The Sun. — London, England, 1870-04-28 00:00:00

THE MORDAUNT CASE WEDNESDAY. In the full Court of Divorce, before the Lord Chiel Baron, the Hon. Justice Keating, and Lord Penzance, the point as to whether the insanity of Lady Mordaunt prevents Sir Charles from proceeding with his petition, was argued. Serjeant Ballantine, Dr. Spinks, Q.C., Mr. F. A. In derwick, and Mr. A. Cohen were counsel for Sir Charles Mordaunt. Dr. Deane, Q.C., Mr. Archibald, and Mr. R. A. Searle were for the guardian ad litent (Sir Thomas Moncrieff). Serjeant Ballantine, in opening the argument, said that the came was one of as great importance as could be, but there could be but little argu ment, and that would lie in a very narrow compass. The real question was whether a person charged with adultery, and who subsequently became insane, could no be prOceeded against for the adultery. There were only two cases in which the same question arose. One was Borden v. Borden-2 S. and T., which came before the lAte Judge Ordinary, who thought the petition ought not to be proceeded with. He (the counsel) would con tend that the case named ought not to influence the pre sent one, especially as regarded the principle of the thing. The learned judge who tried the case said that he had heard from Dr. Bayford of the case, which was heard in the Ecclesiastical Court, and it was there held that insa nity was a bar to a divorce a mense et thoro. Lord Penzance said he had spoken with Dr. Bayford on the matter, and found it was not a case that would operate much. Serjeant Ballantine apprehended not. The next case he would refer to was " Mansfield v. Mansfield," tried in MAssachusetts, United States, which was a wife's action. Tne husband was said to be insane, and the court held that the divorce could be proceeded with. The Lord Chief Baron : Was the respondent the lunatic? Serjeant Ballantine : Yes; and it is all fours with the present case. Lord Penzance : You don't know the law of Massa chussets, do you! Serjeant Ballantine : No; but I apprehend that adul te is the same all over— Lord Penzance said that was so; but in this country there was such a thing as recrimination. Serjeant Ballantine went on th say that a lunatic might bring a divorce, as vas laid down in Parnell v. Parnell," 2 Consistory Reports, where the matter was fully dis cussed. He would argue that, as a lunatic had power to bring a divorce, the other party had a right to re criminate. If the respondent alleged adultery, how could the case be proceeded with ? It amounted to this. that a lunatic could not be accused of adultery, and yet he was able to charge another with it. His proposition was that the power was a discretionary one, and vested in the court. He did not see any more hardship in this case than in one where witnesses were insane, but likely to recover. In such cases the courts had over and over again allowed the witnesses to be called when well. He would now refer to the case. both in a criminal and civil point of view. His proposi tion, firstly, was that m arr i age was prima facie a civil contract ; though the parties might make it a matter of religion. If persons entered into the contract of marriage ha apprehended they would be bound to carry it out. The Serjeant then went on to say that at one time adultery was punishable by death, and at the time of the Restoration there was an Attempt to make it a penal offe ice. That failed, and they must therefore take it now as a civil offence. In the case of " Owen v. Davies," 1 Vesey, p. 82, there was a Bill to enforce a contract on a person who was sane and then became insane. Lord Hardwicke said that equitably he must decide that the contract must be fulfilled. In another case reported in Vesey, p. 590, it was held that a lunacy was no defence to a petition for bankruptcy, though it might be against an action. He would argue that it was decided that in ordinary civil contracts lunacy was no bar to proceedings as to criminal law; in common law a lunatic could not be called on to plead or even be executed if he became insane after sentence had been pronounced, He conceived that in every case brought before a judge that functionary could determine how long a delay could take place ; but not such a delay as would seriously affect the rights of one of the parties. When he came to look as to which side the hardship would lie he could not but think that it was against the husband. If there was a possibility of counter charges there were plenty about who could make them. Lord Penzance said that when the statute passed, first giving the Court power of dissolving marriage, it gave it, subject to certain conditions in the interest of the public, and subsequently the Queen's Proctor was ap pointed to see those conditions were not broken. These conditions were non-condonation, non-collusion, freedom from adultery or cruelty on the part of the petitioner, &c. It was found impossible to prove these bars, as both parties were excluded from giving evidence. That raised the most important question, seeing that the right given was a conditional one, and that the proof must rely in a great measure on the wife; and before the husband could get the benefit of the statute, he must have a sane wife, who could be examined. By the late Act the wife could be examined. His lordship would like to have that point fully argued. Serjeant BALLANTINE said that an analagous case was that where a person was charged with a crime and his wife could not be examined. In a case of perjury he re membered that a woman living with a man as his wife was called, and the man acquitted in consequence of her evidence. Had she been his wife she would not have been called. Their lordships would see that there were often hardships arising, and he would refer to Lord Pen zance to corroborate him in saying that a wife's evidence was seldom taken into cognizance by the court, without taking into consideration the surrounding circumstances. Dr. SPIN/IS, Q.C. ' followed on the sam e s id e . H o said that in fact the order permanently stayed pro ceedings unless Lady Mordaunt became sane. Lord Penzance did not profess to give any opinion of his own ; but simply to follow the precedent of Sir Cresswell CresswelL Justice Keating : The Judge Ordinary says that is so. So you will not be fettered by that. Dr. Spinks, Q.C. went on to observe that it was no t till last April that the guardian interfered. It was by the delay so occasioned that the bill allowing the evidence of the wife was passed ; so that it was by mere accident that the case was not heard when the evidence of the wife could not have been received. Lord Penzance said that the wife could have been called to speak to the conduct of her husband— how he treated her and other matters, though not as t o ac t ua l a d u l tery. Dr. Spinks would admit that the cause could not be as well tried as if the wife were sane. But the lunacy of one person could not affect the rights of another. Lord Stowell had held that the committee on a lunatic could institute proceedings for a divorce on the ground of adultery. The Lord Chief Baron asked if in the case named the wife could not recriminate and put the lunatic on his defence, Dr. Spinks : Undoubtedly. The learned counsel went on to speak of what would be the effect of carrying out Lord Stowell's argument on the present law. The lunatic might be the respondent, and recriminate, and the petitioner withdraw. Could the lunatic go on? If so, why not be proceeded against? In the American Courts it was allowed that if the wife of a lunatic committed adultery she could be proceeded against. In the case of "Dolman v. Dolman," House of Lords reports, the Lord Chancellor never seemed to think of not altering the status of a married woman because she was insane. The Divorce Court has assumed the functions of the House of Lords, so that the case quoted was of great importance, as skewing that their lordships never looked, at the insanity as a bar. Every one of the discre tionary bars was considered by the House of Lords in the conduct of the