The Sun. — London, England, 1860-03-22 00:00:00

TBE EXPORT DUTY ON FOREIGN RAGAS.: A meeting of paper manufacturers was held yes terday at the King's Arms Tavern, New Palace yard, for the purpose of considering what course should be adopted in consequence of the expected imposition of a heavy import duty upon the expor tation of: rags from France. Mr. Joynson took the chair, e.nd was supported by upwards of 40 of the principal paper manufacturers of this country. The CHAIRMAN opened the proceedings by calling upon Mr. A. Kintrea to read the notice calling the meeting and stating the steps which the committee appointed at a former meeting had taken. He then referred to Mr. Puller's motion for the retention of a id. duty upon foreign paper if free trade in the raw material was not allowed. It appeared now that the French Government intended to place an export duty of from £8 to £lO a ton upon the raw material, -which would be from 60 to 100 per cent. upon the value of the article, and practically would be a pro hibitory duty. (Hear.) Unless the proposition about to be submitted to the House of Commons by Mr. Puller should be adopted, the position of the paper manufacturers of this country would be one of per fect ruin, and the printing and writing paper trades would be annihilated. The committee had can vassed about 400 members of Parliament upon the subject, and entertained a firm belief that there would be a majority in favour of Mr. Puller's mo tion. That their demand was a just one no one who considered the facts could doubt. If the United States were to impose an export duty of £lO a ton upon cotton, the manufacturers of Lancashire would soon be in arms, and yet that would only be a simi lar course to that proposed to be taken in respect of the raw material of paper. That export of the raw material was to be taxed 100 per cent, even in countries whence they could export it, while in other countries the export was wholly prohibited. That was not an equitable arrangement, nor one that ought to be sanctioned by the Legislature of this country. (Hear, hear.) Mr. WRIGLEY, of Manchester, in moving the first resolution, said he had always been a thorough Free-trader, but he meant free trade based upon just principles. (Hear, hear.) He had no objec tion to free trade in paper upon the same principles as were applied to other trades, but, as there was no rule without exception, so he thought the paper trade was peculiar. There was no similarity or ana logy between the raw material of paper and the raw material of any other manufacture. In the case of all other articles of manufacture and consumption the producer of the raw material had a motive for extending its production, and as long as the manu facturer was willing to pay a price bringing a profit he might calculate upon an almost illimitable supply of raw material. But the ordinary rules of demand and supply did not apply to the raw material of paper, as the home supply could not be greatly in creased. He had been delighted to read Lord J. Russell's statement that the exportation of rags was to be permitted from France, but he had not been surprised to hear of the subsequent change of policy. He could understand that the French Em peror would not send French rags to England, there to be bought up for the American market ; and -when French manufactured paper was sent here it had to meet the competition of German paper manu factured where the exportation of the raw material was practicallf . probibited. The most devoted friends of free trade must admit that there was a great dis tinction between the raw material of paper and all other articles. He was willing to meet the competi tion of the world, but let him have all the markets of the world open to him for his supply of raw ma terial, as the cotton manufacturer, the silk manufac turer, and all others had. (Hear, hear.) Unless that was done the result would be utter destruction to all small factories, and what trade remained in this country would be centred in the few large establish ments like his own, which would be content with a fractional profit on their production. What was there to prevent this country being supplied with paper from the Continent? Would any one say that the manufacturers of this country could make paper any cheaper after the duty was removed than they did now? He knew of nothing that would enable him to make paper at 1-16th part of a penny less per pound than it cost him at present. (Hear, hear.) It was pardonable in men who, like the Chancellor of the Exchequer, were ignorant of the practical business of papermaking, talking about new fabrics being accessible ; but the fact was, as all present knew, that it was a mere question of what would pay, and he affirmed that in no instance had any one ever suggested anything which could be at all compared with rags as a material for paper making. (Hear, hear.) The supply of that mate rial was not, as in the case of other materials, en hanced by an increased demand, for no man would cast off his shirt any sooner because he could get 2d. per lb. instead of ld. (Hear, hear.) The supply from other sources was equally inelastic. A cotton manufacturer had told him that the paper manu facturers must not expect to get any increased sup ply from him, as he endeavoured to make calico, and not " waste ;" and, in fact, although that gen tleman had enlarged his mills to double or triple their former extent, yet the supply of" waste" from them only amounted to the quantity he (Mr. Wrig ley) received from them 15 years ago. (Hear.) He hoped the meeting would unanimously agree to the following resolution:— "That this meeting hears with great astonishment and regret that, instead of the promised removal of the prohibi tion on the export of French rags and other paper-making materials it is proposed by the French Government to levy an export duty of from £8 to £lO per ton, being from 50 to 100 per cent. on their value, which is, in fact, merely to re tain the prohibition under a new form." Mr. Deputy PEWTRESS seconded the resolution, and observed it-would be impossible for the paper makers of this country, if debarred from access to foreign markets for raw material, to compete with foreign manufacturers, who got the raw material at a less price and paid lower wages, (Hear, hear.) There was another point, that since the free expor tation of coal had been allowed the price of the article had risen, thus' placing the British manu facturer in a still more disadvantageous position. (Hear, hear.) He could not believe that the Legis lature of this country would commit an act of in justice which would depreciate the property and machinery of all present, and tend to annihilate their trade. With regard to other substances, as substitutes for rags, he could only say that he was once persuaded to try an article that could be procured for nothing—at only the expense of carting—but after a fortnight's trial he found that 1001 b. of material only produced 281 b. of paper, and that at a cost of ls. 6d. per lb. (Hear, and a laugh.) The waste and the expense of reducing other materials than rags were so enormous as to prevent their profitable employment, and thus their sole dependence was upon rags ; and if they could not obtain rags at a fair and reasonable price, they could not compete with foreigners. Mr. Ald. BALDWIN, of Birmingham, did not take so gloomy a view of the prospects of the trade as the previous speaker. He had no fear of French competition, and thought an ample supply of rags could be found at home if proper steps were taken to secure it. At present a large proportion of the rags in this country never found its way to the paper • mill, as, having once canvassed 100 houses, he found that only in 40 were the rags saved ; in the remainder the rags were burnt or wasted. A little extra price would always extend the supply, He warned the meeting of the position they would stand in towards the public if they persisted in their agitation. It would be said that papermakers were freetrad.ers in all articles but those they dealt in. The treaty with France was passed, and the public would not wish to see its provisions interfered with for the benefit of a class. Mr. NORRIS, M.P., denied that the treaty with France had anything to do with the repeal of the paper duty. All that appeared in the treaty was that French paperhangings should come in at the same rate of duty as our own paid. At the same time that Mr. Cobden was manipulating the treaty with the French Government the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. M. Gibson resolved, unknown to him, to propose a repeal of the paper