The Sun. — London, England, 1866-01-12 00:00:00

RAILWN .GENCE. SOIITH-EASTERN. A special general meeting of this company was held yesterday at the Bridge House-hotel, London bridge ; the Hon. J. Byng , the chairman, presided. Mr. S. Smiles, the secretary, having read the no tice convening the meeting, The CHAIRMAN said they had been called toge ther to consider the course to be pursued by the company in the approaching Session of Parliament, having already briefly explained the policy which they thought the most expedient in the circular lately issued by the Board. They had been in formed at different times of the territorial arrange ments and agreements which had been made with neighbouring companies with a view to peace and the avoidance of unnecessary capital expenditure. He could conscientiously say that they had endea - voured to the best of their power to pursue that policy, and at the same time to defend the interests of the property intrusted to their care. (Hear, hear.) At a time when shareholders were very much opposed to extensions, they endeavoured to carry out a policy of non-extension in compliance with their views. (Hear, hear.) Hence some 12 years since, when the Bromley Bill for a line from Lewisham to Bromley and Croydon was before Parliament, they withdrew the Bill to avoid fur ther capital expenditure, but the consequence of that step was the immediate granting of an exten sion of the West-end and Crystal Palace line to Bromley and Farnborough. Shortly after, in a subsequent Session of Parliament, an independent company projected the Mid-Kent line, which they had since been under the necessity of purchasing ; and another independent company subsequently projected the Crays line, which the Chatham Com pany had in like manner made part of their system. During the same time the London, Chatham, and Dover Company, which had become established be tween Chatham and Canterbury, was seeking to push itself eastward to Dover on the one hand, and west ward to London on the other. They endeavoured to oppose them to the best of their power, and did so at much cost, but they knew with what result. (Hear.) Parliament granted the rival company, in successive sessions, nearly all that they sought to obtain, until, in short, a second line of railway be came established between London, Canterbury, and Dover, and between, London, Margate, and Rams gate. They were thus compelled to recognise the existence of the competing company's line. They felt that the competition between London, Canter bury, and Dover was affecting the whole traffic of their railway, and if persisted in would become most injurious to their interests ; and they did what all companies similarly situated were under the neces sity of doing—made peace on fair and honourable terms. (Cheers.) While all this was going on, they had to defend themselves against other attacks —not so much bynew companies as by their old ally, the Brighton Company. In 1848 an agreement was made by which the two companies recognised cer tain districts as those of the Brighton and South- Eastern systems respectively. That was originally a toll agreement, but in 1854 the Brighton Company proposed that its meaning should be enlarged, and that the two companies should " not cuter into any arrangement with, or give any assistance, direct or indirect, to any new company" in the districts de fined by the agreement of 1848 without the consent in writing of the other company. This proposalwas agreed to ; and the company accordingly declined to entertain applications which were made to them to work the Portsmouth direct railway, then an in dependent line, and to support a scheme for a new line to Eastbourne. Such was the state of affairs when a line was projected, in 1858, from Uckfield to Tunbridge-wells. As Tunbridge-wells was un questionably situate within the district defined by the agreement as South-Eastern, they called upon the Brighton Company . to declare themselves on the subject, as the projectors gave out that the Brighton Company had agreed to work the line, and to guarantee 4 per cent. on the capital. The chairman of the Brighton Company, over and over again, expressly declared that that com pany had nothing whatever to do with the scheme, awl they had no intention of entering into any arrangement with the promoters. This was also repeated by the board of directors of the Brighton Company, speaking through their secretary, and they also assured the board that they had no inten tion of entering into any arrangement with the pro moters of the Uckfield line. The bill was, however, obtained, as well as a subsequent bill, authorising the construction of a line from East Grinstead to the Uckfield and Tunbridge-wells line, thereby com pleting the connexion between the main line of the Brighton Company and the line to Tunbridge-wells, and both lines were now the property of the Brigh ton Company. (Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding the strong and express denials of the Brighton chairman and board of directors, that they had any connexion with the Uckfield scheme in its early stages, it was quite clear that they encouraged it from the begin ning, if they were not its actual projectors. In sup port of this view it was only necessary for him to quote the evidence given by Mr. Cary, chairman of the Uckfield Railway, before Mr. Meadows White, Master in Chancery, on the 20th of April, 1863, in the case of " Peto v. the Brighton, Uckfield, and Tunbridge -wells Railway, and others." Mr. Cary's statement on oath was as follows :—" Before we went to Parliament at all we consulted the Brightori Company about introducing the bill, and therefore we kept with them. They gave us their assistance BO far as they could in the face of their territorial agreement. . . . We were with them from the very beginning. We have been in treaty with the Brighton board up to this very time." (Hear, hear.) The action of the Brighton Company having been thus in express violation of the spirit as well as the letter of the existing arrangement, the South Eastern considered themselves set free from all obligations under it, and that they were no longer debarred from admitting over their lines the traffic of districts from which they had before considered themselves excluded. (Hear, hear.) They, there fore, encouraged a projected line to Eastbourne, and they brought out an extension of the Mid-Kent line into Croydon. But in the same Session in which these schemes were before Parliament the Surrey and Sussex line was projected, passing through this com pany's district from Croydon to Tunbridge-wells, and giving the Brighton Company, if carried out, a direct competing line to that place. As they con- ... ~ sidered the line calculated to be most injurious to the interests of the company, they opposed it in Par liament. They had various interviews with the chairman of the Brighton Company on the subject of the rival projects, and the result of them was that in 1864 a new agreement was entered into for the Purpose of establishing amicable relations between the companies, each binding themselves not to sup port any future application to Parliament by which an inroad was to be made into the system of the other company without the consent of that other company in writing. Under the agreement thus entered into, th e South-Eastern Company withdrew their Eastbourne and Croydon schemes, and the chairman of the Brighton Company undertook to . obtain the withdra wa l of the Surrey and Sussex Fclietne, which was done. But in the very next en liing• Session the Surrey and Sussex scheme was ,„ was carri e d, and it was now the fa in introduced, p r operty of the Brighton Company, the line. who were ac tively engaged in constructi ng and (Hear.) The projection and construction of th e S urrey Sussex line could not possibly be regarded by them as a friendly project, or calculated to further those " amicable relations between the compa n i es ', which it was the express object of the agreement of 1864 to establish. It ran nearly parallel in the first part of its course with the Caterham line of this