petitioner himself. Mr. F. A. Inderwick, on the same side, proceeded to comment on the words of the order, which gave the peti tioner leave to apply again to the court, when he could say that the respondent had recovered her sanity. That practically was an end to the proceedings, or might be so. It was like the case of a witness where the Judge at Chainbers said, let proceedings be stayed until Aor B returns. Lord Penzance said the point need not be laboured. He made the order for the purpose of raising the question as to whether a man could go on even if his wife were insane. Mr. Inderwick was referring to the case of " Borden v. Borden," when Lord Penzance said that he had sent for the papers in the case, and Sir Cresswell Cresswell's actual order was "This case cannot proceed." Mr. Inderwick went on to comment on the remarks of Lord Penzance as to the right of recrimination. In the present suit it was not sought to punish the person who was guilty, but it was one of a civil character—to give a remedy to the party who had his or her contract broken. In cases of murder, no doubt a man would not be executed if insane, but would the court say that if a petition was filed, and the re spondent subsequently became insane it could not be proceeded with ? With regard to the rights of a lunatic at common law, it was laid down that in a case of trespass a lunatic could commit that act thong]_ without design. In Borrodaile v. Hunter it was reported that a lunatic might be proceeded against for trespass, a s the case was one of injury and could be paid f or . In Tyrell v. Jenner the defendant was a lunatic, and the plaintiff attempted to get the next presentation of a living. The question arose as to_ service on the de fendant and it was held to be a good one. The Lord Chief Baron said that it was no use to labour the poi n t. It was esta bli s h e d th a t f or debt or damages a lunatic could be proceeded against. Mr. Inderwick said he would come to the words of Lord P enzance where he said that the Court felt diffi culty in hearing a case where the respondent was insane. That seemed to presume that there was a defence. But the court must not assume that even if there is a case against the petitioner that it will be brought forward, as experience taught the contrary. Then it was said that the public had an interest, and the Queen's Proctor was appointed ; but his intervention was not necessary where the respondent chose to refrain from a defence. In another view, suppose a man w as wrecked and could not get back within the two years required for a legal desertion, the court in his absence had made a decree. Lord Penzance : But it would not if it knew that he had been so wrecked. Mr. Inderwick : No ; but if he was found to be in corn rnuni.mtion with any friends, those friends could be served. In the present case the respondent was away, and not of her own free will. _ _ Lord Penzance : Suppose Lady Mordaunt's father would not have anything more to do with the case. Mr. Inderwick thought that the Court of Chancery would appoint a committee, or the Queen's rroctor might NVAPPOUI64 i the interests of tho publio, 2hQ btula counsel went on to say that by the order of L or d Pen zance it was left for the husb an d to come to the court and bay that his wife was insane. He would apply the same Jule in the present case as was applied in common law to waterial witnesses ; and in the position of a material witness, Lady Mordaunt, with regard to the public, stood. Dr. Deane, Q.C., for the guardian ad litem, said that he had not been able to find whether his friend said the order was not a good one. His argument was that if the case was allowed to go on pending the sanity of the respondent, marriage was not a contract, but a status. The judgment would not be in personam, but in rem. The case of Borden v. Borden, as it stood in the books, was no doubt a decided case in point ; but that rested much on the case of King v. King. He had searched and found that it was there laid down that there being an alleged insanity when the adultery was committed the judge suggested it could not be the cane if the respondent was insane. The Lord Chief Baron said that the case was not a deci sion : it left the matter in doubt. Dr. Deane went on to comment on the case reported in Massachussets, "U.S. In another case, which. occurred in Alabama, it was held that as insanity in itself was not sufficient for a divorce, that which arose from it could not be so either. And again, Mr. Bishop laid it down that though recrimination was settled in this country, such was not so in the States. With the excep tion of " Gordon v. Gordon," there was no authority, as in all instances it was said that at the time of the adultery the person was insane, and not as now, that at the time of the service of the citation such was the case. The Lord Chief Baron said they must not lose sight of the fact that there were two ca-respondents in the case. Lord Penzance said that they could go against them for damages. _ Serjeant Ballantine said then they could allege that the wife was a material witness, and they would be in pretty much the same condition. Dr. Deane went on to say that his learned friend had argued from " Parnell v. Parnell," that the respondent might become a quasi petitioner, and, though being insane, could go on. If that occurred, he thought the learned judge who presided might stop her. The Lord Chief Baron said if the statute did not give the power, the judge could do nothing. Dr. Deane said the judge could, by simply saying that the case should not be heard till such and such a date. " Parnell v. Parnell " was worth considering. Dr. Deane proceeded to refer to what was called the hardships of the case. The court could not, of course, assume the respon dent's guilt. There could be no offspring as there could be no access. Lord Penzance observed that Dr. Deane put the case as if the wife were insane and an innocent wife ; but if on the other hand, she was guilty of adultery, it would be a hardship on the husband to have to live with her after he had discovered it. Of course he only put a hypothetical case. Dr. Deane said that the hardship would be nothing to a wife being innocent, and in a few years recovering her reason and finding herself divorced. The Lord Chief Baron said nobody doubted the power of the judge to put off a suit : but Dr. Deane had to address himself as to whether a judge had the power to do an act that might put an end to the suit altogether. Dr. Deane went on to say that though the Act of last session made the wife a probable witness, prior to that, she could be asked questions. Mr. Archibald addressed the court on the same side. He contended that the functions of the court were purely judicial, and unless the Act gave the power of hearing a case in a party's absence, it had no power to do so. There were plenty of instances where it was held to be unjust to hear cases in the absence of the other party, though of course this theory was liable to qualification. It was frequently laid down as being against the dignity of a judge to levy a fine or take a recog nizance from a lunatic. From this he argued that the law did not allow a citation to be served. Lord Penzance Then comes the question whether the court had not the power under the e h to hear a guardian. Mr. Archibald contended that it did not. If such were to be the case, it would carry out the term of being naturally unjust. In referring to what the other side had termed the hardship of the case, it would not weigh at all. They were there with not even a prima facie case. Mr. R. Searle, on the same side, would not enter into a lengthened argument after the speeches of his friends. To go on with the case now would be informal, as there had been neither substituted or personal service. If the Act had meant to provide for such a case it would have named somebody to appear for the respon dent. The Court adjourned at four o'clock, and Serjeant Ballantine will reply to-morrow (Thursday). FROU-FROU " AND THE QUESTION OF INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT. WEDNESDAY. In the Court of Vice-Chancellor Sir W. M. James to day, the cause of Wood v. Chart was investigated. This was a bill presented, with the view of preventing the de fendant, Mr. Nye Chart, proprietor of the Brighton Theatre, from performing the five-act French comedy, " Frou-Frou," at his place of amusement, the plaintiff having become entitled to the translation by purchase from the French authors, MM. Meilhac and Halevy. The question involved was an important one, namely, whether foreign dramatic authors under the existing International Copyrights Act, or by virtue of any con vention confirmed by order of Council, are really able to secure a marketable property in their productions in this country. The case having created considerable in tenst, a large number of profesional g ;ntlemen were pre sent in court whilst the case was ihoca.ding. Mr. Eddis, Q.C., and Mr. Beale were counsel for the plaintiff • and Mr. Kay, Q.C., an d M r . Li n dl ey f or th e defendant. Mr. Eddis, in openinr , the case, said the real question at issue was whether the play which had been performed at the defendant's theatre was a piratical translation or a fair adaptation. Within three months of the publication of the play in France the provision of the International Copyrights Act was complied with by the registration of the play at Stationers' Hall. The comedy was first . produced at the Theatre du GymnAse, in Paris in Octob er , 1869, an d th e au th ors th en not ifi e d their intention of reserving their right of translation, but on the 18th of January following they assigned to the plaintiff, who was a music -seller, carrying on business in Regent-street. London, the right of representation, whether in English or French, in England. The piece was duly translated by Mr. Sutherland Edwards, and pu l l:dished in The Musical World, which translation was acknowledged by the authors. Subsequently Mr. Benjamin Webster, jun., intimated his intention of producing on the London stage a translation of the piece, but to this the plaintiff objected, and threatened to apply for an injunction in Chancery to restrain him if he persisted in his intention. The production of Mr. Webster's translatiol on the London stage was abandoned for a time, but a short time afterwards it was presented at the Theatre Royal, Brighton, the characters being precisely the same as in the original piece with the exception of a very subordinate one, which was entirely omitted, while the scene arrange ments differed in no material point whatever. The plain tiff prayed, consequently, that the defendant might be restrainedby injunction from representing at Brighton and elsewhere the play in question, and that an account might be taken of the loss which hehad sustained in consequence of the defendant's proceedings. Mr. Eddis added that in Mr. Edward's translation the French names had been Anglicised ; but the characters were identical, and the dialogue, the sequence of events, and entire plot precisely the same as in the original. It was true that there were several omissions in the plaintiff's translation, but the translation contained all the essential elements of the original, and what was of more importance, in its bearing upon the issue of the cause, had obtained the sanction of the authors. Mr. Kay contended for the defence that the production of Mr. Webster, jun., was a fair adaptation of the French play. The material point was to define the distinction between a translation and an adaptation, and he argued that in a case where no less than 141 out of somethinc , like 400 speeches were omitt e d , it cou ld not b e regarded as a translation. Madlle. Beatrice, who was con nected with Mr. Chart as defendant, first saw the play at Paris, and, being desirous of having it produced in England, she made bond fide arrangements to that end with Mr. Webster, and the piece was actually in course of preparation when the plaintiff's interference occurred. It was not, therefore, a case in which, even if the defendant had erred, the court could properly grant the extraordinary relief of an injunc tion, but merely damages. Mr. Lindley pointed out that Mr. Webster, in his affi davit, stated that his adaptation was such as was usual and fair amongst theatrical adaptators. Mr. Horace Wigan, who as a French scholar was scarcely inferior to any in the c nintry, averred, too, that the plaintiff's was not a translation of the original comedy at all. Looking even to the title of plaintiff's supposed translation the defects were obvious, for nobody could say that " Like to Like" was a translation of " Frou-Frou.' The Vice-Chancellor : It would be rather difficult I Ihink, to translate " Frou-Frou." It is intended to repre sent the rustling of silk, and that would be just the same in French as in any other language, (Laughter.) Mr. Lindley continued that the plaintiff's play was merely a version of the original, and the defendant could not therefore be liable. The business of a translator was not to omit, nor on the other hand to invent or interpolate, and all this Mr. Edwards had done. The argument was proceeded with until 4 o'clock, when the Court adjourned. ILLEGALLY STORING PETROLEUM—A tradesman has been fined at Manchester for keeping 330 gallons of petroleu m w i t hi n f i fty yards of a dwelling-house or build ing in which goods were stored. The defence was that the stuff was intended for booth-keepers at Knot Mill fair, and that it was only in the yard about a quarter of an hour. The petroleum was forfeited. S.P.G.—The Guardian, noticing the condition of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, has reason to believe in the truth of a recent statement that the ex penditure of that society in administering funds of about £90,000 a year, is no less than 212,000. Nearly half of this immense Burp- goes to defray the expenses of the various "deputations," by whom meetings are held and At the la s t meet isneormaonlestpterleawcashedrinewalidfroofmthtehseocheetyv.. Lryrner B e l c h er, offering. to give £5 for every £l,OOO collected for a new house for the Society. Ulric de Fonvielle presided at one of the public meetings respecting the Plebiscite held in Paris, the manner in which the malcontents should protest against it being the subject of discussion. At another meeting, at which three thouscnd persons assembled, M. Lissa garay, who has lately been released from Sainte Pelagie, presided. M. Raspail has addressed a vehement letter to the elect ors o f L yons and of Paris, exhorting them strenuously to vote "No " on the day of the by P. 49041 they Will do a good action. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, APRIL 28, 1870. PROGRESS OF 'IHE ERIE WAR. The next move was Mr. Burt's reply before the ' Committee on Railroads of the New York Assem bly on the 30th March. Mr. SLie Armen attended to defend the directors and the Classification Act of 1869. Mr. Burt brought up Mr. Eldridge's evi -1 donee as to the payment of $70,000 of the Bos ton, Hartford, and Erie money to Jay Gould to buy proxies to secure the Erie election of 1857, and ex ' plained the devices by which Gould, Fisk, and Lane got a majority of the votes in 1863 and 1869. At the latter election there were 160,000 shares in the names of Smith, Gould, Martin, and Co., most of which shares had been sold to foreign hollers, but not transferred, and many thousand other shares in the names of people doing business with Gould and Fisk, and whose votes were thus obtained. The Clae-sfication Act was a clear breach of trust in the directors, and was ig rinst law. Parliament would pass no Act without the approval of the stockhold: rs in general meeting, nor could mortgages, bonds, or new stock be issued without the stockhol !era' con sent. The improvident and wasteful management he termed a calamity an 1 a disgrace ; the issue of $32,000,000 of the new stock a fraud alike on old stockholders, and the new his clients, who thought they were buying part of a total capital of 116,000,000 instead of $78,000,000. The