duties. If Mr. Cobden had known that, he would certainly have said to the French Government, " We will let in your paper free, but you must give us a free ac cess to your rag-market. (Hear.) The difficulty had arisen from the grievous mistake committed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in allowing Mr. Cob den to negotiate in the dark. He (Mr. N.) fully in dorsed the statement of Mr. Wrigley that all other fibres were valueless for paper-making as compared with rags ; and as to what the public might say, he believed that the public would esteem them the more for looking closely after the interests of their home trade and industry. Mr. WRIGLEY suggested that Mr. Baldwin might look with less apprehension upon the future condi tion of his trade than others did from the reason that the low class paper, which was the chief ma nufacture of that gentleman, would be compara tively little affected by the new state of things. With respect to their position before the public, he thought there could be little ground for any fear lest their motives might be misinterpreted, but he did not believe that the public were so much interested in the question as was supposed. Those who would be benefitted were the proprietors of newspapers and the publishers of books ; the readers of penny newspapers and books would not get a fraction of the remitted duty into their pockets. (Hear, hear.) He affirmed that if no alteration were made in the proposed arrangement the Government would be deliberately sacrificing one section of the trading community to another section. (Hear, hear.) The resolution was then put and carried with only one dissentient. Mr. T. H. SAUNDERS proposed the second reso lution : "That, inasmuch as this retention of the prohibition cn the part of France renders less likely than over the removal by other countries of their restrictions on the export of their rags, this meeting considers that the British paper manu facturers are entitled to Call upon the Government and the House of Commons to retain, for the present, the existing Customs' duty of id. per lb. on foreign paper until we are allowed by foreign countries free trade in the .r papermak ing materials." He observed the justice of their case w as generally admitted, and he believed that when the Govern ment had pointed out to them the injustice that would be perpetrated, they had endeavoured to pre vent it in negotiating with foreign countries. He did not blame the French Emperor for what he had done; it was his duty to look after the interests of the French manufacturers, but it was the duty of our Government to look after them (the paper makers of this country.) He was afraid that Mr. Baldwin knew little about rags, inasmuch as he only made the cheaper sorts of paper. Mr. PIRTE, of Aberdeen, seconded the resolution, which he held not to be inimical to the principles of free trade. (Hear, hear.) He did not fear fo reign competition fairly conducted, but an export of £8 or L 9 a ton on rags would operate as a bounty of 20 per cent. upon some kinds of paper manufac -1 tured abroad. He had just returned from Germany, and had visited some of the paper mills there, which were upon as large a scale as any in this country. He found the manufacturers there entertained great expectations of their prospects when the budget was carried. (Hear.) Those manufacturers hoped for an increased demand in England, knowing that the Zoll'rerein could not, at least for some years, take off any duty which operated in their favour. It was true that the English public might to some extent obtain an immediate benefit, and that some 12 or 15 years hence the trade would equalise itself, but in the meantime the British papermakers would be sacrificed. (Hear, hear.) He knew, from personal inquiry, that rags which cost here £3O per ton could be obtained in Germany, and also, he believed, in France, for about £l6. He would not say that all our mills would be shut up if the measure passed in its present shape, but they would lose much of the legitimate profits they were entitled to receive. The flax, silk, and cotton manufacturers had nothing to fear from free im ports, because they had free acegss to the markets of the world for raw materials ; but it was far different with the paper manufacturer. This resolution was also carried with one dissen. ticalt. Mr. EVANS moved and Mr. MACDONNELL, of Dublin, seconded a resolution to the effect that a memorial be presented to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the seconder observing that, having tried the manufacture of straw paper, he had found the results very unsatisfactory, and was making arrangements for discontinuingit. The resolution was agreed to, and after the usual complimentary vote to the chairman the meeting broke up. THE PAPER TRADE. The impending abolition of the Paper Duty has produced one of the most interesting controversies ever raised in this country upon a question of a - n fa ctur e or trade. We have been so accustomed to hear from all professions in turn their peculiar claims to protection or encouragement that we can no longer listen without suspicion to pleas of this kind ; but it must, we think, be confessed that the papermakers have done as much to establish the exceptional character of their calling as could be done by any:manufacturers in a country like ours. That we actually share all their misgivings in the matter is more than we can say, but probably few persons ever dreamt of the anomalies which the break-up of the old system would disclose. The Excise duty on paper has been a nuisance, as all such duties must be. It was also indirectly a tax upon knowledge, for it was a tax upon the vehicle by which knowledge is conveyed. So far, therefore, the arguments against its retention were well-founded, but it does not appear that the duty operated to the discouragement of the manufacture, or to the annoyance of the trade. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, who recently felt themselves called upon to publish their views of the case, as serted distinctly that the actual production of paper was in no degree impeded by the Excise regulations, which, in this single instance, were enforced with the slightest possible inconvenience to the manu facturer. The duty represented, in fact, a tax upon the public which the manufacturers collected, and it is now alleged that they derived a certain positive advantage from the transaction. In making their payments to the Exchequer they were allowed what was virtually 13 weeks' credit, and this credit was equivalent to a certain proportion of capital available for their business. We have seen it stated, indeed, that the system offered a direct in ducement to people of moderate means to embark in a trade so conveniently regulated, and that even the supply of paper itself was increased by the effect of the same arrangements. As the manufac turer, at the expiration of his term of credit, could often only provide for his engagements to the Ex cise-officer by producing more paper on which a fresh credit could be obtained, he was constantly stimulated to the work of production, even irrespec tively of the market demand ; and as the paper dealers, again, were fully cognizant of these periods of pressure, they availed themselves of the oppor tunity to put the screw on the paper-makers, and get the article at a low price for distribution to the consumer. Such are some of the secrets of the trade as now revealed, but the actual conditions of the manufacture are more curious still. In the case of all other articles there is a recipro city of interest between the producer and the manu facturer of the raw material which acts as an infal lible guarantee against any failure of supply. If more calico, for instance, is wanted, more cotton is grown ; if more bread is consumed, more land is planted with wheat; but the raw material of paper is not " produced" in any such fashion. Rags can neither be grown nor sown; they can only be col lected, and the supply in this single instance is not only not governed by the demand, but is utterly and totally unconnected with it. If the manufacture of paper were suddenly to cease to-morrow morning, there would be just as many rags forthcoming as before ; the only difference would be that, as they would not be saleable, it would be worth nobody's while to collect them. In the same way, if file de mand for paper were suddenly doubled, the supply of rags would not be increased except by such a margin as the extraordinary zeal of the collectors might create. The " production," in short, of the raw material is in this case involuntary. To a cer