company, crossed the main line near Godstone and Edenbridge, and ran in nearly a parrallel line with their own to Tunbridge-wells. In short, it was a line of a di rectly hostile and competing character throughout. (Hear.) he line in course of construction by the Brighton Company was from Leatherhead to Dork ing, whi c h di str i ct h ad until now been entirely served by this company, but in a short time they would have the Brighton competition to encounter in hat quarter also. lie asked whether they were to sit still and see th e i r traffic abstracted at those diffe rent points and take no steps to prevent it. (Loud cr i es o f " o, no !') Some of their proprietors called out " Peace," and others asked them to re main quiescent and do nothing. (A voice—" Not peace at any price.") It was possible they might be more largely increased in Brighton than they were in South-Eastern stock, and were influenced by considerations of that nature. (Hear, hear.) But they were there solely as defenders and pro moters of South-Eastern interests, and as they saw the traffic assailed and likely to be abstracted, they were compelled to look out for new traffic to supply its place. The Brighton Company, by their re peated violations of agreements, bad set them en tirely free from all obligations to them—(hear, hear) —and they must see if they could not extend their accommodation in the interest of the public as well as of themselves, and thereby obtain a large acces sion of new customers from entirely new quarters. (Hear, hear.) Reference had been made in the cir culars addressed to the proprietors by Mr. Bell to the large expenditure incurred by the company in providing the new termini at Charing-cross and in Cannon-street. It was quite true that the expendi ture had greatly exceeded the original estimate— (hear, hear)—but a far larger amount of accommo dation was afforded than was originally contem plated. He then read a letter from Mr. Hawkshaw, the engineer, which stated that the Charing-cross main line of railway, extending from London-bridge to Charing-cross, as well as the city extension into Cannon-street, were both designed and originally estimated for two lines of way only, with stations of moderate size at Cannon-street and Charing cross. These works had been increased from time to time to three lines of way south of the Thames, to four lines of way across the Thames at Hunger ford, and to five lines of way across the Thames at Cannon-street, and the stations both at Cannon street and at Charing-cross were about double the size - originally proposed and for which the Parlia mentary estimates were made. In addition to this it had been necessary to provide locomotive depots on the south bank of the Thames. The works, there fore, had been nearly doubled in magnitude, and this fully accounted for the increased expenditure on that head. The increased quantity of land re quisite for the additional lines of way and enlarged stations necessarily swelled the amount to be paid for land ; but on this item it was necessary to ob serve that in the neighbourhood of the works the cost of property ever since the first Act for the Charing-cross Railway was obtained had been rapidly increasing. Mr. Hawkshaw believed the directors adopted a wise course in increasing the amount of accommodation on these lines to the ex tent they had done. He regretted that these ter mini had been so costly, but the provision of them had become absolutely indispensable for a first class line. (Cheers.) Had they remained cooped up at Loudon-bridge while all the other large compa n es were forcing their way into the central parts of London, they must have seen the best part of that traffic leaving them for other routes. They had secured, without exception, the two best and most centrally situated railway termini in the metropolis, and they must now exert themselves to make the most of them. (Hear, hear.) With that object they had again projected the extension of the Mid- Kent line into Croydon, and, should they succeed, but few Croydon passengers whose destination was the city would travel by the other line and stop short at London-bridge, when they could carry them directly into Cannon-street. The proposed new lines to Brighton, as well as to Clapham, Kenning ton, and Brixton, which they proposed to promote, would also furnish a very large accession of traffic for the new termini, which could not be otherwise than most profitable. By the connexions of the proposed Brighton line, Brighton passengers would have direct access to the five first-class stations at London-bridge, Cannon-street, Farringdon street, Charing-cross, and Victoria, as well as to fifty other stations in London and the suburbs. It had been assumed that the expenditure in curred on the city terminus and works would be un productive, and that there would be next to no traf fic carried upon the line between Cannon-street and Charing-cross; at least no mention was made of it in the adverse circulars ; but it was only neces sary to point to the tens of thousands of persons daily travelling between these two points—to the numbers who crowded the omnibuses and the boats, to show that there already existed an immense traffic between the city and Charing-cross, and that if they did not get a very large share of that traffic it would be the fault of their own arrangement. With trains running every ten minutes, and doing the journey in about five minutes, so much faster than either boats, or omnibuses, or cabs would do the distance, it was his belief that they would have a very large accession of remunerative traffic as soon as the Charing-cross line connecting it with the city was opened to the public. The opening of the Cannon-street station, in connexion with the new line through Mid-Kent, whereby the distance to Ramsgate and Margate by the South Eastern Rail way would be shortened by about 13 miles, must also have the effect of enabling them to recover much of the traffic to those places which they had lost since the opening of the Kent Coast Railway. There was also the increase to be anticipated on the opening of the Cannon-street station such as they had experienced since the opening of the Charing cross station, in consequence of its greater conve- nience to the public, and which would place the South Eastern line at a great advantage compared with other routes to Gravesend, Woolwich, and Greenwich, as well as other places where they com peted for traffic with adjoining companies. Their general manager had handed him an estimate of the probable increase from these sources, to this effect : That the opening of the Cannon-street terminus would give an increase in net receipts of about £51,000 a year ; Lewisham and Tunbridge direct, £45,600; Lewisham and Dartford, £22,800; and the Cranbrook, Woolwich, and AV esterham branches, £15,750, or an estimated total increase of about £138,000 per annum, but he(the chair man) trusted that this estimate would be very con siderably exceeded. These were their general views as to the present position and poli cy o f t h e company which they recommended for approval and adoption. (Cheers.) His friend the deputy chairman had sug gested that in order to place the board as much as possible in accord with the proprietors, four of the present directors should retire and make room for four new directors, two represent ing th e N ort h ern _ _ interest, and two the London and Southern interest. The subject had also received the consideration of the board, who had passed a resolution to the effect that four of the present directors retire and give place to four to be chosen out of the number of shareholders holding thelargest amounts of the con- solidated stock of the company. He concluded by proposing the following resolution :—" That this meeting commits the policy of the company to the board, and pledges to it a cordial support in protect.. ing the rights and interests of the proprietors at large ; and that this meeting approves the resolution of the directors in reference to the reorganisation of the board." (Cheers.) Mr. WATKIN, M.P., deputy-chairman, seconded