committee hearing the old story looked the very little impression it made ; indeed they seemed rather to regard it as a joke until Mr. Burt brought the matter strongly home by likening it to the purchase by a committee man of a barrel of whisky marked with a high-class brand who found it to be good, but the next, one third water, and the third one halt water, though branded as the first, and the illustration told. Only 11,000,000 dollars had been accounted for of the 32,000,000 new issue, and the election of 1869 was a sham devised by the directors to get another year of office. Mr. Burt defended the combination in England as ab:olutely necessary for the protection of the stockholders, who could not otherwise cope with Gould and Fisk, the holders of the company's purse. He ridiculed the idea that this was a na tional question, as Gould sought to make it. He doubted Gould's statement that he had been obliged to pay a seining a share on 20,000 shares, said to be carried by h is party i n En g l and ; b ut if it were true it was the " sweetest morsel" he had tasted in that country, while expecting that at the next Exe cutive Committee, at which Gould, Fisk, and Lane were present, the president would present a bill of $5,000 expeOded in England on behalf of the com pany, and the controller (Mr. Fisk) would examine the account, and find it correct, the treasurer (Mr. Gould) would be ordered to draw a check for the amount, which he would instantly do, so that the Britishers would after ail pay three-fifths of it. Then taking up Mr. Crouch's address, he represented him as a contributor to Punchinello and the Sun, and the writer of a pamphlet called " Another Chapter of Erie." Mr. Fisk, Crouch said, ha , i taken him over the line and treated him like a prince. That gentleman had been written up a speculator, operator, an.l Ad miral, but not, as Mr. Crouch was aware, as railway manager ; so, added Mr. Burt, Crouch rushed for the vacant place, and getting it, thus frankly be- ' gins " All matters pertaining to charges of wa tering stock, gold cornering, unlawful appropri ation of hods, &c., preferred against Messrs. Fisk and Gould, must be ruled out of this chapter as altogether irrelevant." Instead of 5,000 shares, Mr. Crouch's holding should have be e n e n t ere d $5 , 000 ; and he had n o shares when the book was written: Burt calls him the literary laureate of Fisk and Gould, and he proceeds in a severe strain of cliti cism to handle the laureate's work, finally using these words of Crouch before the Senate Commit ' tee to convey his opinion of the statements con tainedin the pamphlet, "No better illustration of the sublime impudence with which the English stock holders have been imposed upon from time to time by their American friends is needed." Crouch naively asked, " No better illustration than what?" and was quickly answered, "Than your book." Mr. Crouch desired to explain, but ,Mr. Burt refused to give was and he went on s h ow i ng up t h at curious production for the edification and amuse ment of the Committee. Pointing out that the $2,000,000 of shares Gould says he carries in Eng land are the identical $2,000,000 Crouch asserts be represents, he concluded by asking the Committee to remember, "that if at any time you should see in 'he newspapers a statement that I have re signed my office of agent for the Erie Committee in London ; if it is announced that I have failed in serving papers on _Messrs. Fisk and Could at the Opera-House in New York ; if you see it sta ed that I have been et: timed off the floor of the Senate or the Assembly in Albany, that there is no chance of your passing this bill; it I am descrihed as a weak Tiling man cowering under Mr. Gould's eagle glances ; if there are any no:ices of me of tits kind in the newspapers—you will remember, will you not, that Mr. Crouch is the author of ' Another Chapter of Erie ?' " Mr. Shearman, in reply, stated that he w as aware t h at some of Mr. Burt's assertiens were untrue; he meant no dis respect personally, for he entertained a high reeetrd for Mr. Burt.. lle-cribing Mr. Gould as a man abun dantly able to take care of himself, he said that he would have personally answered, but he thought it fairer to Mr. Burt that a lawyer should reply to p. him as a lawyer. He regretted, for Mr. Burt's own sake and that of the bar, that he Occupied his pre sent position. Not one of thy , cases of litigatipn against the directors bad been conduct d in a fair, el raightforward manner, nor had a stockte ever yet made ari e honest demand to see the accounts of the company. What right bad the editors of the Tri bune and the Times to ask that these accounts should be made public, or the World that it should be ac quainted With the company's internal affairs? Mr. Spearman was closely questioned on the subject that no shareholder had applied for information, bat he confined the assertion to himself as counsel. lie did not approve of the Classific ition Act being made applicable to the present Board, but the shareholders had sanctiem , ed it at a regular meet ing, or which due notic had been given. " Where," a ked Mr. Burt?" "In the newspapers." answered Mr. Sheartnan, "for thirty days before the election." A conversation about the shares on a hiett the votes had then been taken followed ; Mr. Shearman as serting the right of the directors if they owned a majority'of the stock to pass what resolut'ons they pleased, and:co make them binding on the subse; quent shareholders. Among the names of the voters for the resolution w. re R. RaPl,ael and Sons, Mr. Burt's clients. This, however, Mr. Bert denied on Mr. Gould's evi lence, but Shearmau maintained its truth, that they had notice, and couldact through the tele graph. Of the proxies held by Gould not one had been paid for. "Do you say tt, at as a lawyer ?" asked Mr. Burt. " Yes," was the answer, " and as represented by clients upon whose truth I can rely." Gould and Fisk had been put in for the longest periods with the con , ent of the other di rect ors, and in all his professional intercourse with the company he had seen the desire prevail of doing what was best for the road. He had never been able to discover where the fraudulent acts ch , trged had been committed. nor where the vil lainy had come in, though looking closely for it. When he entered the service of the company, it was amid a clamour on the part of the newspaper s, which he thought were edited by men so much wiser than himself that there h.u..t he something wrong, and he commenced his duties with ft•ar and trembling, hut found no occasion. " Doyou :till speak as alawyer?" asked Mr. Lit; lejohn. " No, sir, as a man." As a proof of that, a lawyer of a Quixotic sense of hon our, Mr. David Dudley Field, had become ad viser to the company. New York St rte had given the company $3,000,000, and had therefore some tight to interfere with the road; the non-payment Of dividends showed the Erie to be the opponent of monopoly, and on the Board the only fault found was the low rate for freights. A new board, re presenting the stockholders, would double these rates, and quickly pay dividends to the injury of the State, whole the Legislature ought carefully to protect. Taking the flavetn Railroad, be showed how the directors broke faith after many cottages had been builtalongtheline. Railruids had norights superior to those of the community, as with their charter goes the notice hat they shall be adminis tered in the interest of the people, its well as of the stockholders. The combination represented by Mr. Burt forc?s the payment of a shilling per isl.are from the stockholders oh the penalty of exclusion from the Lon lon Stock Exchange, the market which fixes the price of Erie all over the world. Mr. Burt here emphatically denied that any such resolution had been passed by the London Stock Exchange. It was opt'onal; but Mr. Burt did not add, that as job bers would only buy unstamped shares at a heavier discount it became in effect compuls Ty. When Mr. Shearman appealed to the newspapers as the autho rity for