tain extent it cannot be avoided, and beyond a cer tain extent it cannot be increased. It will not answer anybody's purpose to make rags ; for, though they are worth something, they are not worth so much as the material out of which they are made. When a piece of linen or cotton is worn out it will do to make paper with, but, as it will serve a still better purpose in its original state,people naturally endeavour to make it wear as long as possible, or, in other words, to retard the period at which it becomes a rag and is available for the papermill. The production of rags, therefore, can not be stimulated, nor can it be increased by any measure except the prevention of waste. But cannot some other material be found ? Un luckily, the conditions of the case are almost as dif ficult at this point as at that last described. Any raw material possessing the quality of fibre requisite for the manufacture of good paper would be avail able also for the manufacture of those articles out of which good paper is now made, and the latter, as a matter of eourse, would be the more profitable ap plication of the two. The other day, for instance, a plant was found nearly as fit for these purposes as hemp itself. It would make good paper, but it would also make good ropes, and so it was turned into ropes, and will not come to the papermill till it has served another purpose first. Again, if the desired material could be discovered, it would have to compete in the market with rags--a material equivalent, as we have shown, to a mere ref use , produced insensibly and without any expense what ever. From these curious conditions it will be easy to comprehend the arguments now cu, a certainrrentandsuthpe negotiations now pending. Every country pos sesses, in its natural supply of rags ply of the raw material of paper. The amount of the supply depends on the number and habits of th e population ; the demand for it is governed by the intelligence of the community, the freedom of the press, and other circumstances connected with the diffusion of knowledge. In this country and the United States the demand has long overtaken the supply ; in many States of the Continent the sup ply is more than equal to the demand. There, accordingly, rags are cheap, while they are dear in England, and still:dearer in America. Ame rica, therefore, comes to England to buy them, but England cannot resort for the same purpose to the Continent, inasmuch as the ports of the Continent are closed against such exports. Hence arise the arguments of our paper makers, as expressed by one of the most eminent of them in another portion of our columns. The natural wish of all nations is to retain the office of manufacturing, or, in other words, to obtain cheap supplies of the raw material and the largest pos sible field for trade in the finished article. France would be only too glad to send us paper, but not to send us rags; and if she sent us rags and paper to gether she would still, says Mr. Wrigley, be under. sold in our markets by other countries, which, re taining all their own rags, and therefore getting a cheaper material, could supply us with paper cheaper than France. The upshot of the whole de mand is, th a t i mport d ut i es upon paper and export duties upon rags should be made to balance each other ; otherwise the privilege and profit of manu facturing paper for the world's market will belong IHE - SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EV.ENING, MARCH 22, 1860, to that country which is shrewd enough to take everything and give nothing. The Americans buy our rags over our heads, but keep an import duty of 30 per cent. on our manufactured paper ; in other words, they make paper as cheap as possible in the United States, provided only it be of home manu facture. If we receive paper duty free from any country which will not give us rags free of duty, we give that country an advantage in our market which the selfishness of its policy does not deserve. This is the argument of the papermakers. As re gards the truly exceptional character of the raw material, we fully admit its validity, but our mann facturers do themselves less than justice when they shut the resources of their own skill and energy so completely out of the account, For our own part, we can see no likelihood of French paper, of the quality we require, coming into competition with that of English manufacture. :Were the case other wise, French rags would speedily rise in price to a level with English, and the chief cause of alarm to our papermakers would cease.—Times. THE REFORM BILL. DEPUTATION TO LORD JOHN RUSSELL. Yesterday an influential deputation from the Tower Hamlets Reform Association had an inter view with Lord Russell at the Foreign-office, with a view of inducing his lordship to amend the Reform Bill in committee, with special reference to an in crease of the representation of the Tower Hamlets. Mr. BUTLER, M.P., in introducing the deputa tion, said they waited on his lordship with the view of bringing under his notice the case of the Tower Hamlets with reference to the Reform Bill. On the morning after the introduction of that bill they had had a meeting of the inhabitants of the borough, which was very numerously attended, and there had been no difference of opinion whatever With regard to that part of the measure which gave to Birmingham, Leeds, and other towns increased re presentation, and left the Tower Hamlets without any addition. There had been very great disap pointment experienced in that borough in conse l i - quence, and he would leave it to the sense of justice of his lordship, who had done so much for civil and religious liberty, and for the extension of political representation, to do his best to free them from the exceptional position in which they stood. He could not understand the principle upon which it was proposed to distribute the seats. The property in the Tower Hamlets was rated at between two and three millions, and if the vastness of their shipping interests and the extent of the other inte rests of the borough were considered, he could not understand the plan on which the Government had acted in framing the bill. There were great inte rests in the Tower Hamlets. He might instance the shipbuilding interest, which employed 12,000 skilled artisans—men of great intelligence; it was important that that interest should be considered. They received goods from all parts of the world, and there was the silk trade, which was, unfor tunately, not so good at present, in which 30,000 persons were employed. There was an idea abroad that the Tower Hamlets was a poverty-stricken district, and not entitled to the benefits of increased representation in the same manner as Birmingham, Leeds, and other manufacturing towns. They had a larger share of houses rated at £2O and up wards than any other metropolitan borough, and more than Birmingham and Leeds put together, and the population of those two places, which were to have six members, was not so large as that of the Tower Hamlets; and, in point of education, he considered the Tower Hamlets at least equal, if not superior, to those towns. He ventured to hope that when the committee now sitting on bribery had com pleted their reports, if certain towns were denuded of two members, one of them might be given to the '1 ower Hamlets. If he spoke strongly it was with the greatest respect to his lordship, feeling conscious of the debt of gratitude this great city owed to him, and that if the bill passed in its present form it would be not so much his lordship's desire as that it was thrust upon him by his colleagues. Lord J. RUSSELL said he was prepared to admit everything that had been said; but the question was what was the best way of amending the representa tion as a whole ? He remembered when the repre sentation was fixed at two for Marylebone, four for the City, two for Westminster, and two for South wark. It was considered and proposed to add eight to this number, which might be said fairly to repre sent the metropolis, and there was no part of the Reform Bill which excited so much doubt and oppo sition. The representation was not founded on the exact population or wealth of constituencies, but on general considerations. With regard to the metro polis he thought that 10 members who resided in the metropolis were worth in point of attention and activity 15 or 20 of those who come from other parts of the country, and whose private business, fre quently requiring their presence elsewhere, did not allow them to devote so much time to their Parlia mentary duties. Members came from Liverpool Lo represent the shipping interest, and were