the motion. Mr. BELL thought as the holding of shareholders had been alluded to, the directors ought to state their holding in the stock of the company. The CITAIIIMANSaid he held £5,000 ordinary stock, and about £5,000 of preference, and other stocks, making altogether £lO,OOO stock in the company. Mr. WATKIN said he held £4,700 ordinary stock. - in the company, and also he held in trust for four members of his family £6,550 of theirstock, making together £11,250. (Hear.) Mr. A. BEATTIE, a director, said he held £3,500 of the ordinary stock, and no stock in either the Brighton, or the London, Chatham, and Dover Companies. He said a duty had devolved upon him to give some information with regard to the bills they were promoting in Parliament on their own account and in conjunction with other companies. There were only two bills promoted by the South- Eastern Company. One was a bill for powers to connect the two ends of the Greenwich branch line granted last session ; and the other bill was for powers to extend the Mid-Kent Railway through Croydon to the Caterham Branch, and to a junction with the company's main line south of that place. Those two bills would require a share capital of £774,000, end the usual borrowing powers of one third the capital. The other bills were stated inthe circular. One was for making a line from Becken ham to Lewes and Brighton, in conjunction with the London, Chatham, and Dover Company. That line would require a share capital of £2,250,000, and the usual borrowing powers of one-third that amount. A line promoted by an independent com pany would require a capital of £300,000 and one third borrowing powers. The line between the city, Kennington, Clapham, and Brixton would require a capital of £2,000,000, together with the usual one third for borrowing powers. Those were the bills they were promoting—first by themselves, and se condly in conjunction with the London, Chatham, and Dover Company. There was another bill for working arrangements with the North-western and Charing-cross Company which was not in a shape to deal with at present. Now, those were very large and important measures. He contended that the Brighton Company were not justified in supporting the Surrey and Sussex scheme, and afterwards in obtaining possession of their line. The South- Eastern Company were thus forced to take steps to retrieve the traffic which would be taken from them by that line. When their traffic was assailed they could not be expected to sit still and do nothing. They had therefore projected a new line to Brighton, which had the largest pleasure traffic of any town in Eng land, and they could afford Brighton passengers ac cess to Cannon-street, Ludgate-hill, Charing-cross, and other stations in London. The South-Eastern Company had heretofore abstained from obtaining traffic in the South London in order to keep peace with the Brighton Company. By making a line beyond Baiham to the lower side of the hill near the Star and Garter, Richmond, they would be enabled to accommodate a very large traffic, and thus very much relieve the crowded station at Waterloo. They had offered the South-Western Company to come into the station at Cannon-street, but they had not accepted it ; that company had, however, made an agreement with the London, Chatharri, and Dover to use the Ludgate Station. To protect the interests of the shareholders the directors had pro moted a line to Croydon, and another line into Brighton. (Hear.) It was for the proprietors to determine whether they would sanction those mea sures. He was very sorry that they had been com pelled to promote them, as they would much rather have been at peace with their neighbours. He then alluded to the circular issued by Mr. Bell, in which he said there were certain errors as to the financial position of the South-Eastern Company, particularly with respect to estimating their future dividends at £1 Is. 10d. per cent. subject to certain traffic. The Brighton Company were now making the Surrey and Sussex line from near Croydon straight to Tun bridge, which Mr. Bell seemed to consider was per fectly valid. The making of: that line had led to other agreements with the Chatham Company. Dr. BEATTIE wished to know whether there had been any communication with the South-Western Company as to the extension line to Richmond. The CHAIR3IAN said there had. Dr. BEATTIE believed that the Brighton and South- Western Company had been asked a very large sum for access to the Cannon-street Station. He held nothing in the Brighton line ; but he had stock in the South-Western, and, therefore, felt in terested in both companies. Mr. FIELDER believed that one of their own directors had given evidence in favour of the Surrey and Sussex line. He represented several Brighton shareholders, who regretted the present hostile pro ceedings between the two companies. Mr. C. BELL moved an amendment, to the effect that the meeting having heard the explanations of the chairman it was expedient that the bill referred to in the circular be not proceeded with, save and except the " Further Powers Bill" for forming the middle portion of the Greenwich branch line, in order to join the two ends of it, which were sanc tioned by Parliament last session. He then went into a history of the company since 1853, when there was a line submitted to the board for accom modating East Kent, which they might have had in their own hands for £350,000, or purchased it by giving a guarantee of 4 per cent. on its cost. It was promoted by Lord Sondes and other landowners, and the contractors were Messrs. Wythes, Trcd well, and Jackson, who were then willing to make the line for that sum, as part of a direct inland line to Do ver. He happened to be the negotiator with the South Eastern Board in respect of the line, and he told them at the time that they were wrong in re fusing to accept the offer of the promoters. If the Board had not fallen into that fatal error and adopted a mistaken policy, they would never have heard anything about the Chatham agreement. He had pointed out in his circular that the proposed now scheme of the company would involve an addi tional outlay of £7,080,000, but Mr. Smiles had stated that it was not so ; but he contended from the preambles of the bills that the figures in his cir cular were so far correct. It was not likely the proposed railways could be made for double the sum specified to make incursions on their neighbours. He thought it was rather late to ask the share holders their opinion of those measures after the Board had incurred an expenditure for surveys, plans, &c., of between £20,000 and £30,000 in pro moting those measures. There might have been some errors in his figures with regard to the revenue ex- penses of the company, but the result of the opera tions showed him that there would not remain much over 1 per cent. for the ordinary stock. He did not know what might be done by suspense accounts, but that was the result of his investigation. Mr. Watkin had told them at Liverpool or Manchester the divi dend would be nearer £4 9s. 6d. per cent. than what he (Mr. Bell) had stated. In alluding to this sub ject, a writer in the Times, who had written a series of articles on the principal lines in England and France, and who had, no doubt, the Board of Trade returns and official documents to refer to, had ar rived at the conclusion that the South-Eastern divi- dend would be reduced to 2 per cent. He (Mr. Bell) had stated in his circular that he had not put down anything in his estimate for prospective traffic. He considered the estimate of the directors as not re- liable, because if he referred back to the Charing cross estimates there would be found ample proof of that. The estimate of £138,000 for expected traffic if it should hereafter prove to be erroneous, the share holders would be told was merely approximate, and therefore nothing wrong, but he thought it was a very doubtful estimate. It was stated at the meeting in Liverpool that the effect of the agitation he was connected with had reduced the price of the stock in the market from 78 to 73 ; but he (Mr. Bell) con