h's statement, Mr. Burt at once quickly replied, "You have cautioned me against saying what 1 don't know ; now don't you say what you don't know." After a little sparring, Mr. Shearman continued. The money paid by Mr. Eldridge to Mr. Gould imputes nothing against Mr. Fisk, nor indeed against Gould till evidence was forthcoming that he knew where it came from. The English shareholders had ample time to oppose the Classification Bill, but they sent Mr. Burt to oppose the law and reverse the fixed policy of the State only after they had formed a hostile combination. The policy of the State had not been adopted purely for the Erie nor for the stockholders, but fir the interest of all; and the Erie had never been so well managed nor so safe as now, though.the improvements were at the expense of present dividends. As regards the $32,000,000 alleged to have been received, it never had been received, stock to that amount was issued, but Erie has not reached 40 per cent. for a long time, and that issue did not fetch 40, but had it done so, $12,800,000 would then have been the sum, while Mr. Burt admits $11,000,000 had been accounte I for. "I do not,' - said Burt ; Crouch says that, but Ido not believe it." Mr. Sh. artuan prdceeded to explain how a sum amounting to $18,000,000 had been expended, a full account of which at the pro per time would be given ; but their business at l►resent was to discuss what was for the advantage of the Commonwealth. The next day Crouch read a long paper in defence of . the Fisk and Gould management and against the repeal of the Classi fication Act ; and in his reply Mr. Burt likened Crouch to the dog which always gets on the race course at Epsom before the Derby begins:— " His shareholders are bogus, and his protest was bogus, written in New York. No one in London knew anything of it. No one in London would have,used the expression 'Board of Stockholders.' There was no such body in England, but there was in New York. As to his creden tials, he paced in the chairman's hands powers of attorney from London stockholders stated by Mr. Gould to hold 60,000 shares. He had 100,000 more shares in New York ready to produce, and there were 100,000 more in London ready to be sent over. And he would produce a declara tion of the Secretary of the Loudos Committee that 470,000 shares had been registered by the committee, and sup ported their action. it was, of course, impossible to get power of at:orney from 200 or 300 persons. As to Mr. Shearman's complaint of his appearing i❑ the character of stockholder and advocate, that complaint was unrea sonable." Shearman spoke now as an individual, then as a lawyer, and again as a third party ; while he • (Burt) was only a small shareholder to secure a locus standi. Mr. &warm= knew some of his charges to be incorrect ; but why did he not specify and disprove them ? his assertion that Mr. Goul I is able to take care of himself no one doubts ; but the stockholders wanted a president to take care of them ; he was their trustee and representative, and should look first to their interest. If Shear man's clients owned half the stock, why oppose the bill, which was not to turn Fisk and Gould out, or to deprive them of their hard earnings as tr a surer and president, vice-president and contr, tiler, or to remove the elegant monogram-, (G. and F. in tertwined) which now adorned the temple of the Muses and the railroad. bu. simply to get the sense of the shareholders. He had not been invited to examine the accounts, nor had Gould promise I his influence to appoint the (thee- ors he shoed no minate. For four weeks h c9uld not get a copy of the bye-laws, nor did Gould answer letters asking information as to the regulations. After showinlz the fallacy of the arguments in favour of the Classi fication Act, Mr. Burt took up the main reason, that the bid protected the State of New York against the road being made an irtstrnin,nt of ex tortion and freights raised, and he ridiculed the notion that it was necessary for the welfare of the Empire State that Fisk and Gould, the anii monopolists, should be made by law inanal.n.rs of the Erie Road for five years. The Erie Charter did not differ from other railroad charters, and if the classification laws were required for State reasons, they would be imperative, not permissive, and applicable to all. The following exr c:s from reports of the company to the State Engineer showed that the management was not conducive to tae in terests of the people : Total Total No. of Passengers Mileage of persns persus carried. passengers killed injured President 1866 2,444,935 157,725,808 57 62 Berdell 1867 2,245,180 128,491;241 58 57 Eldr dge 1868 2,194,348 124,312,881 104 1i.7 Gould 1869 2,497,113 128,455,158 75 114 Gould Capital and Net Income, Exclusive of Railroad Rents and Interest. Capital paid in. Net Income. President. 1866 525,105,800 $3,288,911 Berded 1867 25,111,210 3,642,292 Eldridge 1868 46,302,210 2,660,709 Gould 1869 78,536,910 3,003,415 Gould He denied that foreign stockholders had notice of the bill, as four lines of small print in a New York newspaper was to them no notice. Mr. Shearinan was a highly respectable lawyer, but when he said he had never been able to find where the alleged villany comes in, and brought the employment. of hims, if as the best proof of Fisk and Goa'd's honour and integrity, Mr. Burt fe are d th at hi s sight had been obscured by clouds of $lOO and $l,OOO bills. Mr. Burt had only just reached New York, when he got a glimpse of the villany, for 16,000 Erie shares, properly stampd and endorsed for transfer to Mr. Heath and Mr. Rapha .1, were refused at the transfer office, which was next day closed, and a collusive suit got up, a bill filed, and immediately Judge Barnard granted as injunction exa• - •tly as the gal asked, restraining all transfers un it the suit. had been settled. Yet Mr. hearman took no steps to protect the rightsof the s ockho ders against this gross and fraudulent violation. " I ask you," said Mr. Burt in conclusion, "to pass this bill as an act of simple justice to the share hollers. The Leg/s'ature has tied our hands ; I ask you to cut the bonds." George Crouch se lected April Fool's- Day to indit • a letter to the press, pointing to Mr. Burt's assertion for the edi fication of newspaper men, that "he was nwhing but a journalist. Complimentary, eh!'.' He had his choice between law and journalism, and "chose the latter as +he more respectable, while it is surely equally honourable." Thereon Mr. t. roach says be fears that Burt's contemituous expression may have injure I the cau•e of his cdenrs, so he desires in ch aity to suggest that the insidt was not in tentional. "It ii,ay be that journalists are de spis, d in England, and my learned friend has made the unfoatunate mistake of imagining that American journalists are equally de=picable. Sup pose we forgive h in. He has ouly been in this bla-asted country' a short time, ' you know.' " It is amusing to see how the Erie clique in America and the limes in Eng/and try to give an interna tional turn to the Erie proceedings, the one to secure support for a dishom st management by arousing American prejudice, and the other to injure American credit by making as general as possible an isolated case, most strongly denounced in the United States.