sceptre, not a foot of land under her rule, not the corner of place in the politics of Europe; she did not appoint a a senator or a magistrate or a constable, ws Ambrose met Theodosius at the porch of tinhuenCiecanattheedt-. o a m nd th s e en a t lta h r im . d i aT ar the Roman Church, the loss of the triple crown will not, anddr a l repelled o at f c M an i l i a o h t f , r , with her triple crown on her head, do that now ? If she e y rate, deprive her of the an s d h nthat Theshe cannot the very events of this movementP ve r, Pope denounce- Victor Emmanuel a parricide, but he dares not deny as a robber and that robber and parricide the sacraments. That robbe r a nd parri cide enters the P o p e ' s own territories as one of the faithful ; he cannot be prevented f rom being a Christian by all the omnipotence of Rome. Is this a state of things to contend fur, as if the Roman Church would lose its power when its temporalities went ? Lose her power, indeed ! Wny, what great power has she to lo se if she cannot perform one spiritual Rot w 6. 4inst the very leader in the %to-ileac? -- .e off' when she has lost her plain, at altevents, that she it not to have th e 0 0 ton, that the first son of the Church, the 7 13.0114. Bch who by position is such, is o show that if the Pope would not Can tem p s o h r e a l b i t e i e m s ? 11 1. t w i 3 °r: innea;,im he can take one off the Pope. en talked of as the field on which the g sse uL a e s d car c ioe te m i s, i , e ii revival of a spi ritual Pap ac y i s t o b e tr i e d . This is, indeed, a % - '2 l by er too primitive prospect ; it is not pleasant to be reminded so pointedly of early be ginnings, and to have to face the perpetual memen toes of a yew! es love', reminding us of times, when neither Cardk lulls i'or temporal Popes nor evens s viritual Popes existed. This is for the Papacy to , i n ' 0 w itself: 'I Chico return to such very first rudi me„A's is disco urteou, -, ; it is a lesson of humility given at the i nest inopp,lrtime moment. We do not like t hi s examination into our emblazoned pedigree. Ther,c. itl, however, but one way of taking this chal lerige, 2 ,nd that is to come fov ward in the first t shrink from inst . vice , and accept it boldly. One must not, at on. Rome has en ou,g , h o for l any fate, ,l'all by one's own coniessl theory, and she must no theory . _ of her . meet . al wn back upon it. The beingput ol.llt, ewer ought to be strong fall any thing,spiritu atolhatrPc'e;. ady to respond to all trials, I arry her triumphant over all ot: 1 toeteles ovents, and e, and therefore she any repugnancm baek upon it ?-w-hryinilleass. ROBBERY Of £1,500 AT LIT.ERPOOZ - John Thomas fkicha rdson, who had been in custody for more than a fortnight upon the charge of stealing three £5OO Bt ink of England notes and £75 in gold, the proper% 7 of Mr. Henry Moore, a grocer, at Liverpool, lees i on Saturday brought before the beach of n tag strates sitting at the Court-house, at Liv,, , rpo 01, for final examination upon the charge. Mr. Toulmi n , solicits."' of Liverpool, appeared to conduct the prosecution ; aud Mr. Beard, solicitor, of Basinghall-street, atte n ded on behalf of the prisoner. It will be remembe re d that .the prosecutor, who was out of business, re s ided k it Sandstone-road, e was com- Liverpool ; and on the day the obb milted he and his wife went o u t, .w ing no one in left locked. e oom tha house, and a sum of nearly £2oo' ‘, vas r. The up in one of the drawers in his be reason for his having so large a sum optmoney by him was that Mr. Moore had made array ngements for the purchase ofsome property, and he had provided the money for that purpose, but oet'ing to the deeds necessary to carry out the sale being accidentally not prepared by the time specified, it became necessary that he should keep the money' by him for a day or two, and it was owing to this unfortunate circumstance that he sustained his severe loss. Upon the return of Mr. Moore and his wife in the evening they speedily discovered chat some one had entered the house during their absence, and that the whole of the money was gone. Information of the robbery was given to the police, and the notes were stopped at the Bank of England, but nothing was then heard of them until about a month ago, when one of the £5OO notes was paid into the Bank of England by a London firm, and it turned out that this note had been changed for gold and Prussian and French bank notes by a money-changer at Berne, in Swit zerland. Nothing further was heard of the matter until a few days afterwards, when the prisoner presented himself at the shop of Messrs. Mon tagu and Co., money-cha:agers, on Cornhill, and he produced nearly the whole of the Prussian bank Dotes that had been given a,,t Berne for the £5OO note, and wished to get them changed, but in con sequence of information they ha,ri received they sent for Sergeant Funnell, a detective officer of the City police, and he was given into cistody and ultimately was sent down to Liverpool to uadorgo examina tion upon the charge of having stolen the property in question. Upon the case being called on, Mr. Toulmin addressed the bench, and said that since the last examination the prosecutor had not been able to obtain any further evidence to convect the prisoner with the charge. It was supposed that evidence would have been forthcoming to prove that the prisoner had changed one of tke notes abroad, but the result of inquiries