tended that it was only part of a general fall in the price of the South-Eastern stock ever since 1863, when the price stood at 95, and, therefore, the agitation had nothing to do with th e continued fall in price. He maintained that the Brighton Company in supporting and making the Surrey and Sussex line had not committed a breach of faith. That matter had been tried before the House of Lords, who were very strict in such matters, and had been given in favour of the Brighton Company. The latter company were at Hastings before the South-Eastern, and therefore were entitled to shorten the distance to that place when the oppor tunity occurred. The directors had commenced the Charing-cross scheme by asking the shareholders to subscribe £300,000, and they ended by adding the Cannon-street Railway to the undertaking, and in volving them altogether in an outlay of £4,000,000 on that account. He wished to know what the pro position of placing four new directorS on the Board had to do with the question before them. He and his friends asked them to abandon five bills, and the Board proposed to abandon four of the present di rectors and elect four new ones. He had nothing to say against Mr. Smiles nor against the Board, but he felt that there was some unseen influence that misled them. He believed if his amendment were,adopted some arrangement would be come to with a view to peace. (Cheers.) Mr. Alderman WiLsoN, of Brighton, seconded the amendment. He was a large shareholder in the South-Eastern, he held stock - in the Brighton, and much more in the London, Chatham, and Dover, and was of opinion that the proposed railway to Brighton would be perfectly valueless. Mr. WATKIN, M.P., complimented Mr. Bell on the gentlemanly manner in which he had conducted his opposition to the measures of the Board. He was glad that the business of the meeting had been carried on in a calm and temperate manner. It was THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 12, 1866. right shareholders should know the position they had been placed in by other parties in reference to the traffic. It appeared that Mr. Bell -wanted them to withdraw the bills for which notices had been given, and his amendment ended Ity requesting that negotiations be entered into with other com panies. He (Mr. Bell) did not tell them that he was the bearer of the olive branch. No ; but he had told them the Brighton Company - would not negotiate with them, and concluded by asking the South-Eastern Company to withdraw their bills. He quite agreed with Mr. Bell that the policy formerly adopted by the South-Eastern Board was a wrong one, and had endeavoured to induce a different policy, so as to have preservedtheir district intact by making lines which were absolutely required to ac commodate it. As to the question of proposed new capital he (Mr. Watkin) saw how it could be re duced. He thought that no one could blame them for making a line to Richmond, because it would pay. Tkc proposed Brighton line would be as good as the existing line, and would have the great advantage of having more stations in London than the existing line. He believed they would get half the traffic, and as the traffic from London to Brighton was not less than £300,000 a year they would get £150,000. From his 20 years' experience of railways he believed that the proposed line would be made for less money I than the estimates. If the Brighton shareholders present were there to form a bridge of peaceor were prepared to submit to arbitrationwhich was required for the accommodation of the public, he would en tertain that question. Whether the directors were to blame or not, there was the green lane on the map in the room, and he maintained that it was an injury to the South-Eastern Company. He complained that Mr. Bell's circulars had been sent only to certain shareholders as private and confidential communi cations, but when he and other directors heard of those proceedings they thought it best to call the shareholders together and meet them face to face. It was a question whether the South-Eastern share holders were to be allowed to settle their own affairs, or whether they were to follow the advice of shareholders interested in other companies. He then showed that several professional gentlemen, who had business connexions, had been acting in the late movement with a view to bring about the rejection of those bills, and a favourable state of things for the advantage of another company. Hold ings of £9O and £lOO in the stock of the company had been recently transferred into the names of some active and influential gentlemen to bring about that result. A circular by the Brighton Company had been issued in the nick of time, stating that no negotiations whatever with the Brighton were pending. Although the directors' circular did not say that there were any with that company, if they came before Parliament the whole matter would be sifted, and they would probably find out that things had been done which no com pany ought to have done. They had been told that there was some unseen influence at the board. That was a most unfair insinuation, and he believed it was unfounded. If any one would bring them terms of peace he would be glad to meet him. It was important they should maintain those projects. The liabilities under the bills were not exactly as stated by Mr. Bell. The public would be asked to take shares in them; there was no other responsi bility than the working of the traffic, and, of course, the. interest on capital would go to suspense ac count during construction. He was totally opposed to giving estimates of traffic, but from a statement by Mr. Eborall, their manager, including an item of £42,000 for accidents in their expenses, the divi dend, instead of being 1 or 2 per cent., as stated, would be close upon 4i per cent. In 10 years their traffic had increased 35 per cent., while the mileage had only increased 8 per cent. No one could say what the traffic between London and the Continent would amount to in a few years hence. About 50 years ago the population of London was 1,000,000, and it was now above 3,000,000, and if it went on increasing at the same rate in 20 years hence it would be 4,500,000. Owing to the pres- sure a few years ago on the directors for closing the capital account of the company, many good op portunities had been lost by which the company might have profited considerably. The policy of non- extension was a great mistake, and it was now dent that they should take a large and comprehen, sive view of their position. (Cheers.) Mr. G. Smrrit, as an old shareholder, asked Mr. Bell to withdraw his amendment. After some observations from Mr. NORTON and Mr. BEAVIS, Mr. EBORALL explained that they found, with re ference to the operations of the Charing-cross line on the traffic of the South-Eastern Company, that it had increased £82,000 in one year. Mr. BELL said he could not withdraw his amend ment, as proxies had been given in favour of it ; but he and those with him would enter into a friendly communication, with a view to bring the two boards together. (Hear, hear.) The CHAIR3IAN thanked Mr. Bell for his offer. Mr. 