The Sun. — London, England, 1861-07-31 00:00:00

THE MERCANTILE NAVAL RESERVE BILL, - We pointed attention some weeks since to a 'scheme, emanating from the Admiralty, for creating a Naval Reserve of Officers of the Mercantile Marine. The bill in which this is embodied has DOW passed the House of Lords, and last night passed the committee stage in the House of Com mons. Amid the Battle of the Bills, aided by a little quiet, energetic backing, it was pushed to the front, an d went through committee without a word. The house does not seem just now to be in a very combative mood, and, as Mr. Hennessy has taken occasion to make manifest by his divi sion of yesterday that the Opposition left in Lon don can all comfortably ride home in a four wheeled cab, we suppose there ought to be no surprise that the passage of this Bill does not occupy quite one l ine in our Parliamentary report of this morning. We could have wished that the measure had come before the Commons when there was more time and inclination to examine the scheme which it represents. It is, indeed, of very first-class importance. It is of no less purpose than to take the whole pith and marrow of the Mercan tile Navy, and to make it available for the emer gencies of a sudden war. From all time of our naval supremacy we have somewhat idly relied upon our Mercantile Marine for our seamen. By bounties, and pressgangs, and the natural effect of the war impediments to commerce, we have counted to obtain as man-of-war's-men every one who ob tained a,livelihood upon the water. We have never, however, in former days, turned a very wistful eye upon the officers of the Mercantile Marine. It is only lately that these have risen to an importance which cannot be disregarded. By their modern system of training, by their examinations, and by their scientific acquirements, they have now becoilie a great resource to the country in case of need, and we must have them—upon our terms if we can, upon their own terms if need be—enrolled among our effective force in case of war. In such a matter Parliament is called upon to do no more than to give power to the Admiralty to enrol and to subject the persons so enrolled to the laws which enforce discipline. The bill itself is therefore most brief and simple. It authorises her Majesty to accept the services of masters and mates of the Merchant ,Service as Officers of Reserve to the Royal Navy ; it enables the Admiralty to enrol and call out for exercise such officers and to fix their rank ; and by a third clause it places them on a level with the permanent Navy in respect of allowances and pensions for hurts or wounds. There is nothing in the mere bill which could directly raise any ques tion except that of the general expediency of flay ing a Reserve of skilled seamen accustomed to com mand and available for service as officers in time of war. Upon this point there can be no difference of opinion. If war were to break out between us and any first-class neighbouring nation the first thing we should want to do would be to cover the narrow seas with a multitude of vessels difficult to hit, quick to advance or retreat, and throwing a heavy shot as far as possible. To command such vessels we should want a very large number of men with very special qualifications. They must be experienced seamen, knowing the narrow seas perfectly, capable of improving every advantage, and possessing that mingled caution and audacity which is only found in perfection among those who have the habit of conxmand, Whenever a war time arrives, and it is only in contemplation of such a contingency that we go to the expense of a navy, we shall have no approximation to the supply of officers necessary to the occasion. At the expense of money, life, and reputation, we should, no doubt, eventually create such a body of officers ; and we should bring the whole staff to a high degree of efficiency by the the time the war was over. As soon as that con summation had been effected we should, of course, be compelled to cast them aside to hopeless inaction and half-pay. The general policy of some such scheme as this is so obvious that it is not worth dis cussion. If we can get a sufficient supply for our present use, and if we can, without expense, create a depot whither we can go at any time for a tem porary supply for a temporary emergency, we can not demand better. It is good for us, and good for the navy. We are not called upon to pay for ser vices except when we require them, and the navy is not burdened with competitors for service after the temporary abundance of commands is past. But the bill which is passing through Parliament is the least important document relating to this matter ; and the discussion we had hoped for was rather upon the Admiralty regulation than upon the bill. The bill is, when it becomes law, to be worked by " Regulations," and those regulations have already been issued from the Admiralty. In the first place, the officers of the Naval Reserve a W. cro•volaz, uvrtia.a..• •.