The Sun. — London, England, 1841-11-08 00:00:00

MORNING SUN SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF SATURDAY. STANDARD.—The Rev. R. W. Sibthorp, one of the Fellows of Magdalen College, Oxford, and minister of St. James's Chapel, Ryde, has quitted the Church of England, to seek for new ordination in the Papal communion. Those who have been aware of the symptoms which have recently manifested themselves in St. James's Chapel—the bowings, crossings, using several different parts of the church to read the service from, and, it is said, even the introduction of incense—will not be much surprised at this melancholy close of the whole course of mental aber ration ; melancholy, we mean, for the unhappy man himself. For the Church, we regard the separation as an event rather fortunate than otherwise. And we hope—we earnestly hope—that this secession will prove hut the first of several. Happy, indeed, would it be for the cause of truth and religion, if the pre sent year were to witness some imitators of Mr. Sibthorp. The danger, the real danger, under which the Church now suffers, is not that of losing the services of men of Mr. Sibthorp's mied, but of retaining them. Let us find all Romanists at heart under their own proper banner, and we shall know where and how to meet them. It is when they hide themselves among our own men that they' excite a real and well-founded alarm. We are well aware that the number of those who, in the main, agree with Mr. S.bthorp, although small, is greater than could be wished. Were the error con fined to but one or two individuals, it would not have excited the admonitions, within the lost few months, of the various Prelates who have made the topic a promi nent one in their charges, among whom we remember the Bishops of Ripon, Durham, Chester, Gloucester, Winchester, and Exeter. Nor has Mr. Sibthorp been at all the foremost in the mischief. His prece dence in the final step is probably owing to the greater honesty and straightforwardness of his charac ter. We trust, however, that those who secretly think with him will quickly evince the manliness to act with him also. Their own language, in their quarterly organ, is, "It is impossible to stop where we are." With honest men it ought to be impossible. The equivoca tions, of " No. 90" do not look like the workings of an honest mind. The event will shortly show whether we do its author an injustice. GLOBE.—The tergiversation of the Times is with out parallel in the history of the public Press. On eery imaginable topic within the wide range of poli tical or polemical discussion it has, alternately, sup ported the most diametrically opposite opinions. Every public man has, in his turn, been the god of its idolatry, and the subject of its virulent abuse every line of public policy, domestic, co lonial, foreign, has been advocated or condemned, according as the madness of patty ruled the hour, and prompted the language of praise or condem nation. From being the indiscriminate calumniator of the Irish Roman Catholics—the reckless libeller of their clergy, whom it accused of every crime against society—of their religion, to which it attributed the physical and moral calamities which they suffer—and of their loyalty, which it impeached and denied—we find the Times assuming the tone of moderation ; de nouncing in others the course which it only recently pursued ; and coming forth from the extreme regions of blind partizanship and infuriated bigotry, to en force the duties of moderation, and to expatiate on the advantages of unity and peace ! We are furnished with a clue to this sudden and striking transformation in the following passage : " The days arc gone when the state of warfare pro duced by Orange domination can be considered in any more favourable view than an enormous evil." To be sure they are! Tr e Tinics is an expert discerner of what is suitable for the changed position of its party, to which, with wonderful facility, it moulds its ad vocacy—and becomes the counsellor of the very course which, hut a few days, and even hours, before, it re presented as fraught with danker, and to be contem plated only with dismay. When the Whigs were in power, moderation toward Ireland was stigmatized as giving encouragement to Popery, to discourage and eventually suppress which was enforced as the impera tive duty of the Government ; and the Protestants were invoked, by the reverence and love they professed for their religion, to combine to overturn a Government which had entered into covenant with Popery, and was encouraging its claims by conferring place and patronage on its professors. But " the days are gone by " when the tocsin of alarm, sounded in the cause of party without reason and without the slightest ground for belief that any alarm existed, can serf e the cause of party. The Whigs have been succeeded in the Go vernment by the Tories ; and the raised hopes of the Ultras, that the days of Orange domination were to return with the advent of Sir Robert Peel, are to be damped, and even extinguished, by the very organ which aided in calling them forth, and fed them to the full. COURlER—Without subscribing to the full cor rectness of the estimate given by a Morning Contempo rary of the sayiugs and doings of the people that con gregate in Exeter Hall on each returning anniveriary of the Gunpowder Plot, vie must, however, enter our protest against all such exhibitions as being unsuited to the times in which we live, and to the circumstances by which we are surrounded, and as being most eminently calculated to damage, by dishonouring, the cause which those who meet to hear and be heard on such occa sions affect to have so much at he irt. We may concede to them that " Popery" is the monster-evil they delight to paint it—that its eradication from the British em pire is a consummation most devoutly to bo wished ; but even with this mrasure of ample concession we cannot reconcile the tone and temper that charac• terise their addresses, either to the reverence due to the sacred subject of religion or to those feelings of cha rity and forbearance which should distinguish the really sincere Christian. Surely the parties who attend there either for the purpose of denouncing a large portion of their fellow-subjects, or of hearing them denounced by others in terms as grossly offensive as violent!) , in tolerant, cannot be guilty of the extravagant folly of supposing that the work of conversion can be promoted by such agencies, or that such language can have any other effect than that of disgusting all sober-minded people, and of confirming in their errors those against whose faith and religious principles it has been fulmi nated. A state of perfect religious equality has been established, whether wisely or not is now too late to discuss, in every portion of the British empire. A Minis try has succeeded to office determined fairly and fully to recognise and act upon the principle, not alone of tolera tion, but of equality, adopted by the Legislature; disposed as pledged to the maintenance of the Established Church in unimpaired rigour—to the enlargement in every possi ble way of the sphere of its influence, and to the support of all those time-tested institutions encompassing it. And yet this is the time selected by hot-headed zealots for a display of coarse and offensive intolerance, unchari table in its nature and mischievous in its results. MONEY MARKET alai CITY NEWS. FROM TUE MORNING PAPERS OF SATURDAY. TIMES. —The examinations b . of Messrs. Rapallo and E. B. Smith have no means tended to alleviate the uneasiness of the holders of spurious Exchequer bills, as to their final indeaLfication. T The confession of Mr. 'Smith to Mr. Malik, ' givento the Solicitor to the reasury, that many bills were Mr. Rapalle with the numbers only, and without the signature, is very alarming, since, as far as those bill s are concerned, it is doubtful whether of they would afford .a chancethe action gnlnrly against issued across the Go vernment, never havin g been re counter, but only acquirin g the of circulation in the hands of the party out of doors who might have added the signature. ()n the other hand, those parties who took the bills some months theyto the Treasury, and were then distinctly informed thatt o officialperlor to the holders con ceive that they are in a position s were good, mi,,ht information i in general, and that by such compr l o a m ve ise h d een Mr. withstanding the informant (not- Smith himself) the Government is c ertainly does seem hard that parties, against whom no neglect can be char g ed, but who, onar the exhi bited more than ordinar y diligence, should contrary, after having taken t he onl y ste p s that were i n their power. It is not impossible that this proceeding on the part of f a few holders may d ivide the holders generally into tw o classes—one of whi ch would stand in a different position to the other with regard to a claim against Government. A fact has transpired lately which is calculated to in crease the alarm in the Money Market, and to deprive many holders of Exchequer bills of the consolation of a belief that their bills were genuine. The general impres sion has been for some time that none of the spurious bills were ever sold, but merely lodged as a deposit for loans, so that, notwithstanding the general panic, the boon fide purchasers felt that they at least could not be losers. To-day, however, it has transpired that some of the bad bills have actually been sold, and therefore every holder is in a state of uncertainty. There is a very general impression to-day in the City, that the only way out of this affair by which the monied interest can be satisfied, and the credit of the Govern ment maintained, is by the appointment of a Commis :ion to inquire into the situation of the respective h olders f spurious bills, and to protect those who a pp ear Clearly to have become possessed of them without the ~.,o r least cognizance or suspicion