The Sun. — London, England, 1858-09-10 00:00:00

EXTRAORDINARY CASE. (From the West Briton of Aug. 27•) MARY TRELEAVEN, WIDOW, V. SIR JOSEPH SAWLE GRAVES SAWLE, BART. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a widow, at the St. Austell County Court, held. on the 19th August, before C. D. Bevan, Esq., and a jury, against the defendant, for the recovery of £5O damages for an illegal and excessive distress levied by the defendant on the goods of the plaintiff in the month of May last. Mr. Bishop, of Fowey, appeared for the plaintiff, and the defendant was represented by Mr. Stokes, of Truro. From the statement made on behalf of plaintiff, it appeared that her late husband, Thomas Treleaven, in the year 1852, occupied a tenement and. mills called Molingey, in the parish of St. Austell, untler a lease at the yearly rent of £ll2—Sir Joseph being the landlord, and Mrs. Treleaven still continues to occupy the property. Just before and at the gene ral election in the month of July, 1852, Sir Joseph exerted himself very strongly in favour of Mr. Robartes, the then candidate, and one of the pre sent members for the eastern division of the county. Thomas Treleaven, and his father, Joseph Tre leaven, were voters, and Sir Joseph was very de sirous of securing their votes for Mr. Robartes. Thomas Treleaven was disposed to vote for Mr. Kendall, or stand aloof from the election, which coming to Sir Joseph's knowledge, he sent a farmer named Wm. Thomas, who rented the estate of Tciwan, under Sir Joseph, to obtain his vote. Thos. Treleaven deeined to pledge himself, unless, as ho stated, Sir Joseph would agree to make the same abatement of £lO per cent. on his rental as Mr. Robartes had made to his tenants in consequence of the badness of the times, and Thomas Treleaven also intimated that his father (Joseph) would vote as he did. Thomas, the witness, tried. the Tre leavens hard, but they would not give way ; Thos. Treleaven stated that he should serve his own interest. This determination was con veyed to Sir Joseph by the witness Thomas, and, as Mr. Thomas stated, Sir Joseph on the evening be fore the polling, authorised him to 6 0.0 to the Tre leavens, at Molingey, and tell them that the required. abatement of £lO per cent. should be made. This he did, and on the following day the Treleavens polled for Mr. Robartes. Thomas Treleaven died in the latter part of the year 1852, and at the first rent-paying afterwards Mrs. Treleaven, through her brother, kept back a portion of the rent, at the same time telling Mr. Martin, the cashier at Messrs. Coodes, who received the money, that Sir Joseph would know what the deduction was for. It ap pears that matters went on in this state from the year 1853 down to the month of January last, when the plaintiff's brother, having been summoned at the instance of Sir Joseph for shooting without a license on the tenement occupied by her, and. which is but a short distance from Penrice, she gave evi dence in his favour, at which Sir Joseph was so annoyed that he instructed his solicitors to require her to give up possession of the tenement, and threatened to bring an action of ejectment in case of a refusal. Notwithstanding plaintiff's term would not expire till Michaelmas, 1859, she, to pre vent legal proceedings, agreed to give up at the coming Michaelmas ; and it was arranged that an agreement in writing should be drawn up and signed, to carry the understanding into effect. Upon the agreement being prepared. _Mrs. Treleaven found that she would be bound to pay up certain so-called arrears of rent ; this she objeeted to, as she said that Sir Joseph knew very well why the £lO per year had been kept back, and the agree ment was not signed in consequence. No further demand of rent was .made till the latter end of April, or beginning of May last, when the same answer was given as before. On the 28th May Sir Joseph summoned his tenant, Mr. W. Thomas, for trespass for shooting rabbits on Mrs. Treleaven's arm, Mrs. Treleaven appeared before the magi strates, and gave evidence in his favour that she had invited him there, and the case was dismissed. The very next day Sir Joseph distrained Mrs. Treleaven for £llB, being £56 for half-a-year's rent due at Lady-day, and the sum of £62 for arrears. Mrs. Treleaven had always before paid her rent yearly. On the distress being levied, a Stealer was made of the amount which plaintiff con e eivect she owed, which being refused, the full sum tst ZllB was paid, with the costs of the distress. Previously to bringing the action, the plaintiff's saterney proposed to leave the matter to the cleci ecion of two magistrates ; which, with other over- I meg, being rejected, the action was brought to recover £5O, being the utmost limit of the County Court jurisdiction, although the plaintiff considered fille had overpaid £6B 183., witii the costs. It should also be stated that she claimed an allowance of £4 per annum for some Meadows, which had been destroyed by sand. In support of plaintiff's ease, Mrs. Treleaven, the plaintiff, was called, who gave evidence to the effect before stated, and de nosed to her being present on the evening before the election, when Mr. Thomas made her husband the peomise of the abatement of £lO per cent., which he said he was authorised to do by Sir Joseph. Mr. Thomas, of Towan, farmer, was pest caned. He stated that he had been a tenant pf Sir Joseph's for years. He gave evidence at great length, and with much clearness, as to his interviews with Sir Joseph previous to the elec. tion. He related the conversation which he had on the evening before, when the promise was made , and stated that on his hinting to Sir Joseph that he had better have the Treleavens up to Penrice, and make the arrangements himself—Sir Joseph said, " Oh, I can't do that, I shall be brought up for bribery ;" and that witness then remarked , -" You will stick me into it, Sir Joseph;" upon veteich Sir Joseph said, " You can do it ; but few sofili know it, and the amount can be allowed when the rent is paid at the office." This witness was very severely cross-examined by Mr. Stokes as to his having quarrelled with Sir Joseph Sawle, whether he had made any notes of what had occurred, and whether he had told any one besides the story for the past six years; he adhered, however, to his previous state ments, and in answer to Mr. Stokes's question, whether that was the only case in which he had bribed, he said " that it was the only case in which he had gone so far at Sir Josephs request, although .he had made some other promises. Mr. Stokes pressed him to name any other case, but this he declined to do, and the judge ruled that he was not bound to disclose any more. Mrs, Treleaven was recalled. She corroborated the evidence of the last witness as to the promise made by him to her husband. James Channian, the brother of the plaintiff, was next called. He deposed to having paid the year's rent first after the 'election, and that he kept back a Portion ; at the same time telling Mr. Martyn, to whom it (the rent) wag paid, that Sir Joseph - would know what it was for. He also proved hav ing on another occasion paid rent. when he kept back as before ; and that he paid the rent for the year. ending Michaelmas last, when, on Mr. Mar tyn's calling his attention to the arrears, he said there were none ; the .£lO a-year was to be allowed, as Sir Joseph knew all about it ; and the £4 a-year for the fields, which would make it right ; that Mr. Martyn's figures and his corresponded; but that Mr. Martyn said he himself could not make the allowance it must rest with Sir Joseph. Richard Chapman, another brother of the plain tiff, proved the tender of the rent admitted to be due, and the subsequent payment of the £llB and costs. lie also proved that the meadows were in jured to the extent of £4 per annum by the sand. Several lett ers were here put in—one from Messrs. Coode and Co., requiring possession in January last, and threatening an action of ejectment in of refusal. Another from them in the month of May (mis-dated), requesting plaintiff to come t o some understanding as to th amount -of the rent owing, and also a letter from plaintiff's attorney, dated Ist June, making claim for damages sustained through the distress, and proposing to refer the matter to two magistrates. Mr. Stokes then addressed the jury for the de fendant in a very forcible speech. On behalf of Sir Joseph, he totally denied that any such promise had been made, as sworn to by the witness, Mr. "William Thomas. H e severely criticised Mr.Tho mas's evidence, and denounced the action as a con spiracy. He endeavoured to impress upon the minds of the jury the impossibility of a gentleman, in Sir Joseph's p osition, doin g such a th ing as was charged against him, and contrasted Sir