• • " 2 Liu hold themselves in readiness to serve is to be alto gether gratuitous. Of course, when they are called out for their drill or for service they have their regular pay and allowances, but as enrolled officers of Reserve they get nothing. No one complains of this. It is quite as it should be. The fact, however, ought not to be lost sight of. It marks the position of these gentlemen. It is they who make great personal sacrifice for the public service. We must not begin by requiring such a sacrifice, and then go on to treat them as though we had bought them out and out, and paid them high bounties at their enrolment. Even then the Admiralty, accustomed as the Admiralty is to meet with nothing but sub mission from every man who wears a blue jacket, may realise the possibility of not being able to get men to enter into this one-sided contract unless • they have something to offer on the other side. A man who will hold himself at the call of his country without any pecuniary object will in all probability be very tenacious, and perhaps rather tetchy, about points of rank and precedence. He will not like to wear the naval uniform of his nominal rank " with a distinction," any more than a man would care to bear the blazonry of the Smiths, or Joneses, or any other noble family with the bend sinister which is indicative of bastardy. Neither will he like to rank " with, but after," the officers of the Royal Navy of the same grade. There is nothing in these and kin dred regulations likely to induce very valuable men engaged in a lucrative occupation and occupying a good social status to take upon themselves a certain gratuitous and onerous responsibility. In such cases as these a distinction is a degradation. If the navy requires these gentlemen, the navy must frankly accept them upon terms of absolute identity for the time being. At the meeting of merchant captains held to consider these regulations, Captain Congleton spoke the sentiments of his class when he said that " ranking after meant nothing less than holding anether rank altog ether, and that, for his part, he wou l d rather go ad serve at the guns than take his position as an officer under such a condi tion." We believe thes c e o rne t°u n e my Y all be had if they are courteously. treated fairly and The meeting held at the London Tavern showed s th . at they are all ready to come in if they can be made ternptuous and ungrateful tre a s t ecure against con ent. They love rank and they love fighting, and they nir their s t ro ng love of country like other gs hh most moderate t w o resolutions they passed were and reasonable. First the y reso lved,. That this e meeting is of opinion that the rank of Lieutenant and Sub-Lieutenant offered by the Government will be accepted by the Masters and Mates of mer chant vessels, provided that rating shall im p l y equality with the corresponding rank in the Roy a l. Navy, and that the officers of the Reserve shall not be called upon to serve under any officer of in ferior rank to that of Commander in the Royal Navy ;" which is so obviously reasonable that we believe the First L.)rd has conceded these points. Their second suggestion was—" That this meet ing is of opinion that it is desirable to place the Royal Naval Reserve force in its relation to the Navy on a footing (as far as practicable) similar to that which the Volunteer Force on shore occupies in relation to the Army ;" which is in effect the wisest way in which the whole matter can be viewed. The 400 officers of the Naval Reserve cannot be looked upon as an institution apart from the 30,000 seamen of the Naval Reserve. If the thing is to be a success, and it must be made a success, the two must practically be worked toge ther. At present we have neither the 400 officers nor the 30,000 men, but with a little tact we may easily have both. ire do not mean that any un varying rules shall be laid down which would pre vent a body of the Naval Reserve being put on board a line-of-battle ship which may be in want of hands, nor do we contend that the Admiralty should part with the power to send officers of the Naval Reserve to serve as a line-of-battle ship upon .. occasion. Bat this is not the legitimate object of the institution. We shall always have our great, solemn, monster ships, with their regular, orthodox e q ul Ptnents. The Naval Reserve is intended to enabl e us to supplement them with a countless swarm of cruisers , and to this object the spirit and should be sorry ought to be directed. We the passing to say one word which would im pedeshould hav e 151,11 g of this necessary bill, but we from the Common with pleased if it went forth feeling that no mere with a strong expression of matters of Admiralty etiquette should be allowed to mar its practical operation.- 1 imes. THE MILITIA.—A return iustt—C-ade to Parlia ment shows that since the beginnin g militia of the United Kingdom has teers to the regular army, and the ids.hed 4 2,733 volun teers ~orinnons this T o d e n t 35,624. The Estimates before the H ouse is o e f m c bodied militia Session provide for the training this . year and privates of the disembodied militia ; thi s t A 7 C 2 officers of the permanent staff, whose numbers are about g ~• ~, ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE, HOME CIRCUIT.