The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—Our readers are aware that we are not friendly on principle to indefinite propositions for the Extension of Suffrage, and for the framing of what is sometimes called a second Reform Act, though we are not blind to the imperfections and abuses of the present elective franchise. In reviewing last night's discussion on the motion of Mr. Sharman Crawford, we cannot but feet that there is some degree of falseness in the por tion of both parties. We do not say this to escape from the explicit statement of our own views, which we will never disguise from our readers on any question of national interest. But it does ap pear to us that there is some degree of vice in the arguments, or, at least, of imbecility in the positions, which are practically occupied by each party—the advocates and the opponents of mea sures of organic change. There are no two of the former who seem agreed what change they should advocate. There are no two of the latter who are quite alike satisfied with the system they defend. 1V hile Mr. Roebuck and Dr. Bowring have no notion of any but numerical franchises, Mr. Ward is not pre pared to abandon all property qualifications. While Sir Robert Peel defends the Reform Act as something he was nowise responsible for, except to embrace the less of two evils in order to stave off the greater, Lord Stanley and Sir James Graham have their quantm pars magna to proclaim, and put themselves forward i n the front of the battle, as champions of the Grey Reform of Parliament. All these variations, which hardly amount to serious discord within the walls of Parliament (excepting a note or two from the Members for Bath and Stockport in a somewhat sharper key), indicate that this question is not likely to present itself in a practical shape. It is, however, before such questions become urgent, that it will be well for those who assume to take any part in public instruction to discuss them impartially. For our own part, in our opposition, on principle, to Uni versal Suffrage, and—in general—to all Reform of Reform which assumes numbers as its guiding rule, we do not solely rely on an opinion of popular igno rance. It is invidious to ascribe ignorance to any one class in particular ; and it is difficult to prove in what degree ignorance or instruction characterise one class or other. 'The utmost extent to which the argument derived from assumed ignorance can go is, that—when numbers alone are made the basis of political repre sentation, whatever ignorance exists in the community is sure of being represented. STANDARD.—Very nearly half the community, that.is, the minority at the election of representatives, are bound by laws made by men whom they positively distrust and dislike ; and in no sense can they be con sidered as consenting to such laws, except as they con sent at all to live under a representative constitution ; and this consent is the same whatever form that repre sentative constitution may take. How unjustly, then, was Sir Robert Peel blamed for not gravely answer ing the solemn trifling of the revived Cartwright, and for amusing himself and his hearers with the ludicrous reasoning of the triflers—Dr. Bowring's planetary and book-keeping arguments among the rest. By the way, we would remind Dr. Bowring that there are planets whose periods greatly exceed twelve months, and others the periods of which fall short of that term ; and there are merchants who post their books quarterly ; so that his argument is false in its premises, besides belonging to our chapter of false analogies. But how are arguments like this to be answered except by a smile ? Sir Robert Peel did, however, gravely and decisively meet the propo sition of Mr. Crawford, by pointing to the impos sibility of the country going in a current of revolu tions ; and by showing, from the variety of the propo sitions propounded by the different speakers, that to a current of revolutions, without end or respite, the country would be committed, by once more break ing up the Parliamentary constitution. Sir Robert Peel might have added, that the current would not stop with political alterations, but having done its work with them, must, in the end, overwhelm property. For our own part, we can see one hundredfold more and stronger arguments for an agrarian distribution of property than for any political reform ; and if the people are to be all charged with the office of legisla tion, and have nothing else to think of, they will not be slow to discover arguments so seemingly profit able to the vast majority. This hint ought not to be lost on Mr. Cobden, and his worthy partners, in the more than worth of the land of the United Kingdom, which the millowners boast to have acquired in 25 years ; nor ought it to be lost upon the aristocracy. COURIER.—There is, in fact, no election law in Ireland except what Committees of the House of Commons enact, and that which is strict law with one Committee, another, sitting in the next room, and at the same time, pronounces to be a grievous wrong. It is not now for the first time that a know ledge of this unsatisfactory and disgraceful state of the law reached the Legislature. Immediately after the general elections of 1835 and 1837, the glaring evils of the system became perfectly appa rent, and the then Government affected to deplore and promised to remedy them. Session after session the Irish law officers of the Crown introduced, what they termed declaratory acts, but, :session after session, these were allowed quietly to drop off to wards the close. Early in 1840 Lord Stanley, aided by Mr. Emerson Tennent, took the subject in hand ; but, at that period, parties were too equally balanced in the House of Commons to admit of the success of Lord Stanley's admirable measure. What, we should like to know, has become of that Bill ? It possessed all the materials of a searching and effectual remedy, and, if tempered a little, and purged of any thing that could be construed into harshness, it would, we have no doubt, receive the support of a very large majority in the present House of Commons. We have heard, it is true, that an attempt will be made to assimilate the laws that regulate the franchise in Ireland to those which obtain in this .coun try, and that, for the purpose, one comprehen sive measure of election reform will be in troduced. We are not disposed to under-rate the value of uniformity, but to such a course of proceed ing we discern many grave objections. The qua lifications and descriptions of electors, in both coun tries, do not correspond, arid therefore we consider any attempt to introduce uniformity in matters es sentially different will signally fail. It were far better to confine the remedy to the specific evils complained of, than to endeavour to apply one grand panacea. We have but little confidence in that system of char latanism which aims at the cure of various distempers by the same means, whether in a medical or political point of view. MORTALITY in the METROPOLIS. The following are the results of " A Table of Mortality in the Metropolis, shoeing the Number of Deaths from all Causes Registered, in the week ending April 16, 1842." The Table is issued from the Office of the Registrar-General:— Four I Four Springs. Yeari Epidemic, Endemic, & Contagious Diseases 121 183 190 Diseases of the Brain, Nerves, and Senses 150 147 149 Diseases of the Lungs, and other Organs of CAUSKS OF DEATH. Weekly Average 838-940- I Total. Respiration A.:seases of the Heart and Blood-vessels Diseases of the Stomach, Liver, and other . . Organs of Digestion ... Diseases of the Kidnoys, &e Cbildbed, Diseases of the Uterbis, &c lO 9 10 Diseases of the Joints, Bones, and Muscles 7 6 6 Diseases of the Skin, &c Diseases of Uncertain Seat lOO 99 104 o'.d Age, or Natural Decay 6l 63 69 Deaths by Violence, Privation, or Intern- ' 9 25 25 fiance ' Causes not specifi e d 9 6 7 Deaths from all causes - - '", . Average Weekly Deaths ... 871 912 Average Deaths DISTRICTS. Weekly in Deaths the 183;?-9-40-1. Week. West—Kensington St. George r ( Hanover-square), Westmin- Four I Four s ter, St. Martin in the Fi e ld s , Ye rs.l Springs. St. James North—St. Diary-le-bone, St Pancras, Islington, Hackney 365,660 162 15 6 16 5 Central—Saint Giles and Saint George, Strand, Clerkenwell, Holborn, St. Luke, East Lon don, West London, City of • London ... ........ ...373,806 188 179 169 East—Shoreditch,Whitechapel, Eethnal Green, St. George in the East, Stepney, Poplar 392,494 206 190 179 South—St Savimr, St. Olave, St. George( Southwark ), Ber mondsey, Newington, Lam beth, Camberwell, Bother . Greenwich .... ...438,060 221 210 207 Population merated Ib4l. Total ........ 1,870,727 912 871 822 It is stated that under the term Metropolis are comprised the 32 districts herein mentioned, which include the City of Lon don with and without the walls, the City and Liberties 01 Westminster, the out-parishes within the Bills of Mortality— and the parishes of St. Marylebone, St. Pancras. Kensington, Fulham, HamrnersmitL Chapeliy), St. Luke (Chelsea), Pad dington, St. Mary (Stok e N ewington), St. Leonard ( Brom- Icy), St. Mary-le-bow, Camberwoll, Greenwich, St. Nicholas and St. Paul (Deptford), and Woolwich. The population, a, enumerated in 1831, was 1,594,890, and in June 1841, was 1,870,727. The weekly average for 1838, 1839, 1840. and 1841, was obtained by dividing the deaths in the four years by 208, and the deaths in the four winters by 52, TEMPERATUKE IN THE WEEKS ENDING April 9. April 16. 57' 49' 34 37 43 42 21, 1642. Highest Lowest ... Daily Mean .... ... General Register Office, April The Union Ciitholique relates that the Commission of Antiquaries having obtained permission to take a cast of the statue of th,,, Virgin, which adorns the porch of the church of the Marthuret at Riom, in the Puy-de-Dome, and the iron grating which protected it being, a few days ago, removed fur the purpose, the inhabitants, who had formed a false notion that the statue had been sold for 10,000 f. assembled in great num bers, armed with rude weap ons o f all kinds, and with great violence declared their determination to prevent its removal, and defend, at all risks, what they had preserved throughout the Revolution. Numbers remained on guard throughout the night, but, in the morning, listened to the assurances made them that there was no intention to deprive them of their Pal ladium, and order was restored. LAW INTELLIGENCE. HOUSE OF LORDS, April 22. The House sat to-day to hear appeals. The Peers present were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell. CHARTER V. SIR J. TRETELYANT. The further arguments in this part-heard appeal were re sumed to-day, bur. not having concluded at four o'clock, the further consideration of the case was adjourned to Monday. WHITE V. CUDDEN-JUDGMENT. Lord COTTENHA3I gave judgment i n thi s case , w hi c h was argued a few days since, reversing the judgment of the Court below. ROLLS' COURT, April 22. Lord LANGDALE heard motions to-day. BETON U. WATERHOUSE. Mr. PEMBERTON, applied on behalf of the plaintiffs in this cause, to have book accounts and other documents produced by the defendants, who were agents of a certain plantation estate in the West Indies, in which the plaintiffs had an interest. Mr. TURNE R . opposed the application, on the ground that greatinconvenience would result to the defendants, who resided in Liverpool, and were in extensive business as agents f.,r other parties, from their being obliged to produce their books in London, to be detained there till the accounts in question were examined. The defendant was will ing to I'm nish copies of all the parts of their hooks that related to the matters in question, and would consent that those topics