Joseph's position with that of the man Thomas, who, he con tended, was not to be believed on his oath. H e also called the attention of the jury to the fact that the plaintiff did not procure an attorney from st. Austell, but went to Fowe y to get_ one. The learned advocate stated t hat he should prove that the abatement of rent was made in the year 1851, and not after the election of 1852, as sworn to by plaintiff and her witnesses. He concluded a most powerful address by reminding the jury that he should call Sir Joseph, and that it would be a case of direct perjury on the one side or the other. Mr. Stokes then called witnesses for the defence. Mr. Nicholas Martin, who stated that he was a clerk at Messrs. Coode and Co.'s, and kept Sir Jos. Sawle's rental account for them. He produced the rent ledger, showily , the payment of the several rents on account of Molingey, from the year 1852 down to the m on th o f M ay last ; by these accounts it appeared that more than £lOB, at times, was paid yearly during those y ears . He showed that the deficiency was carried on as i" arrears." He stated that he had called Sir Joseph's attention to an abatement claimed for a depression in the times, and that £2O was deducted . or allowed eonsc- quence. In cross-examination witness stated that the depression in the times was in the year 1849 and 1850, but on referring to the rental it appeared no allowance was made until the year 1853, after the election. lie would not undertake to swear whether it was before or after the election, that Sir Joseph authorised the abatement. He admitted that plaintiff's brothers hadmade statements to him from time to time that Sir Joseph had promised to give up £lO a year, and Sir Joseph had access to the books, and saw how the accounts stood; that plain tiff had never been furnished with a statement of the account, and that when he told her, in January, of there being arrears, she said she did not owe any, as the £lO per year promised by Sir Joseph, and the allowance for the meadow would make it up ; that the rent was usually paid yearly. Sir Joseph Sawle, defendant, was then called; In answer to questions put by . Mr. Stokes, he stated that all that Mr. Thomas had sworn to is false—it is wholly false. I never made any such promise, to allow £lO per year, or authorised. Mr. Thomas to make such a promise for me. Thomas never referred to the bargain or promise after the year 1852, nor did the Treleavens. I never heard of their claims for the allowance on such account until just before the distress was put in ; that was the first time—l put in the distress in consequence of that, and not on account of the dispute about the rabbits. I did allow on account of the times a deduction, before the election of 1852, I think—l think I agreed to give up two years—that was the only -allowance I ever agreed to. I think so." Cross-examined by Mr. Bishop—What Thomas has sworn to is all false—it is wholly false. It may be true that he was at Penrice the evening before the election. I did see him about a week before the election, as he has sworn, and I did send him to canvas the two Treleavens as well as others. I swear 1 1 never received a letter from Thomas Treleaven about his rent. I will not swear that I did not have a conversation with Thomas in this very room about the vote. I will swear that Thomas, the witness, did not make any report to me about the Tre leavens' votes. I did desire Thomas to invite the Treleavens with the other voters to breakfast at Penrice, the morning of the election. It was before the election I told Mr. Martyn to deduct the rent, but can't say whether it was made after or not. The first time I had a dispute about the rabbits was more than 12 months ago. I did take steps to turn Mrs. Treleaven out of the farm. I gave directions for the letters (produced) to be written (these were the letters referred to in Mrs. Tre leaven's evidence). I have never spoken to Mrs. Treleaven except about a summons—she did not apply to me about the. £lO a-year promised, nor her brothers—very likely I refused to see them, when they called at Penrice. They may have called there and I may have refused to see them. The second rabbit dispute was in May. I sum moned Mr. Thomas—the charge broke down—the summons might have been heard on the 28th, and the di.;tiess might have been on the 29th. I do not know when the distress was made ; I cannot recollect. Sir Joseph was here asked how he re collected so well what took took place six years ago at the election, and did not know the particulars of the distress which took place only three months since ; but he was not further pressed. Mr. Bishop then replied, and in the first place called the attention of the jury to the attack made on the plaintiff and himself by the learned advocate for the defendant, whose zeal for his client's cause had led him to do that which the circumstances would not warrant. Mr. Bishop directed the jury to the fact that the defendant not being content, or feeling secure, notwithstanding the powerful aid of his own St. Austell attorneys, had thought it necessary to take a journey to Truro (a distance of some 16 miles) to secure also the services of the " leviathan of the law," Mr. Stokes. (The parties in the Hall here made a strong demonstration of applause, which the judge instantly ordered to be suppressed, and threatened to commit any one who should similarly offend again.) Mr. Bishop then proceeded to remark on the utter failure of - defendant's proofs, as stated by Mr. Stokes, who had in his opening said that, he should prove the allowance to have been made in 1851, whereas it was shown by the testimony of Mr. Martyn,-his -own witness, tilat no abatemeat was made until the 'year 1853, being for the year', succeeding the election, and which strongly corro borated the evidence of Mr. Thomas, the " man" so denounced by Mr. Stokes. He pointed out the dif ference of the manner. in which Sir Joseph had. given his evidence to that of Mr. Thomas—the latter having gone into-the most minute•particulars, in respect of which his evidence had been altoge ther Unshaken,' whilst Sit - Jo - seph,. after 'making wholesale denial of Mr. Thomas's statements, after wards admitted, in six particulars out of seven, that Mr. Thomas'S evidence was correct. The advocate contended that Sir Joseph's evidence and that of Mr. Martyn completely substantiated plaintiff's case, for though they both admitted that the agri , cultural depression was in the years 1849 and 1850 no abatement or allowance. was made from the rent till the year 1853, the next rental after the elec tion, when plaintiff stated that the promise. was made. He also called attention - to the manner in which Sir Joseph had tried to evict the widow, though she held under a good and valid lease, and asked them to say which was the most likely to be true—that Sir Joseph had levied the distress in consequence of her claim for the allowance of the £lO per year as she believed was promised, or in consequence of her giving the evidence on the rabbit dispute, seeing that she was distrained the very following day, when, as Si Joseph stated, he had broken down in his prosecution, and through her evidence. Mr. Bishop expressed his surprise that the advocate for the defendant had paraded his long and high sounding name, and his title, as a guarantee that his evidence was to be more valued than that of the witness, Mr. Thomas, a highly respectable farmer, whom Mr. Stokes had styled throughout " that man," and reminded the jury that persons who might have the prefix of a " Sir," and the addition of " Bart." to their names, were not to be credited more than others whose antecedents were equally good that birth and title alone would not ensure respect unless it was accompanied by in tegrity of principle and conduct. Mr. Bishop concluded by calling on the jury, not for an expression of their sympathy for the widow, but that they would do' her plain justice, and award her a verdict for the amount claimed. The Judge summed up the case to the jury, and at the same time expressed his doubts as to the probability of a gentleman in Sir Joseph's position, a Baronet, and an enlightened magistrate of the county, making such a promise as had been alleged, or of his putting himself in the pow er of hi s t enan t Thomas, to make such disclosures: The Judge, however, remarked, that it was a question for them to decide, as to the comparative - credit due to the evidence of Sir Joseph and that of Mr. Thomas.; and that possibly, as they lived in the neighbour hood, they knew Sir . Joseph better than he did ; that Mr. Thomas had certainly given his evidence more clearly than Sir Joseph had done. He was glad to find it admitted on all sides that Mr. Robartes knew nothing of the transaction in ques tion. He then read over the whole of the evidence, and left the case to the jury, who retired about half-an-hour, and then returned with this verdict : " Verdict for plaintiff, damages £5O, and desiring to add their belief that Sir Joseph had made the promise, but that his. memory had failed him." The verdict was received with considerable ap plause by an audience of many hundreds of persons. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Sept. 9. (Before Mr. Payne, at Cl ß e a :enz o e v ll e . r ) s, llenry Ripley and William were indicted for " unlawfully, wilfully, co.. n con temptuously disturbing a certain congregation tionof n persons called Latter-day Saints, assembled for the purpose of religious worship." Mr. F. H. Lewis appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. Metcalfe for the defendants. The defendants pleaded guilty. Mr. Lewis said, this prosecution had been insti tuted by the elders of a congregation of persons belonging to the Mormon church, for the purpose of being protected from a systdm of annoyance and interruption to which they had been for some time subjected while in the performance of their reli gious worship. These defendants had taken part in such annoyance, but there was every reason to believe they were the dupes of another person whose name need not then be mentioned ; and Mr. Metcalfe, their counsel, had with his usual judg ment and discretion, advised them to take the course tiiny had adopted in pleading guilty, and, as the only object of the elders was to obtain the pro tection of the law, they believed that the defend ants, having seen the folly and impropriety of their conduct in interfe r i n ,, with the proceedings of the congregation in question, that object would be attained by their being bound in their own recog nisances to come up for judgment when called upon. If they repeated their misconduct they would most certainly be called upon to receive sentence ; if they did not, of course they would hear- no more of the matter. Mr. Metcalfe said, the defendants were willing to enter into their own recognisances exercise appearofif him cr e dit, dis cretion for whichtl s cwt givenstohaandy say that the defendants, as two he had only to requ ired, and, disorderly crowd, had done that legallyjustified in doing and w hich they were drunken men in anat which they would not repeat. body approved, still, Mr. Lewis said, although the_ doctrines of the Tr AlQrpons were not what every b THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING,- SEPTEMBER 10, as a religious body, they must be protected from annoyance in the exercise of their religion. Mr. Payne said, the law protected all religious bodies peaceably assembled for the purpose of wor ship, and it must be equally and impartially admin istered to all denominations: The defendants must each enter into his own recognizance in the sum of £5O to come up when called upon, and if they repeated the disturbance they would be brought up and dealt with as the Court might think fit, and if they did not appear when called upon they would be liable to be imprisoned until the amount of the recognizance was paid in each case. Those who professed Mormonism, or any other " ism," when peaceably, assembled for the purpose of worship in an authorised place, must not be disturbed ; they were entitled to the protection of the law, which the Court was bound to enforce. The defendants promised not to offend again, and, having entered into recognizances, were dis• charged. Caroline Dunn, 32, was indicted for stealing the sum of £5 10s., the money of Joseph Petford, from hiA person. Mr. Ribton was counsel for the prosecutor, Mr. Metcalfe for the prisoner. The prosecutor stated that he lived at No. 5, erdinand-place, St. Pancras, and on the night of the 31st of August he met the prisoner in Ferdi nand-street, and they had some ale together. It was between 10 and 11 o'clock, and he went with her to 11, Weedington-street, where she lodged, and he fell asleep on the bed: When he went there he had £5 10s. in his pocket ; when he woke up it was gone, and the prisoner too. From other evi dence it appeared that the prisoner soon after the robbery was seen at publichouses showing money, and with the landlady of o ne o f th em she - left X 2 15s. for safety, which sum was produced in court. The jury found her guilty, and she was sentenced to four months' hard labour. Sarah Winfield was indicted for stealing from Jessie Proctor, a child four years of age, three penny pieces, the property of George Proctor. Mr. Abram was for the prosecution ; Mr. Ribton for the prisoner. A police-constable,. 41 B, stated that he was on duty in Victoria-road, Pimlico, on the 26th of August, when heinoticed the prisoner with a little girl, and he watched them. He saw the prisoner take something from the child's hand, and then leave her. He asked the child a question, when she began to cry, and in consequence of what she told him he went after the prisoner, whom he took to the child's mother, and charged her, upon the child's statement, with having robbed her of 3d. The prisoner took out a shilling, five penny pieces and a farthing, which she said was all her own ; but the mother, the wife of a farrier in the Royal Mews, identified one of the pieces by the letters "G. H." stamped upon it. She had shortly before given it with two others to the child. The prisoner, who is the wife of a builder, re ceived a very excellent character, and her counsel put it to the jury whether they would ruin that good character on the identity of a penny piece, about which there was every probability of a mis take. The jury found her not guilty. A boy named William Johnson was brought up on Wednesday for judgment, having been convicted on Monday of going up to a lady in Barnsbury road, Islington, and snatching a purse from her hand. He was remanded in order that inquiries might be made about him. The officer said that he had ascertained that a statement made by the prisoner that he had been an errand boy to a jeweller was correct, but he had been there only three weeks, and it was suspected that he obtained the situation only for the purpose of robbing the place in concert with others older than himself. His father lived in Gray's-inn-lane, and had five children. The prisoner had been taught to dance on a spade and in clogs, and had performed as a little wonder at public-house con cert rooms, not for his own benefit, but for that of those who took him about. Mr. Creasy said, the best thing that could be done with him would be to pass such a sentence as might lead to his being sent to a reformatory for such a period as would afford a full opportunity for his becoming a good young man. It was quite clear that if after a short imprisonment he went back to those from whose clutches he was now free he would be ruined for ever. He should, there fore, sentence him to four months' . imprisonment, and to four years' detention in a reformatory. He was sorry to say that the claims upon the resources "of these valuable institutions were so numerous that many cases could 'not be brought Under their operation. - William Smith, 38, was indicted for having stolen six gas-burners, the property of her Majesty's Commissioners of Works and Buildings, from the new bridge from Chelsea to Battersea. Mr. Abram prosecuted ; Mr. M‘Donnell was ( counsel for the prisoner. The indictment charged that the offence was committed in the parish of Battersea, in the county of Middlesex, and, upon the application of Mr. Abram, " Surrey" was substituted for " Middlesex." It was then contended, by Mr. M'Donnell, that the Court had no jurisdiction to try Ilia car:c, 113 it hsd no jurisdiction in SuiTey, but Mr. Abram cited a case to show that the Court had jurisdiction to try for an offence committed within 500 yards of the boundary of the county, and proved by a witness that the spot where the burners were taken from was less than that distance from the Middlesex side of the bridge. The case then proceeded, and the prisoner (who had been employed on the works) was convicted. He had borne a very good charac ter, and was intoxicated when he committed the offence. Mr. Creasy sentenced him to three months' hard labour. Mr. Abram said, he was only instructed on the part of the Court, and was not aware of the error in the indictment. It was a case in which the commissioners ought to have instructed their own solicitor to prosecute. Benjamin Smith, 62, dock labourer, and Charles Gue, 30, carman, were indicted for stealing a bag of coffee, value £2, the property of the St. Katharine Dock Company, in their dock. It appeared that Gue had been in the habit of going to the dock for his master, and he was charged with having stolen a bag of coffee, which he did not, however, get clear off the premises, and it was alleged that Smith was an accomplice in the transaction. The jury acquitted Smith, and found Gue guilty. He was sentenced to four months' hard labour. Isabella Reid, 52, charwoman, was charged in four counts of an indictment with having obtained linen from houses under the false pretence that she had been sent for it by the laundress. She pleaded guilty, and *as sentenced to 18 months' hard labour. her husband, said she lived in Bell-lane, Spital fields, and that morning early her husband came home intoxicated while she was asleep in bed, and beat her very badly about the face and head. Pri soner was a " translator" of boots and shoes, and earned high wages. For more than two years she had been an inmate of a lunatic asylum, which she attributed to his ill-usage ; and on one occasion the Lord Mayor had sentenced him to six months' im prisonment for assaulting her. Mr. Haimnill sent the husband to prison for three months, and directed that 10s. should be given to the wife from the poor-box. SOUTHWARK.