—MAIDSTONE, JULY 30. (Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.) Henry Croucher, a young man, surrendered to take his trial for the manslaughter of Henry Miles. Mr. Russell prosecuted, and Mr. Ribton was counsel for the defence. It appeared that the prisoner was employed to frighten birds from an orchard, and he had a gun loaded with shot for that purpose. While he was watching he saw something black in a tree at some distance off, and imagining it to be a bird he thoughtlessly fired at the object. It unhappily turned out that the deceased, a young lad, had climbed up into a cherry tree, and that he was the object aimed at. He received the whole of the con tents of the gun in his body, and died almost imme diately afterwards. The unfortunate deceased, it appeared, was trespassing, and had no business whatever to be in the tree, and the prisoner ex pressed the deepest regret at what had taken place ; and there was no doubt that to a certain extent the unhappy catastrophe was the result of accident. Mr. Ribton made a very able address to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, in the course of which he , earnestly urged them not to add to the misery he had already undergone by convicting him as a felon. when it was perfectly clear he had not the slightest intention to injure the deceased, or any reason to believe that it was a human being in the tree when he fired. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty. (Before Mr. Justice -Williams.) George Brett, an aged man, who appearedto be to paralysed and hardly able to walk, surrendered be tried upon a charge of bigamy. Mr. Meadows conducted the prosecution. This was rather a singular case. It appeared that the prisoner was first married at Canterbury so long ago as the years 1823, and a few year after wards the prisoner's wife left him, and in 1843 he was again married to a woman named Mary Anne Leman. The second wife, it appeared, was aware that the prisoner had been married before, but he told her his first wife was dead, and they continued to live together until last February, when the second wife became lunatic, and she was removed to her legal settlement at Camberbell, in her maiden name of Mary Anne Leman. From something that subsequently transpired the relieving officer of Camberwell went to make some inquires of the pri soner, in anwer to which he told him that his mar riage with his second wife did not hold good, as he had a wife living at the time. The relieving officer, upon hearing this, told the prisoner he would get into trouble if he did not mind; to which he said, "I trust in the Lord, for I have taken the advice of one of our divines (the prisoner, as it appeared, was a Wesleyan), and he told me that under the cir cumstances of my wife going away and committing adultery, I could marry again." The prisoner, when called upon for his defence, made a rambling statement to the effect that he lived with his mother, and she became so old that she was not able to do up the house, and Mary Anne Leman, the second wife, came to the place as charwoman. The period of seven years having passed away, he said that people used to come to his house and say, " Brett, y ou look very comfortable ; you may as well marry Mary Anne Leman." He said that his first wife went away with another man, and he did not know whether she was alive or not, and, under the circumstances, he thought he was justified by the Bible in marrying again. He thought that as he had not heard from his first wife for so many years he was free to receive Mary Anne Leman as his wife for her kindness to him during a period of seven years. At the time he married her he had not heard of his first wife for eighteen years, and when she went away she told him that she would rather break her legs then come back again. (Laughter.) She went to London with an other man, and he heard nothing of her till very shortly after the second marriage, and he then saw ' her getting out of the train, and she said to him, " John, I should have been down here before if I had known,what you were about." (Laughter.) The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the learned judge said he would consider what punish ment, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, ought to be inflicted upon him. OXFORD CIRCUIT.-STIREWSBURY, July 30, CROWN COURT. (Before Mr. Justice Hill.) Charles Jones, a respectable looking man, was charged with the manslaughter of William Rogers, a cripple, at Kinnerley, on the sth of June. Mr. Benson prosecuted ; Mr. Corbett defended the prisoner. A verdict of Guilty was returned. Sentenced to three months' imprisonment. Thomas Bishop, cattle and cider dealer, of Wel lington, nereiorastaire, surrenaeren to - mire nis trial on the charge of manslaughter of Thomas Timlin, on the 15th of July, at the Grapes-inn, Shrews bury. Mr. Benson prosecuted, and Mr. Powell defended the prisoner. A verdict of Guilty was returned in this case also, which, like the latter, arose out of a public house brawl. Sentenced to three months' imprisonment. FATAL FIGHT BETWEEN TWO FARMERS. William Farmer, of the Meadows Farm, near Churchstoke, farmer, was charged with the man slaughter