—A nglo- America 22 limes. THE Ku-KLUX IN TENYESSEE. --Mr A. J. Fletcher, Secretary of Tennessee, gave evidence before the Reconstruction Committee of the House, showing the lawThss condition of the State. Iu Middle and West Ten nessee violence of all kinds has long been committed with impunity. In one county the Ku-Klux assemble a hun dred men in a few hours to murder two. In another they collect as many even in a shorter time. In the loyal county of Carroll 150 were quickly got together to take five men out of prison and aboot them. Mr. Fletcher says the Ku-Klux is a military organization with de partments and districts, each having its own commander ; acting quickly and precisely, and rarely failing in its object numbering about 40,000 persons. The attempts of the Legislature, of the State militia, and loyal citizens to Sup press the organization had been partially successful ; but what was termed the Ku-Klux law was repealed last ses sion, and the organization immediately revived. Alarmed. the Legislature passed a bill after much opposition to punish masked marauders; but not being stringent it was ineffectual. No one dare prosecute, and when the Ku- Klux execute a man the chief anxiety of his friends is to avoid a like fate, and those ma. ked usually fly the State, glad to escape. with life; and though the outrages have been going on for three years no case of punishment has occurred. It is to correct this lawless condition that Governor Center has applied to the President for military aid. Confederate Generals pledged themselves to see that peace was preserved if the Governor would dis band the militia, and for' a short time after he did so crimes became less frequent, but the Order still asserted its right to open gaols and execute criminals. They have a peculiar whistle, which is said to be for sale in the hard ware stores of Nashville. Mr. Fletcher often saw the masked bands and heard the whistle, and he gives au im mense number of cases of outrage and murder. In glanc ing over these the hatred to the Yankee is con spicuous, murders of Federal soldi-rs are frequent, of which one case will suffice for illustiation. W. J. M'Annalley, after his discharge from the U;.ion Army became clerk in a store at Pulaski. One night, on his way home, he was s urroun d e d b y a bancl.t)f masked men who sent three bullets through bite, and left him for dead. He recognised the voices of two of. the ruffians, and when he was discovered and carried to his bed, the first to appear to comfort him was the man who had shot him, but instead of prosecuting them when he recovered he left the place for Nashville. Another ex-Federal sol dier had a horse which a Confeder , te, named Dixon, told his son to shoot " the d-d Yankee horse !" Suit was brought, and the statement is that the Yankee paid the costs, which means, we quppose, that he was murdered. ROYAL MAIL STEAM-PACKET COMPANY. WEDNESDAY. A general meeting of the shareholders of this company was held at the City Terminus Hotel to-day, Captain C. Mangles in the chair.—The Chairman, in moving the adoption of the report and accounts, said the surplus that time last year on the working account was £73,000, and now it had reached £147,000, which was a Considerable in crease. At that time the profit and loss shewed a surplus of £lO,OOO to be carried over to the depreciation fund. On this occasion the amount was £74,900 to be placed aside for depreciation and repairs and renewals. While the work ing expenses had diminished, every item on the receipts, with but one e xce pti on , s h ewe d an i ncrease . H e a d verte d in the Ida being on her voyage home, and the arrival of the Elbe, and then to the new route to Cherbourg, which, he said, had been com menced by the company a little too late in the season. Nevertheless fifty-two foreigners had availed themselves of their ships and that mode of travelling.—Admiral Whish seconded the adoption of the report, and Mr. Simpson moved an amendment to the effect that the report be adopted, but that 30s. per share out of the Renewal Account should be paid, instead of 10s. This amendment was put and lost. The Hon. C. L. Butler then moved another amendment, that the divivend be £1 per share out of the balance of the renewal account, instead of 10s. This was carried. The directors were re-elected, and the business terminated. SINGULAR FORGERY BY A. WOMAN, WEDNESDAY. At the Mansion House, to-day, Elizabeth Smith, other wise Mrs. Simpson, a well-dressed woman, aged 32, was brought up before the Lord Mayor, charged with uttering a cheque for £l2O with intent to defraud. On Saturday last the prisoner called at the Banking-house of Messrs. Twining in the Strand, and presented to Mr. Samuel Harvey Twining, a member of the firm a letter of introduction purporting to be signed by Dr. Cook, of Fitzroy-square, in the following terms :—"Dear Sir,—Allow me to intro duce to you Mrs. Simpson, an old friend of mine, who wishes to open an account with you." The prisoner handed him a cheque for £l2O, with which the account was opened as requested. It purported to be drawn upon Messrs. Smith, Pa) ne, and Smith, bankers, Lombard-street, by Mr. William Longman, the well-known publisher, who many years ago knew the prisoner's father (who was now dead), and had recently given assistance to the prisoner. The prisoner received a cheque-book, and, before leaving the bank, drew a cheque for 250, which was cashed. Later in the day Dr. Cook call e d at Messrs. Twinings, and the letter and the cheque for £l2O were discovered, to be forgeries. Yesterday, Messrs. Twining's cashier met the priioner in Fleet-street, and she was given into custody. She had then in her possession £2B of the £bo she had received on Saturday. _ _ The ford Ma—dm , remanded the prisoner for a week, in order that further inquiries might be made. ACTION AGAINST A GOLD MINING COMPANY. WEDNESDAY. The case of Villesboisnet v. the Ovens Gold Quartz Mining Company (Limited), was tried to-day, before Mr. Justice Willes and a Middlesex common jury, in the Court of Common Pleas. Serjeant Parry, and Mr. Day, appeared for the plaintiff ; while Mr. Montague Chambers Q.C., and Mr. Lloyd, represented the defendants. From the opening statement of the learned serjeant, it appears that the plaintiff is a French gentlemanwhohasresidedfor some time in this country. The company professed to be owners of an estate called the Oven's Estate, in the county of Lunenberg, Nova Scotia, where it is believed that gold is to be found, and the company was formed for the pur pose of working the gold mines. In May, 1867, the plaintiff, having seen certain auriferous quartz specimens in the shop of a chemist named Robins, one of the direc tors of the company, made certain inquries, and was furnished by the secretary of the company (Mr. Luke Williams) with a prospectus, which stated that its capital was 230,000, in shares of £1 each, to b e p a id u p in f u ll w h en called upon. It further stated that 6,000 shares were reserved for the vendor of the estate ; that 2,500 shares had been applied for ; and that the remainder would be allotted on priority of application, On the faith of this prospectus, plaintiff applied for 200 shares ; and on the 30th of May he deposited £2OO with the bankers of the company. He now sought to recover that amount on the following ground :—Having heard that it was the intention of the company to commence operations before the capital was paid up, he wrote to the secretary protesting against such a course, and inti mating that if they did so he should demand his deposit back. He afterwards did so demand his money back ; and it was asserted by the learned serjeant that at that time the compady had not in fact allotted him any shares ; nor had they allotted shares to anybody else so far as could be found out. Plaintiff demanded the return of his money on the sth of June, 1867. and it was not until the 16th of July that the secretary forwarded scrip, signed by two of the directors.' This, it was contended, was a sham allotment, to prevent the plaintiff bringing an action. The 2,500 shares said to have been applied for lad not been paid up, as the prospectus led the plaintiff to believe, nor had the directors paid a penny on any shares, but they were mere speculators trying to get hold of other people's money to work the affair. The banker's book shewed that 580 shares only had been - applied for, including the plaintiff's 200. The plaintiff underwent a long cross-examination with out his evidence being materially shaken. He acknow ledged that the secretary had written to him to say that he would have received his allotment of shares but for his absence in Paris. Mr. Chambers denied that the company had ever com menced operations at the mines, which was the alleged ground of plaintiff's desire to