be read against them in the same manner as the original ac counts, with which the copies could be compared. Lord LANGDALE thought the proposition of the defendant very reasonable. Mr. PEMBERTON said that it would greatly inconvenience the .plaintiffs to send down a commission to Liverpool for the purposa of making copies of the accounts. Lord LANG DALE said inconvenience must arise in either case to both parties. At all events the plaintiffs were entitled to have the accounts produced. Such was the rule of the Court, and an order to that effect should be made. It was ultimately agreed that the books should be examine, at Liverpool. VICE-CHANCELLORS" COURT, April 22. ( Before Vice-Chancellor Baucx.) ROSE V. CLARKE. The Court was engaged the entire day with the arguments in this part-heard cause, which came on for further directions. It was totally devoid of interest. (Before Vice-Chancellor WiottAx. ) ROWER. V. COOPER. The bill was filed in this cause by the plaintiff, as purchaser of a small property near Southampton, against the defendant, who was the vendor, and who had refused to perform tht specifiic contract entered into at the sale. The case was entered into at considerable length, but its de tails were quite uninteresting. Short causes, unopposed petitions, and cause petitions, oc cupied his Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England the whole day. COURT OF QUEENS BENCH, April 22. RICHARDS V. DYKE AND ANOTHER. In this case the point to be decided Was, whether in cases of non-payment of Church-rates, under the sem of 101., the validity of which has not disputed, the Ecclesi astical Court possessed co-ordinate jurisdiction with the Magistrates ; whether, in fact, it was competent to Churchwardens to sue persons in the Ecclesiastical Court for non-payment of a Church-rate under 101., without summon ing them before a Magistrate, and ascertaining whether it was a mere refusal of payment, or whether the validity of the rate was disputed. The arguments were wholly of a technical nature, and turned upon the construction to be given in the wording of one of the sections 54th of Geo. 3. The COURT took time to consider the point. DUNN V. COOMBE. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, whose name has been so frequently before the public as the suitor of Miss Burdett Coats, against the defendant, the Magistrate of Hatton Garden, for false imprisonment The defendant had committed the plaintiff to prison under certain articles of the peace, which this Court had subsequently determined to be bad. The case was tried before Mr. Baron Alderson, at Hertford, and the Jury had given him a farthing damages. The plaintiff in person now moved for a new trial, unless de fendant would pay 35/_ because he had proved special damages to that amount, and that would have carried costs. It appeareC. that the Learned Judge had refused to certify. Lord DENNIAN said the Court would consult the Learned Judge who had tried the case, and give judgment in a few days. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, April 22. THE BANE OF ENGLAND V. TOMICINS.-THE EXCHEQUER- BILL FRAUD. This case, which excited considerable interest, as connected with the recent frauds in Exchequer-bills, was tried before Lord Abinger, at the sittings after Hilary Term, at Guildhall, when a verdict was taken for the Bank—Damages 8,0001. Mr. GILL now moved for a rule to show cause why the ver dict should not be set aside, and a new trial granted, on the ground of misdirection on the part of the Learned Lord who tried the cause. It appeared on the trial that the defendant had deposited eleven Exchequer-bills for 1,000/. each with the Bank, and that the Bank advanced 11,0001. on this security, under the agreement that if the money advanced was not forth I coming on a certain day, the Bank might sell the Exchequer bills. The dfeendant paid 3,0001. within the time specified, and had back three of his Exchequer-bills, but the others re mained in the plaintiff's hands, and those Exchequer-bills after wards appeared to have been forged as respected the sig nature. Lord Monteagle said, on the trial, that his name, which appeared to the Exchequer-bills was forged, and Mr. Percival, who was the only person authorised to sign Lord Monteagle's name, also swore that the signature of Lord Monteagle was a forgery. It clearly appeared, however, that the paper on which the Exchequer-bills was printed, the print ing, and the stamp or seal of the Exchequer-office, were ge nuine. In other words, the Exchequer-bills which the de fendant deposited with the Bank, were genuine in every respect brit as regarded the signature. Mr. Baron PARKA—The case is quite clear. The Bank was to advance money on genuine bills. The bills depositied were forgeries. The Bank had, therefore, a right to demand the re-payment of the money advanced. If the defendant had any claim on the Exchequer Bill-office, on the ground of neg ligence, that was entirely a different question. The defendant might bring an action on the case, or his claims would be taken into consideration with those of other persons who held the forged bills. ' The other Barons concurred, and the bill was refused. THORNTON V. PORTMAN.-THE GURNEY CASE. This case was tried before Lord Abinger, at the last sittings for London ; when a verdict went for the plaintiff—Damages, 1,250/. Mr. GILL now moved for leave to show cause why the ver dict should not be set aside, and a nonsuit entered, pursuant to leave named on the trial. The Learned Counsel stated the case as given at the trial, with the result, and in conclusion said the application now made to the Court was founded on the fact that the agreement was illegal, and could not be sustained. The COURT inquired whether the illegality had been pleaded. Mr. COLE admitted that the illegality had not been pleaded. The question for the Court was, whether it was necessary to plead the illegality, as it appeared that the facts establishing the illegality had been given in evidence by the plaintiff. Baron PARKE said, it had been decided In a late case in the Court of Queen's Bench, and he thought rightly, that illegality was not an available defence for a defendant, unless specially pleaded, although it appeared in the plaintiff's case. Mr. GILL submitted that the argument in this case was in furtherance of what, in the eye of the law, was illegal. Baron PARKE said, it was contrary to law to gamble, but he was not prepared to say it was contrary to law to pay gaming debts. The Court did not decide in this case that the contract was illegal, but, under the new rules, if such a defence was to be set up, it must be specially pleaded. The other Barons concurred.—Rule refused. FRIDAY. JONES V. TARLITON. This case was an action of trover for a cargo of pigs, tried before Mr. Justice Coltman at the last Assizes for Anglesea. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of 1001. The plaintiff was a dealer in pigs in the Island of Anglesea, and the defendant was the owner of a steamer engaged in the conveyance of goods between Anglesea and Liverpool. The plaintiff having become indebted to the defendant for certain charges of freight, the pigs, which gave rise to the action, were seized by him, on their being placed on board of his vessel ; and he afterwards kept possession of them in payment of his claims. It had been proved on the trial that a notice had been hung up in the office of the defendant, stating that goods shipped on board his vessel would be seized in pay ment of the sums due to him ; but the notiee was not produced at the trial. Air. ANDREWS now applied for a rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted, and the verdict for the plain tiff set aside, on the ground that the Learned Judge had im properly placed out of the consideration of the Jury the notice in the office of the defendant. The COURT refused to grant the rule. The notice was not sufficient, or, at all events, it should have been produced at the trial. PENNY V. SMITH. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff, for the recovery of the purchase-money and the enforcing the pur chase of certain copyhold premises. The case was tried before Mr. Justice Patteson, at the last Assizes for Staffordshire, and a verdict was found for the p:aintiff, damages 2751. Mr. ALEXANDER now applied why a verdict should not be entered for the defendant, on the ground that the only evidence adduced against him was that of his attorney, who had also acted as the attorney of the plaintiff. The COURT was of opinion that the rule could not be granted. There was nothing to show that the attorney acted as the agent of the defendant on the subject on which be had given his evidence. BAIL COURT, April 22. FINLAY V. BIRD. This was an action for 581. 81. sfaci., the price of work done for the defendant by the plaintiff. The plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant to survey.the ground from Staines to the Grand Junction Canal, a distance of seven miles, -which it was necessary should be completed by the 30th of November, in order that the survey may be lodged in the House of Com mous. But the plaintiff, and those whom he engaged to complete the work, did not commence the survey till the 24th of November, and he told the defendant that it would be scarcely possible to complete the work at the time specified, to which the defendant replied that they should only do their best, because though the survey was not complete by the 30th, he might afterwards get the standing orders of the House of Commons suspended and the survey lodged. The plaintiff in consequence ordered the survey, and it was proved in evi dence that the surveyors made every expedition. The defence set up was, that the survey not being complete it was of no use to the defendant. His LORDSHIP briefly summed up the evidence, and the Jur3 brought in a verdict for the plaintiff to the full amount claimed. Mr. Thesiger appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Richards for the defendant. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, April 22. IN RE JOHN WHITE. The insolvent in this case was a boot and shoe-maker, carry ing on business at Newington.causeway, where he also kept the post-office. His petition to be discharged was supported by Mr. Cooke. _ _ _ Air. Nicholls, on behalf of a person named Kemp, who was a bill-discounter, in Finch-lane, opposed the insolvent's dis charge on the ground of having made away with properly to the detriment of his creditors. After a number of witnesses had been examined, whose evidence occupied the entire mornin2r, Mr. Commissioner BOWEN said he could not entertain the opposition for a moment, as there was no proof of the insolvent having disposed of any proferty in such a manner as to render him amenable to the discretionary clause of the Act. The insolvent was then discharged forthwith. IN RE JOHN ABRAHAM SMITH. The insolvent appeared in Court to receive judgment. He had been already brought up for hearing, when the case was adjou rne d for further evidence. The facts have been already reported in The Sun. He was, remanded for six mouths from the date of his vesting order, at the suit of Mr. Swan, w ho was appointed assignee. CONSISTORY COURT, April 22. JUD GMENT.