of William Corfield, farmer, of Little Stretton, on the 18th of July. Mr. Corbett for the prosecution ; Mr. Benson and Mr. Motteram for the prisoner. It appeared that on the evening of the 17th inst. Farmer and Corfield met in Little Stretton, both being on horseback, They were opposite the Crown Inn, and after a little conversation they began to abuse each other. Foul language was made use of, the word liar was bandied about, and Farmef showed fight. They appeared to be tipsy, as well as others with them, having been at rent audit. Preen, the landlord of the Crown, tried to stop the fight, but was driven into his house by Farmer. Corfield had ridden off, and Farmer galloped after him, and over took him on the canal bridge. There he struck him several times on the back of his head with a stick. immediately after the last blow Corfield fell heavily on the ground. Farmer did not help him up again, Out some persons who saw the affray did so, and carried him to his own house close by. Mr. Wilding, surgeon, of Church Stretton, after making a post-mortem examination, found serious fractures and a starred wound on the head, with a great effusion of blood, which in his opinion caused death. The wonder was that the man lived an hour after such injuries, but he did not die until the morning of the 18th. The whole of the injuries could not have been inflicted by the fall, but were the result of direct blows in conjunction therewith. Mr. Motteram made an earnest appeal on behalf of the prisoner, and called several witnesses to character. His lordship having summed up, the jury re turned a verdict of Guilty. Sentence—three months' imprisonment with hard labour. WESTERN CIRCUIT.—EX EWA:, July 29, CIVIL SIDE. (Before Mr. Baron Channel).) BRADLAIJOII V. EDWARDS.-ACTION FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT. The plaintiff is well-known by the soubriquet of 1 Ml. Collier, " Iconoclast," and a lecturer on free thought in r h f e e r v e l n a c i e nt t i o ix t . h d,a e enfd S . c .m r . ip r. tures ; and the defendant is the superintendent of the Devon port Police force. Kingdon for opeenndant. Q C , and Mr. Lopes appeared for M. Smith, Q.C., and Mr. that the plaintiff announced From the of Mr. Collier it appeared a lecture at the that he should deliver March. "Iconoclast" Devonport, on Sunday, the 3d d me a nt a t isbekiever i n idola trous worship. breaker of imagHesa,viaongd said that th ati e t s w e was stupid for the police to make martyrs ) men, something et re markeder odo a t h inat tiltYhod were ox in political hlreligion, g b i e o l n i e , ved and o eco nomy, for they did not hold with "strik es ." Th e superintendent of police was, no doubt, a very good injudiciously, for man, but he acted mo s t he went to the owner of the field, a Mr. Tozer, and tried to get him to forego his agreement w iththe lecture r ; field and ultimately he went t o the with the deter mination to prevent the ge ntleman from lecturin g , and if he did lecture to take him into custody. H e believed the law held that the superintendent had no right whatever to interfere with the plaintiff; but if he gave utterance to that whi ch was blas phemous, or any seditious doctrine, he wa s liable o be indicted. There were about 200 peopl e in thet field, and the plaintiff said something to the effect that he was induced to address them on the Bible. If the superintendent heard that in the course of his address the plaintiff uttered anything which was profane, blasphemous, or immoral, he might have proceeded against him according to law, and unless the plaintiff was using such language as would lead to a breach of the peace the police had no right to interfere. But the police did interfere. On Mr. Bradlaugh persisting to proceed with his lecture five or six policemen laid hold of him to take him off the field ; and one of them seized him by the collar in such a way that he experienced a choking sensation, and he begged him to take his hands off. • The police, however, removed him to the station-house, and gave him in custody on a criminal charge. The learned counsel said the charge which the police laid against the plaintiff was that he was inciting to a `breach of the peace, and that he resistedthe police men in the execution of th • eir duty. But it seemed the next morning that charge was altered, and that 'the plaintiff was inciting to a breach of the peace, THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 31, 1861. and that he assaulted the police in the execution of their duty. The plaintiff was conducted to a cell, and the magistrate heard the case on the following day, After they had adjourned it they dismissed the cam. The plaintiff thought that his liberty had been in vaded. He did not bring the action to make a profit of it, but he believed that the law had been stretched against him. He had offered to stay proceedings if the defendant would consent to give XlO to the Devon an d Cornwall Hospital and £lO to the Female Orphan Asylum, to pay all expenses, and insert an apology in various papers , but this was taken no notice of. If a superintendent of police was the fit person to judge of that which was irreligious, he would necessarily state what political doctrines should be promulgated. The learned advocate concluded by remarking that "trath was great and would prevail"—that if the police were permitted to interfere in such a manner, our liberties would be endangered, and no man would be safe. The plain tiff expected no sympathy from the jury, but he merely asked to have justice done him. For the defence it was contended that Icono clast threatened to knock any p o li ceman d own w h o ca me near him; that then a row ensued, and that he did push the defendant, upon which he was taken into custody. Verdict for the plaintiff—damages one farthing. POLICE INTELLIGENCE-July 30. MANSION-HOUSE.