frequently absent, whereas the metropolitan members were continually there. He thought the metropolis was very well represented, if not so large numerically. It was proposed to give a member to Birkenhead, as the interests of that place could not be properly represented by the members for Cheshire. Their claim was, however, a matter for fair consideration, and every point should be brought before the Cabi net. In conclusion, his :lordship thought that no plan which was more extensive or went further than the measure proposed, could be carried through Parliament. The deputation then withdrew. tion from the Court, Mr. Barrow kiaolly consented to act in her behalf. Sergeant Ballantine opened the case for the pro secution in a very clear and temperate r nanner. It appeared that the prisoner was a persm a in humble circumstances, and that she was legally chargeable to the Petworth Union, and on the 17th of Novem ber last year she was admitted into the - workhouse with the child in question, which was then about two months old. She was at this time in a very miserable and dirty condition, and. very soon after her admission to the workhouse she was supplied with a preparation of mercury, :known as white precipitate, mixed with lard, for the purpose of cleansing her head, and this pr, eparation, it ap peared, was used twice by her, an ,d the remainder, which, according to the evidenoe, consisted of about the quantity of the size of a walnut, was placed in a window-frame in one of the wards of the workhouse. The child appeare d to be tolerably healthy when it came into the workhouse, and nothing was observed to be the matter with it, ex cept the ordinary ailments to IN/Arial children of tender age are subject. Nothin.g particular oc curred until the 20th of December,. and on the morn ing of that day the child appeared to be in good health. In the course of the afternoon the prisoner asked one of the paupers, who was employed as a sort of portress, to buy her a penny worth of white precipitate powder, and she did so and gave it to the prisoner, the quantity consisting of about 20 grains, the paper in which it was wrapped up hav ing upon it in large letters the word " poison." There was no doubt, from the use that had formerly been made of the powder, that the prisoner was perfectly well aware of its deadly character, and it was one of the circumstances strongly pressed against her that she had no necessity to buy such an ingredient, as she could have obtained any quantity that IN as required by applying to the medical officer of the workhouse. In the course of the evening of the same day that the prisoner had obtained the white precipitate under the circumstances stated, some arrowroot was ad ministered to the child by the prisoner, and imme diately after taking . it he was very sick, and during the night the poor infant was heard to make several peculiar shrieks as though it was in great agony. On the following morning the child was found to he dreadfully ill, and, according to the evidence of some of the witnesses, it had become " quite an old man" during the night, and its appearance had un dergone the most extraordinary change. It con tinued sinking during the whole of that day, and expired about two o'clock on the following morn ing. It would seem that the circumstances attend ing the death were such as to immediately create suspicion in the minds of the authorities of the union, and the prisoner was told by Mrs. Hobbs, the matron of the workhouse, that the child could not be buried without further inquiry, as there was a strong suspicion that she given it something wrong. The prisoner replied that she had heard something of the same sort, and she was very glad the child was going to be opened, as she had not given it anything. The matron then asked her what she had done with the precipitate powder that had been purchased for her, and she at first said that she had rubbed it into her head as it was. She was told that if she had done this, she must have injured herself very much ; and the prisoner then said that she had mixed it with the portion that was left of that which had been originally supplied to her; and she made one or two other contradictory statements with regard to the manner in which she had disposed of the poisonous ingre dient. Upon a post mortem examination of the deceased child by Mr. Shout and Mr. Mims, the medical officers of the union, the cause of death was discovered to be violent inflammation of the small intestines, and there were unmistakeable in dications of the exhibition of some violent irritant, and the stomach and other portions of the body were sent to Dr. Taylor, the eminent lecturer and professor of chemistry, for analysis, and the result was that this gentleman discovered the presence of white precipitate in the gullet and other parts of the body to the extent of two grains. Dr. Miller, of King's College Hospital, also made an indepen dent examination of other portions of the body of the deceased infant, and he came to the same con clusion with regard to the cause of death as Dr. Taylor; and Dr. Pavey, of Guy's Hospital, gave evidence to the same effect. Mr. Barrow, at the close of the case for the pro secution, made a very eloquent address to the jury on behalf of the prisoner. He said he was sure the jury would believe him when he statedlthat he rose to address them with,feelings of the very deepest anxiety, for although the prisoner was not upon her trial for wilful murder, yet the crime of which she was accused was still a capital one, and the effect of a verdict of guilty might be to consign the wretched girl now standing before them to the scaffold. The charge against the prisoner was that she had wilfully and deliberately administered to her child a quantity of deadly poison, and that she did ao with the intention of destroying its life, and unless both those points were clearly made out by the evidence they would not be justified in finding her guilty. After the medical evidence, he said he did not think he should be justified in attempting to deny that poisonous matter had been found in the body of the deceased child, and that this poison was administered by some person or other, but he said he should cont that the evidence was by no means conclusive to show that this poison was ad ministered by the prisoner, or that, even if it had been, it was given accidentally. The learned coun sel then proceeded to urge the absence of evidence to show that the prisoner entertained any unkind feeling towards this poor child, and to the absence of any motive for the commission of such a dread ful crime, and he concluded by earnestly entreating the jury to give the prisoner the benefit of any doubt that might be created in their minds, and say that she was not guilty of the very heinous offence alleged against her. - The learned Judge, on summing up, explained to the jury that the learned counsel who conducted the proseeution, having, in the exercise of his dis cretion, thought it advisable not to proceed with the charge of wilful murder, the question they had to decide was whether the evidence established be yond any reasonable doubt that the prisoner had knowingly administered poison to her child with the intention of destroying life, and if so, they would be bound to find her guilty. He at the same time said he thought it right to inform them that although the learned counsel for the prisoner had correctly told them that the offence that was now the subject of inquiry was still a capital one, yet the capital punishment was in a great many cases mitigated, and the result of a conviction was very different to that involved by a conviction for wilful murder, in which case the law almost inva riably claimed the life of the prisoner in return for the life she had destroyed. His lordship then pro ceeded to call the attention of the jury to the evidence that had been adduced, commenting upon all the material portions of it as he proceeded. The jury retired to consider their verdict, and after being absent about a quarter of an hour they again came into court, and returned a verdict of guilty. The prisoner was then asked in the usual form whether she had anything to urge why judgment of death should not be recorded against her, and she made no reply. The learned Judge then addressed her, and said that she stood convicted upon perfectly clear evi dence of a crime of the most aggravated character. He had no desire to add to the misery she was enduring at that moment, and he should say no more than that he did not intend the law should take its course, and that he considered justice would be satisfied by his