--Wm. Kelly, a horse dealer, who falsely described himself as a corn merchant and a contractor for watering the streets, was brought before Mr. Combe for final examination, charged with being, concerned, with another not in custody, in administering a narcotic to Jonathan Fisher, a greengrocer, residing at Lewisham, and stealing from him a horse worth £l5. Mr. Downey appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Edwin for the prisoner. It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutor that on Friday morning, the 27th, while going to the New Cattle-market to dispose of a horse, he fell in with a man named Fielder, who accompanied him. There Fisher changed his horse for a dun cob, and on returning (still with Fielder in the cart) he came up with the prisoner, who was standing near the road. Fielder pointed out the prisoner as a man who was likely to buy the cob. He said he did not want to sell it—that at all events he should want £l5 for it. Hereupon they all went to the " World Turned Upside Down" public-house, in the Old Kent-road. Prisoner offered him £l3, which he refused. Afterwards they had some stout, and after taking a glass of it prosecutor almost immedi ately lost his senses, and had no recollection of any thing that happened until midnight, when he found himself lying on a sofa at home. He was positive he never sold the horse while in his senses, but in his pocket was found a sovereign and a piece of paper, which purported to be an I 0 U for £l2, signed " William Kelly." He had no recollection of ever seeing that before, neither had he any . recollection of seeing the paper produced by the prisoner's soli citor as follows :—" Aug. 27, 1858. Sold a dun cob for £l3, and received as part payment £l. Jona than Fisher." It was his signature, and had a penny stamp attached to it. William Palmer, 125 L, said he took the prisoner into custody, and when told what he was charged with, he said that he had bought the horse in the usual way for £l2, but he had not the opportunity of paying all the money at the time. He also told witness that the horse was at grass at Mr. Chand ler's, at Guildford. Witness went there, and the horse was given up to him. Mr. Combe asked whether the man Fielder had been found ? The constable replied in the negative ; but the prisoner and that man were no doubt connected with a well organised gang of sharpers who infested all the high roads leading to the metropolis, on the look out for victims. There were other distinct charges against them. A limeburner named Crow ther, residing in Rent, had just come into court, who, on the 29th ult., was robbed of a horse by the prisoner under similar circumstances. Mr. Combo said that he should commit the pri soner for trial for hocussing an robbing Mr. Fisher, but to enable the other persons to prefer their charges he should remand him for a week. 1858. SOURCE OF INSANITY. The following remarks on the sources whence insanity springs, or appears to spring, taken from the report of the Medical Superintendent of James Murray's Royal Asylum for Lunatics, near Perth, will repay the trouble of perusal : No year passes without abundant proof of the hereditary, or hereditary transmissibility, of insa nity. Of 69 admissions, horeditary predisposition was proved in 17, 13 females and 4 males—the female sex, therefore, largely predominating in the proportion of more than 3to 1. In one of these cases the mother was insane ; in 2, the father ; in 1, the father and brother ; in 2, a brother ; in 6, sisters ; in 1, the maternal uncle; in,l, the paternal uncle ; in 1, a half-uncle and aunt ; in 1, a grand father's cousin ; and in 1, the family generally were eccentric or insane, according to the views taken as to what constitutes insanity and eccen tricity respectively. With a view to illustrate the subject of hereditary predisposition more fully and trustworthily, we have examined our statistics for the last 31 years—from the opening of the institu tion in 1827 to the present date—and we find, as the result, that of a total of 1,130 cases admitted, it existed in 26.54 per cent., or rather more than one-fourth ; or, if we deduct the cases in which no cause is stated—which gives us a total of 733 in 40.92 per cent. Of 300 cases, in which hereditary tendency is thus noted, 165 were females and 135 males—the former sex, therefore, greatly predominating. Esquirol estimates here ditary predisposition to occur in nearly one fourth of the admissions, or 21 per cent.; Guislain at one-fourth, or even 30 per cent. ; Dr. Webster, from the statistics of Bethlem, at 32 per cent.; the statistics of the York Retreat show nearly one-third of the admissions ; and Professor Holst of Chris tiana states it as high as 69 per cent. in Norway. It may be necessary to explain that our statistics make no distinction between collateral and direct relationships. And it may further be advisable to remind the reader that it does not necessarily fol low, because progenitors have been insane or eccen tric, that the immediate affspring should be equally so. There are well-established laws of transmissi bility which we cannot here stop to explain or enumerate. The form of insanity chieflytransmitted appears to have been Dementia. The mother was noted to have been insane in 20 cases, and the father in 29. The mother's insanity was transmitted in 13 instances to daughters, and in 7to sons ; while the father's was transmitted in 16 cases to sons, and in 13 to daughters. This bears out the conclusions ar rived at by the majority of British and foreign statists—that the mother's insanity is chiefly trans mitted to daughters, and that of the father to sons. The father, however, according to our tables, was more frequently insane than the mother, in the pro portion of 29 to 20 times. This does not quite accord with the generality of statistics, which show that the mother is more likely to transmit insanity than the father. Intimately connected with this subject is the deli cate and painful one of the inter-marriage of tainted persons, especially of tainted females—of women laboUring under, or predisposed to insanity, and whose offspring are more than likely to mani fest insanity, or at least to bear about with them a strong predisposition. We cannot too strongly reprehend the practice in parents of wilfully con cealing from an intending husband or wife the fact of existing or prior insanity in the opposite con tracting party. Such practice is not only cruel, but criminal • it is perpetuating and propagating insanity broad-cast ;it is burdening the country with the helpless and diseased ; it is—to use a phrase which, if plain and homely, nevertheless embodies a great and wholesome truth—" deteriorat ing the stock" of society. One lamentable instance came under our notice during the year. A woman was brought here for the second time, whose house, on the evening preceding her admission, had pre sented the following scene :—ln one apartment lay a dying husband cursing, with his last breath, the day he had been married, and lamenting bitterly that he had not been made aware that he was ally ing himself with a tainted woman. His simple and pathetic story was this : In his . youth he had had an attachment for her as a ; he spent some years abroad as a soldier ; on his return, finding her still unmarried, he renewed his former attach ment, and was permitted to propose marriage with out being made aware; either by her or her friends, that during his absence she had had one or more attacks of insanity. They were married, and sub sequent attacks soon opened his eyes to his wife's morbid tendency ; from that day to the period of his death he never ceased to allude to Ins alliance as the curse of his life. In an adjoining apartment, a son—an indolent " ne'er-do-weel," who had never exerted himself either for his own support or that of his parents—had just committed suicide, on being told that, in consequence of his father's approach ing death, he would be compelled to work. A daughter had just come home to this scene of misery to be confined of an illegitimate child, while the mother was rushing from room to raving mad, and unable to comprehend the scene in which she was so prominent an actor. But, strange to say, similar marriages are sometimes deliberately solem nised among the educated and higher classes of so ciety, when both Parties have their eyes open. Such mesalliances are, however, much less seldom mar riages of love than of convenience ; there is probably in general, money to -be got on one or other side. The parties entering into such compacts are inex cusable on the plea of ignorance of the fearful results of such mal-assorted and unnatural unions. It is a delicate and difficult thing to interfere with civil liberty ; but it admits of a reasonable degree of doubt whether there shOuld not be some legal re striction in regard to such marriages. Their effects are most disastrous to society at large ; and surely society, which bears the burden and pays the pe nalty, has a right to enter some species of protest against proceedings which are contrary to physio logical as well as to moral law. The propagation of insanity by means of fatuous and facile female pau pers is now amenable to civil law. The subject we may safely leave in the hands of the new Lunacy Board. Such females are comparatively seldom married ; their lives are too frequently of the most irregular and dissolute character. More than one deplorable instance has occurred to our notice during the year. We are naturally led from the subject of marriage among the insane to consider celibacy as a predis posing cause of insanity. Of 69 admissions during the past year, 49 patients have been unmarried, 17 married, and 3 widowed ; or,, in other words, the single have been considerably more than double the number of the married. But as the statistics of a single year may exhibit somewhat unusual or falla cious results, we have examined our statistics,bear ing on this subject, for the last 31 years ; and we , find, as the result, that of a total of 679 cases, in I which the social condition has been specially quoted, 445 have been single, 196 married, and 38 wiclo - wed ; that is, the single have constituted 65.64 per cent., and the married and widowed to gether 34.46 per cent. of the whole admissions ; or, in other words, the former have been nearly twi ce as numerous as the latter. It is but fair to state that the statistics of a single asylum may be as fal lacious—in relation to society at large—as those of a single year in any given asylum. The statistics of other asylums do show different results. Those who are sceptical as to the value of statistics go the length of asserting that they may be made to prove anything. We trust society has a right to expect that this and similar inquiries and subjects will be elaborated by the new Lu nacy Board for Scotland, one of whose most useful duties we take to be the drawing up of statistic s from the returns which Government compels the officers of asylums to furnish. Such is the public interest attachable to celibacy as a predisposing cause of insanity that we venture to compare our results with those arrived at by some of the first authorities, British and foreign, on the statistics of insanity, and to draw or deduce a few general con clusions therefrom. The statistics of Bethlem Hos pital for the Insane, London, according to Dr. Hood, show that the married are more numerous than the single patients, in the proportion of 1,364 to 1,194. This, however, is certainly an exceptional state of matters. Opposite results are given in Buck nill and Tuke's " Manual of Psychological Medi cine," and in the statistics of the majority of British and foreign asylums. In - the Saltpetriere and Bi cetre, during 20 years ending in 1822, according to M. Desportes, of 2,490 patients, 1,472 were single, and 956 married, widowed, or divorced. Jacobi's statistics of insanity in Germany show that, of 2,015 patients, 1,573 were single, and. 422 married or widowed. Statistics then, on the whole, indubi tably prove that celibacy predisposes to insanity, and also the converse—that matrimony is, to a cer tain extent, an antidote against insanity, or exer cises a preservative influence. These propositions we commend to the attention of the limes and other journals which have recently, with such abi lity, discussed the advantages of early marriages, amid the disadvantages of prolonged, unnatural, and unhealthy celibacy. Parchappe remarks that celi bacy, as a predisposing cause of insanity, equally affects both sexes ; but that matrimony is a greater preservative against insanity in males than in females. We do not here stop to inquire whether insanity in celibates is producible by, or traceable to, the restraints merely, or the vices of celibacy. The subject is too delicate, difficult, and extensive to dilate upon at present. But its connexion with what has recently been paraded in the Times as the " great social evil" is too evident to ss-arrant us in omitting a mere allusion. Let it not, however, be supposed that we mean to infer or imply, in the 445 cases cited in our statistics, that the insanity was in them necessarily due to the condition of celibacy per se—let not the reader - . onfound the post with the propter hoc. No douW, in many cases, celibacy POLICE INTELLIGENCE. BOW-STREET.—Mr. Henry was called upon to deal with a charge of horse-stealing affording a curious instance of mistaken identity of, a mare. m The defend an t i n th e case, a young an named Collins, was brought to this court in custody on Wednesday, charged with stealing a mare, the property of Mr. Johnson, broker, 8, Dorset-place, Pall-mall. The prosecutor stated that about two months ago he put his mare out to grass at Guildford. That morning, however, he was sm. • prised to see her standing in Parliament-street, opposite the Red Li on public-house, in harness, and held by the bridle by a woman. The woman on being questioned referred him to the prisoner, who was in the public-house drinking. The pri soner said he had bought the mare from Mr. Gould , ing, a horsedealer at Lock's-fields. He (the prosecu tor) then claimed the mare as his property, but said if the prisoner would take him to the horsedealer and satisfy him that he (prisoner) had honestly come by " the mare, he would pay him os. to recompense him for the loss of time. The prisoner expressed his readiness to do so, and they started together, but on the way the prisoner stopped short and said he would go no further ; if prose cutor suspected him of stealing the horse, he could lock him up. Prosecutor accordingly called a con stable and gave him in charge. Three witnesses, friends of the prosecutor, strongly confirmed his identification of the mare. - At the prisoner's desire a messenger was sent to Lock's-fields for Mr. Goulding, who shortly at tended and deposed that he sold the mare to the prisoner at Aldridge's. He was sure the witnesses were all wrong, as he could, if necessary, produce the person who had the mare before him. Mr. Henry said the prosecutor had better go down immediately to Guildford, and satisfy him self whether his mare had been stolen. The mare might remain in the greenyard, and the prisoner might be liberated on his own recognisance to appear again. 011 the following day (yesterday) Mr. Johnson said that he and his friends had been mistaken about the 'identity of the mare. When he got down to Guildford he found his own animal safe and sound. At this announcement Collins declared his inten tion to " have the law" of Mr. Johnson, but ulti mately an arrangement was come to between the parties, and as they wished the magistrate to act as arbitrator, Mr. Henry awarded Collins £5 as compermation for imprisonment, and 30s. greenyard fees and expenses. With this the matter ended. WO RSHIP -STREET.—William Phillips, 52, was charged withviolently assaulting and maltreat ing Sarah Phillips, his wife. The complainant, apparently much younger than The prisoner wasfOTMally committed for trial. LAMBETH.