—DILLON v. DILLON. On the opening of the Court, Dr. LUSIIINGTON gave judg ment in this case. This was a suit brought by the Rev. Dr. Dillon against Frances Charlotte Dillon, his wife, for separa tion, by reason of adultery. Certainly, since he had sat in that Court he had never met with a case in which the evidence required more careful and painful investigation. On the part of the wife the adultery was denied, and it had been further alleged that the conduct of Dr. Dillon, after the discovery of the adultery, was such as to bar him of any remedy, even•if the charge of adultery should be found to be sufficiently established. It was to this point that his attention must be directed. The marriage took place at the end of November, 1839, and it was truly stated by the counsel for Dr. Dillon, not under happy circumstances, for it was proved by Mr. Wingett, a wit ness for Dr. Dillon, and his intimate, that previous to such marriage, Dr. Dillon had seduced this young woman, who was under twenty years of age, and had had a child by her. When this case was adverted to by the counsel in favour of the remedy for which Dr. Dillon prayed, it was observed, that however reprehensible the conduct of Dr. Dillon might have been in this particular, the Court ought not to visit him with punishment, on account of it, in this suit. Certainly not, and the Court wholly disclaimed both the intention and the power to do it. Farther, a marriage under such circum stances, is of itself commendable; for it was making all the re paration in the power of the individual for the injury he had already done. What had occurred between the parties previous to marriage never ought to be allowed to operate on the circum stances occurring after marriage, so as to form a bar to Dr. Dillon's claim. Still, in a claim like this, facts occurring prior to marriage were not altogether without a legiti mate bearing, for the Court apprehended that a hus band, contracting a marriage under these circumstances, was bound to exercise a more than ordinary degree of care and circumspection to prevent his wife deviating into those paths of vice into which he was the first to lead her. The cohabita tion was of no long continuance; the citation was taken cut on the 10th of May, 1841, and there was not much evidence to show on what terms they lived together during such cohabita tion. From all appearances, however, they were not happy ones. Dr. Dillon had often complained of his wife absenting herself, but under what circumstances there was no evidence to prove. He would now proceed to the charge of adultery, which was contained in articles 4 and sof the libel. It was alleged that it took place on Tuesday, the 29th December, 1840. It was stated that Francis Charlotte Dillon went on that day to Gravesend, in the county of Kent, for the ostensible purpose ofa visit to her mother, Mrs. Drury, for several days, her mother residing at or near Gravesend ; for this visit she had solicited, and obtained the consent of the husband, who accompanied her to Hlackwall, from whence she went by the steamer, as if for the purpose of going to her mother's house. That some time previous to the premises, Frances Charlotte Dillon had formed an adulterous intercourse with some man whose name is unknown. The deponent alleges that, on the arrival of the steam packet at Gravesend .Mrs. Dillon was met and joined by some man, and shortly afterwards proceeded in an omnibus or public conveyance to the Sir John Falstaff Inn, at Gadshill, where they spent the evening and slept together. On Wednesday, the 30th, they left the inn for Gravesend, on which occasion she stated to the chambermaid, while assisting to dress her, that she had a mother living, to whom she was going. The first observation naturally occurring on reading this statement was the absence of all preliminary circumstances leading up to and rendering the adultery probable. In most cases it was true that the adultery is clandestine, but it was equally true that when the parties were living together there was, in the great majority of cases, evidence after the discovery of the fact that rendered the fact probable. It was the com mon and ordinary course of things that the previous circum stances came to light, and were appealed to and proved. This species of evidence was always looked for ; and, indeed, required where the circumstances allowed of its production. It was more than once observed by Lord Stowell, that the Court looked with extreme jealousy on cases where the fact of adultery alone was appealed to, and all the previous circum stances rendering the adultery probable were entirely omitted. It was upon these facts the Court looked, as tending to show whether the fact was probable or not. Upon the present occa sion all such evid , nce was wanting, and it was only on the cross-examination of Mr. Wingate, that it accidentally came out that Mrs. Dillon had been in IA habit of absenting herself from home, how often, under what circumstances, and what means Mr. Dillon took to check such a habit, and bound he was to exercise all the control of a husband, well knowing that he had not married her under ordinary circumstances—with re spect to all these facts, the Court was left wholly in the dark. Such evidence, assuming the facts to be true, on the part of Dr. Dillon, might have been given, and there could be no doubt that, being thus purposely kept in the dark, the Court was boiled to take especial care, with respect to the further facts of the case, that it walked in the light. To proceed to the charge of adultery, it was not proved by any evidence that on the 29th of December, 1840, Airs. Dillon met any man whatever at Gravesend ; but it was admitted that in the after noon of that day, she was in the neighbourhood of Gadshill, where, it was alleged, she went and committed the adul tery. The fact was not unimportant in its bearing. if the three witnesses were not grossly perjured. They proved that some man and woman did sleep at their house on the night of the 29th December, which, if true, would bring the question merely to one of identity. With respect to the particular day, it was of course very important, and under the circumstances, he should have but a slight reliance on the accuracy of the memory of a witness, unless, from some pecu liar facts, they were enabled naturally and probably to fix them on the memory. It certainly appeared that the facts spoken to by one witness of a ball that was to take place on the 31st day of December, the last day of the year, was a fact reasonably tending to enable the witness to fix the time. Nor was the accuracy of Mrs. Wilson affected by the state ment of the maid, that the parties slept in the house two nights before Christmas day, and not two nights before New Year's day. It was but a slight error, and not such a discrepancy as would lead the Court to doubt the accuracy with which the witness had fixed the day, or the probability of the fact making due impression on her mind. With regard to the identity of the persons, the power of a witness to speak to the identity of the parties who slept in the house on the 29th of December, would much depend on the opportunities they had had of seeing them, and having their attention called to them. Mr. Wilson, who attended the parties at tea, and again in the morning at breakfast, had such opportunities as might enable him to speak to the identity of the parties with reasonable certainty. He said reasonable certainty, because, in all common cases, he was of opinion that an innkeeper was not the best witness as to the guests whom he sees but once. This was obvious on the slightest consideration, because from the habit of seeing a very considerable number of strangers, unless some particular fact called his attention to the personal conduct of any individual, he was not likely to retain any very fixed recollection of their persons. But upon the present occasion, there was, as stated by the witnesses, the additional and particular fact of the lady having lost one eye, or that it was visibly affected ; and also the particular fact, that the person who accom panied her again came to the inn in May afterwards, and spoke of bringing the lady there again. The maid ser vant, rances Gough, had still more ample opportunity, according to her own aecount, of ascertaining the identity. She not only waited on the parties, but assisted the lady to dress and undress ; and she fui ther stated, that upon see ing her in the steam-vessel as she was leaving, she recognised her. It was unnecessary to travel through the evidence as to the mere fact of adultery, because, unless this witness was grossly perjured, it was clear they slept together at the inn at Gadshill. In the libel it had been stated that the person who slept there told the chambermaid while she was assisting to undress her that she had a mother living, whom she was going to see ; that was true as stated in the libel, but the evidence of the servant went further, for she says that she not only stated that she had a mother living, and was going to visit her, but that she had not seen her for eight or nine years. Now, though the adultery here charged was limited to one occasion only, and although there was no circum stance either preceding or succeeding it to throw any lightupon the case, yet he felt himself bound to say that the onus of proof which was thrown upon the accuser was prima facie borne out by the evidence. But before the Court arrived at the conclusion, that the adultery was established, not only must the evidence be duly weighed, but many other important and peculiar circumstances must receive grave consideration. All this must be done before the Court could arrive at the deter mination that the facts alleged were proved, and that Dr. Dillon was entitled to the divorce he prayed. The evidence with re gard to the alibi consists of Mrs. Drury, the mother of Mrs. Dillon, who at the bine resided at Gravesend, Janet Rumball, Emily Dix, and Elizabeth Lloyd. They were exa mined to prove that Mrs. Dillon was at Gravesend, and slept there on the night in question, and therefore that she could not be at the Sir John Falstaff. Now these witnesses were in that situation which induced the Court to watch their evidence with great diligence. With respect to Mrs. Drury she was the mother of the party accused, but it was riot on that account alone that the Court had watched her evidence with great dili gence, or that it would say that she ought net to be entitled to credit, for nothing could be more irnprt per than to hold that a person standing in the situation of mother to the accused could not be examined. It came therefore to this, that when they came to examine a witness connected with the parties as to facts, they were to consider whether that witness was entitled to credit or not. Now, if Mrs. Drury, Janet Ru m b a ll, an d E m il y Di x spoke the truth, it was manifestly impossible that Mrs. Dillon conld have been at the Sir John Falstaff at the time stated. Eli zabeth Lloyd did not establish the fact with the same certainty, for she spoke of Mrs. Dillon being at her mother's on Tuesday evening at six o'clock, so that she might have gone to the Sir John Falstaff. But the evidence of Elizabeth Lloyd was of considerable importance, for it tended strongly to corroborate the evidence of Mrs. Drury, Janet Rumball, and Emily Dix of her having been at the house at Gravesend. With such means,' looking at the contradictory nature of the evidence, the credit of the witnesses was most important. The credit of these four witnesses, the manner in which they gave their evidence, and ! the probability of the reasons which induced them to fix so positively on Tue3day night, were circumstances which the Court must look to in pronouncing its judgment. The fact that Mrs. Dillon did go to Gravesend with the con sent of her husband on the 29th of December, took away all improbability of her going to her mother, and put in doubt, at least, the circumstance of her being at the Sir John Falstaff; and it had this additional bearing, it was in unison with the evidence of Mrs. Drury, when she stated that she had written to, and expected her daughter. Th e C our t, upon a careful ex amination and consideration of