—Adam Rogers, John Glee son, and William Percival were brought before the Lord Mayor, charged with violently assaulting Richard Hodson, and stealing from his person a pocket-book containing two bills of exchange for £lOO and £34, and some memorandums and five keys, a pocket-handkerchief, and some letters. It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutor that he was in the Whitechapel-road, when a man went up to him and begged for a penny, which he gave to him, and likewise took him to a publichouse and gave him half a pint of beer. At the same time the three prisoners, with three or four others, went into the publichouse, and after a few minutes went out again, and when he left they were all waiting outside, and followed him. He tried to get away from them, but could not, and he gave them two pots, after which they followed him about until he came to the Minories, where they took him to a publichouse, and he paid for two more pots of beer. When they left there it was about half-past three. When he got near the church he heard a whistle, and in a moment Rogers gave him a ter rific blow on the forehead and knocked him down, and the other two, Gleeson and Percival, rifled his pockets, and a pocket-book containing two bills of exchange and some keys was taken from his side pocket. Rogers came up to him again and asked him if he had got his purse, and he felt in his in side coat pocket and took it out, upon which Rogers made a snatch to get it and missed, after which he made a desperate struggle to get possession of it. Chas. Oliver, police constable 31, deposed to search ing the prisoners and finding five keys, a pocket handkerchief, and some letters on Percival, all of which were identified by the prosecutor as his pro perty. The prisoners said they had beer. drinking with the prosecutor all night, and they were all drunk together, he as bad as they were, and they had no idea of robbing him. The Lord Mayor said that the evidence was too strong against them to justify him in discharging them, but he would remand them that inquiries might be made. The prisoners were remanded accordingly. Richard Tobin, who was brought up a few days ago charged with stealing a horse and cart, con taining a quantity of meat, value together about £5O, from Leadenhall- market, was brought up yes terday for final examination, and was fully com mitted for trial. SOUTHWARK.—Matthew Tunstall, a decent looking man, a shoemaker, was brought before Mr. Burcham, from: St. Thomas's Hospital, charged with making a most determined attempt to com mit suicide by cutting his throat. Police-constable 49 L said that on Wednesday evening last, about 9 o'clock, he was on duty in the Blackfriars-road. when he saw a crowd in front of the Old King's Head public-house. On going there he perceived the prisoner with his throat cut, and some one had taken a shoemaker's knife from him. Witness conveyed him to St. Thomas's Hospital, where he had since remained. Mr. Burcham asked the prisoner what he had to say for himself. He replied that about sixteen months ago he was foolish enough to marry a second wife, and having had great confidence in the first he trusted her, but soon found out his mistake, for she turned out not only a drunkard, but a thief. She robbed the land lord, and was sentenced to three months' hard labouw.4 tll.. Lambeti. polioo oourt. When she came out of prison he received her again, and in a few days she returned to her old habits, and robbed him of everything she could lay tier hands on for gin, and her conduct had so upset him that he did not care what became of himself. Mr. Burcham asked him why he made such a wicked attempt on his life • The prisoner said that his wife had actually sold the last thing she was possessed of, and meeting her in the street he remonstrated with her. She abused him so much that in the heat of passion he foolishly cut his throat. He was sorry for it, and would pro mise not to make such an attempt on his life again. Mr. Burcham told him that if he had a bad wife he should live apart from her and not seek to take his life. As he promised not to make such an attempt again he should discharge him. having regard to the aggravated character of the offence, the sentence of death will, in all probability, only be commuted to one that will entail upon the prisoner penal servitude for the remainder of her existence, IHE ALLECiT;D ..TUIIDAR IN CAVEN- DISH-S TR LET. Richard Austwick Westbrook, the solicitor charged