of the original fr aud. / this purpose there should undoubtedly be selected Wren well acquainted with commercial practice, for there appears _ wee to most people a very strong analogy be administration what cccurs in this case, and the practice in the of the bankrupt laws, in which innocent holders, whatever may be the origin of the docu ments the o yl l iold, are uniformly protected. What would he the n , cit be tly, ai:. satisfaction therefore in this matter, would appointment, say of two eminent bankers for the ml two for the west-end of the town, who pow should have power to decide or. all claims of the Govern ment, arising out f ia u l l of these spurious transactions. No mixture of official persons, or others connected with the Government, w ) answer the purpose. If this is to be the course determined upon,it is obvious that the action ought to be a p rompt of the Governme n t as one —w e mean, as well for the sake the suffering parties, for it is ob vious that the Exchequer bill market is in a most critical se connected t o th the ported entirely by the demand funding, and though parties who want them- fpr that purpose are compelled to pay a premiuiiiill-e. or 85., thrPoejsoebbers who deal in them for the sake of selling them h a i g s ain to the public will not This purchase them at par. ' a mercantile feeling which will may be termed, perhaps, subside in a few days by the operation of self-interest ; but the Go ve r nm ent will evince great ignorance of the nature of credit generally if they place their reliance on such a thing. A float ing debt of 20,000,000 1 . and upwards is not to be kept afloat but by the diffusion of universal confidence, not among great capitalists only, but also amongst small ones, and undoubtedly all trustees and executors will rather keep their money in bank-notes in the Bank of England than bring themselve3 within the peril which has lately been witnessed, and yet such parties, it is well known, are the real supporters of the Exchequer bill market. We speak the opinion of the best informed persons in the City when we say that . this is not only the best course for the Government to pursue, but that no time is to be lost in appointing such a commission. HERALD.—Two or three banking-houses in the City and at the West-end are spoken of as having ascertained on examination probably at the Exchequer bill-office, that certain batches of bills in their possession are among the class of fraudulent issues, or forged, as the case may be, for as yet it is not •onsidered that the point has been absolutely decided either way. Two of these firms are said to be holders to the extent of 20,0001. each, and one firm of 40,0001., but whether taken in against ad vances of money upon them direct, or held merely in deposit for customers, did not transpire. The amounts themselves are of small consequence in the way of loss to the respectable and wealthy parties concerned, if held in their own right, and the facts are only noted by way of showing that no certainty has yet been arrived at respect ing the whole quantity which has been issued, and simi larly held amongst bankers and money-lenders. Some curious stories are in circulation respecting one of the parties in custody, but as they rest on no positive foun • dation, so far as can be ascertained, and, what is more conclusive, might tend, if adverted to, to prejudice the case of a man about to be placed on his trial, it would neither be right, nor is it necessary, to repeat them here. CHRONICLE.—The report of the evidence yesterday at Bow-street and the Mansion-house on the examina tion of Smith and Rapallo, corroborates the views we have formerly expressed regarding the claims of the in nocent holders of the spurious bills on her Majesty s Go vernment. It is now established beyond all question that the spurious bills and the genuine are in all respects the same, with the sole exception of the signature " Monteagle," which the Deputy-Comptroller states he can at once detect to be forged, as they are neither in his own handwriting nor in that of the Comptroller-Ge neral. The origin of the fraud is now distinctly brought out. It was accomplished by Smith giving instructions to throw off a larger number of bills than would be re quired for the legitimate issues. We also learn that the fraud began in 1836. Smith said that he gave the bills to Rapallo without the signatures, but previously ad mitted that he had seen the name of Monteagle sub scribed to them; but that another hand, which he would not or could not disclose, had put the name. Rapallo said that he received the bills in a complete state from Smith, and had no suspicion of their being spurious. Be that as it may, we now see clearly that the whole of the bills alleged to be forgeries are, in all re spects, identical with those admitted to be ge nuine, with the single exception of the signature. The only case for the Crown against the bona fide hold ers, therefore, is restricted to the supposed forgery of the name " Monteagle." The evidence of Mr. Perceval, as regards the test of the counterfoil, does not tend to in crease our opinion of its accuracy. The duty of num bering the bills fell to the charge of Mr. Smith. Mr. Perceval distinctly stated so, therefore the numbers on the disputed bills are genuine, and written by the proper Government officer. The paper, printing, and stamp also are all confessedly the same on genuine and spu rious bills. There is no attempt to dispute that fact. There is nothing in question but the signatures and the technical point of agreeing with the counterfoil. That of itself is now almost abandoned as a sufficient ground of rejection, and merely held out as showing " pretty , clearly that the bills which do not fit the book are genu ine." It could not be maintained that if the signatures were genuine, the mere want of suiting the counterfoil would warrant the Government in refusing to pay the .nnocent holders. MORTALITY in the METROPOLIS. The following are the results of " A Table of Mortality in the Metropolis, showing the Number of Deaths from all Causes Registered in the week ending Oct. 30, 1841." The Table is issued from the Office of the Registrar-General : Weekly Total. Average CAUSES OF DEATH. 1838-9-40 Epidemic, Endemic, and Contagious Diseases l4l 204 Diseases of the Brain, Nerves, and Senses ll3 151 Diseases of the Lungs, and other Organs of Respiration Diseases of the Hea-t and Blood-vessels l2 18 Diseases of the Stomach, Liver, and other Organs of Digestion Diseases of the Kidnoys, &c. .. ..... ... 9 4 Childbed, Diseases of the Uterus, &c. Diseases of the Joints, Bones, and Museles Diseases of the Skin, &c 1 1 Diseases of Uncertain Seat 96 103 0 1 4 Age, or Natural Decay 6B 71 Deaths by Violence, Privation, or Intemperance 25 25 Causes not specified Deaths from all causes 792 Average Weekly Deaths .. 926 Deaths in the Average Weekly Week. Deaths, 1838-9-40 Western Districts ..... ... 98 ...... 139 North Districts Central Districts l3l ..... 190 East Districts South Districts ... ..... Total 792 It is stated that under the term Metropolis are comprised the 3.2 districts herein mentioned, which include the City of Lon don with and without the walls, the City and Liberties of Westminster, the out-parishes within the Bills of Mortality—. and the parishes of St. Marylebone, St. Pancras. Kensington, Fulham, Hammersmith (Chapelry), St. Luke (Chelsea), Pad dington, St. Mary (Stoke Newington), St. Leonard (Brom ley), St. Mary-le-bow, Camberxell, Greenwich, St. Nicholas and St. Paul (Deptford), and Woolwich. The population, as enumerated in 1831, was 1,594,890. The weekly averrge for 1838, 1839, and 1810, was obtained by dividing the deaths in the three years by 156. TEMPERATURE IN TUE WEEKS ENDING Oct. 23. Oct. 30. 63' 58' 38 37 50 48 4, 1841. Highest Lo — west . Daily Mean . . .. I General Register Office, Nov. RAILWAY RETURNS. We extract from the Railway Magazine the sums received on the principal Railways of Great Britain for the week ending on the day of the mouth prefixed to each. The return includes the money received for passengers, parcels, carriages, horses, mails, and mer chandize : Week ended Name of Railway. 1%1 iles . Openea. Oct. 30 Birmingham and Derby Junct. 384 30 Birmingham and Gloucester 524 30 Chester and Birkenhead ..... l5 31 Dundee and Arbroath... 16% 31 Eastern Counties 30 Glasgow and Ayr.. .. ... 30 Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock 224 22 Grand Junct. &Chester &Crewelo34 Nov. 1 Great North of England 45 Oct. 31 Great Western .llBl 30 Hull and Selby. . .. 30 Lancaster and Preston Junction 20a 29 Liverpool and Manchester 3l 30 London and Birmingham 1124 Nov. . 4 London and Blackwell ... London and Brighton . 40i I No returns ... Ditto Shoreham Branch ... 54 2 London and Croydon 4 Li ndon and Greenwich 3% Oct. 30 London and South Western 28 Manchester, Bolton, and Bury 10 Nov. 1 Manchester and Birmingham 5 Oct. 25 Manchester and Leeds 5O 30 Midland Counties .... 57 30 Newcastle and Carlisle 60% 31 Northern and Eastern .... 224 30 North Midland ... 72% ... North Union .... ... 25 30 Preston and Wyre 31 Ulster Nov. 1 York and North Midland . 23 Total. X. 3. d. 1,266 19 7 1,677 1 2 440 6 4 251 19 4 727 6 3 1,104 16 9 695 12 2 8,918 7 1 1,476 5 4 12,175 1 11 847 17 3 466 3 10 4,636 13 0 15,9'21 19 4 630 13 5 430 8 10 752 19 0 4,904 11 8 632. 19 11i 289 13 0 4,141 5 4 2,477 14 Ili 1,794 12 8 760 13 10 4,342 8 0 No returns. 