—Yesterday Henry Arlett, a man about 30 years of age, wearing large jet-black whis kers and moustaches, and in the uniform of an artil leryman, was placed at the bar before the Hon. G. C. Norton on a charge of vagrancy. William Hewett, a mendicity officer, deposed that on the evening before, standing near the railway , arch in the Westminster-road, the prisoner was beg ging, and his appearance having attracted a num ber of persons, and more than ordinary sympathy, h e in a short time got as much as half-a-crown in coppers. The officer added that Vie prisoner was dressed as smartly as if he was going to parade. In reply to the charge the prisoner said he had been in the Royal Artillery about a year and a half, that he had been sent home invalided from Malta, had been some time at the hospital at Wool wich, and was ultimately discharged at Christmas last, with merely a sovereign as a gratuity. Since then he had been living by the exertions of his wife as a laundress, but her work getting slack he was compelled to beg. Mr. Norton—What is the reason you cannot work for your living ? Prisoner—Because I am unable from an affection in the back. Mr. Norton—Then your proper course is to go to your parish ; you cannot be permitted to beg in this way. Where is your parish ? Prisoner—ln the City of London. _ _ Mr. Norton—Then You must go there. You must be a mean-spirited person to disgrace the uniform of the finest corps in her Majesty's service by begging in it. I shall give you a light sentence of seven days, and on the expiry of your imprison ment you must go to your parLh. The Prisoner (insolently)—This uniform suit is mine, and while there is a single shred of it together I shall not cease to beg. Mr. Norton—You seem a worthless fellow, and deserve a much more severe punishment than I have given you. Prisoner—l say what I mean. I'll keep my word, and beg. The prisoner was then removed from the bar. HAMMERSMITH.—Mr. Francis Thompson, a pawnbroker, of No. 38, Norland-road, Shepherd's bush-market, appeared before Mr. Ingham to answer an adjourned summons, at the instance of Mrs. Martha Nasmyth, a lady residin9- in Norland square, for knowingly taking a quantity of clothes sent to wash as a pledge from a laundress named Caroline Burton. Caroline Burton stated that she lived in James street, Kensington, and form er l y t oo k i n washing. She was Mrs. Nasmyth's laundress in the month of June last, and she pledged the washing at the defendant's shop to procure her children bread, as her husband was out of employment. The defen dant had known her for three or four years, and she had repeatedly pledged at his shop. He knew that she was a laundress, because she had pledged £1 worth of shirts at a time. She had pledged her customer's clothes a great many times, and when she got money she redeemed them. She had taken a clothes-basket full at a time and pledged some times 20 sheets in a bundle. The defendant had several times said he hoped she would not get into trouble when the bundles had been large, and she had told him that it was in consequence of her hus band being out of work. Mr. Ingham said he had a duplicate before him relative to a quantity of clothes and other articles pledged in July for £1 ss. The witness said, at that time three tickets were made into one for £1 si. She told the defendant that the lady wanted her things home, and that she could not get them out. She then asked for the three tickets to be made info one for her to take to the lady. The articles in the ticket consisted of two large tablecloths, five sheets, a pair of drawers, 36 towels and pillowcases. The defendant said he had no knowledge of the things being " washing" at the time they were in. The things were pledged separately, and for small sums. Mr. Ingham said the defendant must have been aware that the witness was a laundress from her pledging 20 sheets at a time. Besides, he must have known that a painter's wife was not likely to possess 36 chamber towels. The defendant then called his assistant, William Goodley, who stated that he was not cognizant of the things being " washing" at the time they were taken in. The witness asserted that she told him that the articles were " washing." Mr. Ingham said it was not material to inquire as to whether the defendant knew the things were " washing" when they were first pledged. In July the duplicates were consolidated and made into one.l That act was substantially a pledging, and then the question was whether at eat time the defend an t k new th a t t h e woma n was,,a laundress, and that the thi ngs were " washing."',4, He thought that the case was quite clear, and thit the defen dant knew p er fectly well when he _,nade out the ticket th a t t h e woman was a l aun dress and that the thin gs were " washing." He ordered the defendant to forfeit £2 10s., and to deliver up all the articles, with 4s. costs. MR. DORLING, OF EPSOM.—The Mr. Dorling whose death was y es t er d ay recor d e d i n severa l o f th e me tropolitan newspapers was the father of Mr. Henry Dor hug, the well-know n c l er k o f t h e course a t Ep som . H e had nothing whatever to do with the " Grand Stand" and " correct cards." Mr. Henry Dorling, whose name is so familiar to the public, is, we are glad to state, likely to discharge his duties in connection with Epsom races for many years to come. [ADV E RTISEMENT]._--11olloway's Pills and Ointment.— Those medicines have obtained a celebrity and an amount of sale in all parts of the world, which must be taken as a sufficient proof that their virtues are not exaggerated. They have stood the test of nearly a quarter of a century, and during all that period there has not been a single charge brought publicly against them. No one has com plained that they shave done harm instead of good. No invalid, after a fair trial, has found them fail to relieve his pain or cure his disease. In all cutaneous disorders espe cially, the combined action of the Ointment and the Pills is absolutely irresistible. Tho cure is nqt temporary or superficial, but complete and permanent. was a result and not a cause ; an effect of the same physical or mental condition which also caused the development of insanity. But deducting such, there still remains a sufficient number to. enable us to assert that the state of " single blessedness" is not the most healthy one either as regards mind or body—nor the most natural one, view it as we may. This year there has been a great preponderance in the admission of female over male patients, the num bers being of females 39, and of males 30. Last year there was an excess of one female. These numbers, taken by themselves, would tend to prove that femal6s are more liable to insanity than males. But of a total of 1,061 admissions during 30 years, from July, 1827, 527 were females and 534 males, showing a slight preponderance in favour of males. Our statistics tend to prove, however, that reco veries have been more frequent and deaths less frequent among women. For, of 456 recoveries from 1827 to 1857, 263 were females and 193 males ; while of 197 deaths during the same period 77 were females and 120 males. Taking the general statis tics of British and foreign asylums as a basis, it is found that males are slightly more predisposed to insanity than females; and experience, therefore, proves what a priori reasoning would lead us to expect—judging from the greater frequency of the causes of insanity in the one sex than in the other. The age of patients when admitted does not give an accurate idea of the age at the time of attack ; for the interval elapsing between the attack and ad mission varies greatly. Of 69 admissions 20 patients were under 30 years of age, 38 below 40, and 53 below 50, while there were only 16 above 50. This shows, as all statistics tend to show, that the liabi lity to insanity is greatest in mid-age, when the battle of life is fiercest—when the powers of intel lect proper are strained, and the emotions and pas sions excited to the utmost. Out tables will show that the greatest number of admissions occurred between the ages of 30 and 40—viz., 18 ; then be tween 20 and 30, and 40 and 50,15 each ; and lastly between 50 and 60, 12. Of the recoveries, 23 in number, 6 occurred under 30, 13 under 40, and 18 under 50, while only-, 4 patients were above the lat ter age—thus showing, that, as in the liability to insanity, so are the chances of recovery greatest in mid-age. The period of admission is not a safe criterion or index to the period of attack; but the dates of ad mission in the aggregate may afford approxima tive results, nevertheless, of some value. Our sta tistical tables for the last 31 years show that the months in which the greatest number of admissions took place were August, July, June, and March ; while those during which the fewest admissions oc curred were Nov., Dec., and Feb. Hence it may be broadly stated that the liability to insanity appears greatest during the hotter months of the year, and least during the colder—greater during hot than cold weather. This is borne out by the expe rience of asylums not only in Britain and onthe con tinent, but in India. Esquirol's experience in the Saltpetriere was that the liability was greatest in May, June, July, and August, decreasing from the latter months to September or