merely ordering judgment of death to be recorded against her. A verdict of not guilty was then taken upon the charge of wilful murder, and the prisoner, who cried bitterly, and exhibited the deepest anguish during the trial, was then removed from the bar. MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—DERBY, March 21. (Before Mr. Justice Willes and a Special Jury.) WEST V. WILSON. Mr. Boden and Mr. Lushington appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Merew ether and Mr. Wills for the defendant. This was an action brought by the plaintiff to re cover damages for a breach of promise of marriage made by the defendant. The plaintiff was the daughter of a farmer at Cresswell, and had when 12 years of age been left an orphan with a brother, who succeeded his father in the farm, and with whom she continued to live. In 1853 the defendant came, with his mother and brother, to occupy an adjoining farm at Frithwood. An intimacy ensued between the two families, and a courtship between the plaintiff and defendant, which in 1855 resulted in an engagement. On the ground of their approaching marriage the defen dant made applications to the chief land agent of the neighbourhood for leases of various farms. A series of letters written by the defendant at inter vals, when either of the parties were absent from home during the years from 1855 to 1857, were pro duced and read, and these sufficiently showed the nature of the intimacy and relations between them. At Martinmas, 1858, the plaintiff's brother removed to another residence four miles from Cresswell, leaving the house there is her charge. The defer dant after this time continued to visit the plaintiff on the same terms, and was generally in the house once or twice a-day. In July, 1859, the plaintiff appeared to be in the famityway, and upon her brother inquiring of the defendant what he intended to do, he refused to marry her, alleging that he did not believe the child to be his, although up to that time he had never "seen nothing amiss by her." Under these circumstances the action was brought. The farm occupied by the defendant, his mother, I and brother was one of 280 acres, and very fairly stocked. The only plea of the defendant was a denial of his promise, but this was abandoned at the commencement of the case, and his counsel con fined himself to addressing the jury in reduction of the damages, which were laid at £2,000. The learned Judge said that, as the defendant had not pleaded that which would have been an answer to the action—viz., that he was not the father of the child born of the plaintiff in October, 1859, it must be taken that he was its father, and the only question was as to the amount of damages. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, award ing her as damages £2OO. The Lord Chief Baron, with a special jury, re sumed the trial of " Cresswell and Jackson," which occupied the court until 5 o'clock, when the jury retired to consider their verdict. OXFORD CIRCUIT.—SIIREWSBURY, March 2 CIVIL COURT. (Before Mr. Baron Bramwell.) Samuel Brown and William Jeffreys surrendered to take their trial upon a charge that they, with a third man who was not in custody, being armed with a gun and bludgeon, entered certain enclosed land at Uffington, on the night of the sth of Jan., 1860, for the purpose of taking game there. Mr. Cook Evans and Mr. Chance appeared for the prosecution ' • Mr. J. J. Powell defended Brown, and Mr. A. Hill defended Jeffreys. It appeared from the evidence of Thomas Tom kins, the head gamekeeper of Lady Brinckman, of Sundorne-castle, that on Thursday night, the sth of Jan. last, he was out with his assistant, a man named Sharp, watching the game. They heard shots fired in the direction of a wood at High Eveall, and having roused up three watchers, they all went out on the road which leads from Eveall to Shrewsbury, and lay concealed for several hours behind a hedge. About 3or 4 o'clock in the morn ing the firing had ceased, and soon afterwards three men came down the road, and passed about six yards from where the keepers were. Sharp, who had known Brown and Jeffreys from their boy hood, immediately recognised them. The men passed on a few yards and went into a field. Jef• freys took a net out of his pocket and laid it across the gateway, and all three stood a few yards off in the field while two dogs were beating it. The keepers then rushed out of their hiding-place and the three men ran off, Jeffreys having first put the net in his pocket. The keepers followed them on the, road and soon overtook them, and asked what au thority they had to go into the field. Jeffreys struck Sharp a stunning blow on the head with a bludgeon, and knocked him down. Brown had a double barrelled gun, which he cocked and pointed at the head keeper, telling him to stand back or he would blow his brains out. By this time Jones, one of the watchers, had got the third man down, and Brown then went up to him, and pointing the gun at him threatened to blow his brains out unless he let the man go. Sharp said he knew all the lot, and told Jones to loose the man, which he accordingly did, and all the party walked together several hundred yards on the road to Shrewsbury. Tomkins, Sharp, and Jones positively swore to the identity of both the prisoners, and said it was a bright moonlight night, the moon being near the full. The evidence of Tomkins was much shaken by his admission that he had once made a statement as to the identity of a poacher which was shown to be incorrect, and had afterwards endeavoured to excuse himself by saying that he had not sworn to the party, because when the book was given to him he did not kiss it. Sharp's evidence was not at all shaken, and he said he had known the two prisoners for years, and had seen them together at 6 o'clock in the morning about three weeks previously. The prisoner Jef freys was taken into custody on the Saturday after, at the house of a man named Rutter, at Wem Northwood, and he then said to the policeman that he had left Shrewsbury on Thursday evening and had come to Rutter's at six o'clock on Friday morn ing. Brown was taken into custody a few weeks afterwards, and then admitted to the police that he was on the road, but denied entering the field. Mr. Powell addressed the jury in support of this defence. Mr. Hill then addressed the jury for Jeffreys, and called several witnesses to prove an alibi. They traced the prisoner by the railway to the house of a poacher at Wcm, 10 miles from the place in ques tion, where he had tea, and left it about 12 on the Thursday night; Rutter, who was a poacher and net-mender, said the prisoner came to his house five miles from Wem, at a little after two o'clock on Friday morning, aid in this he was confirmed by his brother and brother's wife. There were several contradictions in their evidence. Mr. Baron Bramwell analysed and summed up the evidence with great care and minuteness, and the jury, without hesitation, found both prisoners guilty. Brown then said Jeffreys was not with him. His lordship, in passing sentence, said it was well for Brown that he had not used his gun, though invited by Jeffreys to do so. In considera tion of his using no violence his sentence would be only six months' imprisonment, with hard labour. But as to Jeffreys, his was a bad case, for he had struck the keeper a blow which had stunned him, and his sentence was five years' penal servitude. As soon as sentence was passed on Jeffreys, a gentleman who was on the bench so far forgot himself as to applaud the sentence by knocking on the ground with his walking stick. Mr. Baron Bramwell, with great warmth, con demned the conduct of the gentleman in question, and said he was beyond measure surprised. His lordship asked the offender, who seemed quite ashamed of himself, whether he would like the people at the other end of the court, who probably sympathised with the prisoner, to imitate such conduct. Thereupon, somebody at the other end of the court, cried " Hear, hear," which called forth a second rebuke from the learned judge. WESTERN CIRCUIT.