Mrs. Drury's evidence, con sidered that it was not marked with such improbability, or was so void of truth, as to give it no weight. M rs. Drury's' evi dence was confirmed by that of Janet Rumball, Elizabeth Lloyd, and Emily Dix. The Learned Judge did not think it necessary to follow minutely all the circumstances stated; they appeared probable, and were spoken to by a ll t h e wit _ nesses, as well as Mrs. Drury herself. Elizabeth Lloyd was, as far as it appeared to the Learned Judge, as credible a witness as any in the cause. She did not attempt to go beyond the facts in her own mind, she simply gave the fact that she had been engaged to go that evening to sleep at Mrs. Drury's, for the purpose of making a dress, and she did not attempt to carry down the presence of Mrs. Dillon at the house of Mrs. Drury, a moment longer than six o'clock. If she had been brought forward to establish the fact of an alibi satisfactorily, it was to have been expected that she would have gone further. The question was, was she a credible witness, and were the reasons she gave as impressing the cir cumstances on her mind consistent. Now with respect to that, the Learned Judge would observe first, that Thursday was New Year's Day, was a fact admitted on both sides. Now what were the circumstances that occurred to her, not simply that she was disappointed at not sleeping at the house, but that she had, at six o'clock at night, on the 29th of December, to go back to Northfleet, havi n g no other place to sleep at. That was a circumstance calculated to make on impression cn the mind of any -witness, and induced the Learned Judge to think her evidence entitled to credit. With respect to the evidence of Emily Dix, there was nothing in it that would induce the Learned Judge to say that she was a less credible witness than f ratices Gough, the servant at the Sir John Falstaff; they were both in the same situation of life, and equally entitled to credit. Her reasons for fixing the day might not be so cogent as those operating on the mind of Mr. and Mrs. Wilson, but still there was no appearance of fiction in her evidence. To her the circumstance of being permitted to have a holiday was likely to fix the time on her memory. Her statement, too, of her interview with Mrs. Dillon on the 10th of May, was consistent in itself and with the evidence of Janet Rumball; and it was scarcely possible—he was now alluding to what took place on the 10th of May, when Dr. Dillon went down for the purpose of seeing this girl ; she had quitted the service when Janet Rumball was closely examined as to what took place on that occasion, and so also was Emily Dix—they had to give detailed evidence as to what occurred, and they were both consistent in that evi dence, and it was impossible that it should have been concocted by two such witnesses ; they could never have met a cross examination, such as had been applied to them, by any previous concert. Now, he was bound to say that there was one fact deposed to by Emily Dix—he was now considering her credit—of a very startling description ; he referred to her evi- THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 23, 1842, dence on the 9th article, and she on the 9th article stated, agreeably to her belief, that subsequently to the 10th of nay Dr. Dillon did come to her; did question her as to the day Mrs. Dillon came to her mother's, and did endeavour to persuade her to say that it was on the Wednesday. She stated that at the time of the first interview she mentioned it to her mistress, and that the person returned a second time. The reference to her mistress certainly tended to show that some one at least so visited her ; but he had thought it his duty to look at the answers. Dr. Dillon there positively denied that he ever had any interview with this witness at all. Now upon her sole testimony as against Dr. Dillon, in this particular opposed by his answers, he thought he should not be justified in imputing to Dr. Dillon the .attempt to induce this witness to swear falsely; but though he did not impute to Dr. Dillon the offence of endeavouring to pervert the evi dence to be brought before that Court, yet on the other hand he should be wholly unjustified in imputing to this witness that she had wilfully told an untruth. The principle which he had acted upon in considering this evidence was analogous to that which was acted upon in a Court of Equity where a single witness deposed to a fact, which fact was distinctly denied in the answer of the other party ; and though he did mot say that those principles could always be carried out in those Courts, and indeed they ought not, yet he thought, in a case of this great difficulty, it was justifiable to resort to that principle, and he thought there might be equal justice between the parties when on the one hand he disclaimed imputing to Dr. Dillon any culpability with regard to the witnesses, and on the other did not fix upon Emily Dix the charge of having told a wilful falsehood. Now this was the evidence of those seven witnesses. He feared that, in looking at other parts of the case, it would be indispensably requisite to advert to other parts of their testimony which would have a bearing also on the question of credit and identity. But he had now considered the evidence of these seven witnesses, as to the great point in dispute ; viz., as to where Mrs. Dillon slept on the night of the 29th of December ; and he was compelled to say that on whichever side the truth might be, on the examina tion of the evidence of these witnesses, so far at least as he had hitherto gone, he was placed in this painful predicament: he did not find sufficient to enable him to say that either party had been guilty of wilful perjury ; if mistakes there were by either, it was certainly as difficult to be accounted for. In such a case it behoved the Court to proceed with great caution ; and, therefore, he should now address him self to the other points a r i s i ng in this case. There were two points to which tho evidence in great measure equally applied, and he should deal with them together ; the conduct of Dr. Dillon before and after the discovery of the alleged adultery, what took place as regarded the witnesses, as regarded his wife, and with regard to the unknown adulterer. The evidence as to the manner in which the adultery first came to the knowledge of Dr. Dillon, was given by Mrs. Wilson on the 7th and Bth interrogatory, and the truth of that statement could not be denied without impugning the veracity of one of the principal witnesses examined on behalf of Dr. Dillon. He would not advert to the other alternative, or, to the supposi tion that Dr. Dillon had wilfully mis-stated the truth. Now what were the facts established by Mrs. Wilson's evidence on the 7th interrogatory. Havin g fi rs t sa id th a t D r . Dill on h a d ca ll e d upon and questioned her, she said, " My husband was the only person present on that occasion. Dr. Dillon stated that he had been repeatedly written to about his wife to watch her move ments; that he paid no attention to the letters he received about her, till he received one from a friend of the gentleman who had been with her at our house, and who had quarrelled with the said gentleman, stating that his wife and the said gentle man had slept at our house on the said 29th day of December." Now the Bth interrogatory went on further to say, that she did not know who the man was, that Dr. Dillon said he did not know the man himself, but that he had been told that he was the son of a solicitor, living at No. 3, somewhere, at a place which Dr. Dillon mention e d in Li nco l n ' s I nn . Now what did Dr. Dillon do upon this? That which was not prudent in any ease, and still less in one like this. He undertook the investi gation in person, and going down to the inn there saw the two principal witnesses. This happened some days before the 10th of May ; he went down twice, between the beginning of May and the 10th of May. Mrs. IN ilson stated that on Mr. Wilson observing that the lady had something the matter with one of her eyes, Dr. Dillon said, " It is my wife," and was much af fected. Pursuant to an arrangement then made, Mr. Wilson proceeded to town on the 10th of May, and met Dr. and Mrs. Dillon at the Polytechnic. The conver sation which took place was somewhat singular. The previous facts which he had mentioned must be borne in mind. It was for the purpose of identifying this lady that Mr. Wilson so entered the Polytechnic; and he said, having observed Dr. Dillon sit down with his wife in a less frequented part of the room, and having immediately recognised her, he went up and said, " Good morning, Al a'am ; I hope you are better. Mrs. Wilson and myself thought we should have had the plea sure of seeing you at Gadshill again before this. Your good gentleman was at our house a short time since, and said he should bring you down again, as he thought it benefited your health." Now, it did appear to him, that was a rather singular mode of addressing her, and it produced at least one fact, that this gentleman—this unknown gentleman—who, as they found from the other parts of the evidence, had been at the house subse quently, and as he thought pretty clear, many times before, though still unknown, that he had used, according tothe statement of this witness, an expression denoting his i n t en ti on to rev i s i t hi m. But what said Dr. Dillon to that? Dr. Dillon and his wife then stood up, and he questioned about what he had said to her, addressing her by her Christian name, which he did not now remember, "My dear," says he, " what does this mean ? Your good gentleman—what does this mean ?" Why Dr. Dillon knew all this ; he was perfectly cognisant of it ; he had received the letter; he had seen Mr. and Mrs. Wilson. He could not but say that what followed appeared like an arrangement of identity. " What does this mean—your good gen tleman ?" Addressing me he said, " I are this lady's good gentleman." Surely Mr. Wilson knew that before; it was a very gratuitous piece of information. " I am her husband—was it I who was with her. at your house?" Cer tainly that was a fact in his own knowledge. " I told him no, and he proceeded to question me further as to his wife, and as he was so doing Mrs. Dillon squeezed my arm. I con tinued, however. He appeared very much cut up, and putting his hand •to his forehead he turned round." Why if he had believed the witnesses before, certainly it was somewhat singular that he should conduct him self in the manner stated. NOW, the reason why he ad verted to this was, because of the predicament in which the Court was placed, vbere an individual undertook to conduct his own ease. What it had a right to expect was, that some person, whose integrity and impartiality could be re lied on, should have been employed in isifting these witnesses ; on this occasion, there was only the party himself. He must not, however, though very much struck by the detail of the conversation, take a one sided view of this evidence. This was distinctly sworn by Mr. Wilson, of whom he had already said that he knew no reason why he should not be entitled to credit ; and it was a fact of the greatest importance in this case, that Mrs. Dillon, by urging him to silence, in effect admitted her identity; because it was impossible, prima facie, that if she was utterly ignorant of the whole of this transaction, hut that she should have utterly disregarded all assertions to the contrary made by Mr. Wilson; and certainly she would not have endeavoured to silence him in the manner which had been deposed to by Mr. Wilson himself.. It was a very strong circumstance, but it was deposed to by a single witness alone, and corroborated by no other. Now what