'WITHERS strongly recommended the meeting to support the directors' resolution. The amendment was then, on a show of hands, negatived, and the motion was carried. A poll was demanded by Mr. Bell, and the meet ing was adjourned till Saturday (to-morrow) to re ceive the result of the poll. A vote of thanks to the chairman so far concluded the business. A Railway Guard Convicted of Stealing from a Train. At the Worship-street Police-court, yesterday, Thomas Davey, a guard working on the Woolwich line of railway, was charged with stealing from a luggage-van while on transit between Mile-end and Ipswich. Twist, formerly attached to the metropolitan division of police, and now employed by Mr. Super intendent Kent, of the Great Eastern line of rail way, as a detective, said—On Wednesday morning I entered the back compartment of a second-class carriage in the 7.15 train, Parliamentary, from London to Colchester, and immediately next to it was the luggage brkae-van, and my instructions were to watch it. I got in at the Bishopsgate ter minus, and on reaching the Mile-end station, the first at which the train stops, I distinctly felt a vibration of the buffers, as though some person was treading on them to pass over into the six-foot way or middle of the line. I looked through the window, and although nearly dark perceived a man close to the luggage-van, standing as if privately engaged. As the train began to move off, however, he sud denly unlocked the door of the van, entered, and closed it. Just as the train entered Stratford the door was again opened, and he alighted with a basket and bundle, which he did not have when he entered, and made his way across to the opposite platform. I followed and called to him, and said I wished to see the contents of his luggage, took him into a se cond-class carriage, and found the bundle contained a sailor's jacket, and the basket a pair of boots. He said all wore his own property, and that he was going to take them to Woolwich. I conveyed him back to London, and gave him up to my superin tendent. He wore his guard's uniform. Mr. Ellison--Do you, prisoner, wish to ask any questions ? Prisoner—l wish to say that I did not cross the buffers. Mr. H. Kent—l am superintendent of police on the Great Eastern line. When the last witness brought the prisoner to me I questioned the latter as to his possession of the articles. He said that they belonged to his brother-in-law, who was a foreman at Woolwich, and that he was, when taken into cus tody, going there with them. He could not give me any address of his relative, but named his own as being at 40, Oxford-street, Whitechapel. I instantly telegraphed to Ipswich for inquiry to be made as to any sailors having proceeded by the train in question, and if so, to ascertain whether they had lost anything. I then proceeded to Woolwich, made search for prisoner's brother-in-law, could not learn about such a person, and on returning found an answer to my telegram. The owners of the pro perty had been found, but not without some diffi culty, as their luggage was fastened up so neatly it did not appear to have been touched. The men are ' I now present by my direction to claim the things, and their evidence will complete the case. John Lewis and James Milne, both sailors, iden tified, one of them the jacket, and the other the boots, his best. They had seen their luggage placed safely, in the brake-van mentioned. Mr. Ellison—Am Ito assume that you, Mr. Kent, placed the detective in the position he named in consequence of previous robberies by this means ? Mr. Kent—There certainly had been robberies, and I felt convinced that some person was prowling about who was not likely to be suspected. The prisoner entered the Great Eastern Company's service as a porter about six years since, and has been a guard on the Woolwich line eight months. He is one of the last men who, from his apparent good conduct, could be supposed guilty of stealing. When I told him that two sailors had claimed the property and were coming to London, he admitted having taken it from the van, declaring at the same time it was his first offence. Prisoner—lt is, I assure you, sir ; and lam very sorry for what I have done. Mr. Kent—Before the train started I took the precaution to have the door of the luggage-van secured on the down side, so that it was compulsory to open that on the other. Mr. Ellison—Robberies by servants are, at all times, great offences. A certain amount of confi dence must necessarily be placed in such persons, and where they succeed in avoiding detection, sus picion, and at times the worst results follow to those who are perfectly innocent. Yours is an especially bad case, and but for these sailors having to pro ceed immediately to sea, thereby rendering it im possible for them to attend before a jury, I would most certainly send you for trial, if only as a warn ing to others. As it is, you must go for six months' hard labour. Another Death from Destitution and Neglect Yesterday afternoon an inquiry was held by Mr. Humphreys, coroner, at the Duke of Cambridge Tavern, Felix-street, Cambridge-heath, relative to the death from destitution of Margaret Fairservis, aged 48. The deceased was a member of a very well-to-do family, but being of somewhat weakened intellect (her family alleged that she was simply given to drink) she had sunk into a state of the most miser able poverty, and received no effectual aid from her relatives. Mrs. Annie Miller, 2, Victoria-street, Hackney, said she was the wife of an oilman. The deceased was her sister, and worked as a sempstress until six months ago, when she became unable to follow that avocation. " I used," said the witness, "to give her relief every Monday. She always came for it. I used to send it out to the door to her generally; she used not to come inside my door ; she was not fit, not clean. I gave her a shilling and some bread and tea, and some meat when I had any left. When I met her in the street I would give her 3d. or more, but she used to go into the publichouse and spend it. Coroner—Did you see her do that ? Witness--No, I did not. But I know she did it and I often saw her drunk. She had two brothers. both well off. James Fairservis gave her ls. a week, but William never gave her anything, although ht had £lO, and often £2O a week. She would not lei me go to her room, or know where she lived, and her temper was very bad. She once tried to take a knife to my husband. A few days ago the deceased called upon her very ill, and said that the hospital told her she would die of disease of the heart if she went out in the street. Witness offered her a bed to take home, but she declined it, saying she was going into the hospital. On Saturday her niece came to tell her that " Old Moggy" was very ill. Witness took her 35., and next day took her a bed, &c., and some underclothing. Witness was going to take her to the workhouse on Tuesday in a cab ; but she died on Monday. In answer to a juror, witness said that on Sunday she took deceased a chemise and a bedgown. Wit. ness did not know whether the deceased had either of those articles on. She had something which wit ness was afraid to look at or touch. Louisa Emmerton, 27, Matilda-street, Bethnal green, said that since August last deceased lodged with her and paid ls. 3d. a week. Witness was never in her room until Saturday, when a friend, a person of French descent, called to see her. The only fur niture in the room was a bedstead, not a bed, and a table. The deceased was sitting on the bedstead clad in one garment. She was deplorably dirty, and the room was in the same state. On the previ ous Thursday night witness had seen her take her cape to a leaving'ishop. There was an old meat pie in the room, but deceased could not eat it. Wit ness gave her food, but she could not eat much. The Frenchwoman, Mrs. O'Blein, went and got a parish order for the deceased, and witness sent in every direction for the relatives of the deceased, and at last found out her brother at 9, Prospect-place, a confectioner. The same night her sister came and brought things to her. This witness also said that the deceased was given to habits of intoxication, but nearly all the jury said that they had seen her daily for years, and they never saw her drunk. Latterly, however, she was not very " sharp," and people would mistake that for the effect of drink. Mr. C. Walsh, parish surgeon, said that he visited deceased on Saturday at noon under an order. She was in a most destitute condition, having no bed, and scarcely any clothing. Witness certified that she ought to be at once taken into the workhouse in firmary, and told the persons about her to send to the workhouse at once. He heard no more until Monday night, when he was sent f or an d f ound her dying. There was then a bed and a fire in the room, but deceased died. The post-mortem examination showed that she was much emaciated. She died from suffocation from asthma. There was no disease of the heart. In a case of asthma, clothing, bedding, and warmth from fuel were essentially necessary. The want