—TAUNTON, March 21. NISI PRIUS COURT. (Before Mr. Baron Channell.) During the trial of a case the Court adjourned for a quarter of an hour, and the jury were desired to return within that time. After the Judge had taken his seat one juryman was missing ; his name was called, and messengers were sent after him, but he could not be found. At length some one stated that the chief constable had said he could find him in five minutes. Upon this the chief con stable was called, and he stated that what he had said was that he could send his men, the police men, out to search all the public-houses for the man, and he had no doubt by those means he could be found. After a lapse of one hour 50 minutes the juror came into court. He was asked the reason of his absence, and he stated that he had come from home without his breakfast, and had gone to take some refreshment, as he had understood two hours were allowed. The learned Baron Channell reprimanded him for his conduct, and fined him £2O. His lordship sub sequently stated that he was convinced the chief constable had rendered the Court assistance in the plan he had adapted. CROWN COURT. (Before Mr. Baron Martin.) James Wookey was convicted of setting fire to the house of Walker Middle, at Litton, on the Bth of September, several persons being in the house at the time, and judgment of death was recorded against him. Mr. Edwards prosecuted, and Mr. Edlin defended the prisoner. Edward Brewer was indicted for burglary at Keynsham, and stealing money and jewellery. Mr. Prideaux prosecuted, and Mr. Edwards de fended the prisoner. It appeared that the prisoner was an apprentice at Keynsharn and was courting the servant of Miss Copeland, whose house was broken open, in Oct., 1858. Miss Copeland's house waa properly locked up ; the next morning it was discovered that seve ral rings which had been placed on the dressing room table on the previous night were missing, and it was evident that the house had been broken into during the night, and that the burglar must have used a ladder in order to effect an entry into the house, and that he must have been acquainted with the premises. No suspicion attached to any one ; but about 12 months after the burglary the pri. soner went to a watchmaker's to have something done, to jalii watch, and he then offered some rings for sale. The prisoner was found guilty, and he was sen tenced to three years' penal servitude. Frederick Smith was indicted for uttering a forged bill of exchange for £lO at Bath on the 16th September. _ Mr. Saunders prosecuted.' it appeared that the prisoner went to the shop of John Pearce, and said he had a bill of exchange for XlO which was accepted by his brother, John Smith, and he wished to have some goods for it. Mr. Pearce, knowinc , John Smith, gave the pri soner some goods which he wished to purchase, and also gave him the rest of the amount in money. The bill was subsequently found to be forged. The prisoner was apprehended in Bristol, and he then said he was very sorry, but he had been driven to it by distress. The prisoner now said he was in great distress. He had a large family and could not obtain em ployment. They were all starving. The ,jury found the prisoner guilty of uttering. The prosecutor hoped the Court would be merci ful. Mr. Baron Martin said that the prisoner was a man of education and mast have known that some years ago such an offence was invariably punished with death, and it was a crime which now was al ways severely punished. He should, however, take into consideration the recommendation of the pro secutor. The sentence would he four years' penal servitude. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME CIRCUIT.—LEWES, March 21. CROWN COURT. (Before Lord Chief Justice Erle.) Caroline Martin, 28, an unmarried woman, was charged with the wilful murder of her female ille gitimate child. The coroner's jury returned a verdict of man slaughter only against the prisoner, but she was subsequently committed by the magistrates upon the charge of wilful murder, and the grand jury having returned a true bill, she was put upon her trial for the more serious offence. Mr. Attree and Mr. Hurst conducted the prosecu tion ; Mr. Roupell was counsel for the defence. It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner was in the service of a lady, named Payne, residing at Carlisle-parade, Hastings and in the beginning of February last s h e wa s discovered to be in the family way, and her mistress made an arrangement that she should go home to her friends at Hawk hurst, to lie in, on the 10th of that month. During the night of the 9th the prisoner was taken very ill, and in consequence of what was observed by a fellow-servant, she made a communication to the prisoner's mistress on the following morning, and she put some questions to the prisoner, who ad mitted that she had been delivered of a child during the night, but said that it was dead. A medical gentleman, named Savery, was then sent for, and he asked the prisoner what had become of the child, and she told him it was in a box at the foot of her bed, and he there found a newly-born female child, apparently of full growth. The child was at this time alive, but in a very weakly state, and notwith standing every endeavour was made to restore it, the child died in the course of the same day. Upon a post-mortem examination all the vital organs were discovered to be healthy, and there were appear ances of slight wounds upon the neck and cheek of the child. These injuries were suggested to have been caused by a broken steel petticoat-hoop, which was found in a drawer in the prisoner's bedroom, with blood upon it, but there was consi derable doubt upon this point, and it also ap peared that they were not of a natare likely to have caused death, and the evidence appeared rather to show that the fatal result was the conse quence of the neglect the child had sustained after its birth, through the prisoner not having made any attempt to obtain assistance. Mr. Roupell made a very feeling address to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and he urged that she really believed the child was dead when she placed it in the box, and that in ber distress and agony at the moment she could hardly be held re sponsible for her actions. - The learned judge having summed up, The jury retired to consider their verdict, and in about half an hour they returned into court and found the prisoner guilty of manslaughter. Harriet Moore, 20, a diminutive girl, was placed at the bar to plead to an indictment, which charged her with the wilful murder of her illegitimate child, Alfred James Moore. There was a second indictment against the pri soner, which charged her with the capital offence of feloniously administering to the same child a large quantity of deadly poison, called white preci pitate, with intent to murder it. When the prisoner was first called upon to say whether she was guilty or not guilty, she replied in a low voice, " Guilty." Lord Chief Justice Erie told the prisoner that if she would take his advice, she would plead not guilty, and he gave her the advice, because he thought it probable that she did not understand the precise nature Theprisoner o t f the hen p c l h e are ad g e ds not n i adagainst guilty iltyt to her. et h the charges. The indictment for murder was not proceeded with, but the prisoner was given in charge to the jury for the offence of feloniously administering poi son to the deceased child with intent to murder. _ _ Sergeant Ballantine was specially retained, with the Hon. G. Denman, to conduct the prosecution. The prisoner had no counsel, but upon an intima- SURREY SESSIONS, March 21. OLD COURT. (Before T. Tilson, Esq., Deputy Chairman.) Robert Davis, alias Drayton, 39, was indicted for stealing a number of silver spoons, forks, and other articles, the property of his master, Porter Smith, Esq., of Mortlake, near Richmond. It appeared from the evidence that, in November last, the prosecutor, who is an invalid, was in want of a butler, and among the applicants was the pri soner, who gave a reference to a party apparently respectable, and believing it to be genuine, he was engaged. A few days afterwards he came to his duty, and the plate and other property was de livered up to him. About two months after he had been in his situation his true character began to ooze out, and his drunken habits called forth the censure of his master. He however promised to amend, and was forgiven. On the 15th ultimo he was so in toxicated that the prosecutor discharged him, and directed him to bring up all the plate, Instead of that he absconded, and then the whole of the plate was missed. Information was given to the police, and Mr. Smith, one of the Scotland-yard detective officers, was employed in the matter, and a few days afterwards he succeeded in apprehending the pri soner, and tracing all the plate to three different pawnbrokers. The crest had been erased, and the prisoner got a man named loath to pledge it for him. Evidence was given to that effect, and the jury found the prisoner guilty. Smith, the detective, informed the Court that the prisoner obtained the situation by means of a false character. Mr. Tilson