290 3 11 185 10 1 1,557 10 10 FIRE IN THE TO WER OF LONDON About mid-day on Friday smoke issued from one of the apartments in the Bowyer Tower,iildicatin bu gt t h i a t y t ,a itic s , devouring element was not yet powerless, soon extinguished. The scaffolding erected in front of the grand entrance for the purpose of saving the sculptured coat of arms (and which has been contracted for by Messrs. Harri son), is now nearly completed, and hopes are entertained that this tine work of art will be taken down with very little injury. It was executed by the celebrated Gib bons, and great merit is due to the Board of Ordnance for their attempts to save it. Colonel Gurwood, Governor of the Tower, who left England for the Continent on Saturday se'nnight, has not yet returned. Despatches were forwarded to him on Monday, acquainting him with the melancholy disaster, but it is supposed that they have not yet reached him. The Board of Ordnance met again on Friday, and proceeded with the investigation, Colonel Peel in the Chair. Mr. Swif te and several gunsmiths were exa mined, but the profoundest secrecy is observed. No person is allowed to go over the ruins, unless pro vided with an order in Major Elrington's name. That portion of the Tower denominated the view de partment, in which the arms were inspected previous to being brought into service, is entirely destroyed, and my of cavalry swor d s, car bi nes, riads (it may almost be sa id) and fusees are blended in one undistinguishable mass in the cellars beneath. ---; Major Elrington, the Governor, R Tuesd a y su b m i tte d to his Grace the Duke of Wellington Contain ing all the circumstances relative fo ° tl Fri day the following communication from I afi report ‘e, and on rela tive Fr ito the subject was publicly read to his Grace officers and entire battalion of Scotch Fusileer Guards on the ptivade fronting the Armoury. " London, November 3, 1 " Sir—l beg to co mmunicate to th e officers of 1. Tower and the war ders the ex p ression of the setiseol the en tertain of the gener al zeal, alacrit y , diligence, and in telligence which t he y dis p la y ed in the performance of the laborious duties imposed upon them in consequence of the occurrence of the late calamitous event in the Tower. " I selected them for the appointments which they hold in the Tower for those very qualifications in the performances of their duties in their several regiments ; and I am happy to find that the public have had the ad vantage of being served by men of this description. " I will not fail to report their conduct in such quar ters as that a knowledge of their merits may reach our most gracious Sovereign. I have the honour to be faithfully yours, " Major Elrington. " WELLINGTON." Sir Robert Gordon, the newly-appointed Am bassador to the Court of Vienna, had a long interview with the Earl of Aberdeen on Saturday morning, at the Foreign-office. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 6. The Lord Chancellor took his seat in his Court at Westminster to-day shortly after ten o'clock. rN THE MATTER OF SWINDELL, A LUNATIC. The further arguments in this lunatic petition, which were opened yesterday, were resumed this morning, and occupied the Court the whole day. The object of the petitton was the removal of the Committee, on the ground of misconduct. We refrain from entering further into the particulars of the case till the arguments are concluded. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 6. (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of England.) Cause petitions occupied his Honour the whole morning. (Before Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.) His Honour was engaged the entire day in hearing the arguments in a cause which presented no feature of pub lic interest. All he contended for was, that being valid or not, in a Court of Law or the Ecclesiastical Court, the juris diction of a Court of Equity remained entirely uncontrolled to deal with the parties who took benefits under an instrument, which benefits were obtained by fraud, and would deem such individuals trustees of the individuals so defrauded. The Learned Gentleman then cited Barnsley v. Powell, Ist Vesey, 119 ; Dugal v. Horne, 9, Simons 540 ; Kennel' v. Abbot, 4 Vesey ; ex-parte Wallack, 4 Brown ; Marriott v. Marriott, Ist Strange, 166 ; Seagrave v. Curl, Ist Vesey, 157; and Wilford v. Buckley, 2d Clarke and Venelly, 103. Unless his Lordship would disaf firmEthe doctrine laid down in these cases, he could not decide that the parties procuring the revo cation of this instrument by fraud could be considered otherwise than as trustees. With respect to the demurrer for want of parties the bill sought no administration of the estate, but simply to leave the ninth codicil inoperative. It prayed that the will might be established and carried into execution, and that plaintiff might take the benefit given to him therein. It merely repudiated the 9th co• dicil. He hoped, therefore, his Lordship would overrule i the demurrer. _ _ _ ROLLS' COURT, Nov. 6. MAIDEN V. BADCOCK. Lord LANGDALE, after hearing Mr. Pemberton in re ply to this case, which was reported in our paper yester day, said that he did not think he should be satisfied to make an order without further information as to the de crees and directions of the Court in the suit. It ap peared that in 1791 a testator named Smithers charged his estate with certain debts and an nuities, and, subject to the payment of these, devised it to his son, with remainder to the plain tiffs, if his son should die before attaining the age of 21 years. Testator died, and his son also died before attaining the age of twenty-one years A bill was then filed to administer the trusts of the will, and for the purpose of procuring payment of the bequests, to those who were entitled under the will, and Mr. Dray son was appointed receiver of the rents and profits of the estate in the year 1806, and was continued as receiver by a decree made in February, 180 g. In his life-time Mr. Drayson passed two accounts, and paid into Court the money chargeable to him on the balance. After his death his executor and executrix applied to the Court for leave to pay into Court the balance due from the roceiver, which application was made with full know ledge of his assets ; and upon their petition an or der was made for an inquiry, by which it appeared that the sum of 992/. was due from them on account of the receiver. This report was made in 1812, and the Master afterw irds made his general report, and when the case came on for further direction it appeared that Mr. Bice, one of the persons entitled to the estate sub ject to the charges, was in possession of the estate, but what provision was made for payment of the charges did not appear. He (his Lordship), therefore, wished to see the decrees to know what was done. But it appeared to him that the charges provided for, and intended to be paid, still subsisted, and the money was due from the executors of the receiver which they were entitled to pay. There was then subsisting the order to pay into Court the sum of 992/., and unsatisfied claims to wards the satisfaction of which this sum was liable. In this state of things all the persons concerned in the case seemed to have abandoned attention to it. Mrs. Saunders, one of the persons entitled to an annuity under the will died in the year 1829 ; the conduct of the cause was given to the petitioners in 1830, and in 1841 they discovered that the sum of 9921. which ought to have been paid into Court in 1812, had never been paid. It was said that it was extremely hard to come upon the parties after so great a length of time, but was there ever a time in which the executor did not know the state of the case ? It was matter of consideration over and over again, and instead of considering what it was their duty to perform the executors and his solicitor seemed to have considered it their duty to enter into an arrange ment with the tenant for life, and to set off this sum in part of payments made to him. If the receiver had taken upon himself to see that the charges on the estate were sa tisfied, and had then thought fit to make the payment there might be no reflection on him ; but he had thought fit to make this arrangement without regard to those who had prior claims. He (his Lordship) should not give a final opinion, but he was strongly impressed that the money must b'e brought into Court to satisfy those claims. Mr. KINDERSLEY having replied at length, Lord LANGDALE said the case was one of extremely great importance, though a very short one. He wcuid look into the authorities cited, and order the cause to stand on the paper for Friday next. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 6. PHILIP JOHN MILES V. BOUGH. This was an action brought by the plaintiff as trea surer of the Clifton Suspension Bridge Company, of Bristol, to recover the amount of calls upon certain shares in that Company. The case was tried before Mr. Baron Maule at the last Gloucester Assizes, and a verdict had for the plaintiff for 171.105. _ ALLEN V. M'PHERSON. Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS now moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside, and a non suit entered, on the ground of the admission of improper evidence. The Company was formed some years since for the. purpose of carrying into effect a plan for building a suspension bridge across the river Avon below Bristol, to the opposite shore of Somerset. A sum of money had _ been originally bequeathed by a gentleman for that purpose, which having accumulated to between 10,000/. and 15,000 L, an Act of Parliament was obtained, and a Company formed, with power to raise money upon loan or otherwise. At the trial the books of the Company were produced, but the resolution authorizing the calls was not signed by the Chairman as it ought to have been. Now, in the case of the South ampton Railway v. Richards, the same point bad been raised, and it was decreed in that case that the books should be signed by the Chairman at the time when the meeting was held at which the calls were authorized. Another objection was that there were no Trustees within the meaning of the Act, as it was not proved that they had been regularly sworn. The COURT thought the Learned Gentleman was en titled to the rule, but as the question was one of some im portance, they would see Mr. Baron Maule in the first instance. Mr. KINDERSLEY (with whom was Mr. Russell) stated that this case came before the Court on demurrer, fu'r want of equity, and also, for want of parties. The bill was filed by Robert Allen and others, which prayed that he might be entitled to a legacy be queathed to him by a codicil in the will of John Allen, which had been revoked by fraud ; and that the parties profiting by such fraudulent revocation might bo appointed trustees of the legacy for him. It alleged that the testator, John Allen, in the year 1824, made his will, and thereby gave large bequests to his daughter, Susannah Evans, and made her his residuary legatee, and appointed Messrs. ll`Pherson and Tomkins execu tors. That he subsequently made nine codicils to his will, by which, among other legacies, he gave certain legacies to the plaintiff, and by the sixth of which he gave to plaintiff and his children one-fourth part of his estate and effects. It further stated, that soon after the execution of the sixth codicil Susannah Evans was informed of it by ono of the attesting witnesses, and in consequence became extremely jealous, and entertained great dislike to the plaintiff ; also that soon after the execution of this co dicil the testator became very infirm and unable to undertake any business requiring serious attention, and that Susannah Evans acquired great influence over the testator, and used it to acquire the whole or as much as possible of the property to herself and Wm. Allen, an illegitimate son of the testator, whose mother he after wards married, there being a secret understanding be tween them as ta sharing testator's property. It also stated that the testator, when about to marry the mother of William Allen, received an anonymous letter, dis suading him from doing so ; which Susannah Evans and William Allen represented to testator was written by the plaintiff, and used to preju dice testator ngainst the plaintiff, for his al leged opposition to testator's marriage; and it fur ther stated that Susannah Evans, with a view to obtain a revocation of this codicil, urged testator to send Wil liam Allen into Somersetshire to inquire into the cha racter and designs of plaintiff and his family, and that William Allen was accordingly sent, and remained there two days, but did not make bona fide inquiries respecting the plaintiff, and returned on the 2d October to the testator's house, and made a re port to him prejudicial to the plaintiff ; and that on the following day testator made another codicil to his will, whereby he revoked the bequests lie had given to the plaintiff; and substituted for them a devise of 8001. stock to Wm. Allen, Nath. Bartlett, and Susannah Evans in trust, to pay the income to the plaintiff for life, or until he charged it with any incumbrance, after which it was to go to his children. John Alleo, the testator, died in 1837, and the will was ad mitted to probate after an attempt on the part of plaintiff had failed to prevent probate as to such codicil. The Learned Gentleman said the first observation was, supposing no observation to be made on the number of allegations, but simply that the testators intended, by a former testamentary instrument, certain benefit to the plaintiff, which, by reason of repre sentations made fur the purpose of inducing him to alter it, and which were false and fraudulent, he revoked, and the party who induced the testator to alter his opinion with respect to the individual, and upon that altered opinion took all the benefit intended to the other party. Of course the Ecclesiastical Court and no other would have jurisdiction to judge how far that which was propounded as the will of the testator was to be admitted to proof, and no doubt if a case was made out that the testamentary act was done by the testator in consequence of fraud, that Court would have jurisdiction to decide whether that was to be treated as a testamentary act of the testator or not. But in this case, the Ecclesiastical Court, after all the evidence had been laid before it, was of opinion that the testamentary act of the testator was a valid testamentary act, and was of opinion that the codicil in question expressed the last will and in tentions of the testator. What, therefore, was asked of his Lordship was, after the attempt had failed in the Ecclesiastical Court to make out a fraudulent intention to depart from the general rule of the Court, that it was limited to the construction of the will, and to invalidate the testamentary instrument which had been pronounced valid by the Ecclesiastical Court. No case could be adduced to show that the Court had ever ex ercised such jurisdiction, and therefore he felt assured that his Lordship would nut make a decision which would overturn the established principle of the Court with respect to its jurisdiction. With respect to the demurrer fur want of parties by the will, Messrs. M'Pher son and Tumkins were appointed trustees, but by the last codicil, William Allen, Nath. Bartlett, and Su sannah Evans, were appointed trustees for the benefit of the plaintiff. How then was it possible the suit could proceed without having Mr. Bartlett as a party to it? Moreover the allegation as to testator's state of mind, as to the influence used upon him, and as to the circumstances under which he was induced to make the ninth codicil, applied to every individual affected by it ; but these parties, whose interests were to be affected, were not brought into Court. He submitted, therefore, on these grounds. that for want of parties, as well as for want of equity, the demurrer must be sustained. Mr. PEMBERTON (with whom was Mr. Joliffe) said, the cause, as it stood before the Court, rendered it perfectly clear that there was no want of equity. What was the principle of law on which the bill rested ? Not that his Lordship was to control the decision of the Eccle siastical Court. Tho bill alleged the testamentary act of the testator, and that it was a valid instrument, and properly admitted to probate ; but it said there were circumstances of equity which should induce the Court to convert the individual who had obtained a bequest by fraud, into a trustee for that individual, who by that fraud had been deprived of it. It asked that the plaintiff might be declared entitled to the several bequests given to or intended for him by the testator, notwithstanding the revocation of such bequests by the 9th codicil, and that the defendants might be declared trustees to the extent of such bequests. Now, was it or not the principle of a Court of Equity that where a testamentary paper was to be adhered to, having been revoked, or to be acted on, having never been called into existence, through • fraud, the Court would deal with these instruments as still subsisting instruments for the benefit of the party deprived by fraud, and against the party who commited the fraud ? lie should prove that it was the principle of the Court so to act. He should prove, by a number of cases, that where a partytlegacy ti le intendeddefrauded, frauintention,d e to an individual was not in a will through fraud, th e C ourt wou ld d e f e nd the notthat deal if a party v,ith i ‘t, a and si i though becauseu induced that Ecclesiastical e ff e c t wo u Court d b e couldgiven itd w to u r n ev o o t k i e n t e existence raeywei cl tihey fraud e Court would give effect to it, as if i t h a d no t b e en re voked. These prin c ipl es were fam i l i ar to ever y : th of the individual benefit e d b y and the person conversant with the rules of equity. What were the authorities necessary to produce ? THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1841 peared that one of the Directors, named Clift, • being made aware of the fact of the premium not having been paid, had written on the policy the word `` lapsed" in pencil; but when Mr. Rapallo called for payment, the actuary being then in the country, and the director Clift having no recollection of the facts at the moment he paid the sum of 9971. 10s. to Mr. Rapallo on behalf of Mr. Solari, the defendant including in that sum 1971. 10s. upon the policy of the 3d of September, 1836, which had lapsed. Under ►these circumstances his Lordship was of opinion that the plaintiff was not entitled to reco ver, because the money had been paid, they having at the time full means of knowledge. Lord ABINGER—NO full knowledge, because the evi dence of one of the clerks in the office was, that he had not only mentioned the fact several times, but, according to the practice of the office, the lapsed policy was carried through five different books. Mr. THESIGER—There was no doubt they had the knowledge at the time the policy lapsed, but the circum stance was forgot at the time of the payment of the money, and the question was, had they not a right to recover it, it having been paid under an evident mistake. The law upon the point was very obscure. It was laid down that all monies paid by mistake, but where the party had a full means of knowledge, were not recover able; but he could find no authority for saying that where a party has the means of knowledge, but has not the actual knowledge at the moment of payment of the money, is precluded from recovering. The Learned Gentleman went at considerable length into the cases of Byas v. Dickenson, Ist term Reports, 285; Bilby and Lumley, 2(1, East 649; Cox and Prentice, 3d, Manic and Selwyn, 344; Wilkinson and Johnson, 3d; Barnewell and Cresswell, and Mills and Duncan, 6; Barnewell and Cresswell, 671; and trusted that as the law was so ob scure, and as the point in question was of so much im portance, the Court would see fit to grant him a rule. The COURT granted a rule to show cause why the ver dict should not be entered for the plaintiff for 1971. 