December. Par chappe comes to a similar conclusion. From this fact of the influence of season in predisposing to in sanity, it may naturally be inferred that climate should act in a similar way ; or, in other words, that insanity should be more prevalent in hot than in cold climates—in India than in Scandinavia. This, - however, explain it as we may, is contrary to fact, for it' is notorious that no country or climate is so preg nant of insanity as that of Norway, for instance. Again, in this institution, the greatest number of recoveries occurred in September and August ; next in March, October, and December ; while the fewest occurred in November and February, the next months in order being April, May, and July. Esquirol's experience in the Saltpetriere was that recoveries were more numerous in spring and autumn than during the other seasons or months of the year. Our table of periods of recovery also shows distinctly the preponderance of recoveries among females, in the proportion of 263 to 192 males (the numbers of the sexes admitted during the last 31 years being equal, or nearly so.) This preponderance of females in regard to recoveries holds good from year to year, and as a general rule the disease in women being usually more acute, transient, and curable than in men. In this asylum, intemperance has always figured comparatively low as a cause of insanity. During the past year, of 69 admissions, intemperance was assigned as the cause in only 4 cases ; and in some of these it may have been wrongly so assigned. It apparently figures much higher among the recoveries, for of 22 cases discharged recovered during the year, intemperance was ascribed as the cause of the original attack in six instances. Taking our statistics for the last 31 years, we find intem perance or dissipation to have been the assigned cause in about 10 per cent. of the total of 1,130 cases admitted; or, if we deduct the cases in which no cause is stated: at all—which will leave a total of 733—in about 15 per cent. No distinction, how ever, is drawn, nor can it generally be drawn, be tween the influence of intemperance as an exciting, and as a predisposing cause ; for, undoubtedly, in different cases, it may be the one or other. More over, it is almost impossible to ascertain in how many cases it is really the cause, or a cause, and not the effect, or an effect. For instance, intempe rance is frequently associated with disappointments in business, grief and despair, and other depress ing emotions*; and it seems pretty certain that, in many of such cases, at least, intemperance and insanity arc produced by the same moral causes— the intemperance exaggerating the insanity, or the insanity the intemperance. We fear that there is a great tendency in certain sections of society to exaggerate the importance of intemper ance as a cause of insanity, in order to illustrate more powerfully their own peculiar views. There is no necessity . for this • the relations of intemper ance to insanity are sufficiently apparent, and illus trations of the evils to which it thus leads are suffi ciently numerous, to render exaggeration unneces sary and even mischievous. It may be necessary to enter a caveat against a popular error, viz., that all cases of insanity from drink are cases of dipso mania. This term is liable to be abused and mis understood. Cases of insanity traceable mediately or immediately to drink—to intemperance—arc comparatively common in all asylums ; but cases of dipsomania proper are much less so. The term is properly applicable only when the disease takes the form of incessant and uncontrollable appetite for stimulants, an appetite which no consideration, moral or intellectual, personal or public, can enable the infatuated victim to control or keep under. HANDSOME CONDUCT OF A FRENCH CAPTAIN. LIVERPOOL, Sept. B.—The master of the Peter Foulkes writes :—" On the Bth of July, when about 120 miles east of Malta, on her passage home, the schooner Peter Foulkes, of Liverpool, under my command, with a cargo of Indian corn from the Danube for the United Kingdom, suddenly sprung a leak during a heavy gale, and, when in a sinking state, myself and crew, five in all, were taken off the wreck by the French steamer Simois, Lieut. Guillon Penau, commander, exhausted by our ex ertions at the pumps to keep the ship afloat until assistance could be obtained, and with nothing on us in the shape of clothing but the shirt and trousers each in which we had been working. On getting on board the steamer, Capt. Penau sent us sufficient comfortable clothing for all hands, and for 15 days, while we were on board of his ship, during which time he was beating down under canvas to Mar seilles, the screw having been broken, he treated us in the most kind and hospitable manner, allow ing us to want for nothing. On arrival at Mar seilleS he brought all hands into his oivn cabin, and insisted on my crew taking 100 f. to supply immediate wants, adding, that while we remained at Marseilles, if we liked, we might make his ship our home, and that our provisions would be there for us. He then sent one of his officers with me to the British consul. I am sorry to state that we did not receive the assistance from that gentleman that we expected, and to which I think British seamen, circumstanced as we were, are entitled. I stated our case to him, and three days afterwards my men were supplied each with a pair of trousers, a shirt, and a cap, and, after a further delay of four days, I was supplied with a shirt and a pair of trou sers. To save time waiting for a remittance from my owner, to whom I told him I had written, I wished him to advance me as much on a draft on my owner as would carry me home. This he 'declined, and suggested that I might raise as much as I required by going round amongst the English shipS in the harbour. That I declined to do. In due course of postl received my owner's remittance, whenbefore leaving I went to the French Captain what I was in hisPenau, to know debt, and d to thank him for his great kindness to myself crew. We had pre viously offered him the clothing aii we could spare, on receiving the supplies from the cons u l, w hi c h th e captain decli ne d to t He said I owed him nothing, and he would ac . cept of nothing ; that he had done no more than he believ e d an E ng li s h man would do f or a French man similarly situated. On shaking hands with me he looked at my clothing, said I had but a poor outfit, and offered to supply me with a b e tt er f rom his wardrobe. ' This, of course, I declined.. Hoping you will excuse the length of this letter:ai I have no d ou bt y ou w ill agree with me such noble conduct should be known.---4 am, sir, your most obedient k avant, IV:v. GRAHAM." STRANGE AFFAIR. On Wednesday, a melancholy occurrence kept the inhabitants of a populous part of the town, the Blakemore district, in deep anxiety and suspense, for some hours, and it had a fatal termination. John Griffith, a working collier, of good character, had a daughter, named Emma, aged 15, in service at a neighbouring beershop, kept by a man named William Trunter. On Sunday forenoon, some men in the house heard the poor girl call for help, and there appears no doubt that he shamefully abused her. The girl, on escaping from him, went home and told something of what had occurred to her mother and female relatives : but appeared in great dread of the truth being told to her father ; and on a man not of the family appearing, she ran affrighted into another room. On Tuesday, her father went to the magistrate's office, to apply for a warrant against Trunter, desiring his daughter to follow him. Still her fear and shame withheld her, and she did not go. Her father upbraided her for this, and, some additional facts having trans pired, he told her that next morning she must go to a surgery for examination. In the morning, when the time came, it was found that the poor girl had left the house. The father sought her, and learned at her grandmother's that she had been there, and said she would never again return home. On prosecuting his search further, he caught sight of the poor girl, who, on seeing him, ran off down a by-road in the direction of the coalpits at Blakenhall. Her father followed slowly, till, see ing that she got near an old coal-pit shaft, he called to some men to stop her. The girl then ran into the field, up the bank which surrounded the shaft, and had thrust herself between the apertures of the planks which formed the protection to the shaft. Her father, seeing his worst fears about to be rea lised, shouted with much feeling, " Don't do that, my wench !" but the girl was too determined, or too panic-struck to heed him. Dragging through the rest of her body, she rolled herself into the pit. By this time her terror-stricken