had led to the belief that this was not the case, and under th ese circumstances he should not ask for any further .re mand or detention of the prisoner. The chairmata having consulted with his brother magistrates said that after the statement of the solicitor for the pro— secution their only course was to order the prisoner to be discharged, and he was consequently at ones , set at liberty. The inquiry appeared to excite a. great deal of interest, the court being crowded dur ing the proceedings, and a good deal of commisera tion was expressed for Mr. Moore, to whom the loss of the money is very serious indeed. Upon the application of Mr. Beard, the magistrates ordered. that a bank note, some gold, and a large quantity of diamonds, that were found upon the prisoner when he was apprehended by Funnell, should. be delivered up to him. LOUNTRY M4RICB7'S. YORK-- OCT. 6. The supply of wheat was limited to-day, but the demand was fair, and currencies were le per qr over the previelte week. Of barley the show was scanty, at former rates. Oats firm. Beans is dearer. Wheat, red .62s to 64s 1 Oats.... 2Bs to 30s White do .64s to 688 I Beans 48s to 60s Barley .348 to 42s Peas ....—s to —s Malt, 68s to 70s per qr. ; rye, 40s per qr. ; flour, 47s to 50s per sack. LEICESTER—OcT. 6. There was a small supply of wheat to-day, a tolerable attendance, and prices as before. White wheat, 66. to 748 —red, 60s to 68s per 36 stone; a ready sal• for line barley, grinding, 36. to 38.; malting, 408 to 44a pet• qr. ; oats, 25. to 36s per 24 stone. Beans—old, 628 to 648, new 508 to 528 per 38 stone. Fine flour, 48s I Seconds, 44s I Thirds, —4 per 20 atone. CAMBRIDGE—Ocr. 6. tfewmhooavte,dbootffh aotldwaendton6eBw.: There was a thin show of a re n d Td , barley again ; malting, 3 , )s to 428; g r i n di ng, 304 to 384 , h s e w o r i e e t with to 584 t s a o B l e l e i r m p a e b i r t l e e 3 d s 6 a s u l e e p t ,: l w y e h . o i per 30 stone. Oats at 223 to 26s for new; old oats, 30s to —s. Beans in limited supply, and extreme rates—ne w, 40a to 498 ; old, 43. to 45s per 38 stone ; peas, 40s to —al per 36 stone. White cloverseed, 868 to 898; red, 46s to 60s,per qr. ; tares, 14s to 158 per bushel. NORWICH—Our. 6. To-day's market was fairly attended, and the wheat trade was slow. Good dry samples at former quotations. Other descriptions of grain had a moderate inquiry. White wheat. ..... 648 to 68s I Red wheat 54s ta' 65e Malting bar1ey....408 to 43s Chevalier barley 33 a to 35a Distilling do.. ....258 to 27s I Oats.. 30s to 32a Flour, 46s to 46s 6d per sack from the miller. , CT. 5. s. d. a. d. Do., new l5 0 to 16 6 Bere Rapeseed Oatmeal l5 0 to 17 6 Bakers' flour Indian corn DUBLIN• s. d. B. d. Wheat, white 33 0 to 36 0 Do., red 3l 0 to 33 G Do., new Barley . 18 0 to 24 0 Oats Do., black l4 0 to 15 0 Pill■ aid medicine invariably ag eLironaddodrvissasnatotheEy and expense may be avoided by perilous ag gravate and leTs E p l e i r E pet r u l ate diseases ; their annoyance, dis appoints►ent, a s. BarrY, n s g trert, ly iT t . h , i n rece ive gratis and free by post th e "IwvAtma' Oww w G ;,, or Natural Restorer, Without medicine or ex perfect digestion, strong nerves, sound lungs, and r P e e f il re se ;:i n i g sleep, to the most enfeebled, insuring the removal in indifferent Eig.,he7a7l,thß Regent-street, of indigestion (dyspepsia), e,onstipation, liver complaints, nausea, epilepsy, paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitation, 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, palls, tation, heartburn, headache, despondency, cramps, sinsial sinking, Its. renchitis,—" Unquestionably the safest Quids to health." B I R T:II S. r , Esq BROMLEY. —On th e Gth inst., at 9, Portugal-street, May.. fair, the wif e c f Thomas Bomley, o f & daughter. HARCOURT.—On the 6th inst., at 6, Pont-street, Mrs. WW. G. Vern on H arcourt, of a son . LEY. —On the sth inst., at 2A. Talbot-villas, IVestbourite. park, th e w i fe of Wm. Ley, Esq., of twin sons. SMITIL—On the 2d inst., at 14, Ashiql"F e, . the wife of Archibald Smith, Esq., of Luicol n barna_ ter - at-law, of a son. MARRIAGE S. HtsLor —CIRISTIE.—On the 4th inst., at the p al i sh church, Eastbourne, Sussex, Thomas Hislop, Esq of Brixton-hill, to Jane, daughter of the late Alexander Christie, Esq., of Rothes, N.B. NEWTON—BILLINa.—On the 6th inst., at St. George's, Hanover-square, Harry Robert Newton, Esq., only sur viving son of Sir Wm. J. Newton, of Argyle. street, to Edith Nicola, the youngest daughter of Dr. Billing, of Grosvenor-gate, Hyde-park. DUATHS. Athelstan Cornish, vic ar o f t h e parish CORN e I s H .—On the 3 d i nst., at the Vi carage, Old Winds or , g v} NGTO N.—On the 4th inst., at his res id ence, No. 1, iGloucester-terrace, Regent's-park, Wm. E verington, aged 45. E . Arthur Esq., - satEu.—On the sth inst., at Grosvenor -gate, Park-lane, I 'Louisa Catherine, wife of Sir John William Fisher. ' county of GOILDON''.—On 3d inst., at 1, Duke-street, Bath, Ad.. miral Gordon, aged 79. s p ritwoE7L , 7: "O nn the l l e s t t i i n n s s t t . . , , at at ße E te n h h t a o m n u e dover, Captain W. J. Prowse, Chester, George Sewell, Esq., aged 70, R.N:, agi ß ieo r 7 8 ,9 e: near An. LONDON : Printed and Published by MIJRDO YOUNCi o f No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Jfka, No. 112 & ra id, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the eoni t ty 41 , giddledga, M9Adsy, 9stOor 8, 1860. Asc=ii i ~:r