10s. HARRISON V. BIRCH. This was an action against the Sheriff of Lancashire, which was tried at the late Liverpool Assizes, before Mr. Justice Wightman, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff, damages 2901. Mr. CRESSWELL now moved for a rule to show cause why that verdict should not be set aside and a new trial had on the ground of the improper reception of evidence. The sum sought to be recovered was the value of a quan tity of wines, which belonged to Jones, Winkle, and Co., and which was by them deposited, by the endorsement of the bill of lading, with the parties for whose benefit they were afterwards sold. They were deposited under a written instrument, and upon an advance of money. The written instrument was produced and proposed to be rea:l at the trial. It had only an agreement stamp, therefore, he (Mr. Cresswell) objected to its reception. lie contended that the instrument was a mortgage, and ought to bear a mortgage stamp —as it bore only that of an agreement, therefore, it ought not to be received. The Learned Judge admitted the paper in evidence under the impression that the 55 Geo. 111., called the Stamp Act, did not apply to personal property. In that opinion their Lordships would find the Learned Judge to be decidedly wrong by reading the statute, its lan guage was most comprehensive, and applied to property of all kinds. The COURT—Take a rule. DAILLY V. THOMPSON. This was an action tried before the Lord Chief Baron in London wh©n a verdict was found for the defendant. Mr. ERLE now moved to set that verdict aside. The action was brought against the defendant for refusing to register twenty shares in the Anti-Dry-Rot Company, of which the plaintiff was the holder of the scrip receipts. By the Act of Parliament the Company were empowered to register 10,000 shares and no more. That number was issued, and many were registered, but one of the Directors took upon him self to reissue a great number of the scrip receipts, which had already been registered. The fraud was found out, the delinquent Director absconded, and the shares, which before were from 121. to 131., instantly fell to from 2/. to 41. V lt was proved that the plaintiff bought his shares after the fraud had been made public, and the price of the shares depreciated. The scrip held by him were genuine, being signed by three of the Direc tors ; but it was impossible to say whether they were part of the reissues or not. When he applied to have them registered, the Directors refused to comply, be cause the number of 10,000 was already registered, and they had no power to register more. He (Mr. Erle) contended that it was just as likely that sonic of those now on the register were fraudulently obtained as those the p"operty of his client. After some consultation on the Bench, The Lord CHIEF BARON said—You may take your rule, for the rest of the Court have some doubt on the point. I confess I have none. No man has a right to go into the market to purchase after public notice of a fraud, and at a greatly depreciated value, and then put all other holders of scrip to proof of the genuineness of their property. I should think it a gross injustice if this action should succeed.—Rule granted. BAIL COURT, Nov. 6. EXPARTE CHILDE. Mr. DOWDESWELL made an application to the Court on behelf of a person named Childe, for three rules, calling upon the Rev. C. Langley to reinstate the appli cant in the offices of parish clerk of the Church of St. Clement's, Wallingford, and of parish clerk and sexton of the Church of St. Mary's, Wallingford. It appeared from the affidavit of the applicant that he had held the offices in question prior to the appointment of the Rev. C. Langley us Rector, and that the Reverend Gentleman had dismissed him from these offices. The only reason alleged for dismissing him from the office of parish clerk of St. Clement's was, that he hadrefuied to deliver up the keys of the church, and in the case of St. Mary's the reason alleged for dismissing him froin the offices of parish clerk and sexton was drunkenness. The applicant on oath denied the truth of these things. The Learned Counsel contended that the Rector had no authority whatever to dismiss the appli- Cant in the manner he had dune, and, therefore, he applied to the Court for redress.—Application granted. BURNETTS V. MONTAGUE. This was an action brought to recover the amount of 621. 4s. for goods sold and delivered. Mr. JAMES said that the plaintiffs in this case were the Messrs. E. and J. Burnetts, ironmongers, in Holborn, and the defendant, a Mrs. Sarah Montague, who had recently been residing at 24 B, Davy-street, Berkeley square. The defendant had ordered ironmongery goods of the plaintiffs to the amount of 621. 45., which had been delivered between the months of January and March,lB4l. The defendant had pleaded that she was never indebted; but there was also a second plea placed on the record, which was one of the most impudent pieces of effrontery that had ever; been exhibited. There were degrees in im- Pudence,—the first was to resist the payment of a just debt, the second was to place such a plea upon the re cord, and the highest degree of impudence was to offer evidence in support of such a plea. The defendant had actually placed upon the record a plea stating that one of the plaintiffs had had some connection with her, and that these goods were given to her as compensation. This he had authority to state was a most scandalous libel. He was surprised that any attorney should place such a plea on the record, and that a Counsel should sign it. Mrs. Montague had been intro duced to the Messrs. Burnett by Mr. Hart, to whom he believed she owed money. She had left, and by a ruse a writ had been served upon her, which she had torn up and returned to the plaintiff, enclosed in a note, which was couched in the following terms:—" Mrs. Montague begs to enclose to the Messrs. Burnetts the remnants of some paper that have been left with her at half-past five. Preaps the Messrs. Burnett will call to explain the meaning of it, as I understand that a similar paper was left some time since. Mrs. M. has left her house, but can be found there on Monday." The LEARNED COUNSEL then called J. Brett, a porter in the eniploy of Messrs. Burnett, who proved the delivery of the goods. He was cross-examined by Mr. PLATT, but nothing material was stated. T. Hicken, whitesmith, prOved that he was employed by the plaintiff to do certain repairs. Cross-examined by Mr. PLATT-1-lad seen defendant. Did not think her any great shakes. Mr. Hunt, upholsterer, is the father• in-law of Mr. F. Burnett. Introduced defendant to them. Furnished a part of the house in Day-street fur her. Had never been paid. She had sold the furniture and had left. She had authorised witness, if he could let her house, to pay himself and Messrs. Burnett out of the proceeds. Various letters were here put in and read, in one of which she stated to Mr. Hart that she should defend this action, and if Mr. hart brought an action she should defend that also. Cross-examined—Mr. F. Burnett married witness's daughter in April last. Did not consider defendant a fine womati. Understood she intended the house as a lodging-house for gentlemen. She represented herself as an officer's widow. The second time she came to witness a gentleman accompanied her, who said that he would be responsible for her for 401. Who he was wit ness did not know. That was the case for the plaintiff. Mr. PLATT for the defence said the question for the Jury to consider was, if the plea to which the Learned Counsel for the plaintiff had alluded in such strong terms were true. Having made great efforts to induce the Jury to believe that this plea was correct, the Learned Coun sel concluded by saying he should call no witnesses. Mr. Justice PATTESON said' there was a plea on the record which defendant might have proved if there had been a word of truth in it, that Frederick Burnett was indebted to her for meat, drink, board, and lodging, and that the two plaintiffs had agreed that it should be set off. The defendant represented also that Frederick Burnett had seduced her. Now, he supposed the Jury would consider with him that there was not the slightest pretence for such a defence. The Jury said they were perfectly satisfied that there were no grounds for the defence, and found for the plaintiffs--Damages Gal. 4s. SPENCER V. TRUSLOE. In this case both plaintiff and defendant were barge owners at Rotherhithe, and on the 30th August, when there was a rowing match in the river, plaintiff was standing on his barge, when defendant stepped up to him, and after challenging him to fight, which plaintiff refused, he pulled plaintiff's nose. To recover damages for this injury the present action was brought. Mr. HumPintEY having stated the case to the Jury, called Ann Snow, who said she saw the nose pulling takeplace. Cross-examined by Mr. PLATT—Did the nose crackle? —(A laugh.) Witness—l cannot say. I did not hear. Mr. Spencer took it very quietly. Mr. PLATT—What, as if he were used to it. Another witness, who was excessively deaf, was called to prove that defendant had said that he had pulled Mr. Spencer's nose. Mr. PLATT (for the defence) denied that any assault had been committed. In the course ofa quarrel between the parties, th© plaintiff; had said to the defendant you are drunk, upon which the defendant said, " If you say that again I will pull your nose." Mr. Spencer, with a COATES AND ANOTHER V. BURCH. This was an action for an escape out of custody upon an execution. It was tried before Mr. Justice Wight man, at the last Liverpool assizes, and a verdict had fur the plaintiff fur 831. Mr. CRESWELL now moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside, and a nonsuit entered, for although the Learned Judge had decided the point which had been raised in favour of the plaintiff, if it was ruled the other way the plaintiff must have been nonsuited. It appeared at the trial that there were two writs against the party—one in the hands of the officer, and the other in the Sheriff's-office, and in order to connect the Sheriff with the arrest it was necessary to prove the warrant. Keely;the officer, was called and was asked if he had the warrant, and he said he had not. The defendant's