sentenced him to 18 months' hard labour. William Haley, 22, was indicted for stealing a silver watch from John Annandale. The prosecutor went to the bar of the Ship wrights' Arms, Bermondsey-street, at 12 o'clock on the night of the Bth ultimo, to partake of a glass of beer. The prisoner and a number of other young men and some women were there, and while he was drinking some one snatched his watch, broke it from the ribbon, and ran away with it. Mrs. Conne way, the landlady, saw the prisoner go in front of the prosecutor, and she ordered him a way. A few minutes afterwards she observed that he had lost his watch. The prisoner and his companions had then ran out of the house. She gave information to the police, and he was secured some time after wards. The prisoner made a very rambling defence, bu the jury found him guilty. Sentence, 12 months' hard labour. William Fisher, 20, pleaded guilty to embezzling various sums of money belonging to his master, Hugh Evans. The prosecutor is a milkman in the Kent-road, and employed the prisoner to carry out milk and receive money from the customers, which it was his duty to pay over each day on receiving it. He was a defaulter to some extent when discovered. The Court sentenced him to three months' hart labour. Charles Spurrett, 19, was indicted for stealing three night-dresses and other articles, the property of William Turpin. It appeared that the prosecutor resided in Cooper's-read, Old Kent-road, and on Thursday last his daughter hung out a quantity of wet linen to dry. Between four and five in the afternoon Mr. Weatherby, the manager of the Windsor Castle Tavern, saw the prisoner run past him with a bundle, and when he was pursued he threw the bundle over some railings. He was then taken into custody. The bundle was foiled to con tain the prosecutor's wet linen. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the Court sentenced him.to 18 months' hard labour. Henry Albert Hook, 36, a carpenter at Kings ton, surrendered to take his trial for stealing 23 glazed sash frames, the property of Thos. Foulkes, at Thames Ditton. Mr. Lilley prosecuted, and Mr. Laxton defended. It appeared that a short time ago the prosecutor purchased the Ember Court Estate, near Kingston, from Sir Charles Sullivan, for £13,000, and among the tenants was a gardener named Robertson. who soon became in arrears for rent. Mr. Foulkes for gave him his rent on his giving up the premises. At the time he was removing, Mr. Foulkes saw the prisoner carrying away iu a truck the sash frames which had belonged to a greenhouse erected on the premises, and believing that they were his property he gave Mr. Hook into custody, although the latter said he had purchased them of Robertson, and offered to produce the bill and receipt. After considerable argument as to points of law, and the production of the receipt and examination of Itobertsou, who contended that the sash frames were his property, The jury returned a verdict of acquittal. POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—March 21 MANSION-HOUSE.—EIIen White, a dissipated middle-aged woman, was charged with being drunk and wilfully destroying an earthenware drinking cup, at the drinking•fountain in Bow-churchyard. A policeman deposed that he saw her break the cup by dashing it againt the wall, while drunk, as she had been every night for a long time past. It was one of a number presented by Mr. Alderman Copeland, five of which had already been stolen or broken in the same way, while chained to the foun• tain ; while the metal ones, which were used pre viously, and were chained to the fountain, had more than once been stolen, chains and all. Sir R. Carden sentenced the prisoner to seven days' hard labour. Samuel Hedge, a carman, in the employ of Mr. Golding, Christian -street, St. George's-in-the-East, was charged, on remand, with reckless driving and breaking the leg of Mrs. Elizabeth Essex, a lady residing at Stanford-terrace, Church-street, Cam berwell. The defendant was originally charged about seven weeks ago, when it was deposed by a gentleman who witnessed the occurrence that he was driving at full swing out of Arthur-street into King William-street, when his vehicle knocked down Mrs. Essex, who was crossing the road at the time, and who was at once taken to the hospital, her leg being broken. It was now shown that she was still unable to attend, and a second witness stated that the defendant was driving at the rate of five miles an hour at the time, and looking another way; but he admitted that Mrs. Essex herself, instead of looking out while crossing the roadway, kept her eyes fixed upon the groun. The defendant said he had no idea at the time that any one was near, and that he was looking ahead to see how he could get into the rank. He had been a carman for sixteen years, and had never met with an accident or had a complaint made against him before. His master gave him a good character generally, and more particularly so as a careful driver. Mr. Essex (the injured lady's husband), said as far as he could ascertain there had been gross care lessness on the part of the defendant, who besides driving fast was not looking about as he ought to have done. He said, too, that lie should be a loser to a considerable extent by the occurrence, as his wife kept a fancy shop, and had been compelled to employ a manager since she had been disabled. Sir It. Carden said the defendant had no doubt been guilty of carelessness to some extent, but Mrs Essex herself was not free from blame, as While crossing at such a dangerous spot sbe ought to have kept her eyes about her instead of fixing them on the ground. Under all circumstances he should fine the defendant 10s., and lea v e Mr. Essex to hi s remedy in another court, if be thought hi mself en titled to compensation. ..........- 0.1/11 LAMBETH.—COCKNEY SPO RTSMEN.—Mr. Tur ner, a tradesman, attended before M r. El l i ott to an swer a summons charging him with maliciously shoot ing a pigeon of the pure dragon breed, and of the Far Farmer p dre. o p p o e s r e t d y, , t r h e a s d f i o n r g some value of £2 10s., the property . of Mr. Farmer, a gentleman t r . at Camberwell. years he had been in the habit of breeding pigeons of the very choicest and most valuable description. He did so merely from fancy and to make presents to his friends, and though he had been offered as much as £2O a pair for some of them he had never sold one, as he had a dislike to part with the breed of birds so choice as many of them were. On Monday, the 12th inst., he was f rom h ome, and on his return he was informed that the defendant had shot a hen dragon belonging to him, and that the bird was lying dead on the top of his house, and there it was found. (Mr. Farmer here produced the bird, which he identified as his by a mark which he made on it while young, and said its value was 505.) The wit ness was cross-examined at some length, and ac knowledged he had heard that there had been a sparrow shooting match on the grounds of Mr Smith, of th e R osemary B ra n c h, on th e day in question, b u t d en i e d th a t th e re h a d b een a pigeon match. Two lads deposed to having seen the defendant shoot the pigeon, and the bird drop on the roof of Mr. Francis's, where it was afterwards found. The defence set up was that there was a pigeon match at the Rosemary Branch Tavern on the day in question, and that the bird shot by the defendant was one that had escaped from the trap and got out of bounds. Mr. Elliott, however, was of a different opinion, and ordered the defendant to pay 10s. penalty, to bet her with 5 5., the va l ue o f t h e p i geon, an d eosts . I li , a secon d complaint by Mr. Farmer, Mr. w r i g ht, a tail, n., was the defendant, for threatening to p „,-.1 his head, &c., and was ordered to find b a il f or ,I-.wo xn onths, and pay the expenses. SOUTfli V ARK.—ATTEMPTED SUICIDE or A FEMALE AT ' BLACKFRIAES-BRIDGE.