of them accelerated the deceased's death. The internal organs showed no trace of drinking habits. A juror said that the deceased was well known in the neighbourhood for years. She had been used as a klud of serf or d ru d ge to d o dirty work until she got ill, and then she was sent adrift by those who could well have afforded to support her. The Coroner said that the case was a most shock ing one in every respect. The deceased had about 2s. a week to live upon, and after paying is. 3d. for rent she could hardly have spent much upon drink, as was alleged. The jury returned a verdict, " That the deceased was found dead from the mortal effects of asthma, accelerated by destitution, by want of clothing to wear, and by the want of bedding, warmth at night, and necessaries generally, through the neglect of her relatives." The jury added that the parish was in no way to blame in the case, and that they desired to censure the relatives alone. During the proceedings it was mentioned that the relatives of the deceased, who stated that they did not know of the extreme poverty of deceased, " would bury her well." After the dose of the case, however, Mrs. Miller, the sister, demanded her fee as a witness for giving evidence, and on being refused, she said, " I in tended to have buried my sister, but now that I am refused the fee I shall leave her to be buried by the parish just as they like." THE MURDER NEAR ABERDARE.—There is strong probability of the mystery which for the time being surrounds this horrible tragedy being cleared away, as far as circumstantial evidence can clear it up. Since the ex amination of Coe, it has transpired that on the day of the missing of the youth Davies he borrowed a small hatchet of a gardener, for the alleged purpose of cutting some wood to make a hen coop. The woman of the house where he then lodged, and also his companions, say they never heard him express any desire or intention of making a hen coop; and if he did make one, they never heard anything about it. The hatchet was not returned that day, nor for many days afterwards. Indeed, the gardener says he should not have had it back at all had he not pestered the prisoner for it. At last it was returned, but very dirty and very rusty, as though it had been buried in the earth. The hatchet was unsuspectingly put by. It is now, it is said, in the hands cf the police, who have caused a minute ex amination of it to be made, with very important results. On Monday a further piece of information cropped out. In the first:week in September—the same week as.the murder —a common pocket handkerchief, saturated with blood, was found in this same wood. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.-It takes some time fully to realise the true nature and extent of so great a calamity as the rinderpest seems likely to prove itself. The infliction under which we are suffering is on a scale, and ac companied with a virulence and intensity such as no living inhabitant of this country has witnessed. Whether the rinderpest be the same as the smallpox or not, it reminds us most forcibly of those times when that dreadful pestilence stalked through the land without the suggestion of any possible cure, and before the discovery of a preventive in vaccina tion. There was then the most imminent risk that the loveliest face might be turned into a hideous mask, and the strongest health shattered or de stroyed, by a cause which no one could calculate on or control, against which there seemed to be no means of guarding beforehand, and against the viru lence of which medicine was powerless. No doubt, then, the smallpox was the cause of very great misery, but it, after all, only anticipated a fate for which all living are sooner or later destined. In an artificial state of society there is somebody to gain by every body's death, somebody ambitious to fill the place ain't() inherit the clients, the patients, or the property of the departed. But in the case , of a visitation like the cattle plague all is pure loss. The owner loses, but nobody else gains. The cattle that are swept away were never intended to die a natural death, and the food and capital of the country are dimi nished without any compensation whatever. The loss, though it will doubtless ultimately be divided among the whole community, falls with crushing and almost irresistible weight on a single class in the first instance. Our present system of agricul ture is so entirely dependent on the feeding of stock that we cannot wonder at the dismay with which such a visitation has filled the tenant-farmers throughout the country, and that large and most influential class a main part of whose income con sists of rent. If the tenant loses his stock, he is threatened with something little short of ruin from the mere pecuniary value of the capital destroyed, to say nothing of the prospective injury to his cul tivation from the want of manure. No wonder, then, that the panic on all sides becomes greater and greater, and that the desire of efficient prevention, or of indemnity if that prevention cannot be ob tained, becomes every day more urgent. In one re spect it certainly appears to us that the agricultural interest have good right to complain. With the disease increasing terribly week by week—.we might say day by day—the measures which are taken for its suppression are notoriously and avowedly not the best that the case admits of. The Government can not be charged justly with neglecting the subject; perhaps it is evee more rightly accused of over-legis lation. If the mere issuing of an infinity of orders be a proof of diligence and industry, the Govern ment has not been wanting in that respect. Shortly after the outbreak of the disease the Privy Council came into the field as a legislator, and has produced on this subject a code voluminous enough to suffice for the legislation of a whole city in the earlier days of Greece or of Rome. Nor, while we accord to the Government the praise of diligence, are we dis posed to speak harshly of the form which its ideas in the first instance took. It believed, not at all un naturally, that for a disease scattered so widely over the country the best remedy that could be found would be the agency of local authorities; and so it be gan with the smallest units of local authority it could find, and intrusted to them such powers as seemed to be necessary for the purpose it had in view. It also appointed a commission, composed of per sons who, until they made their report, were con sidered competent for the duty assigned to them. The Commission made a distinct recommendation, on which the Government did not choose to act, but it is only fair to say that three very important members of the Commission—Lord Spencer, Lord Cranbourne, and Mr. Reed—dissented from the recommendation, so that the Government may be excused if it took the opinion of the minority in stead of the majority. It is also certain that, if it had been left for public opinion to decide, the Re port of the majority of the Commission would not have been accepted as a safe basis for action at the time it was made. So far, then, we think it would be unfair and uncandid to find any serious fault with the Government ; but here, we fear, is the limit up to which its exculpation is possible. The Government might be excused for not being con vinced by the reasonings of the Commissioners, but it ought, we think, to have yielded long before this to the logic of facts. At any rate, for the last six weeks there is no excuse for saying that we do not know the real character and true danger of the Rinderpest from our own sad experience, and without reference to the annals of any other country. We have learnt, without entering into any questions of curiosity as to its origin or as to the possibility of its being spontaneously generated, that for all prac tical purposes it may be considered a contagious disease, the most contagious, probably, of which we have any knowledge, and that against it there are at present two practical remedies—circumscrip tion and slaughter in its earliest stages, and the prohibition of the movement