attorney was then called, and he was asked whether he had got the warrant. He (Mr. Creswell) objected to his being asked that question until he had first answered the question of whether all the papers which had come to him connected with the case had not come to him from his client for the purpose of defending the action. He replied in the affirmative, and the objection was then raised that answering such a question was a controversion of the privileges of his client, and that whatever passed between the attorney and client in reference to the case ought not to be dis closed. The Learned Judge, however, was of opinion that his having or not having the warrant was a question of fact to which he might speak. The Learned Coun sel referred to some authorities bearing upon the same point, but The COURT was of opinion that the question having been decided in a former case the other way, it would not be right in them now to raise a doubt. The rule, therefore, must be refused. WILLIAMS V. FORD. This was an action of replevin tried before Mr. Baron Maule at the last Wiltshire Assizes. There was an avowry of rent in arrear to the amount of 45/., and a plea of payment. The Jury found a verdict for the defendant. Mr. ERLE now moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside and a new trial had, on the ground of its being against evidence. On the part of the plaintiff it was proved that after the rent be came due there was a sale of a portion of his property, which amounted to 41/ The defendant was present, and said he had his own rent to pay, and requested plain tiff to let him havo the 451. The son of the plaintiff went and.borrowed 51, and the father having added that to the produce of - the sale, handed it to the defendant. A servant of the plaintiff heard the defendant say he was in a hurry to go and pay his rent, and that he supposed the receipt would do at another time. Not withstanding that evidence, which was not contradicted, the Jury found for the defendant. There was no question about the 451. having been paid to the defendant, but there was a large sum due by plaintiff to defend ant for a considerable period, and the only question was whether the payer, in handing over the' money appro priated it to the rent, or gave it to the creditor to be ap plied to the liquidation of a portion of the old debt. He did not think under these circumstances that any other conclusion could be come to than that the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict, and there being no fact to dis credit the witnesses for the plaintiff, he was entitled to say that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, and that the case should have a reconsideration. Lord DENMAN said the Court would consult Mr. Baron Maule as to his view of the case. AUSTELL V. HUGHES. This was an action upon the case, brought by the plaintiff to recover compensation for damage sustained in consequence of the alleged negligence of the defendant. The case was tried before Lord Denman at the last West minster Sittings, and a verdict had for the plaintiff, da mages 10/. The facts were shortly these. The de fendant carried on business at Barnet, as a corn mer chant, and on the evening of the 14th of December last, about half-past six o'clock, employed a man named Bald win, who occasionally acted as porter, to carry out a sack of corn to a customer about fifty yards off. The sacks for such short distances were usually carried upon the porter's shoulder, and in the present instance Baldwin, who it turned out was extremely tipsy, carried out the sack, but afterwards returned, and, without the knowledge of the defendant, took a truck, upon which he placed the sack, and proceeded to push it along the road. The plaintiff and his wife were coming along the road at the time in a chaise, and came in contact with the truck, in consequence of which plaintiff's wife was thrown out and her arm broken, and the horse was thrown down and injured. The defendant, after the ac cident, was heard to say that Baldwin was very tipsy, and that he was extremely sorry he had employed him. Mr. PETERSDORFF now moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside on the ground of the verdict being against evidence. The Learned Coun sel contended that the man had been employed by the defendant in the ordinary course of his business, and that the deviation that had taken place was the act of Baldwin himself, without the knowledge or sanction of the defendant, and for which he could not be held le gally responsible, The COURT was of opinion that the case bad been properly left to the Jury, they having been asked whe ther the employment of Baldwin, under such circum stances, amounted to negligence. There was clearly evi -1 dente of negligence on the part of the defendant, and they did not think there was any ground for disturbing the verdict. LANE V. 'MULLINS. This was an action upon a bill of exchange, tried be fore Lord Denman at the sittings after last Term, and on which a verdict was had for the plaintiff upon the first count, with damages 1,332/.; and for the defendant on the common money count. Mr. WADswoirrn now moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside and a new trial h . had, or why the damages should not be reduced to no minal damages. Th e ac ti on was brought by the drawer . rst plea, upon w hi c h judgment was given for the agai nstplai the acc e pt or , an d t h e re was a demurrer to the n tiff, and the case was se t down for trial. For the plaintiff it was contended that he was entitled to a verdict without adducing any evidence ; but for the defendant it was said that the bill of ex change should be produced, which was not done. No doubt the reason was, that at the previous trial before Mr. Justice Coleridge, the plaintiff was nonsuited, on the ground of the bill being drawn upon an insufficient stamp. The Learned Counsel having referred to some authorities on the subject, The COURT did not think there was the least doubt about the practice in such cases, which was that there was no necessity for the production of the bill. The rule, therefore, must be refused. EXCHEQUER COURT, Nov. 6. KELLY V. SOLARI. This action was brought by Air. Alderman Kelly, as one of the Directors of the Argus Life-office, to recover from Mrs. Solari the sum of 1971. 10s. alleged to have been paid to her in mistake. It was tried before Lord Abinger at the sittings in London after _last Term, when, under the direction of his Lordship, the Jury returned a verdict for the defendant, he at the same time giving the plaintiff's counsel leave to move to enter the verdict for the plaintiff if he was wrong in the law. Mr. THESIGER now moved accordingly-. lie said the late Angelo Solari had three policies upon his life in the Argus dike, one for 4001, dated 3tl August, 1536, one for 2001., the one in question, dated 3d September, 1836, and one fur 4001., dated 23d May, 1837. The premiums upon the policy effected in September, 1836, amounting to 13/. 165., was payable quarterly, viz. 31. 9s. on the 3d March, the 3d June, 3d September, and 3d December ; and there was a provision in the policy that it should cease in case of the non-payment of the premium within 21 days after it bec ame due. It appeare d t hat Sol ari received notice on th e 3d September, 1840, t h a t t he pre mium was due. H e did no t pay, and consequently the policy expired on the 23d September. On the 18th Octo ber Angelo Solari died. On a day in the February fol lowing application for the a mounts of the poli cies was made at the office by Mr. Rapallo, on behalf of Mrs. Solari, the defendant. It ap• proper regard to his nose, abstained from repeating the offensive expression, and Mr. Trusloe left, and never returned, so that no assault whatever was committed. Several witnesses were called for the defence, who stated they had witnessed the whsle transaction, and swore distinctly that no nose-pulling whatever had taken place, although it had been threatened. Mr. HUMPHREY having replied, Mr. Justice PATTESON, in summing up, said that the shaking of the fist in a man's face was an assault, even if there were no wringing of the nose. - The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 51., costs 40s. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 6. The Court was occupied the whole of the morning with motions of course, which presented no feature of the slightest interest. POLICE INTELL i(TENCE. MANSION-HO USE. A lad named Wiliam Hopkins, who was errand-boy in the establishment of Messrs. Edgcombe and Co., of No. 24, Watling-street, was charged with having stolen several bobbins and a skein of silk, and his father, Ed ward Hopkins, i-as charged with having received the property, knowing it to have been stolen. Mr. J. 11. Fellowes stated that he had the care of the house, and having reason for suspecting the boy, he went with an officer to the house of Edward Hopkins, the boy's father, and found in the drawers, the keys of which the father had in his pocket, several bobbins of silk, from which the name of the prosecutor bad been evidently burnt off. The father said that they were his property, and that he had had them fur years, but he afterwards stated that his son had brought them home. The LORD MAYOR—What account does the father now give of the business ? The father (Edward Hopkins)— I am completely innocent of any intention to do the least wrong, and shall state the whole matter most truly. I was suspicious that my son was not going on properly, upon finding that he had more halfpence than in my opi nion he ought to have, for I only allowed him ninepence a week for pocket money ; and having mentioned the matter to my wife, she determined to go and watch for him in Watling-street, which she had to pass on her way to business. She observed him go from his employer's house towards Milk-street with a bundle, and she fol lowed, and demanded it ; and the boy having refused to deliver it up, she called a