with causing the death of Mrs. Jane Janette Cathrey, at 3, New Cavendish-street, by stabbing her with a knife, was brought before Mr. Tyrwhitt, at Marlborough street Police-court yes terday, for re-examination. Mr. Wontner, of 26, Bucklersbury, on the pre sent occasion appeared for the defence. The result of the coroner's inquisition in the ver dict of" manslaughter" being made known to the court by Inspector Hubbard, who had been compli mented for his mode of getting up the case. Mr. Wontner said he had been instructed to ap pear for the accused, because the coroner stated before the jury that if a solicitor had appeared for him the case, without losing real facts, would have been very much narrowed, inasmuch as the rules of evidence being adhered to, much irrelevant matter would have been left out. Several witnesses examined at the inquest were now called,!but it was soon found that their evidence was inadmissible in this court. _ _ Mr. Tyrwhitt said the judge at the superior court ould have laid before him the depositions taken at both the preceding courts, and much evidence could come out by cross-examination perhaps of the witnesses. The depositions having been read over by the clerk, Mr. Wontner said he had a question or two to put to young Mr. Cathrey. The witness (son of the deceased), recalled, said prisoner had a habit of swinging his hands about when speaking, gesticulating with them. The con versation had been going on about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour. Mrs. Bryant, in reply to' the Court, said she had never told any one the prisoner made use of any bad expression at the time. Ho said something, but she did not know what. Mr. Thomas Young, surgeon, Sackville-street, said the result of his post-mortem examination had been fully given at the inquest. The instrument had only just entered the bowel. The peritoneal membrane had been wounded and internal hemorrhage had ensued, and this was the cause of death, which he had expected from the first. The cause of death was partly due to the shock. Cross-examined—l told deceased all wounds of the abdomen were dangerous, and I should suppose she was fully aware of her state. She said she was standing at the table, and, being very corpulent, part of her stomach would be• hanging over the table, and this was the part wounded. - Mr. Wontner said he was ready with bail for his client, and ready to put in the same sureties this morning before the coroner for the prisoner's sur render at his trial. Mr. Tyrwhitt agreed to take two sureties in £250 each, and the necessary bail was at once en tered into. THE DANBURY MURDER. Our readers will remember that at the late assizes for the county of Essex, a married woman named Martha Spencer Weaver was convicted of the murder of an illegitimate child, two years and a half old, belonging to another woman re siding at the village of Danbury, near Chelms ford, by strangling it with a shawl under very peculiar circumstances. The prisoner, who was separated from her husband, who is a workinc , man living in London, had gone down to Danbury, which is her native place, and she subsisted upon an allowance of seven and sixpence per week made her by her husband, and any work she was able to obtain, and it appeared that she was very fond of the child in question, and was constantly playing with it, and sending it upon errands, and she always seemed pleased to have it with her. On the day the murder was committed she asked the mother of the child to allow him to go into the lage to buy a box of lucifers for her, and she, of course, willingly consented, and the poor child went to the prisoner's cottage, and was never seen again alive. Upon an alarm being given he was discovered quite dead in the prisoner's bedroom, with the end of a shawl tied so tightly round the throat as to cause an abrasion of the skin, and the prisoner herself was lying upon the bed in the same room in a state of almost deadly stupor, and appa rently utterly unconscious of what had taken place. The condition of the prisoner was accounted for by , the fact of her being in the habit of taking large doses of laudanum for the purpose, as she described it, of "stilling her nerves," and there was no doubt that on the day the fatal occurrence took place she had taken a very large dose of that deadly ingre dient ; and when the discovery took place she appeared to be almost stupefied, many hours elapsed before she recovered her consciousness, and she then seemed to be utterly incapable of giving any explanation of the circumstances under which the unhappy child met its death. The defence set up for the wretched woman was that at the time the act was comitted she was not in a condition of mind to enable her to distinguish between right and wrong; but as there was no evidence to show that her mind was really affected, the jury, after a good deal - of deliberation, found her guilty ; and sentence of death of course followed upon that verdict, and, according to the usual custom in the county of Essex, the execution would have taken place to- 1 morrow. It is always the custom in those painful cases, after all the facts have been submitted