of cattle afterwards. Government has given us both these remedies, but, unfortunately, neither of them in a way to be effi cient. It began by slaughtering cattle, but at the same time took no efficient precaution against the spread of the disease. It then adopted the prin ciple of preventing movement, but it delegated that power to such an infinity of authorities, leaving each liberty to make such a number of exceptions, that the whole plan has became a mass of confusion, and the disease runs its course with daily increasing virulence. It has been shown by the most un answerable arguments that a power fraught with such great inconvenience to the public as the pre vention of the movement of cattle ought to be ex ercised in such a manner as to make that incon venience as short as p oss ibl e, and to give those who suffer it the greatest possible advantage in ex change. It is shown that the matter is much more of Imperial than of local concern, and that there would be enormous advantage in the application of simple and uniform rules, even on the supposition, which is nob the fact, that every local authority was, or would be likely to remain, eager and zealous in the discharge of its duty. Until the Government has taken the thing into its own hands, and issued one General Order for the whole country, it is im possible to say that it has done everything in its power to relieve the grazing interest from the terrible scourge under which it is suffering. We hold that it is the duty of Government to do everything possible in this direction under a calamity so new and so terrible ; and its timidity is the more repre hensible, because it cannot and does not for a moment pretend that the duty which it devolves on local authorities should not be discharged by itself. It is simply from fear of unpopularity, from the dread of an outcry against centralization, from that abject terror of responsibility which seems to be be coming every day more and more the characteristic of our statesmen, that the Government deserts the country in this great strait, and leaves it to fight with confessedly inferior weapons against ax enemy who puts forth his whole strength and knows neither fear nor mercy. We want all, and more than all, the power we can bring into the field against our antagonists, and of a very considerable por tion of that power we are deprived by the un willingness of the Government to take upon itself a responsibility which flows necessarily from its duty. This conduct is the more to be lamented, because, by refusing to do its duty to the public in this particular, the Government not only protracts the existence of a most formidable calamity, but also furnishes arguments against itself very difficult to meet. The cry for a general system of insur ance, under the management of the Government, against the ravages of the rinderpest—in other words, for an indemnification out of the national purse —is again raised, and, unless the British far mer is very much altered from what he was fourteen or fifteen years ago, will be pressed with increasing vigour. Mr. Gladstone has very properly antici pated the pressure that is to be put upon him by a refusal to accede to the demand, and, as far as the general argument goes, we adn'lit the force of his reasoning. But will he not be placed in consider able difficulty when he comes to be pressed. as he certainly will be, with the argument that Govern ment had in its own hands the means of stopping the pestilence ' • that it did not dare to use thos e means ; and that it is, therefore, bound to in- demnify the grazier against mischiefs caused, not by the visitation of Providence, but by its own timidity and want of zeal for the public service? We hope the Government will at length bestir itself in this matter—first, because we wish that every one should do his duty; and next we do not wish by the default of the Government to see the evil precedent esta blished of saddling the general revenue with the 1 losses incurred by any particular occupation. HERALD.-The- Ministry regards the Anglo-Aus trian Treaty of Commerce as a doting mother does her only child. Just as the poor woman finds in her offspring all the virtues and talents given to humanity, is never tired of lauding its wit or even of expatiating upon its good looks, the Ministry, by its mouthpieces, . goes into raptures over its one sorry diplomatic achievement, and tries to make the public discover in a ridiculous fiasco the merits of a great act of states manship. The treaty is merely a contract, by which England buys from Austria, at a large sacrifice of revenue, concessions which she might have obtained, if she . would have waited a short time, for nothing, and the full benefit of which, if benefit there be in them, will be at once given gratis to our competitors in Austrian markets. The Eng. lish Government engages to recommend Parliament to abolish the duty on wood, and to reduce the duty on wine in bottles to that payable on wine in casks. It would be consistent, of course, with the letter of , this engagement, to charge wine in bottle according to its alcoholic strength, just as wine in wood is now charged, and to continue to levy the highest rate wines with a large percentage of alcohol ; but all a plan would be so cumbrous and costly—wcr l i , leave so much room. for fraud—that it may be na 1 , ; ,. e ," 5 assumed that the Minister will propose to eclunu' the duty at Is. per gallon. If wine were still to be charged according to its alcoholic strength, the coil' cession would not be much worth to the Austrian wine producer. This concession now made to AO' tria has been refused to France and the Zollverein it is the price of the Austrian tariff m odificatiot . Let us see wh a t th ey are worth, and what va lue to be attached t o th e prom i se given Engl i s h ;manu facturers of a l arge mar k et for English goods in ,tu Austrian empire. Au s tri a engages to admit article s ; the produce or m anu f ac t ure o f the d om i n i ons of her Britannic Majesty, from Jan. 1, 1867, that is to 12 months hence, a t a d uty w hi c h sha ll no t exce e " 25 per cent. of th e va l ue, w i t h t h e a ddi t i on of the cost of transport, insurance, and commission nec,,, e ' • sary for the t ransport i nto Austr i a as f ar as w„/ Austrian Customs frontier ;" and this maximinn 25 per cent. is to be reduced to 20 per ee% f calculated after the same fashion, from the I st ~s'e January, 1870. Th e a d valorem duties are to Ps converted into specific duties by commission, er r from both countries, who are to m ee t not lat er than March, 1866. Th ere are prov i s i ons for a , revision of the valu es a t th e opt i on o f e i t h er of the contracting parties, and the t rea ty is to be in fo rce for a period o f 10 years. What does the concess ion n amount to ? A duty of twenty-five per cent• ° d the value of the goo d s , augmente d by traissport7, ~, other charges, will b e a d uty w hi c h , upon 05 classes of goods, will amount to much more than „ protection of t wen t y -fi ve per cent. to the A u strian producer, and a ga i ns t th ese a d vantages the E n glish manufacturer will, generally s p ea ki ng, struggl„:b vain. There are, of course , certa i n goo d s vi sii 'v e Austria does not produc e i n any quan ti ty w hich 0 always has had from E ng l an d an d must con tinne o have from England ; but an advantage of 25 and . 