policeman, and, by his inter ference, succeeded in obliging him to hand it over to her. Upon bringing it home she found that it contained a sailor's jacket and trousers, and in the pockets were the bobbins of silk, which were afterwards found in the drawers by the officer. The boy ran off, and my wife, after she brought home the bobbins, burned off the name of Mr. Edgcombe. The LORD MAYOR—Why did she do that ? The fa ther—l suppose because she was afraid he might be ap prehended. I put the bobbins in my drawers afterwards that he might not come at them again, and I said no thing about it, because I thought it hard that a parent should give evidence against his own child, which I am afraid I shall be obliged to do now. I am totally guiltless. The mother, who was called in, stated the circum stances in nearly the same manner. She declared that when she found her son had been acting dishonestly, she wished to burn the ; bobbins altogether, for she could not think of going against her own child ; and how it was possible to avoid that, and speak of what she had found in his pockets, she did ' no ;know. If either her husband or herself deserved blame, she was the culpable person. Mr. Edgecombe stated, that he employed from 250 to 300 men, women, and children, in his business, and he suffered dreadfully from constant pilferings. It was only a few days ago he lost silk by pilfering to the amount of 1:1. He should, therefore prosecute the boy. The LORD MAYOR—I shall commit the boy for trial, and the father must find bail for the appearance of his wife and himself on the trial. William Hopkins was:then committed to Newgate. BOIV-STREET. John Kennot, Thomas Packard, and John Packard, were placed at the bar before Mr. Hall, charged on sus picion with having administered deleterious drugs on Friday evening to a man named Aurigier, thereby causing his death. The prisoner John Packard was not present during the first part of the examination of witnesses. John Kemp, a cab-driver, was sworn, and deposed as follows:—About half-past two o'clock on Saturday morn ing, a boy came to me at my stand in the Strand, and told me to go to a druggist's shop in Drury-lane, to take up a gentleman. I went to the shop, which is the second house from the corner of Russell-street, towards Holborn. I waited about half an hour in the house, when a gen tleman, whom I supposed to belong to the shop, but it was neither of the prisoners now present, came down and brought me halfa glass of brandy and water. After waiting for about another half hour the prisoner Kennot and the other gentleman brought down a gentleman very much in toxicated. The prisoners and the other man took the de ceased into a back room, where they gave him some drink, telling him to take it, and that he would be bet ter. I was in the front shop. I could not see anything, but I heard them urge the deceased once or twice to drink. They then took him up stairs again, and I heard one of the prisoners tell the man to lie down, and that he would be better. About ten mi nutes or a quarter V. an hour after that they brought him down stairs again and put him in the cab. I saw the prisoner Kennot and the gentleman who is not now present. The prisoner Kennot and the other person got on the box with me. They told me to drive to the liummums, in Covent Garden. I did so, and we stopped there. The prisoner and the other gentleman got down, and one of them gave me a half-crown, de siring me to drive the drunken man in the cab to 18, Chancery-lane. I did so, but I found no one up at the house, and after knocking for some time I drove back again to the shop in Drury-lane. After ringing the bell, and not finding any one answer, I brought the man to the station-house in Bow-street. I immediately saw the inspector, to whom I stated what lied occurred; and he .old me he could not interfere in the case; and I again returned to the shop, but could not gain admittance. I brought the gentleman back to Bow-street ; I then I took him out of the cab, and tried to set him standing on the pavement, near the end of Arch-street. A police constable then came up, and, on looking at the man, said he was dying or dead. I told the constable what had occurred. I thought myself at the time that the man was dead. The gentleman was then conveyed on a stretcher to the Bow-street station-house. I afterwards returned, with a constable, to the shop, in Drury-lane ; but we could obtain no admittance. On returning to the station-house again I met the two prisoners, and having pointed them out to the constable, he took them into custody. Police-constable F 51, stated that he had seen the de ceased when brought out of the cab, as stated by the preceding witness. He took the number of the cab, after saying that he thought the man was dead. The man was brought to the station-house, and put into a cell. 'Witness afterwards took the prisoners into cus tody, they having been pointed out to him by the cab driver. A surgeon was then sent for, and he found the man was dead. When the prisoner Kennot was told of it, he said he knew nothing about it, and he denied that he had been present when the man was put into the cub. He afterwards admitted that he had been in the house of the druggist at the time the circumstance had occurred. John Hambley stated that he was a Sheriff's Officer, and by virtue of a warrant of the Sheriff of Middlesex, he had levied an execution at the house of Mr. Packard, in Drury-lane, against his goods, and left the deceased in possession. It was then between twelve and one o'clock. To the best of his belief, he saw the prisoner Packard in the house. At the time he left the deceased in the house he appeared to be perfectly sober. There were four or five persons in the house, but he could not say the prisoner Kennot was one of them. The Sheriff's officers were now in possession of the house. Charles Pearson, an errand boy to Mr. Packard, stated that he was in the house yesterday, when the num was put in possession by the Sheriff?s-officer, and he continued to remain there during the day: The deceased had been playing cards in the evening, in the kitchen, with a servant woman, and the witness heard him several times call for gin. He got no gin ;. but Mr. Packard, the brother of one of the prisoners, came and told him to come into the parlour where he gave him some rum and water. That was between six and seven o'clock. The wit ness went afterwards into the room and saw the deceased drinking. Mr. Packard and the two prisoners were with hint. Witness knew it was rum and water, because his master had given him some of the same drink out of the same bottle, but nut from the same glass. The other three parties had wine glasses and a bottle of wine on the table. Witness then left the room, and did not re turn for about a quarter of an hour. They were then sitting as before. No one but his master seemed at the time intoxicated. The parties afterwards had supper ; and, about two o'clock in the morning, wit ness went to the Strand to call a cab. He saw his master and the prisoners take the man up stairs while the cabman was waiting; and his master and the pri soner Kennot afterwards brought him down. They drove away with him in the cab, and they returned in about half an hour. Mr. John Richard Packard, the elder brother of one of the prisoners already under examination, was here brought in and also placed at the bar. Jemima Cato stated that she was a servant in the house of Mr. Packard. The deceased had been playing cards with her on yesterday evening. Ho had asked her to go for 3s. Gd. for him to her master. It was then about 12 o'clock. The deceased had taken supper with her in the kitchen, and bad had a pint of porter. A little after twelve o'clock the deceased had gone into the room to her master. They then had supper served to them. They remained in the room till about two o'clock ; and the witness had been there during the whole time, ex cept that she had gone for a moment for a plate. The parties present were herself, the deceased, and the three prisoners. They had four bottles of sherry, which the gentlemen drank; and they afterwards had each a glass of brandy. The deceased had drank some rum and water ; he left part of it, which the boy drank. The deceased had taken a glass of gin and water early in the day ; he had afterwards taken porter four times, and the rum and water which the witness had mixed. Besides the four bottles of sherry there had been also a bottle of port drunk. She had seen the deceased on the sofa when her master had given him some soda. Her master and Mr. Ken not afterwards drove away with him ; and they re turned in less than an hour. Her master had been very tipsy. The prisoners were then removed in the custody of the police, and ordered to be brought up again on T ues d ay . To-day a Coroner's inquest will take place upon the body of the deceased. FORGERY. —Joseph Paybody, charged with uttering a forged cheque for 1001., with intent to defraud Messrs. Snow, Paul, and Co., the bankers, underwent a final ex amination, and was ultimately committed for trial on that charge, but remanded for a fortnight on another charge of uttering a forged cheque on the same banker. MARLBOROUG H-STREET. ' Henry Sims, J. Minor, and Frederick Bowman, three MORNING SUN ' O , healthy stout lads ; strong enough to- d o men sv; A . were charged with having conducted the mselves L eh disorderly manner in St. George's ' Work h ous e, of whi place they were pauper inmates. Mr. Rainsforth, the governor of the workhouse, alas heavy complaints of the unruly conduct o f the dell; e dants and other lads maintained at the expens o f t ti rate-payers. They would not do the work which .: i e l at were put to, and they almost set the authorities rd. fiance. They had assaulted some of the old paupers eho ployed in various situations in the house, and they ..., created a great disturbance in their bed - roo ms the ofv` night. Mr. Rainsforth further said that the laggtulet and songs which the lads indulged in, w ere-of thei a* ' a depraved character. .