withdraw. The fact was, they could not get the capital to do so. He took exception to the proceedings on one or two technical points, of which his lordship took a note. The jury found that the plaintiff had not become a shareholder before tho 16th of July ; that there was no allotment before that date ; that plaintiff was induced to make the deposit by misrepresentation ; and that he de manded his money back within a reasonable time. There was therefore a verdict for the plaintiff on all the counts for £2OO. His lordship reserved the points raised until after another action, to be tried to-day, against the directors of the company for fraudulent misrepresentation. THE DEL: CIIEROIS DIVORCE SUIT, Dr. Ball gave judgment on Tuesday in the Provincial Court of Armagh, on the petition which had been pre sented to the Court by Mrs. Delacherois praying for a separation from her husband upon the ground of cruelty. The marriage took place on the 16th of June, 1864. The lady was the daughter of Mr. Tennent, of Rush Park, near Belfast, a gentleman who was the head of an ancient and highly respectable family in the county Down. The case made by Mrs. Delacherois, in hee peti tion, and the evidence, was that her husband soon began to indulge in intoxicating drinks, and habitually used to wards her language insulting and abusive, as well in re ference to herself as her family, and continued to do so while they resided together, and up to the period of their final separation. In July, 1868, the lady left her husband's house, at Bally williarn, and afterwards resided with her father. The es trangement between the parties commenced shortly after marriage - and for some time before the immediate de parture of the wife from the house of her husband, they took meals in separate apartments, and in every part of their conduct pursued towards each other the greatest reserve and hostility. Dr. Ball, in the course of his judgment, said that no incompati bility of temper, no sufferings that arose from a delicate sensibility, morbid temper, a conflict of tastes, feelings, and opinions, afforded any ground upon which the court could decree a separation between the parties—there must be actual injury to health, personal violence, or a reason able apprehension of it. He had arrived at the con clusion that during almost the entire period of their mar ried life the respondent had acted harshly and unkindly towards the petitioner, that he had been upon various occasions guilty of various acts of violence towards her, that the health of the petitioner had suffered under that treatment. Having regard to the husband's general conduct there was a reasonable apprehension tnat a return to a residence with him would not be without danger and personal violence to the wife. Under these circumstances he was of opinion that there hrd not been any condonation or misconduct by the wife legally ade quate to bar the remedy that had been paraded in the case : he, therefore, decreed for a separation between the parties, with permanent alimony. A MONUMENT TO DANIEL O'CONNELL—T/16 Americans, not always very particular in their hero orship, have just crossed the Atlantic to find an object for posthumous distinction. It is proposed, possibly out of regard to the Fenians, to erect a mo numen t i n N e w York to the mem or y of Daniel O'Connell at a cost of 100,000 dols. The proceedings are to go on in the most orthodox fashion. It has been resolved to appoint a com mittee of three in the ward of New York city, while Brooklyn and Jersey are to receive subscriptions limited to one dollar each, no money being received except from them. RUSSIAN PERSECUTION IN LITHUANIA.—The Rus sian Government has adopted most arbitrary measures in the provinces of Lithuania, and convoys of political prisoners have been sent to Siberia. Abbe Petroniez denounced the introduction of Russian prayer-books, for which offence he was arrested and sent off to Siberia. Only ten out of the seven hundred priest of Lithuania have accepted the Government measure. Political demonstrations in Vilna have only been prevented by the presence of a large military force. The officials have been instructed to dis tribute the new Russian prayer-books in the villages; but the peasantry everywhere refuse to take them." SUSPECTED MURDER AT COLCHESTER.— On Tuesday afternoon a man named Dessent, in the employ of Mr. H. Jones, solicitor, was getting some gravel from a pit near the Camp, when he came upon a human body, only six inches below the surface. Information was given to the police, and the body was taken to an adjoining house. On investigation it was proved to be that of a lad named John Harding, aged fourteen years, the son of a small greengrocer residing on Military Road. The deceased had been absent from home since Thursday, but • was seen to enter the Camp on Monday evening. The body was examined by Mr. W. Waylen, surgeon, and there are circum stances which lead to the belief that a cruel murder has been perpetrated. The polie2 are investigating tin miter. MONETARY REPORIS—YEsTERDAy. ny Business in the Stock Exchange to-day has been Pri cipally confined to the settlement of the fortnightli: account. During the earlir part of the day the markets were dull, and the quotations were lower, but subsequently more animation prev a il e d. C onso l s h ave b e en firmer a t " 3 t.) 94 for money, a n d 91 t o 91, 1 1 . for May. Reduced an d neo, 3 Three per Cents., 92.1. to 927 2 . Exchequer bills pa r to ss• prem. India Five per Cents. li3 . to 114, and India Bonds 20s. to 255. prem. Bank Stock has reached.. 233 t° 23i. There has been very little inquiry for English rail w3l stocks, and there ha s b een a t en d ency to lower ra tes, b at ' 4, ' at the same ti me , the movements have notbeenimportant• Metropolitan has been t better, but London and Brig ltc : has receded g ; L on d on and North-Western, i; and Cale donian, Midland has been I-, better. In Indian Railway stocks the transactions have b e e° restricted, at previous quotations. Canadian shares have been quiet. F ore i gn h ave b een fi a t. Ottoman end South Austrian and Lo m b ar d o -V ene ti an h ave receded g• Much heaviness was apparent in the market for foreign bonds during the earlier hours of business, but the toil eventually became more animated. Egyptian op en e haavily on the confirmatiion of the ru na°l°. that a prOtest had bee n ma d e by the Sublime Porte against the introduction of the new loan, a t 80i t ° 80 3 , but subsequently imp rove d t o 80i t o 802. Per il l, 3 l l : (1865) have risen and Turkish (1864) but SP BII.- . have fallen f. American securities have been steady. The Fiv e. Twenty Bonds have risen -, and Pennsylvania.a In British mining shares th ere h as b een a g ood dema n d for Tan-yr-Alt, at an advance of For colonial 81/ foreign mines there has been very little demand. Telegraph shares have been dull, and without Inn le ' ment of importance. The value of 'k shares h as b een we ll ma i n tained, a nd business to a ..iate extent has been concluded. Miscellaneous securities have been quiet, and Price have been free from any important fluctuations. In the money market there has been a fair suPP.I of capital. There has been a good demand for acconni°' dation, partly on account of the settlement, and three months' paper has been taken at 2,1, 3 per cent. The sum of £19,000 has been sent into the Bank to-d B li The Guerrero Gold Mining Company have invited applications for a further issue of 25,000 shares of R 1 e B :_ h —ss. to be paid on application, ss. on allotment, and remaindei in calls not to exceed ss, per share, and no further calls to be made for six months. The Bahia Gas Company have declared a dividend 8t the rate of 3 per cent. per annum. Further failures are announced from Australia, some °f which it is stated will materially affect English houses, At Melbourne, Mr. Brougham, a squatter, has failed f °l. £25,000. At a meeting of the Continental Union Gas Compa n y' an interim dividend at the rate of 8 per cent. per anu ll' was declared. n ce At the annual meeting of the Standard Life .Assui — „,, Company at Edinburgh, th e new p o li c i es f or 1869 w ere shewn to amount to 1,619 for £1,110,347, Yielding in new premiums, £38,532. The assurances in force are t £15,413,600, and the accumulat e d f un d s £4,284,648, the annual income is £710,428. At the annual meeting of the Reliance Mutual Li fe , Assurance Society,the new policies for the year were st ated to have been 744, assuring £250,573, an d yi e lding °% S • h o e ; in premiums. The ann u al i nco m e i s £ 73,327, and the accumulated fund £255,934. A meeting has been held of the Australian Mortglg e , Land and Finance Company (Limited). The directors report has been adopted, and a divid en d at the rate of 10 per cent. per annum has been declared. At a meeting of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Ce ra c i pany, the directors' report was adopted, and a divide ° of £2 per share was declared. The following are some of the official "making uP, prices of to-day being the first day of the account ' l3 shares and foreign bonds :—Foreign Bonds.