occurred then? On this same 10th day of May, the day of this very interview, Mr. Wilson came to Doc tors' Commons, and was examined by the clerk of the Proctor. What occurred there? Mr. Wilson comes to Doctors'-com mons, and is examined by the cl er k o f t h e proctor. If a ll thi s were done by previous arrangement it was most inconsistent with all probability, and difficult to account for the surprise ex. pressed oy Dr. Dillon at the interview ; he must have made up his mind, and have spoken with the proctor. On the 10th of May Dr. Dillon takes his wife home to her mother's at Gravesend; on the 11th of May Dr. Dillon is again joined by Mrs. Dillon, after her return from Gravesend, and the citation is served in the presence of Mrs. Wilson and Dr. Dillon, a fact almost urprecedented in the hiStory of that Court, and as soon as it is served Mrs. Dillon walks away with Dr. Dillon. Other facts show that there is nothing extraordinary in this evidence. After the suit was commenced, it was proved that Dr. Dillon, while the ease was going on, had two interviews with his wife, one on the 3Ath or May, the other on the 4th of July. They took place in the evening, and lasted no inconsiderable time; for taking the fair medium between the witnesses, it appeared that they lasted three or four hours, and did notterminate till twelve at night. It appeared that they walked away arm in arm, and the witness Page says they shook hands at parting. The con versation spoken of by Mis. Drury he should have paid more attention to, had it been deposed to by more witnesses than one; as it stood, he did not feel safe in relying on the evidence of a single witness in this case, in anything of this description. He should now consider what bearing this evidence had on the fact of adultery. This was no ordinary case, and in many respects the observations that ap plied to common cases did not apply to this one. His judgment was not founded on any isolated part of the case, but on all the circumstances combined. It was no ordinary case, because, as lie had already observed, in a case where the husband sought to be divorced on account of adultery from the wife whom he had first seduced, he must expect to have his whole conduct visited with a much more rigid scrutiny and investigation than the conduct of a husband in ordinary cases. In such circumstances the husband was bound to exercise par ticular vigilance ; he had paved the toad to her first fall, and he ought to take care that he did not smooth the path to her second. He had furnished no evidence as to their criminal cohabitation ; use did not place much re:iance on the evidence of the two servants, who deposed that he had often expressed a wish to get rid of his wife. But it was fair to rely on his own witness, who proved that he did not live on happy terms with his wife, nor were circumstances wanting during their union calculated to excite his vigilance. In the early part of 1840, Dr. Dillon declared that they could not live toge ther much longer, from the violence of Mrs. Dillon and her absenting herself from home. This fact considered, with reference to their connexion before marriage, and the disparity of years ought to have excited his attention and have led him to take steps for the preservation of her honour, but nothing whatever appears to have been done. Nothing having been done, he did not think he Vtas expressing himself too strongly when lie said that the absence of such due precautions was a criminal neglect, and which, from the cir cumstances occurring before marriage, never ought to have been lost sight of by him. The absence of all precautionary measures might not alone determine the judgment of the Court, yet, it would be an important ingredient combined with other circum stances. He had himself stated that he had often been written to respecting the conduct of his wife, but he paid no attention to the letters; he had received these warnings of danger, and had totally disregarded them. And what did he do after he had had his second interview with Mr. and Mrs. Wilson? He cont i nued to co h a bi t w i t h hi s w if e. If t h e party accused, s h ou l d prove that the party proceeding had a knowledge of th e adultery, a rrimin i s sc i ont i a, it was a bar to the suit. Here the condonation was pleaded ; the husband had received letters relating to the conduct of the wife ; it had been proved that means of identification had been devised, he had declared that the person implicated must have been his wife, and yet he continued to cohabit with her. In the case of " Elwys v. Elwyn," or rather the dictum of Lord Stowell upon it, the condonation was not pleaded, as in the present ease, for there was not the probabilis scientia. co the dictum of Lord Stowell he was disposed to pay great deference, and he says that in case a husband has some suspi cion, enough to satisfy his own mind, but not to instruct a legal case, he purpose of di s c eese i n g - might perhaps continue cohabitation for th e the party. in the case of " Timmins v Timmins," however, Lord Stowell expressed himself strongly as to the necessity of the husband, thought condonation was not pleaded, not having slept with his wife after the fact of the adultery having come to his knowledge. It was true that in the present case on the 9th of May Mr. Wilson had not a personal interview with Dr. Dillon, yet the Learned Judge could not but think that it was difficult for Dr. Dillon to escape from one of two conclusions, either that Dr. Dillon did not give credit to the story, or that he was very reckless about cohabiting with her again, and the letter the Learned Judge thought was the more probable. The Learned Judge held that the principles laid down by the Court in cases of adultery ought to be strictly attended to. Perhaps, in the might not be inclined to hold, were tesaetcase, he circumstances the only ones with respect to Dr. Dillon, they wou ld bar his obtaini ng a di vorce, hut there were many ot h er t hi ngs t o b e l oo k ed to, There could be n o d ou b t w h atever t h a t if th e i n t erv i ews that had taken place bet ween t h e part i es d ur i ng th e pen d ency of the suit had come to th e k now l e d ge o f th e C o u r t th a t i t wou ld not theseire present h a have permitted the cave to proceed. None of those facts ought to have been kept back from the Court in cases of adul tery. In former times great doubts were entertained whether a solicitor would be justified in keeping back what he knew from the knowledge of the Court, but it never could lie in the mouth of the husband to say that he would afford no information to the Court as to what took place. There was a still further point of no small importance to the final determination of the present e Ise ; here had been no action at common law ; the alleged adulterer remained undiscovered, and it had not been shown that any attempts had been made to discover him. In argument, it was true, it had been said that Dr. ' Dillon's finances would not allow inquiry, but what was there in the case to show that the Court ought to dispense with such evidence? There were letters also, giving important in formation of the adultery, and they were also withheld from the Court. If the story was true that the letters were written by one who must have known the facts, Dr. Dillon had been informed that the adulterer was the son of a solicitor, and the number •f his chambers in Lincoln's-inn had even been stated. This person knew the house at Gadshill before the 29th of December he must have been there previously ; he was there afterwards, according to the evidence of Mr. and Mrs. Wilson. If such were the case how was it possible the Court could say that the individual could not be traced out. In the case of Timmins v. Timmins, the withholding of evidence was strongly commented I on by Lord Stowell, but in the present case such evidence would be of tenfold importance, and yet the evidence had been withheld In ordinary cases proceedings at common law were not neces sary. Far otherwise was it, however, in the present case, when the identity of the adulterer, and the withdrawal of the evidence on that subject, became of paramount importance. It was manifest that in a case like the present, the confronting of witnesses would have thrown more light upon the subject than any written examination. If ever there was a case in which an action of common law ought to be tried, it was the present. Doing as his predecessors had frequently done in the chair, taking into his consideration all these circuni•• stances, the charge of adultery was proved by three witnesses, whose capacity he had no right to deny, and and if there was no other testimony the adultery would be established ; but op posed to that testimony was that of four witnesses equally res pectable and equally to be believed. The present case, as far as concerned his wife, was not a civil but a criminal proceeding, and if there was any doubt she was entitled to the benefit of it. In his opinion the evidence, on the part of the wife preponde rated, but it was not free from reasonable doubt; but it was not on that ground alone that he refused to grant a divorce. I look, observed the Learned Judge, in continuation, to the circum stances before the marriage, and the neglect of warn ing afterwards, direct and indirect; I look to the unjust cohabitation after the discovery of adultery ; I look to the recklessness shown by Dr. Dillon in this cohabitation, to the suppression of evidence in Dr. Dillon's possession, to the absence of evidence, the Court was bound to require, to the non-discovery of the adulterer, and the want of proceedings at common law ; and for all these reasons, I am of opinion, that if I were to pronounce for this di vorce, I should do towards the party proceeded against an act not warranted by the legal considerations of the case, and set an example of granting relief in a case of great doubt, to one whose whole conduct towards his wife, during the whole progress of this suit, shows that he has no just claim. I there fore dismiss the party. The result of this judgment, therefore, is, that the Court re fused the divorce asked for by Dr. Dillon. The case seemed to excite considerable interest in Court. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. BOW-STREET. THE ROEHAMPTON MURDER. The anxiety which was excited to so considerable a degree in the case of Daniel Good, appears to have quite abated in the case of Molly Good; for though it was expected that she and Richard Gamble would be examined at this office to-day, the Court was by no means crowded, and Bow-street was as quiet as it ever is. The night charges having been disposed of by Mr. JARDINE, Mr. HALL entered the Court, accompanied by the Earl of Uxbridge, and took his seat on the bench at half-past ten, when Mary alias Molly Good and Richard Gamble were placed at the bar, charged with being accessories after the fact, with Daniel Good, in the murder of Jane Jones, a!ias Good, at Roehampton. Mr. Maule appeared for the prosecution on behalf of the Crown; Mr. Pelham appeared for Molly Good; and Gamble was unrepresented. Mr. Pelham rose, and addressing Mr. Hall, said—Sir, I re. quest that you will allow me to see Mary Good : I have been instructed by certain of her friends in the east end of the town, and I now attend to watch her interests. 