father had got near enough to her to imagine that he could yet arrest the dreadful act. He clutched at her, but she had fallen too far. The shaft was known to be a deep one, and to have lain unworked for six years. If, therefore, she had escaped being dashed to pieces, there was yet no hope for her life, as the foul air towards the bottom of the pit must be fatal to her. Nevertheless active efforts were at once commenced to recover the body. A brave fellow, an engine driver at a neighbouring pit, volunteered his ser vices. He commenced descending amidst the hearty though stifled cheering of some hundreds of anxious spectators. He had not gone far, however, before he was beaten back by the carbonic acid gas. Other attempts followed, but they were unsuccessful, until some air-troughs were procured from Messrs. Aston. and Corns, the proprietors of the colliery. By these the shaft was cleared to within 9 yards of the scaf fold, which ran across the shaft at a distance of 69 yards from the mouth, and upon which it was known the body of the girl must be lying. Joseph Elwell, however (for that was the engineer's name) thrust himself through that, and hastily groped for the body in the dark. His hand first reached the ...... foot of the corps e , a n d h e s p ee dily d rew it up t o th e ' 1•:.7 ' safe air. Upon th e cor p se reac hi ng th e b an k , it - w:tis •-",.::: found that there was a bruise upon the face upow ,-4e;" the left elbow, a cu t upon th e k nee, an d bl oo ' ' d was A.:l4'<i l oozing through her clothes from her back. She had, . '; --(Y then been in the shaft about seven hours, namely, from 10.30 a.m. till about 5.30 p.m.—Manchester Guardian. COUNTRY MARKETS'. BIRMINGHAM-SETT. 9. At this morning's market there was a large supply of wheat, and the damp samples were sold at a considerable decline on the currencies of this day se'nnight, but dry parcels nearly maintained their value. Barley taken in re tail at previous rates. New oats 6d to is per qr. lower, but old were fully as dear, and scarce. Beans less in re quest, and peas unaltered. MANCHESTER-SEPT. 9. Our market this morning was rather slenderly attended., and a fair amount of business was done at last week's ex treme prices for wheat of good quality. Flour was taken slowly, but sellers held firmly for previous rates. New oats were id to 2d per 451 b, and oatmeal was is per load cheaper, but old ruled steady. Beans and Indian. corn 6d per qr. dearer. GLASGOW-SEPT. 8, There was an average attendance at our market to-day, and business on the whole presented no character of iite portance. We make no alteration in our quotations. 130, business during the week, although not extensive, was &Mei at fully the previous currency. t• t NEWARK, -^-SEPT. S. At to-day's market there was but little animation in ilia grain trade, and prices were unaltered. Fine barley sold freely, at late rates. Other articles were without change. White wheat, new, 50s to 52s Barley, grinding.. 32s to 34s Red do. 46s to 48s Oats, old, 125 t.... 33s to 36st Old white 44s to 46s New do 30s to 31ft Red do. 40s to 42s Beans.. 50s to 53a Barley, malting... , 38s to 40s I Malt.... 6BB to 72g BRISTOL-SEPT. 9 ar corn exchange to-day was again well attended, 'with a good supply of all kinds of grain, which met a firm mar ket at late prices.. Oats were again rather firm, and there was no sellers of new at th e l ow pr i ces o f last week. Beam' and peas were unaltered. BOSTON-SEPT. 8. We had a large attendance to-day, and a liberal supply of wheat, but the trade was dull, at a decline of fully is per qr. Oats 6d to is cheaper. Beans and peas were held firmly for previous rates. In barley no change. Wheat, white 44s to 47s Beans, Mazagan..—s to —s I red 38s to 4os Middle & small 47s to 52s Barley 32s to 46s j White peas 42 s t o 48s Oats . .2 4s t o 28s I Grey 42s to 43a EDINBURGH GRAIN—SEPT. 8. We had a much larger market to-day. Sales brisk, for all sorts. Wheat and barley better. Oats and beans Ntore, _ rather lower. Averages per Imperial quarter. Wheat (N) Wheat (0) 2 5 1 8-12ths Barley. Oats . l. 6 8 4-12ths Beans Total Supply and Sales. Wheat .1115 qrs Sold 962 qrs Barley... 1698 qrs Sold 1651 qrs Oats .1126 qrs Sold 915 qrs Beans B6 qrs ' Sold 32 qrs DERBY SMITHFIELD—SEPT. 7. Beef 644 to 6z 4 d Veal 7d to —d Mutton__ ...614 to 7d Pork sd to 54d Lamb 7d to 71d Rough fat, 4s 6d per stone. FATAL ACCIDENT.—On Monday an inquiry took place at the Wheatsheaf Inn, St. Helen's Junction, before Mr. Dritlield, ooroner, as to the cause o f th e d ea th o f a b oy named Charles Whitaker, aged, 14 years. On Sat ur d a y, an engine z called the Hero, proceeded from Sutton Shade to the points at the Pear-tree House, where the boy got on one of the buffers behind the engine, unperceived by the engine clriver, who proceeded along the Parr Branch. A coal train was seen coming up the same line of rails, drawn by the engine Goliath, and both engine -drivers, seeing the danger, immediately reversed their engines, and then, with the stokers, jumped off. A slight colli- : sion, however, took place, and th en t h e engine Hero, before the driver and stoker could regain their places, bounded off at full speed, with the poor boy still on the buffer; it ran past the points at the junction of the branch, where the pomtsman endeavoured to throw it off the line, and rushed at full speed to the terminus at the junction, where it broke down the railings, ran across the read, and knocked down the middle part of the station be longing to the London and North-Western Railway, where its progress was arrested, and the dead body of the boy was found. The station-master at the junction, his mother, and three children, who were in bed in th e house at the time, had a miraculous escape, the bedrooms being in front and at the back part of the house, and the centre only being de molished. Some blame appeared to be attached to the engine -driver of the Hero, for proceeding down the up fine at the branch ; but the jury, after a long consultation, returned a verdict of accidental death. —.Manchester Guardian. ASHITY.—On the Bth inst., at Isleworth, Mrs. George C. Ashby, of a daughter. BLA.cKErr.—On the Bth inst., at 28, Green-street, Gros venor-square, the wife of Joseph B. Blackett, Esq., of a son. CHICHESTER.—On the 7th inst., at Canterbury, the wifo of Captain Nugent Chichester, of a son. FISHER.—On the 7th inst., at Chetwynd Lodge, Shrop shire, the wife of the Rev. Frederick Fisher, of a son. MARRIAGES. DUNIERGITE— HIGIIFIELD. 011 the Bth inst., at St. George's Church Everton by the Rev. Sir Geo. GlYp., _ the Rev. Walter 'Scott PUMerkue, vicar of Fareham; to Maria Lydia, daughter, of the late Geo. Highfield, Esq., of Everton, Liverpool. - MILEY — SIMPSON,—On 'the Bth inst., at St. Barnabas Church, Kensington; Robert Parsons Miley,. of War wick-street, Regent-street, to Adelaide, fourth daughter of William Henry Simpson, Esq., of Warwick-gardens, Kensington. DEATHS, BLYTIL—On the 3d inst., at 13, Nottin g ha m -t errace, N ew road, Mr. George Linsey Blyth, analytic chemist; aged 36. COOPER.—On the 13th of July; at Nusseerabad, Captain Herbert Stanley Cooper, of 83d Regt., third sur viving son of the late Robert Chester Cooper, Esq., of Brighton. . CROMPTON.—On the Bth inst., at the residence of T. De larue, Esq., the Rasells, Sandy, Bedfordshire, Thomas Bonsor Crompton, Esq., of Farnworth Mills, near Man chester, aged 67. :01.1011.-J. G. Hough, Esq., of 16, Brunswick-square, Foundling Hospital, London, aged 74. _ - - MEREDITIL—On the 9th inst., at 1, Kepple-row, Stoke Newington-green, N. Meredith, Esq., aged 83. SPENCE.—On the Bth inst., at 5, Strand, Colonel Charles Howe Spence, 60th Rifles. . - . LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct, o: the Savoy, in the county of Middlesex, Friday, September 10, 18584 4 <~ .~ 9 'x . fY 1 M ~~ i ~.:fiiJ~ • , G _ d , Week C 7 p.m. i 112:ton for 35., : 11 431. 31 'irst issued £ on Mon 1 3th, 14 able for 18th Se Gene. T"i Items bationa /iingdc Chi Weym( Routha London Char neY, 01 Sept. Pull! Interns Britain B Parti Thine tt of inter The GL AND rl r, G F~ 255. i T" hank THE Es The COMPA MARIN Compai teed an suranec ditions Insur eidents, teethe Propose apply ti Compa: INT] so( X6tabli Grace.- Society ntandin of gram Paymer the ofFu T" Empon SURV ED "V. Rm. Samuel John E Messrs. The I In May Polley taken out in Thee Intern: The Two. every Itg sl Its i amoun Its a The Ahot Sinc, Upwar( For Chaim T B respor and It quotat filb:ba house. 1E Chops rieq, a enable The best s Sold street. Messy other princi • -4 a Bai Prof J. El 1838 1811 1845 1818 1851 142,1 N.T3 " T,E the lx iHd Ner Neu Ern Her D' times the only 1 Intett for hi ,and n Flav year arm, mice rest( bt?re, Lion, exce istreo imii l ft; ev. Inc fines 101 b ceip etre 31Ed at Che Out