—EgYPtr n (1868), 80i ; Italian (1861) 554- ; Mexican, 14i : Buss'a scrip, 5 prem.; Turkish (HO), 6I; ditto, 5 p e r cent s ' 471 Railways. Metropolitan, 1261 ; Londe° and North Western, 124; Great Western, 721 ; Great Northern A, 127 ; L on d on an d B r i g ht on, 46 ; S ou th Easter „ " 781, Lombards, 16a, and Erie, 181. Miscellaneous : American Telegraph, 17-L Hooper's telegraph works t dis., West India and Pa nama , 21 di s ., Don Pedro) 2j prem. :~ MARKETS-YESTERDAY. rat e LONDON CORN EXCHANGE, WEDNESDAY.-Only supplies of English grain have come to hand, and the saw n , foreign has not been extensive. English wheat has chi' SO hands quietly at about late rates. For foreign the demand be t been less active, at previous quotations. With barley the In; ed, has been moderately supplied. The inquiry has been restri. si er but prices have ruled firm. Malt has been dull, on I °4 at terms. Oats have been in moderate supply and fair reque st ' full prices. Beans and peas have been steady. Flour has 3 00 ; quiet. Arrivals :-English and Scotch-Wheat, 750; barley, 0:20; malt, 1,160; beans, 20 ; a n d peas, 60. Foreign - Wheat, ? barley, 2ei ; oats, 11,350 ; flour, 200 s ac k s an d 2 , 650 barrels. or MET.RO I'OLITAN MEAT MARKET, WEDNESDAY. -.The ply of meat nas been m o d era t e. The trade has been Ste' to sustained rates. Beef from 3s. to 4 s . Bd . ; mu t ton, 35. Ki ss. 4d. ; lamb, 7s. to Bs. : veal, 4s. 6d. to ss. 4d. ; and . 4s. td. to ss. 48. per 81b. by the carcase. BOROUGH HOP MARKET, WEDNESDAY.-In th e vale Market no feature of importa nce h as t runsp i re d . Very business has been doing, and the quotations have been *t,s, nominal. Mid and East Kents £7 to £l2 12s. ; Weald of lis -46 to £8 : Sussex, £5 12s. t o £6 12s. ; Bavarians, £6 6S. 0 French, £5 to £6 10s. ; Americans, £4 ss. to £6 ; and ye a ' £1 10s. to £3 155. per cwt. e LONDON PRODUCE MARKETS, W EDNESDAY. -F o r tea tber/log has been only a moderate dema n d , a t a b out late rates- ens, sugar has been dealt in to a f a i r ex t ent, b ut on rat her 3,55 . ; terms. Fine crystallised Mau r iti us (d u t y ss. Bd.), dut y), good middling to fine yellow grainy (ss. 3d. ard, 315. 6d. to 345. ; fine b rown t o low middling yellow anu •Deea 28s. 6d. to 30s. 6d. Coffee has been quiet, but prices have vs steady. Rice firm ; Rangoon, landed, 10 8. lid . t o 10 s. 3d. SP' have been in limited request. r' LONDON METAL MARKET, WED NESDAY. -I ron has pe t e, rather quieter. Copper is dull ; Burra, £74 10s. Stria' ts steady, at £133. bee n LONDON OIL MARKET, WEDNESDAY.-Linseed oil ha s dull, at 325. 3d. spot. Rape firm, 425. 9d. to 435. spot. LONDON TRADE REPORT, WEDNESDAY.-Tallow has been flat .Y.C., spot, 445. 6d. ; last three months, 455. 6d. vet LIVERPOOL COTTON MARKET, WEDNESDAY.-The nisi'' has been quiet. Sales 10,000 bales. Import, 21,250 bales. n " CORK BUTTER MARKET WEDNESDAY.-Ordinary firsts, r t io ; seconds, 120 s. ; thirds, 99s fourths, 81s. ; fifths, 625. ; not quoted ; 860 firkins in the market. Mild cured : firsts, seconds, 1265.; thirds, 108 s. ; 80 firkins in the market. TURKEY AND ROUMANIA.—TII,3 Grand Vizier litl3 Addressed a dispatch to the Prince of Roumania, conWAIn 9'-ihe kg of the introduction of a nation a l co i nage w ithout, c i 3oncurrence of the Port e . Thirty-six members of the ti p nn a sg r t uarr y g , ea s eti n u i p sot p n o t wh r t ei e l d pl rsbehysoertnthtl shortly breaklly n u a s s s itayn, out.aGn over li e t r m t sist a h n roe t up , go a hr r tt e etd a h gi att 7 rt Prince Charles is ill. LAD v EitTlssitiENT. J—Avoid Medicines—they always agg ra ,, C ri e. u f g e chronic complaints; but D n Barry's delicious health-res t r n - s h Revalenta Araks. Food, which yields three times the no es, mentor the best meat, s aves 50 tim::S its cost in other renr,od and invariably restores perf ec t di gest i on, strong nerves, su i re lungs, healthy liver, p u r e bl oo d , refresh i ng sleep, funct ioat „ gularity, ant , energy to the most disordered or enfeebled. NY: or eti tract a few out of the 68,000 cures:—" The Pope's health 1 ' 0 ' 0 66. by Du Barry's Food. C ure N o. 68 , 413 . — " R ome , July 21, 40re, —The health of the Holy Father is excellent, especially ely abandoning all other remedies, he has confined himself 0 , 0 ,00 to Du Barry's Revalenta Axabica F oo d , o f wh i ch he con'teoe' a plateful at every meal. It has p ro d uce d a surpr isinglLoel- Mal effect on his health, and his Holi ness cannot praise 6111'cors lent food too highly.—From the "Gazette du Midi," July 2 5 ., fiver No. 58,216, of the Marchioness de Brehan, of seven yea r t r voul complaint, wasting away, debility, nervousness, with ' l ,`" a nd ralpitation all over, bad digestion, constant sleeplesslYl'pord, the most intolerable nervous agitation.." Cure No. 1, 771 ;„ e ais Stuart de Decies, Lord-Lieutenant of Waterford, of marg . " IT O dyspepsia. No 49,832: " Fifty years' indescribable agorir,,,nd dyspepsia, nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation, Ss"' So ; spasms, sickness, and vomiting.—Maria Jolly." Cu re ,,ais 46,270: Mr. James Roterts, of Frimley, Surrey, of 3 0 ," i od diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangereen 4 ., s o partial deafness. Important Caution.— ware of the ri o o ut unsavoury and more than sloppy imitations to which, w ‘ 1 ,0, , authority, Baron Liebig's name is most audaciously attach e . In tins, at is lid; 1 lb 2s Yd; 2 lb is 6d; 51b 115.: A T g 24 lbs 4 s.—Also DU BARRY'S REVALENTA . RAince. Cllo POWDER is packed in tin canisters : for 1. cu p s at 2 s , for 24 OS at 3s 6d, for 48 cups at6s, for 2,8 cup s a t 30 s, f or 576 mil's, A sent —being about one penny per cup. The 30 8 an d 55 s tins ere free of carriage in England on receipt of Post Office Ortrand BARRY Du BARRY and CO:, No. 77, Regent-street, Londo" ' all Grocers and Chemists. • BIRTHS. LEGGE —On the 27th inst., at 13, O ns l ow - gar d en s, the s°ll Mrs. George B. Legge, of a son. •ren- SLADE —On the 27th inst., at Cro mwe ll- p l ace, South .-- sington, Lady Sloe, of a daughter. MA RRI AGES. DONNE—HUDSON—On the 23d inst , at Portslade C hurch, Joseph Philip Donne, of Great Maidborough-street, don, to ~a rah Ann, youngest d aug h ter o f Henry al ds° Esq., of Portshtde, Suisex. peel LAWRZNCE ETILL—On the 26th inst , at St. vietne Notting-hill, Alfred Lawrence, Es ,of Brentfort ' fock , Emily Maria, youngest daughter of Th . oznesL.Ev -, of Notting-hill. DEATHS. Es q " °f BRENCHLET —On the 26th i ns t. , J c h n C ren ohley , -" s '" Milgute, near Maidbtooe. COUNSELL —On the 25th inst., at Kingston Vale, Sul len Wm. Counsel], Esq., of Chancery-lane, aged 56: London: Printed and Published by WILLIAM ANDRESV4: i,f No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TilE SUN Office, No. f Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the Collat.,' ° Middlesex..—Thursday, April 28, 1870. A Lip etite C elilt l Chei ',her I) thi s the k bow; bniz oft: ver c ,, 1 , , 4 4'a iit,,, ts