'Mr. HALL—Perhaps you are not aware of another applica cation that is about to be made ? Mr. Maule then rose, and said—Sir, I am under the neces sity of asking you to postpone this ease for a few days : the reason of it is that the witnesses who were here last night have all gone home ; and living, as you know, Sir, some distance off, at Putney, Roehampton, and thereabouts, it will take some time to collect them. I was unfortunately obliged to leave the Court last night before the case was quite concluded, and I neglected to leave instructions for the witnesses to be in attendance here to-day ; the consequence is that most of them are absent. If you will postpone the case, however, Sir, say till Monday, I will take care that no further delay shall take place on my part. Mr. Pelham—Sir, I appear for Mary Good, and am inclined to ask you not to grant this application, because from what I know of the evidence, I do not think there is sufficient to war rant you in remanding this person any more. If Mr. Maule, however, will state the precise charge against her, I shall know more about it. Mr. HALL—As the circumstance now stands, there is quite enough. I apprehend, to justify me in detaining both of them, as connected same way or other in this transaction; because there is property found on them which is clearly proved till a very recent period to have been in the possession of the de ceased. At the same time, in the course of this investigation certain expressions fell from each of them which tended, as far as they went, to show a knowledge of what had occurred. Yet it might be shaped in a variety of ways; I cannot tell what the ultimate result may be ; but I still think there is quite enough to justify me in drawing an inference that they may be concerned in this transaction. Mr. Pelham—l presume then that they are charged with being accessories. Mr. HALL—I do not know, and perhaps Mr. Maule does not wish to tell ; and I must say that things came out yesterday which convinced me that he had taken a very judicious course in this affair. Mr. Pelham—Of course, I submit to you, Sir. I have, however, a case from her friends which will clear up any shade that may at present seem to rest upon her character. Mr. HALL—That is very possible; but you know she may be charged with one thing, and be sent to prison for another. Mr. Maule—l only want the case postponed for a few days to collect the evidence—Monday will suit me. Mr. Pelham—Very well, that will do for me. Mr. HALL—Any hour convenient for you. Mr. Jardine is kind enough to say that he will take the night charges; we will then, if you please, begin at ten o'clock. Mr. PELHAM—Perhaps you will allow me now, Sir, to con. fer with Mary Good ? Mr. HALL—Certainly. Then addressing the prisoner Gamble, he said, " Gamble, you have heard what has passed; you have no person here acting for you professionally. I have stated the reason why we cannot go into your case to-day, but it will be entered into on Monday, when your case will be gone on with without delay." The prisoners were then remanded till ten o'clock on Monday. Mr. HALL to Mr. Maule—Sir, I beg to tender you my thanks for the very able assistance I received from you yesterday CLERKEN WELL Catherine Leary was charged under the following circum stances :--On Thursday night, between 7 and 8, Police-con stable Archer proceeded to Bell-court, Gray's Inn-lane, to disperse a mob of low characters who had assembled there. On reaching the place he found the prisoner literally mad drunk, and throwing her little infant, not more than a feW months old, into the air ; sometimes catching it in its fall, and sometimes allowing one of the bystanders to do so. Then she would throw it on the ground, and roll it about like a foot ball. When the constable apprehended her, the helpless little sufferer was almost insensible. The prisoner refused to go to the station-house, and so violent and pertinacious did she be come, that no less than three constables were obliged to assist in bringing her there. Inspector Jarvis, with laudable humanity, ordered a search to he made after her other child. She refused to give up the key of her miserable apartment, but it was broken open, and the child was found in a deplorable state of filth and emacia tion. The Inspector stated that she was drunk six days out of the seven. Mr. GREENWOOD ordered the ehildren tr be consigned to the parish officer, and the prisoner to be sent to the Houle of Correction for twenty-one days. Jeremiah .11' earthy, a young boy of most diminutive stature, was committed for having feloniously entered the shop of Mr. Cochrane, baker, Francis-street, Tottenham -court-road, on Thursday afternoon, and stealing the Ltill therefrom, which con tained about a pound in silver. IVORSIIIP-STREE T. Ann White, a young woman of deplorable appearance, was brought before Mr. Bingham, and charged with being a street beggar. 'fhe prisoner was taken into custody in Finsbury-place, where she was found sitting at the step of a door, exhibiting a written paper, representing her to be in a state of starva tion, and imploring assistance. In answer to the charge the prisoner, with a profus'.on of tears and sobs, declared that she was most willing to labour for her livelihood, but she had been unable to obtain any emplisy_ ment for the last six weeks, and was in the last state of destitu tion and wretchedness. The MAGISTRATE was visiby impressed with the truth of her statement, and was about to direct her how to proceed in order to obtain parish relief, when Horsford, a mendicity officer, stepped forward and said that the prisoner was an incorrigible beggar, who had carried on a long carver of imposition, and had been twice convicted.—She was committed fora month to the House of Correction. NATIONAL CONVENTION, The Convention met this day at the usual hour. Mr. Du NCAN took the chair. The names of the Delegates were called over. The Convention was occupied the whole morning in receiv ing Reports from various Association s . Mr. CAMPBELL, reported from the English Executive, from which it appeared that they had been in existence twelve months. At the time they were established the Association contained only 70 or 80 towns, and at the present time it num bered 350. In London, at the formation of the Association, there were 17 or 18 " localities," and at the present time they numbered 40. In Northampton, at the commencement, they had no " locality ;" at the present time they numbered seven or eight. In Birmingham they had increased in numbers of individuals, though not in Associations. In Leicester, at the commencement of the Association, there were but 100 mem bers; now they numbered 1,200. In Nottingham they had a large increase, as also in Derby, the Potteries, Cheshire, and other places. The Address to the people of England was then submitted to the Convention. The Address had been got up, calling on the people to support and advance the principles of the Charter. The Address, with a few verbal amendments, was then agreed to. Mr. O'CoNNoR said that as a proof of the strong feeling that existed in the manufacturing districts on the subject of the Charter, he had to inform them that there was a man in the room who had walked all the way from Manchester to attend the procession to the House of Commons, on the day the Na tional Petition is to be presented.—( Cheers.) The Convention adjourned at a quarter to one o'clock. A few days ago, a man purchased a roasted goose at a cook's- shop in the Rue de la Cite, paid the price, and carried it home. In ten minutes after he returned with it cut up in a dish, certainly exhaling an odour by no means of a nature to excite an appetite, and complaining of im position, demanded a return of his money. This the cook, who was a female, refused, and a dispute arose, by which the man at last became so exasperated that, finding a large basket of eg , 2,s at hand, he converted them into projectiles against the head, face, anci neck of the cook, so that she was put into a moat deplorable plight, before a corporal and four men of the guard, who were immediately called in, could stop the shower. The poor woman was much bruised and cut by the broken shells. The assailant was taken to the prefecture. FATAL ACCIDENT. Between eight and nine o'clock on Thursday morning James Buchan, aged 43 years, a journeyman painter and glazier, expired at St. George's Hos pital, from the severe injuries he sustained by falling out of a window he was cleaning, on Monday last, only three feet from the ground, at the residence of Mr. Evans, 4-1, Hans -place, Sloane-street, Chelsea. The unfortunate man fell on his back. and on being raised up was found to have sustained a comp.,und fracture of his right leg, of so dreadful a nature as to cause his death. THE INCOME PLUNDER. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN Six,—As the people are generally ignorant of the machinery by which Pitt worked his Income-tax, perhaps the following may show them a little how they may expected to be Peel-ed by the present Income-tax, and to gnaw their chains with re morse for their own apathy in not opposing its enactment. I was (when Pitt's Income-tax was inflicted) a partner in a small manufacturing concern, and during the three previous years, from which our average income was to be reckoned, we had incurred upwards of 8001. losses, in bad debts, and goods shipwrecked. I laid before the Commissioners (some of them violent plot hatching Tories of the Castlereagh school) a clear statement of our losses, giving names and dates of every item, showing that our income was nothing, and that we had been subsisting on our capital. The Chairman settled the business at once by saying, "Yen cannot maintain your family for less than 360/. a year, and therefore you shall be assessed at 3001." We had no appeal—nothing but pay, and work or starve.—l am, ONE OF THE PLUNDERED. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. Sta,—As the Noble Lord, the Member for South Lanca shire, has thought proper to boast of the petition which he presented from Manchester in favour of Sir Robert Peel's Income-tax and tariff, I beg to inform you, for the benefit and satisfaction of those staunch Reformers which Manchester can boast of, that the majority of the manufacturers, merchants, shopkeepers, and others, are opposed to the obnoxious, inquisito rial, and shameful Income-tax ; and therefore I declare that if those 24,000 signatures, which the Noble Lord said his peti tion contained, were scrutinised, there would not be found more than one-fifth in favour of the beautiful and well-liked tax, and that one- fifth is composed of the Church clergy and their friends and partisans, who, when they were asked to sign a petition for repealing the obnoxious Corn-laws, declared it was a public question, and they would have nothing at all to do with it. Now these are the men who cry aloud for the Income. tax, and any measure which their old friend, Sir Robert, may think proper to propose. If the Noble Lord, or any one of the Members for Lancashire, will take the trouble to go round to every elector, or even non-electors, they will find how they have been deluded by their friends, and in such a manner as( think they will not easily forget. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, Manchester, April2l, 1842. LIBERATO REFORMO. SPORTING INTEL LGENCE. THE DERBY.—.-ERRATUM.—The bet against the Frederica colt, after the race at Bath, reported in yesterday's paper, v. as incorrectly stated to be 1,600 to 100 ; it should have been 1,600 to 200. Lord George Bentinck has bought of Captain Elmsall the following yearlings, viz. : —B. f, by Bay Middleton, out of Bob Peel's dam; br f, by Sheet Anchor, out of Lisbeth, by Old Phantom. They are now at the Turf Tavern, Doncaster. His Lordship has also purchased of Mr. Ramshay, of Naworth Castle, three yearlings, bc, by Sheet Anchor, out of Broad wath's dam ;br c, by Bay Middleton, out of Moss Trooper's dam; and br c, by Sheet Anchor, dam by Partisan, out of Jocko's dam. They are expected at the Turf Tavern in a day or two. A R RIVA L:OF:HORSES:AT;PIGBU RN. —On Tuesday last, the following horses arrived at Mr. John Scott's training stables at Pigburn, neariDoncaster, from:Whitewall Corner,neir Mahon : —The Lord of Holderness, the Joanna colt (Jack), Lanercost, Marshal Soult, Fortune. Teller, Syren, Knight-of-the-Whistle, and Rhodanthe. The following arrived on Wednesday : Master Edward, Master Thomas, a colt of Lord Stanley's, William le Gros, Woldsman„ and Baronet. TA TTERSALL'S. —THE NEW Roots.