• <<.,.. ' Olt In answer to the charge, the-lads said, they were 4i. having a lark with " Upright Billy," one of,th'.,l , • : 4.5 5 ' paupers. . .. Pe rttec Mr. HARDWICK asked why such lads were , in the workhouse?—Lacey, the Messenger, said It . "- - ;• impossible to get rid of them. • Mr. llAnnwick told the lads it:would be no niore the a grateful return for the shelter and maintenance tileY received, to conduct themselves with propiety. The lads were sent to hard labour for 21 days. THE MARK ETS-SAT URDA Y f ' NEWGATE AND LEADENHALL. • .., 0 f o r There was a good show of Meat. The detasu?- Beef and Mutton was dull, but in prices little -ran° took place. The supply of Game and PoultrY t c s good, the demand fair, and prices about the sa me ; 4 quoted. Eggs dull of sale at previous rates. WI I CFI: CIIA PE L MARKET. , .4iiir The trade was very sluggish, atebad the..riVr, been unfavourable prices would hare been much- _ o h Beef, 2s. Bd. to 45.; Mutton, 2s. Bd. to 35. 10dx1 ;4 ,-., t 0 2s. Bd. to 4s. Bd.; Pork, 3s. Bd. to 55. Bd.; ,L2nd w k Pl! 4s. 4d. Clover, ,?/. to 5/. 18s.; Hay, 21. to 4 1 . 10$4-',04 ' 1/. 12s. to 11. 16s. • ' -"' ' TEA MARKET. . 4 j. l'uli t°°. Prices were sustained, but the operations were nit. Company's Congou could not be purchased und er 16•7- cash. The deliveries of Tea, however, keep largq.'' TALLOW MARKET. . The operations were fair, and prices were su ..1, y P. Y. Candle on the spot, 475. and 465. 9d. f9r ~' , up to the end of the year. The arrivals still lards'": :;• WOOL MARKET. f t The demand was brisk at the public sales, and' f e e d rates were fully supported ; the principal part 0 g was disposed of. • .. COUNTRY CORN MARIS.E' rot" Wheat. Barley. Oats. I Beall4. to ----- J. . • Per Qua. ter. s. s. s. to S. s. to s. s. ,-‘; Abingdon 5B 73 30 '24 32 40 q Andover 65 70 33 34 •.:5 27 -- °"" ail Banbnry 64 74 32 40 2i 33 56 40. • Basirgstoke 60 72 31 37 24 58 42 46 $g Cirencoster 6O 70 24- 40 4 : 1 Coventry — 69 30 39 24 11 39 , tAventry Darby Howden 65 30 21 Hungerford 50 74 '29 :37 25 30 40 Halton Nlai •ien head 54 81 32 35 25 31 40 , 44 d Nottingham 60 76 30 35 *A 29 41 4 ,t %Vantage 65 80 36 34 30 32 36 4. Warwick —3/ 36 26. 32 Winchester 76 36 29 "" York 5B 70 • . 30 32 19 22 38 4 . 4i 43. 4 6 ' Per Bushel s.d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s.d. s. d. s, d, 1. 6 0 , Birmingham 70 11 6 3 6 46 36 4 15 0 7 0 HULL CORN MARKET Wheat, Whit( (per Quarter) 855. 7.25• 4 Red 6os. 5 14 .7 0, Foreign 66s. fiat SOS. 3 ' l4 ' gai, Asl‘ • Barley. Malting Grinding Oats, British Foreign (in bond) Beans Pease, Grey 389. 1a4 56 6 49 , :al. gt* Pease, Grey _ ..... 945. Blue and White 366. Linseed 'Os. Flour (per sack) . -s. Rapeseed per 10 quarters) ...L WAKEFIELD CORN MARKEr... 001*.• Wneat, Red, Norfolk and Su flblk ..... ..,. •••.6. 635. to bal. .pet;;' -- Lin. and Cam . - ' 6 ' o o . ------------- Yorkshire -s. LBs. toff s ' 00. 696 --- Vll. bite ...---- Foreign, fted - a. f 4 5. to 6 83- `....09 , White -.s. 655. to 1 111 . • ' 0 1 0 "i3/ Barley, Norfolk anti Suffolk 3ls. to a. 5. 00 e V 4' 1. . - Lincolnshire •14s. to 3 . 5 1' 00e 3 _:: - Yorkshire Wold N.L• -. Foreign s oh Beans, New ....... Vs. to - 5. 00e - -- Old Oats, Potato - ,- Poland ...1L ....8. to = l3l. ant 031. -.. Friesland and Small -- h.eafing ”......122. to 1 2 . 1 . P`j , ,1/40:, ShAling 0 01. to 325 Od• E.- , lA._ Malt Rapeseed ...... - ... EDINBURGH CORN MARKET. • Ted. Wheat. 1 Barley. 1 o a t.. re4 lll. la i First t.-4,.ed 41a. Od. : 4 0s. 4.1. 50s. ed. sscond 72 0 36 0 25 0 45 6 ' 40,' Third Average price of Wheat 3/. 145. dd. • ' PRICES OP PROVISIONS: Xc. m to . 1. Beef, per .o. ....... Us. sd. to 09.Rti. , Fresh Butter, lb. Ir . v - 0 Mutton -.............. 0 5 0 7 Salt Ditt4_,_ „.. 01. . 1 , Vea1...„..,,..,,,,.,,..,,, 0 7 010 Ditto, per cat ; .. 86 9 0 4 0 P0rx........... / ...--.. 0 5 0 7 Eggs, per doz... 8 .. 0 Lamu, per qr. ...... 3 0 4 0 OatStrawOtpl.3.. l ° . e .1 0 fallow, cwt......... 39 0 42 0 Wheat Ditto... 8 7, Is 0 Quartern Loaf.... U9l 010 Barley Ditto .... 10 " I Potatoes,l4lb. ...... 0 0 0 5 Hanperst......... 0 . 1 EDINBURGH MEAL MARKET ~ . I ,o_ 4 Per Sack of 2801 b. Imp, Per Stone of 1 44 ." - #1 . I First Oatmeal Second ditto.,„. Barleymeat. .... - 0. I P.isemeal 1 8 0 Peasemeal ............ . ..... Pot Barley from 30.5. to 45e. per saCK CORNWALL MARKETS. .......„...„. (Calculated at 24 gallons to the bushel.) Wheat. ' Barley. I ° all* i s. d. to r. d. s. d. to s. d. I. • la R i fruto... ...... .. — 0 7 3 0 38=° - 9 1 Helstene -- —• 0 ! St. Austell 0 7 8— 0 3 8 Bodtntn 0 88— 0 4 4 -- `l, ~ 1 1 0 Liskeurd 0 7 6 0 .- 3 6 " 7 1 Launceston... • .. ::,•. i Camelford 6 6 7 a 3 0 3 4 26 -'g •• ' 0 • Penzance - 4 0— nig C l — , rnns• .. MINING INTELLIGEITCE. Quantity of Copper ores cold at Itedruth lei; week... - 04 4 tia 0 Average Produce ntity ()thine Copp **** til Amount of sale, '20016 2s. o.l—Average * S:andar.. 12. ner g°ll3 STATE OF PA ISLEY.—The number of r top ilY on the supply list of the Relief Committee i s tow ir,i7t still on the increase. The number is now lied " ; with 3,000 dependents. The number sup P.- 69 soup yesterday, a separate class, amoun t ' I° o o l some of whom got two, or three, or • of soup, according to the extent of their f °I5 0 0 ?; a halfpenny-scone is given with each quart abc The total number of quarts issued would b e e thc tle 1,300. It is a most cheerieg feature in society s o . e tOer, who are able showing themselves equally willing t , tend their aid in relieving the existing distres s ' e 1 1 " 0 trust one and all of the kind donors will exrri eri t bsti L , il truth of the axiom, that it is more blessed to give putt receive. Total number requiring aid, 5,90 2 .' Advertiser. C. 1 11:; PATENT LEVER VVAT— This celebrated construction (the most accurate 00 prii 7 t , watch can be made) is now ()tiered at the followieg e tee?„, with the latest improvements i. e. the detached es ear 00" jewelled in four hole., hand to mark the seconds, an taining power to continue going v. bile winding up, SILVER CASES, 0 With double-bottom cases, capped 6 16 With hunting cases, capped GOLD CASES. - 0 Size for Ladies, with elegant gold dial Ditto in double-backed oases l4 1 3 0 Size for Gentlemen, enamelled dial the h Ditto extra full size, capped l7 I est'''ots A Pamphlet, containing observations respecting icee de' eonstructions on which watches are made, with the in gold and silver cases, and a variety of sketches Ci' signs, which have just been completed in gold Chatut", A; o p. sent, gratis and postage free on application by letterhill, SAVORY and SONS, Watchmakers, No. 9, C °rll don, opposite the Ilank of England. 0 0 • oli g the the J. DENT begs to acquaint his F rie „i f iel the Public that he has just had the honour of ree— subjoined letter from the Admiralty Ig4 : 1. 0 (CopY.) o Admiralty, 29th Septembe r s ', of e l o ' " Sir—The annual trial of chronometers for th e " til re ford Majesty's Government ;laving now terminated , I t o ie - f o l , mended by my Lords Commissioners of the AdmiraltY -o,ebeto you that their Lordships have directed me to pureha t iost t lowing chronometers at the various prices specified ag respectively, viz.:— al Dent, No. 1,571 pine Dent, No. 1,606 *** . 4O gu io n e , 1 , the Dent ; No. 5,621 (pocket) 3O goir'',o.otar ,111 " Their Lordships having been pleased, in orele v , o orti eti superior performance of 1,571, to assign to it a P" increased price to that usually given. ot, up( " I am, Sir, your most obedient serf O ,eSP" "F. BEAUFORT, 1 1 Y ur d. 11 a to " To Mr. Dent, Chronometer Maker, 82, Strati . 4,40 t oe Out of SO Chronometers, by various Makers, s h : i •i ce of 0 4 the late trial by order of their Lordships, the c roft , above three, with two selected for the Niger ExP et h e h t a',. the others, enables Mr. Dent to affirm that he believ es te tt year supplied their Lordships with mere Chronome._ then, use of the Royal Navy than have been furnished t° any other Maker. ti t of Os or It affords Mr. Dent additional pleasure to stat e , boo r ft' to their Lordships' high recommendation he owes to_ e r hger having made a Gold Chronometer, presented to the ,to pedition by his Royal Highness Prince Albert. , vi r s tchel to Dent's Lectures on Chronometers, Clocks, an d be obtained at 42, Strand, price one shilling , but p re customers ratuously. - Presengt pri it ce of Two-day Chronometers, 40 10 1 13 1 R On the 2a i ns t., a t th e Manor House, York, the Dawson Littledale, Esq., of a (laughter. on • 10 0 ' On the 3d in s t., a t Holbeach, Mrs. Key, o f a On the 4th i n st., a t Alilner-square, Islington , Al ri den, jun., of a son. Lau rie ' On the 4th in s t., at Fulham, the lady of John 0 0/4 of a son. Sear , On the 4th inst., at Pentonville, Mrs. Georg oli dau O ghter. flot,°l t he n the 4th inst., at Nottingham-place, Mrs. Ci a.' porl On the 4th inst., at Devonshire-street , f 0 5 O wife af A. 13. Chishol, Es, of a son. n the sth inst., the q. lady of Ch W arles hitlaw, Esq., ° ford terrace, of a sort. o f a daDg hter. • On the sth inst., Mrs. J. F. Adams , IV ° „ . C.arrtt_ewrbnu:lll;ll:l4' r a ces On the 16th inst., at h A f l . l 4 S R a ß ints K Chu • refl, Jane, eldest daughter of the Marchioness of ri, ark ..te ' Charles, eldest son of Charles Mottram, Esq. , Hi g hbury-park. On the 4th inst. , at Clapham Church, F. o ,;_ , G on il l b y e d rat'qght j gr of Wooburn Cottage, Beaconsfield, to Eli zabein Fa te 7 oz of the late P. J. Phillips , Esq. , of Fre g m. ask go i " ode On the 4th inst., at St. Mary Abbot's, e Ju ba Cater Seaton, Esq., M. D., of Sloane-str eet, •„.• 00° 8 ' se cond daughter of W. Hopson, Esq. , of Ear 0 s i ng ton (l.te Captain Ongley, 25th Light Drag IL' London : Printed and Published by 111URDO straD4Pill No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, "° 112,1641. Site connty of Middlesex, Monday, November ai j 4.