0 per cent,—really by the mode in which the duties are to be calculated considerably more--w than compensate the Austrian manufacturer for tr, greater cost of production, a difference which is die minishing every year. The manufacturers of Zollverein, many of whom are placed in as favc` - d: able a condition for production as those of Englan d ' complain that duties much below those which ;", to be imposed on English goods exclude them from competition in the Austrian market, and these dutt to ill ni ° ,7 of 25 and 20 per cent. will be found with regard I A many articles practically prohibitory. No d° ll the general effect of th e s tip u l a ti on w ill b e to ~p , , duce the duties now levied by Austria upon Eng far goods, but so long as the reduction does not go the enough to enable the English goods which paY ~0 . duty to be sold at the same price as Austrian P` he duce of the s ame qua li ty i t is of no benefit to t British manufacturer. A duty of 25 per cent. Mi , be in effect as prohibitory as one of 200 per el, The organs of th e G overnment are compelled to a e , mit that the concession does not look a large ° ll , but they insist th a t A ustr i a is not bound to le '" these maximum duties, that she may, if she pleas e `' agree to much lowe r ones w h en the duties are ar- ranged. Of course, but is she likely to do so ? Thee argue that she will, b ecause t h e ice is broken, b first step taken, the past broken with, and so 0- 00 very unsafe data upon which to found reasoningwe questions of commercial or political economy. e at do not think she will, because she will have neg r o o reason to do so. It is very probable that, 11 kese English Governm en t h a d not entere d i n to 0 , negotiations, Austria wou ld very s h ort l y have e „,,, tered upon a thorough career o f econom i ca l refor'i" o But the eagerness of the English Government 3 get a treaty of some kind, its readiness to P n Y i , high price for such co ncess i ons as maximum duties of 25 and 20 per cen t ., w ill f urn i s h A ustr i an sta; b 00 5 men with excellent re asons f or b e li ev i ng that to adoption of free trade is rather a concession i. , s , foreign manufacturers th an a b oon t o na ti v e inu' ve try, or induce them at least to believe that they Il e a gone far enough when th e i r concess i ons ar e hail with so much delight by th e E ng li s h G ove rnl%, and its supporters. Duties fixed by a treaty O ely eluded for a term of only t en years are ver y ra r ie ft altered during the treaty. Th e i r mo difi ca ti o n is ~'O O to be arranged between th e con t rac ti ng par ties v 7l ' sts the approaching termin a ti on o f th e t rea ty suggeivg the expediency and affords the occasion for ente r . b i o into a new arrangement. It is, of course, Pos s , l r y that the present or some future Austrian Min' s cre may frankly adopt a free-trade policy, and re-arra n i r r , the tariff upon the principle of ma ki ng it s s ole 11. itit pose the legitimate one of yieldi ng a revenue . P,, g h if there is to be such a Mi n i s t ry, if the Eng'ge manufacturer is to have that a d vantage, of what lif), is the treaty ? The old A us t r i an tariff was so ia,he surd that a sweepin g rev i s i on was i nevitable. extravagance of the duties compelled the attent'' e of the Government to the question. The new virtually established by the treaty with Englal i p whilst being practic a ll y as pro hib itive in many ,r": spects as the old one , w ill appear sufficiently m°“ o , rate, and can be d e f en d e d b y the Austrian pr ote o tionists with far more effect. But at presen t if; have only t o d ea l w i t h the terms of the treaty itse the nods and wi n k s w hi c h B aron Wullerstorff .si have given Lord Bloomfield have nothing t° with that question, and we are very much aural "d that our manufacture rs w ill fi n d th e promised for admission to w hi c h th ey are t o wait a twel' tb ", month, barred as effectually against them, 011 Ist January, 1867, as it was on the Ist Jan ll3 oo 1866. A special article of th e t rea t y re duces 00 duty on salted herrings to 50 k reu t zer the Cust ° ,, o t 100 cwt. from the Ist February nex t. We do r o pretend to know the exact value of this cone: 1 1 0 h to the British fishery trade, but we are very ble inclined to believe that it is about the most valt ls concession made to British produce and mantl so ,f ac tures by the treaty which h a s b een b o ught a° serious a sacrifice. COUNTRY MARKETS BIRMINGHAM—THURSDAY. pc Of At to-day's corn market th ere was a s h o rt suPP 400 wheat, for which a fair demand was experienced, and Pa for were nominally unaltered from last week. The dent °? barley was healthy, at fully late prices. Oats sold re f L ora at rather more money. Beans in request, and the clearer. Peas about the same as last week. Wig, 39 0 Currencies :—English wheat, white, 45s to 50s ; re dijig; to 48s per 36 stone. Malting barley, 30 8 t o 35s ; per 22s to 25s per qr. Oats, 24s to 30s ; Irish, 21s to 2' 30 stone. Beans, 42s to 45s ; and peas, 40s to 42s per 4 BURY ST. EDMUND'S—WEDNESDAY. bo th There was a fair show of w h ea t a t mar k e t to-clan tip pli old and new ; prices exp er i ence d no a l terat i on . The E L ore of barley was larger th an it was l ast wee k , and pric e ' t the fully maintained. O a t s , b eans, an d peas were dull at rat of thii day se'nnight. White wheat, 53s to 555; red ditto, 45s to 475; 87s to 40s ; secondary ditto, 30s to 32s per qr. 1 9881 Averages :—Wheat, 434 qrs, 43s 5d ; barley , qrs., 33s Od ; oats, qrs, Os Od. EDINBURGH—WEDNESDAY. „try At to-day's market th ere - was a f a i r su pply of c° 11 " wheat, which sold slowly. 4d dovri l. Wheat on the top, Os 6d down average, Os Barley on the top, Os 6d up average, Os 2d doWv Oats on the top, Os 6d down average, Os ld V i go. Beans on the top, Os 6d down average, Os ld Average prices. Wheat, 488 6d I Oats, 255 lid Barley, 33s 9d Beans 44s 5d Total supply and sales. Wheat 824 qrs sold 451 Barley 1370 qrs sold 11 40 Oats 2543 qrs sold 1 71 1 Beans 339 qrs sold 19 ' Town-made flour sells as follows :—White, 42 s Od; egg superfine, 40s Od; superfine, 38s 6d; fine, 37s Od. GLASGOW—WEDNESDAY. A Vir This day's market was well a tt en d e d. Wheat 10. were in moderate request at a reduction of about 6 a. :: r ies per qr. and sack. Barley the t urn d earer; other 1 0 ' 1 " without material change. Births. A 1101 ALLEN.—At The Cloisters, Bath, the wife of WO . '- Esq., of a son. bj I EDWARDS. —On the 10th inst ., at 21, Elgin - road B f the wife of Colonel Clemnt A. Edwards, ° son. WILLIAMSON.—On the 10th inst., the Hon. Lady Will son, of a daughter. 0 11 WOLF.—On the 9th inst., at Richmond, 8.W., g jje Wolf, of a daughter. Marriages. v reb, BELL—MAGNus.—On the 10th inst., at the parish 4 c i , g a" Hammersmith, Major Thom as E. Bell late a 6'. &tr " dras Staff Corps and Memb er o f th e L eg islative 5 .,11- eil, son of Wm. Bell, E sq ., o f Woburn-place, 0 lJ• square, to Emily Ernest, on ly d aug hter of Cie °l. ' Magnus, Esq., of Oak Brook, Hammersmith. atholio WACREUX—PAUL.—On the 10th inst., at the % g oe Church of St. Peter and St. Paul, London, Meas . j u a rial Joseph Wacheux, of Dundee, Scotland, to Elizand_ter only daughter of Mr. George Paul, of Cunaberla race, London. Deaths. rmo rif BRADLEY.—Orr the 10th inst., Mr. Joseph Bradley , of Upper-street, Islington, builder, aged 70. wh i r sl; BUCKLE.— On "the 9th inst., at Sowerby, near Yorkshire, John Buckle, Esq. (lat e of Bede.le), ag e t i s h- EMERY.—On the 10th inst., at 1, Malden-road, g,,„iir's' town D , M oc r t . or ll B;_c E o m m e ni ry o ,:t a e g of ed D m e . rby, and St../111c hill, - gg rl4 SHARMAN.—On the 10th .inst., at Wellingbo roug-1 Sharman, Esq., aged 68.1at 0 STOKET.—OR the Bth inst., at Hauwell, Mrs. Slo.e-, of Hammersmith, aged 74. lute WALE.—On the 16th inst at Putney Mr. WM. yule,of Gloucester-place, Portman-square,. aged 78. 4 -1.1 .ondon : Printed and Pubiluhed by WIL Lag A.N ro.`l of No. 112, tr,tud, Punter, at Ttut "UN Olfi,e, V Strand, in'the. Precinct of the stow. i n the C oll Mledleacx.—Friday, January' 12, 1866, L'isr at tv Et o ( o Theat re lOTA ri Ze Ire c t It I, p ui I :t : 3 : 1 el: :nu ti GR, Obge ry , . a a 4IJTI Ilo tt SS f I ,'"V, VN r„ "hOl4 tht:ee°'443 discount ed. fadeto 4' la Years W TRE Ilea ry cihlThis & a ' s ' D SIT Ep ria.4 7 OS] l a 'Seeit : D t ur le quari(t)re ' 27, torti , 1:1—i----.c 3, Gre at 1 , A s i b nßle 7 44 t? ub lo T p oe nlbii i 4 l Ig4 ` t- orn Ce p i Ce 2 ead . 1 . 1 1 4 14 A /N.E] 4 h, s :1 1 114 droun4 taken e°"4lt th 444 1 ( a lld rieeB —B4 si z : l2° , Post ro abfl ht lj ep e i i 4 ee 'illt or :', 1 2 ) , sil 04 ht suit( 1 1)ti on (1,414; i t , 4 T ci D Fh ttp. °ll4 lT ke B --811- tXI l ion T hey !n o tid ape fi k , 4 ;:e zr o , Ali ?Il e ( the le th e a ktai o, ,Nea fc