—The new subscrip tion room is progressing rapidly, and, judging from appearances, we should say that there is every probability of its being ready by the Derby. Its dimensions will be double those of the room at present in use, and there will be an enclosed space in front of the entrance, and a second door, opening from the lower ex tremity of the room into the circle, the. gates of. which will be closed on public days ; the subscribers will be freed from the annoyance arising from the crowd assembled in the yard during the sales. THE DRAWINGS OF THE LATE SIR DAVID WILKIE. A crowded assemblage of artists, amateurs, and fashionable visitors, was gathered on Wednesday at Messrs. Christie and Manson's rooms, to inspect the mass of sketches by Wilkie, which are, in a few days, to be exposed for sale by public auction. These sketches consist of a great variety of subjects, and include all those made during Wilkie's last tour in the East. To judge from the number of persons present, the interest displayed, and the encomiums so freely lavished, the sale appears likely to prove attractive; but it required-an almost idolatrous admira tion of the great painter whose drawings were here exhibited, willingly to endure the excessively-heated' atmosphere of the room in which they were placed. As to offering a critical opinion of the collection, the intense crowd in which we were involved renders that almost impossible, but it is scarcely ne cessary, as the admirers, of Wilkie are " legion," and neither to be stimulated nor deterred by print. For our own parts, highly as we esteem the powers of the painter, who deservedly stood at the head of his profession, we confess that it is not to is sketches (as to those of Raffaelle Michael Angelo, and other great masters) that we sho u ld l oo k for a sure indication of the greatness which was in him. The qualities which we chiefly recognise in Wilkie are the originality of his conceptions, the boldness of treatment of his subject, and the truth with which he tells his story; the diversity of his characters, the harmony of his grouping, and the great effect of his light and shade. These are amonyst the merits which belong to his pictures, but his sketches do not bring before our eyes the same fidelity or expression which should belong to parts even of a great whole; they are merely the ebauches which satisfied the painter, who seldom gave his genius full scope until he was fairly embarked in his picture. Of course there are exceptions to be met with, and the present collection affords numerous in stances, but the majority of the sketches which we saw yester day fully bear us out in our opinion. Of this we are certain, that there are hundreds of artists whose drawings would give quite as much satisfaction as those of Sir David Wilkie. To justify the general tenour of our observations, we need only in stance the half-firashed picture of the " Village School," and " John Knox administering the Sacrament," which contain all the excellence that we fi n d i n t h e b es t of his pictures. His portraiture, we consider, of very doubtful merit, and his idra of female beauty somewhat obscure ; but the name of Wilkie will cover a multitude of drawbacks; and we doubt not his sketches will find their way into many portfolios, notwithstanding the high prices at which they will doubtless be sold. We observe that the sale commences on Monday next. LLOYD'S SHIPPING LONDON, APRIL 22.—Wind this day at noon, E. DEAL, APRIL 21.—Wind E.N.E., moderate.—Arrd. from he River and sailed, York, Nith, and Columbus, for Bombay ; Briton, Mauritius. SHEERNESS, APRIL 21.—The Foxhound, Betts, from the Straits, which was ashore on the Grain Spit, has been got off without damage. PENZANCE, APRIL 20.—Arrd. off, St. George, Wilson, Port Melbourne. sailed 16th of November ; City of London, Martin, Mauritius; New Phoenix, Simpson, Jamaica; Arnold and Hector, 'Messina. BRISTOL, APRIL 21. —Sid. Irvine, Quebec. LIVERPOOL, APRIL 21.—Wind easterly, light. —SR Celia, Large, Jamaica; Windsor Castle, Bombay; Sunflower, Bahia ; Leonora, Demerara; General Wilshire, Baltimore; Oakland, New Orleans ; Alabama and Oxford, New York. OFF CORE, A PAIL 19. Marys, Robinson, Mauritius ; Coronet, Bute, Charleston. The greater pa: tof the wind_ bound vessels are now under way, with a light breeze from the southward, including the British Queen, Argyle, and Ann and Marv, for St. John's, New Brunswick. SCILLY.—Arrd., between the 12th and 19th April, Herald, Hancock, Batavia; John Tomkinson, Hutchinson, and E!iza Stewart, Miller, China ; John Hetlena, Port Rico ; Urinden, Ameln, Batavia, for Amsterdam ; Charlotte, New Orb ass, for Gothenburg ; Stadt Schiedam, Boer ; John Cree, Calcutta. PORTSMOUTH, APRIL 21.—Wind E.N.E.—Arrd. Port to Port, Bahia, for Hamburgh. The Experiment, from Card to Newcastle, got ashore on the Sand Head this morning, but is expected off next tide. FALMOUTH, APRIL 20.—Ve ind E. to N.E. moderate breeze: —Arrd. Forth (steamer), Havannah, left 15th ult., Nassau 31st, Bermuda sth inst., and Fayal 14th inst. Arrived off, Republic, Tegeley, Havannah fcr Bremen. The Integrity, Cockman, from Calcutta, sailed hence this m orn i ng, h as put back with damage, having been in contact with the Vrow ' Johanna (Dutch barque), which proceeded. SCILLY, APRIL 18.—The Celt, Galway, loadin g rice at Batavia, for Demerara, strung a leak, and received damage, nd discharged part of cargo. SOUTHAMPTON, APRIL 2l.—Arrd. Tay (steamer), with the Jamaica and Leeward Islands mails. The lice (steamer) was safe at Havannah on the 29th ult. VESSELS SPOKEN WITH.— Gesina, Batavia to Amsterdam, 2(1 inst., lat. 43, lon. 24, by the Port a Port, arrived at Ports mouth. Active, South Seas to London, 13th inst., 100 miles West of Cowes; Centurion of Jersey, from the Mauritius, 19th, 30 leagues S.W. of Scilly ; brig Desdetnona, 20th, by the Forth steamer, arrived at lahnouth. Industriel, Valparaiso to Antwerp, 17th Jan., lat. 45, lon. 89 W. ; Hond uras , bound to Sydney, Bth Feb., lat. 15 S., lon. 31 W. ; Eliza, bound to Calcutta, 10th Feb., lat. 11, lon. 31 ; Floraville, Valparaiso to Swansea, 13th ult., lat. 27, lon. 41, by the St. George, arrived off Penzance, Pondicherry, Malabar Coast to Bordeaux, 3d ult., lat. 2 1 ; Terrier, Swansea to Cuba ( ou t 34 days), 24th ult., by the Herald, arrived at Scilly. Town of Schiedan, Batavia to Rotterdam, 27th ult., lat. 35, lon. 23 ; Union, Mauritius to Liverpool, 7th ult., lat. 5 N., lon. 28; Alderman Thompson, Swansea to Cuba, 18th ult., lat. 24, lon. 44; Minerva, Mauritius to London, 4th inst., lat. 3, lon. 23; Edina, Manilla to London, 6th inst., lat. 46, lon. 16 ; Sey mour, Calcutta to London, Bth inst., lat. 48., lon. 9, by the John Tomkinson, arrived at Seilly. Forfarshire, China to London, 4th ult., lat. 3 N., lon. 28 W. ; Helen, China to Liverpool, same day; Averck, fienneken •' Schneider, South Seas to Bremen (full), 21st ult., lat. 32, ion. 89, by the Was senaar, arrived at Plymouth. Arlita, from Liverpool, N.H., 4th ultt, lat. 27, lon. 62 ; Cleopatra, Trinidad to Sierra Leone, 16th ult., lat. 33, lon. 69, by the Ann Liffey, arrived at New York. EAST INDIA SHIPPING. Arrivals—St. George, Wilson, from Launceston, off Pen_ zance, sailed Nov. 21 • City of London, Martin, from Mauri tius, off Penzance, sailed Dec. 29, St. Helena, Feb. 10 ; Eliza Stewart, Millar, from China, off Scilly, sailed Nov. 26, Table Bay, Feb. 3 ; John Tompkinson, Hutchinson, from China, off Scilly, sailed Nov. 29, Cape, Feb. 1 ; Herald, Hancock, from Batavia, off Scilly, sailed Dec. 8 ; John Creesnell, from Ben gal, off Scilly, sailed Nov. 31 ; Mary, Robertson, from Mauri tius, off Cork, sailed Dec. 31 ; Seymour, Davis, from Bengal, off Penzance, sailed from St. Helena, Feb. 12 ; Essex, M*Leod, from Bengal, off Penzance, sailed Dec. 3, Madras, 16, St. Helena, Feb. 10. Arrivals at Hobart Town—Water Witch, Talbert, Nov. 7, from Adelaide; Maria, Miller, 12th, from Manilla; Camilla, Gardner, 14th, from Red Island Bay ; Grotius, Mugford, f rom Boston ; Maguastia, Taylor, 15th from Port Philip;- Derwent, M'Pherson, 17th from London; Lord Godorich, Dlills, 19th from Portsmouth and Cape. Departures from Hobart Town—Caroline, Wooden, Nov. 5 to Port Philip; Tyrian, Clarkson, 10th, to Launceston ; Sisters, 14th, to New Zealand; Agenoria, 14th, Janice, 15th and Lillias, to Port Philip. Loading at Hobart Town for London—Thetes, Hebe, Glen bervie, and Tasmania. 1 ; and Norma n h a ll, Arrivals at Lauceston —M ona , Millio-17an, Nov. 6 ; Gany mede, Jobson, 7th ; J. Dair , Adair, 13th 18th, all from London. Loading at Launceston for London—Mona, Africaine, Ind, and Hamilton, the latter to sail Dec. I'2. Arrivals at Port Ph;lip—Harriett, Kreeft, Oct. 26, from Johnsto n , 27 t h , f rom Newcastle ; Lady L u a n,a N r i?ence, 27th, fro m Syd ney ; Kil manns , of Hobartst. Luuar, Smith, 29th, from Lombock ; William and Hughes, Hosken, Nov. 2, from Sydney Catherine, Bannatyne, 2d, from Hobart Town ; Will Watch, Harding, 2d, from Launceston ; Geor giana, Robinson, 4th, from 'Timor; Lorina, Salter, 4th, from Lombock ; Challenger, 4th, from Adelaide. is SOUTHAMPTON, APRIL 2O.—The South of England Steam Packet Company's steamer Ariadne left Southampton for Havre last evening with Mr. Brassey, the c ontractor for the Paris and Rouen Railroad, and a number of excavators whom he had engaged in this country to work on that railroad. The arrangements are com pl e t e d by which all the vessels be longing to the Commercial Steam Packet Company are trans • ferred to the Directors of the South Western Railway Company. The Directors will commence running the vessels to France, to the Channel Islands, and to the west of England, on the Ist of May next. Mls l °_ .a THE MARKETS—YESTERDAY• CORN EXCHANGE. The arrivals since Monday have been small. Wheat firul f°r , good qu a liti es , b ut d u ll f or all other sorts. Barley and O a ts v last quoted, with a slow sale. Flour met a slack demand. SMITHFIELD. The supply was an average, and there being few at Mark et.- trade berate heavy, and lower prices were submitted to. Bel, 474 ; Sheep and Lambs, 6,360 ; Pigs, 312 ; Calves , ' 1 ; Beef, 3s. to 'is. 2d. ; Mutton, 3s. 2d. to 3s. 10d. ; Veal 45 '. bs. 2d. ; Pork, 3s. 6d. to ss. ; Lamb, 6s. to 6s. 4d. COLONIAL MARKET. There was little business transacted; but holders were On' and in prices little variation took place. TEA MARKET. The demand was steady, an d p r i ces fi rm . CGmpany'." Co ls. 10d., cash. TALLOW MARKET, The Market was inactive, but prices were steady, at 61. on the spot. PRICE OF BREAD. 11L% 'the highest erit e of •sread L. the M..troplis is yd. for Loaf. Good Bread may be had at 71d. PRI,ES OF SEEDS. Per Cwt. I Per Quarter go Sew English lieu C10ver...65s 80s St. Fein —4 . „ ..- „ 0 Old I it,.. Ditto —s s—s Rye Grass ...3 co op Foreign Di t to......—s 75s 92sLPacey Grass —s -top 01.1 Ditto labto —s —s —s,Linseeti, for te..ding ~.—s . 5. !:611 New White ( 'aver 54 s Fl:s 6ts ? Dit o, for sowing .......-3 a.. Old DM., Ditto —s s —s! Ditto, for crushing ....--5.4'" ~,' :. \ esv Tre 0i1... —s 20s 4.oo'Hern —s 46' 01d Ditto — s 20 s 38 s ,C anary —s 6411 2r1 . Fr folium s —s '—Si Per ILshel. cal English Carraway —s 50s s:ls',White Must.rd.....os Od to ''' ~,, 1 Foreign i)itto — s 46 s 50 s B rown Di tt0.........123 O d to l „ 4 Coriander —s —s --s,Tares ..... ....... ..... 