—A decent looking, mid dle-aged woman, named Ann Palmer, was brought before Mr. Burcham, charged with at tempting to destroy herself at Blackfriars-bridge. George Jo rn es, a youn g man , w h o state d t h at h e was a law-w titer, said that about 11 o'clock on the previous niz ;ht he was passing over Blackfriars bridge from the City, and when near the Surrey side he saw the prisoner enter the second recess on the east .sid o and climb the parapet. He ran to wards her a.; Id fortunately seized hold of her before she got aver. She trembled very much and cried bitterly. Sh e also admitted that she had intended to destroy ;let self, but she was glad he had pre vented her. .1.1 constable then came up and took her into custody. In answer to Mr. Burcham, the prisoner stated that she was: a widow. Her husband (who died about nine n ionths ago) had been for a long time a driver to Mr.. Wood, the omnibus proprietor, and when he die. I. had cabs and horses of his own, which Mr. Wood tipok possession of for a debt he alleged her husband owed him. Mr. Wood gave her £2, which was rill gone. She now had a deceased leg, and was in such a distressed state of mind that she, in a moment of frenzy, made the rash attempt on her life. Mr. Burcham told her that he did not think Mr. Wood had any right to take the cab and horses for his alleged debt, but that was no reason why she should make an a,•ttempt on her life. If she was in distress she ought to have sought assistance of the parish officer. The prisoner s aid that she was in a dreadful state, and she would b e thankful if the parish authorities would assist her. She promised most faithfully that she would never make an attempt on her life again. A very respectable-looking female hero entered the court and said she had known the prisoner and her late husband many years. He was a very in dustrious man, when alive, and she was a decent respectable femalie. Latterly she had become ♦ery much reduced, at id she supposed that preyed on her mind. Applicant was willing to take chn of her if given up to her. Air. Burcham directed the prisoner to be given up to the lady. (Jo u..v Tie Y MARKETS NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE—Mincn 20. The wheat trade since our last has continued lively, and to-day south country limb' were in improved demand at the extreme rates of Saturday. Flour a better sale at Is on late rates. Barley ware°, and well sold. Oats steady. Beans and peas inquired for at late rates. -MARcx 21. Ildance of buyers and sellers l freely at 1■ to 2. advance. Barley, grinding 30s to Si, Oats, old, .. 268 to 30s New do 221 to 26, Beans.. 481 to --s Beans, new 40s tell6B NirSVARK At this con mar ket the atti was tolerable, and wheat soh Barley steady. B cans scarce, White wheat, new, 48s to 53s Red do. Old white Red do. ..44kto 49s Barley, malting .3Bs to 46s BOSTON-14ncn 21. We had a small supply of wheat from the growers to day, the demand for which was steady, and at 11 ad vance on late prices. All other kinds of grain sold at late prices. Wheat, red .42s to 46s Oats.... BBs to 26s White do ....46s to 61. Beans 44e to --s Barley .. ..31s to 37e Peas ....35s to 41. MELTON MOWBRAY—MARCH 20. There was a good supply of wheat to-day, with a healthy business at tho annexed prices :—White wheat, new, 455 Od to 48s Od ; red, 43s Od to 46s per 36 stone ; barley in fair supply, at 38s to 44s for malting, and 30s to 34s:per qr. for grinding; ; oats, 27s to 35s Od per 24 stone ; beans, 44s to 48s for old; new, 52s per 38 st. HULL-MARCH 20. The market to-day was rather slow for wheat, but good dry samples were bought for more money. Barley was in short supply. Beans and peas in fair request. Wheat.... Old white.... per qr 4Bs Od to 50. Od Old red New white .. ~ New red .... ~ Daditzic, Konb , &c. old whits 60s Od to 52. Od Dutch, Belgian, and French 4ss Od to 47. Od Bttltic and Hamburg, red 44s Od to 48. Od St. Petersburg and Riga, old 398 Od to 446 Od 8ar1ey..... nglish malting 36, Od to 421 Od Grinding 3os Od to 32. 041 Saal and Oderbruck Holstein and Danish 34s Od to 388 01 Grinding Oats English, old Archangel and Riga, per st Os 104 d to 111 Friesland and Dutch Oslld to 08114 d Swedish and Danish oslld to 05114 d Beans ....English, old, per qr 46s Od to 48. Od Now pigeon 4oe Od to 42s Od New tick Egyptian Peas Foreign breakers Grinding ---8 Od to —is Id Tare, ....Winter Indian Corn . _ Linseed, feeding sos Od t• 52s Od crushing Linseed cakes (Hull) £lo 10 0 to £lO 15 0 Foreign 715 oto 8 5 0 Rape cakes Bones NORWICH CATTLE—Mjncsr 17. Our market to .day exhibited a poor show of store cattle, comprising Scots, shorthorns, and a few Irish. A slow trade was effected, although there was a tolerable attendance. At the close fully one. fourth of the stock remained unsold. Scots, 4s Od to 4s 6d ; shorthorns, 3s 6d to 45.; Irish, 3s Od to 3s 6d ; Devons, Os Od to Os (estimated weight when fat). Sheep—There wero good supplies of sheep in the pens. Fat sheep, 8s 6d to 98 per stone ; prime, 9s 6d. Pigs—A fair supply. Store pigs 25,4 to 30. ; fat pork, 7s 6d to 8s Od per stone. BRISTOL SUGAR--Maxcx 21. The sales hero of West India aro confined to a few iota of crystallised Demeraras, which have brought about former rates. Some transactions have taken place in cargoes of Mauritius and Java for arrival. In rum there is nothing doing. COAL MARK: (Prices of Coal per Ton at ET—MAncn 21. the close of the market) Walls End. a. d. Bell's Primrose l3 0 Chilton Hartley Steam 15 0 Holywell 16 0 Tanfield Moor 12 9 Tanfield Moor Butes 12 9 Wylarn. ... l6 6 s. d. 1 South Hartlepool. 20 i Trimdon Thornley 17 3 Heugh Hall 19 6 Cassop 21 0 Whitworth l6 0 Thorpe Braddyll's Roam ..... 20 6 Framwellgate 19 6 Bell 39 —Sold, 36. Walls End. Northumberland 17 6 Harton .. l9 3 South Durham l9 6 Ships at marka, FOREIGN NAIL PACKET LIST. In the following table E signides that letters are despatched by evening mails from London, and M by morning mails. I aannddulivaaunrai tinsvia N , vial e w ~ AI Despatch ( I DESTINATIONS. Next Port of Mail iatdtao,,—var,4eet-1 of Mails. I Despatch. due. Southampton lAprill2,3lSouthamp. April 11 Bahamas Australia Canada, ice. Good( Mar. —, E,Liverpool.. April 12 by C u a o n p a e d , n A . p see ck n t 2 L Mar. 21, ELiverpool.. Mar. 21 sion, and St. Helena April 5, ElDevonport April 3 China, rena n ,, an d Sin ..srad pore, via Southampton .IMar. 20, M,Southamp. Mar. 20: Ditto, via M arse ill es Gibraltar, via Southampton .. Mar. 20 , MlSouthamp. Mar. 20 Honduras and Blewfields ....'Aprill7, Mj Southamp. Mar. -- India (Calcutta) and Ceylon, I via Southampton , Mar. 20 , MSouthamp. Mar. 20 Ditto, via Marseilles ;liar. 20, Ej Mar. 21 India (Bombay), via South-I ampton !Mar. 27, MlSouthamp. Mar. 25 Ditto, via Marseilles lMar. 19,E; Mar, 19 Lisbon, Brazils,Buenos Ayres, I and F. Islands April 9,3l'Southamp. Aprils Lisbon, Vigo, and Oporto Mar. 17, 3l'Southamp. Mar. 21 Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Mar. 20, M Southamp. Mar. 20 Ditto, via Marseilles Mexico and Havana Newfoundland lMar. 30, E Liverpool.. United States and British N 1 America (by British packet)lMar. —, E Liverpool.. iMar. 21 Ditto (by U. S. packet) lMar. 20, E Southamp. West Coast of Africa, Mad dcira, and Teneriffe Mar. 23 E Liverpool.. April 10 West India, Californi a , Y ene -I zuela, Chili, Peru, Grey town, New Granada, &c. April 2. MjSouthamp. April 1 _-_ _ BIRTHS. B i'LWER.—On the 15th inst , at Quebec House, East Dere ham, Norfolk, the wife of Captain Bulwer, of a daughter. HAMILTON.—On the 20th inst., at 32, Upper Brook-street, IV., Mrs. Edward Hamilton, of a daughter. MOCATTA.—On. the 20th inst., the wife of Abraham Mocatta, Esq., of 15, Upper Woburn-place, Tavistock square, of a son. MARRIAGES. PASLEY —Losn.—On the 13th ult., at Port of Spain, Trini dad, T. Malcolm Sabine Pasley, Esq., R.N., H.M.S. Atalanta, eldest son of Rear-Admiral Sir Thomas Sabine Pasley, Bart., to Emma Louisa, eldest daughter of the late W. Losh, Esq., of Trinidad. DEATHS. COPBLAND.—On the 22d inst., at the Manor House, Bushey, II erts, Sarah, the belo%ed wife of Mr. Alderman Copeland, M.P. BEAN.—On the 19th inst., at Cavendish-hill, near Notting ham, Samuel Bean, Esq., aged 86. CHILD.—On the 20th inst., at Richard's Castle, near Lud low, Wm. Child, Esq., aged 82. MAsstE.—On the 18th inst. at Gorlston, near Yarmouth, Capt. H. G. M ass i e, R.N.,, aged 84. MERRAY.—On the 17th inst, at Enniskerry L o d g e, co. Wicklow, Dennis Murray, Esq., M.D., late of the 10th Hussars, aged 67. WALKER.—On the 17th inst., at 28, Westbourne-park - ter: race, Commander William Walker, R.N., K.T.S., aged 72. LONDON: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUN G 9 of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the coney of Middlesex, Thursday, March 22, 1860. i:;11 Thg 4t 14. H, The forrrm aj crut "The R CRI Aon l'i 3 0 ciloci from 11 att. J. -1 D - R. _ _ L And One Chi: twelve Cavendi THE 'This Es elegance with the EVENIT w. M. 41, 1)rove him 4 1/G di coolmenc o'clo c k . ter° Na ° °ra or 13 UK L AND pltoi Ti ----._` PR ES , TTF, and of VASE; bear.tita ter, Mart Inratufact M-aiosty ' Mr. 17 e the inter, and GEC PR AC' RALOG' Just PRI Pla VIT 2 'or SPER:M. DISEAS SYSTEI age, prod STItEN( Cane and why the 2 p they can tog-ether „BY A -.medical street, L' !taster- rc Pon HA: Inove tarry . lcei. W(Y A . r o 7i Pr( PATI3 Inc o Uis ( G Most