5s Cd 10 1 , PKIOE OF OIL. . Rape Oil, brown, per ton X49 00 . Ditto, refined Linseed Oil 34 11 ; Linseml Oil Cake at the Mill (per IMO) la '' tla r e ale. per tort Town Tal low PR 1 I ICE OF TALLOW, SOAP, & c. per 1121 b. 6 .a 1 .£2 8 Melting Stuff Yellow Russia White Soap Ditto 0 0 0 G oo d D regs 0 5 PRICE OF RAW FAT, per stone of albs. Price of Tallow (as stated by the Tallow Melters) :s.'/3,14.4 COAL MARKET, • Ships arrived since last market 'day, 15. 4 • Aaair's Buddle's West Hartley l9 I WE . BraddylPsHetton 0. i Carr's Hartley Holywell Main N ew Tantield Moor 13 1) Walls End Hartlepo o l...». 9 1 Pontop W incisor l5 0 Tennant's Hart1ep001...0.... 0 , Townley... West Wylam Wylam Walls End Hedlcy 9O 0 Anthracite Walls End Hilda ... 19 0 (From the London Aleiv Price Current of April: , loi &IC AR. —The scanty supply o f W es t I n di a Muse ,-.-: Sugar has operated materially against business this week., tr To-day several,inquiries p reva il e d f or b ot h groCery 10°,0 fining purposes, and th e p r i ces o ff ere d were f u l ly equa l to w'd of yesterday; but the scanty supply prevented the execudti several orders; the purch ases f or th e wee k are 800 ' khd4 trcs, and the prices fully 6d higher than those of last FridStg, DEFINED.—For Refined Sugar lull rates have been r 1) Bastards, fine at 56s to 60s, good 53s to 555, low to mid end 52s per cwt. Pieces, common 61s to 645, mid 65s to 675&1 to fine 68s to 75s per cwt. Treacle, common at - 275, r a w ord 28s to 28s 6d, good 29s to 30, best old make 29., KWh syrup 30s 6d to 335. Bond e d C rus h e d S ugar of first at 28s 6d per cwt. Dutch Cruched Sugar at 26. on 1 Holland, but there are no buyers. 10* MAURITIUS. — The trad e h ave b een f ree b uyers o. r ajlll brown and yellow descriptions, and prices have advanced_ good and fine yellow sorts,. an d I s p er cwt f or a l l other On( EAST INDIA.—This afternoon the demand was goM if t Bengal Sugar, at auctio n 4,580 b ags . 1 4 1 puns were 0 " and all disposed of at very full rates; low white went at 63 3 . middling 68s 6d, good dry bright yellow 67s to 67s 64,...„0 s l o t middling 65s to 65s 6d, middling 61 s t o 61. 6d , soun d Pip 43s to 54s 6d, damp 47, to 48s, low damp yellow 501 t° : fair 56s 6d to 575, damp white 53s to 64s 6d per cwt. Ati FOREIGN.—Holders of yellow Havannah have subtnir, rather lower rates. Prices have been sustained for white Di . Cocoa.—For British Plantati on :p r i ces h ave declined 11 p cart; red Trinidad at 37 3 64 t o 38 s 6d, m id to good IS 44a 6d, and low St. Lucia 32. 6d p er cwt . G uayaqu il . , 35s per cwt. . .!1111 TEA.—To-day there wa s littl e b us i ness transacte d 10 ,1 .11 Tea market ; it being expe c t e d th a t l arge pu bli c sales wnito shortly declared caused the trade to buy with caution:. holders were firm, and obtained full ra t es ; C ompany ' s ( iS Is 10id cash, and ord good commo n F ree T ra d e Is / Is 10d per lb. caution,,:,. 1 . Is* Rom, BRANDY, AND H OLLANDS. —F or East In dia 11 b ol both for home consumption and export, very full rates,. of been paid ; Calcutta, at th e hi g h d uty at Is. 641, and at. 3 0111 duty Is 8d to Is 90 per gallon. Jamaica, at 4s 6d to 41 TO 30 per cent. over proof of fair quality. Leeward Island of proof at 2s 4d, 3 to 5 0. P. 2s 5d to 2s 6d per gallon. nac first brands of the vinta ge o f 1836 , hh ds at 5s 7°,' .00 5s 5d ; 1837, hhds 5s 3d, pu ns 5 s Id ; 183 8, hh ds bs 114 4s lld ; do 1839, hhds 4s 6d, puns 4s 4d ; do 184 0 i ,A.f. 3s I Id, puns 3s 8d per gallon ; p r i ces f or new sorts ru ts :.'"0 6d per gallon below what it costs to import. Geneva , 2s per gallon. British Corn Spirits at 9s Bcl per gallon, COFFEE. — There has been less demand for British r 0 tion Coffee this week, and the market has presented 5 ; _al aspect, which may be principally ascribed to the uneelisf that exists with respect to the Coffee duties ; althooT,,,,e supply is small, price s h ave su ff ere d a d ec li ne of Is to 2s.rbeS° This afternoon Coff e e m e t w ith more attention from ~ ,to. s e, trade, but for exportati on th e d eman d i s d u ll ; the ouwei3OF consisted of 970 ba g s Dutch Company' s J ava v i a CAP* 00. bags 72 brls St. D omingo, via Cape, 394 bags Coffoojsr° Singapore, 299 bales 21 cases 202 jambie rs Mocha34l however, all sold at full ra t es , v i z . — goo d fa i r gre o , - 0 503 to 51, good ord yellowish 51. to 5116 d; St. Donne' sound quality was all taken in at lower rates, good ord I' 30 0 36s to 375, fine ord coloury 40 s t o 44 s fid ; S umatra wen t 0 to 319 for ordina r y an d goo d or d ; M ysore good ord *-4r004 bold green 52, 6d to 54s 6d ; Mocha went at full est e r t° middling sellowish at 105 s, g oo d m iddli ng greeno 103 s, very foul ungarbled 48s to 52s per cwt. d 5 19 SPICES.—This afternoon the public sales consisted bags 200 pockets East India Ginger ; 230 bag s black re 7o" bags white Pepper; Ginger went at 16s 6d to 17 1 for ' middling ; Bengal and ord Malabar at 15s ; Pepper , 2cl for fair Sumatra, a n d w hi te bi to 6i d for ord to niiu•iier RlCE.—This afternoon the large quantity of 9,500 bat el gal Rice were offe re d a t auc ti on, 12 tons Paddy were sh o t ../ up; the former all sold, and at an advance of 3d per °w a lk good mid white fetch e d lO s t o lO s 6d , m i d 9s 6 d to it ti, yellow 7s 6d to 8s p e r cwt. ; th e l atter f etched 201. per ' 0 TAnnow.—Holders have manifested more &rune& tp week, end the trade ha s b een more on t h e alert. , A Pr spot 46s 3d to 46s 6d h ave b een t h e current rates note Petersburgh Yello w C an dl e . F or d e li very in t h e lilt Se months of the year several purchases at 48s to 485 3d Per` South American at 40s to 44s for low to fine quality. i f" Tallow has been take n more f ree l y. This afternoon a fair busines s was transa.2ted in P. Y-. oto at 46s 3d on the spot ; at public sale 207 pipes 54pun1. 0r.„,.1. 17 brls South American were sold at 39s 6d to 433 3c l "' to good quality. . de Orns.—For Linseed Oil on t h e sp o t 35s and f a r 2 ; 0 35s 3d to 35s 5d per cwt. Rap e p a l e a t 47. 6d to '7,f 1 $ brown 49s to 47s 3d p er cwt. P a l m 301. lOs tee 31" or value of first sort. Cocoa Nut Oil 40s fine quality. ad'. Oil at firm rates. Gallipoli 61/., and Spanish 551. 5:0: _.. 106 . Cod Oil has fetched 30/., Pale Seal 38/. lOs to 391., n„ il tber' . straw colour 311. to 361., Brown 30/. to 301. 10 5 , - it r common 291. lOs to 30/., middling to fine 301. 10s I °'" - tun, Fine British at 821. to 83/. per tun. COUNTRY MARL E , COUNTRY MARI. ETB d <1 Wheat. Barley. it ‘, . eA ns. ...././.tom 5. SPath er Quarter. s• to s. Is.to s. , 5. t , s. 4. to s. it ~.. 56 68 j 30362028 34 46 / ---. Blandtord —52 72 131 32 ,L 326 46 ''''' # oridport '—6B— - -'" 40 ." ! 'hard 15672283222 26 38 42 ~. 46 Exeter '64 70 27 34 21 22 40 --,, 40 0 Gloucester ;60 62 20 30 ' 111 24 es _ 4 t,' 30 50, duildford I6I 78 4 27 34 20 28 30 ;/°„ 3:: 9/ Newbury !44 68 l3 32 18 28 30 4 ,1 50 . Reading 154 76 22 36 ;18 30 2i 4. .... # Salisbury ~ I # 0 Shkrborne 56 62 26 30 i2O 24 36 4 ` a ' 154 4 0 Snepton Mallet 50 68 25 34 ,I 18 24 24 4 ' 0 ..1 Uxbridge I 37 43 I 2'• 4. Wgirminster 148 68 24 33 jl9 514 S 6 48 0 #' Worcester ;64 68 32 36 ;IC 20 38 40 „„.. leovil 148 60 24 28 ' '2O 22 32 44 LEEDS CORN id t RKET. ~1 to v-- . Wheat, Norfolk and Suffolk, 6019. ... . 635. ; 0 („4,.. ri - York. and Lincoln. 6019 7 *** . ...... 04 ' :05 1r- Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Grinding .. tom .. Beans .6 i s. tO o ,olle Oats, l'otatoe ,oijid. P er , 10 4 —Mealing, For. lid. tolod Eng. 934 d. t.• - _ , ~94.P-' S ielling ~7,. 0., - so DEVIZES CORN MARKET. . . 0 0 Per Sack. s. d. s. d. Per Qua/ ter. . 2 - 0 ' 0 ‘, 10 i,4 0 rirst tt beat '33 oto l's 0 Oats .6 v 4/ 0 Second Third darley 26 0 33 0 Bread (pergallon'' CHELTENHAM MARKETS. dated' Pe t lb. .... 6 ?I. l'er Bushel. s. 2. to s . c f .! 6N \ ?at .............. 3 0 3 9 Mutton .................... 6 fi Harley Oats 3 0 3 9 Veal .................... 6 „ Beans .. .. 6 ' Pease Hay 41.51. to 41. 10 . s. Od. p er CANTER BU RI MARKET. _ s .t'3 Wheat, white-----. 655. to :Os. 01d....- , '''' _4. to 1 " -- ted---- flis. to 6 , is. 01d.......--- - ' _.4. tor s ' ...... 2,,. ., t t0 07 .1 4 ; ( 13 ) .. a ir ts le, , f_alti_1 2 . : 30a. 21s t t o . 3 2 4 c 5 0, _ G 0 r i z ..... 1itii ., 1 8 ... •• Bean '. --.-- 32s to 40s. Old---- - " -** 345. to '-' Pease --...-- 40s. to —s. —. Or e l.; it; 0 told CHELMSFORD MA ltlir' • ... ...... Wheat, White ':4 to 69 Oats ................... .. ..... . 2 s ;,, 49 64 Pease, l w i nto . ............ 4-..,1 Si Bed Barley Chevalier v4rintling 27 33 Beans, i li i ; f li 3 ;,,. .... . : ......... 94 ' HULL CORN ISlA.n l `L r ' 604, 625. C' 64 ' Wheat, White (per Quarter) ................... .__. ,_.,, 608. Foreign .................................... 0 3 ' 00 ' ~?,. 355. Oats, British :13iialting ..................................... .Ss 96 4 . 30/. ('lourL itiseeid:....irf.isu.:.ec..k.i 1 V..1:.i.t:,...7.1117.......,......7.17.......................: ... .............." . ............... 7 1 2 : 4 : : 4 3 6 856 : . :15 6 2 926 i 13""••,•-• ..................................... 54.,3ii.• 31,_ 1.11:t 0 riei r 5dEt e 1 i d g 7:7 1 : 1 7'7 (i i n 7 1 ...7. 1 .7 1 1. i .... 1 :7 ) ... ...... 7. ...... 7 . 17 ...... 7 . 7: . ; . 7.1.. " .. ..... 11:i.: ' 1.-1. ' .: : :. : : 3 : 2 : s s: 2°8 3 '647 5 5.. .. 2.2 : 6:20 ::; : / 371...'- ....#,.. Rapeseed (per 10 quLtr_te22) . .._2_;.i:_.:—._:___—:...----------------------..... ~.......-,..... Wetherby, Yo 1 shire , th e tthhee lady y h o i f it s s t . .,;a . tl---BT rown, ESslifir:i;ogf,c7seoanr. On the 17th inst., at Upper Clapton, Mrs. F. J. Catting, of a son. 1 d • of the On the 18th inst., at Chastleton Rectory, the .a Rev. Horatio Westtnacott. of a son. dau O g n ht t e h r. e I Bth inst. , t he wife of the Rev. John Garwood, of • Clooreh (oif f Oat ( h ) nd n eau t g h h e te l 9 r. h inst., at Highgate-rise, Mrs. GeorEe the v. lB E t . h H. Hopper, narflaanddasu,gEhreiriu. rst, Surrey , the Wit On the 19th inst. , Mrs. Barclay Watson, of Cambridge' t er race, Hyde-park, of a s on. Chad ° M On the 19th inst. , at the Grove, Kentish-town, town, rs. Shearman, of a daughter. On the 19th inst., at Lower Clapton, Mrs. Philip Whitaker, of a daughter. On the 19th inst., Mrs. William Stuttield, of a daughter' la'/ On the t2oth inst., at Ulster -terrace, Re g ent's- p ark, the of J. C. Curwen Boyd, Esq., of a son. MAR 11 I ED. I On the 19 th ins t., at Christ Church, Surrey, George Sani" t ,, Hayes, Esq. , of Hull, to Sarah Diana, second daughter of Jo'''" Gilbert Meymott, Esq , of Christ Church. DIED. On the 11th of February, at Calcutta., John Bonrcher, of the Bombay medical service. On the 1 8th inst. , at Ke y ham- p oint, DeYonr , , o rt, O le° Thomas, son of Captain C. H. Burnaby, R. A., a ged 12. L. ( O sm n ot t ai ti ,e e r ll : 9 6F t t: h shq i a h t Ru at ssell - bl s n q i : Hai agoelwe i e l jis i lig. h al t rir7t,spi ja g amgne:des Lc o kl i. 0 : . wife of Major-General Tonson, ~ of London: Printed and Published by 11/7..i11:D0 YOU io No. 11`2, Stran,i, at The Sro. Office., No. I P.-t, Straw), the County of Middlesex, Saturday., April 23.. 1842. k A Ca gel• offic 1 1 ' n E Lie t Ll' BR Ihursda : I 'hursda thursda Thursda irhu Rot rsd Preigt N s L CIIR n k lugham• R. how—_r4--Ande t; Goat (20,0 ‘ 4 lk - Clot I,r) by or i t ,ertis men ,b_ad gr. ORN BAT 4 111 . pport a : t is t r os es e Fashion WR. G paighest icular tYENf. OTIC VED batin g ktNETI uT and qt or else e enga 4 4 ," 4 I alst 11 * 1 111 the l 'iar esur Y 'lag up tl `t\ s, !__: thi: A With l bur, th„ fir E klindia I 4 41 cs of 6d. k ei P t Old 1 INRAW: o R jrat Gold and ttan 70, the I 'eat vari at price [0 01 the ges, bt