to the consideration of the Secretary of State for the Home of the Department, if they should be considered of a character to justify a recommendation of the cri minal to the mercy of the crown, for an application tried the prison was to the effect e t r h to be made to the learned judge to state his opinion case, and whether it was one that would jitusti i s fy u a na c e o r m st m oo u d tat t i h o a n t of m t r l . ie su ca st p i i c t e al w se i n u t i e a n m e s e: an whoand the case was one that was referred to, and his reply if the Government considered punishment, t t did not call for the infliction were circumstances connected of capital the time with the condition he was of opinion that there into the oon act was com mitted,g extended justify the of the prisoner at that sw.doeirialdtio.nusttilfiye and also taking tuhtetermaerbcsyencoef of motive octirveewnforbeiitl; prisoner. A respite during her Majesty's pleasure was of course the result, and a formal document to that effect was received at the gaol at Springfield once on Monday morning, and it was a t the under-sheriff of Essex, in the presence of Capt. communicated to t he p risoner b y Mr. C app , MrGnewly-appointed governor of the p have all along entertained prison. rerSYhi the em an idea that her life would be s p ared, and the com eseed to com munication, therefore, did not seem to have so much effect upon her as it otherwise would have done, and she merely expressed her thanks, and then shed a few tears. As a matter of prudence she was informed of the terms of the respite, and that the sentence was merely postponed during her Ma jesty's pleasure ; but, Of course, there is no chance lof the capital punishment being inflicted, but, THE GAL WA Y MAIL STEAM PACKET COMPANY. Mr. John Orrell Lever, M.P. for Galway, yester day appeared before the Westminster Police-court to a summons obtained against him by Mr. George O'Malley Irwin, charging him with publishing a defamatory libel contained in a pamphlet addressed to Mr. Alexander Murray Dunlop, M.P. The summons had been granted by Mr. Ingham, but the case was heard by Mr. Dayman. Mr. Sturgeon conducted the prosecution ; Mr. Sleigh appeared for the defendant, instructed by the firm of Valance and Valance, of Essex-street, Strand. Mr. Sturgeon said the complainant in this case was a gentleman of the Irish bar, who sought redress for a malicious libel which had been circulated to his prejudice. His client, Mr. Irwin, had had some dealings with the defendant, Mr. Lever, in respect to the Galway Mail Steam Packet Company. A dispute arose between them which ended in an action in the Court of Exchequer, brought by Mr. Irwin, in which he gained a verdict for £l,OOO. The cause, however, had since been again tried, when Mr. Irwin, having declined to receive £5OO in liquida tion of his claims, had submitted to a nonsuit. After the trial of this action, it:was to be regretted that the defendant published a pamphlet and circulated it freely in the lobby of the House of Commons. Mr. Irwin was not aware of the circulation of this pamphlet until, two or three days afterwards, hap pening to call on Mr. Butt, M.P., he saw a copy of it in his room. He was not permitted to take it away, but only allowed to make an extract, and in that way he proposed for the moment to show the libel. If there had been only one pamphlet pub. lished it would not so much have mattered, but there had been many. Mr. Roebuck had been placed on the list of witnesses, with a hope that he might have a copy of the pamphlet. A notice had also been served upon detendant to produce it ; there were also other - witnesses to call, who might have it. All had been done on the part .of the prosecution to produce the pamphlet, in the absence of which, if not produced, he proposed to give at this moment the best evidence he could to connect Mr. Lever with the circulation of the malicious libel upon Mr. Ir win of which he complained. The libel complained of contained imputations of a very serious character to a person of birth, education, and rank ; and al though he had truly been unfortunate at one period of life, he sought every means of obtaining redress, and of being restored to his former position, and was not the imposter he had been represented. Mr. Irwin said—l am a member of the Irish bar. I have had transactions with Mr. Lever regarding the Galway Mail Packet Company. I first became acquainted with him in March, 1858. I was not introduced to him by Col. Ormsby. I sent a parcel by him to my nephew on board one of his ships at Gravesend, It was in March, 1858, that I had dealings with the defendant. I have heard him libel me repeatedly. I can prove it. Mr. Sleigh—You, as a barrister, must know, sir, that what he said is not a libel, but, if anything, slander. A discussion arose between the two barristers as to the production of extracts from the libel tendered by the complainant. Mr. Sleigh asserted that the extract was not ad missible in evidence. Mr. Dayinan considered with him that it could not be received. Mr. Roebuck, M.P., was then examined by Mr. Sturgeon, and said—l know nothing whatever of a letter dated the 20th of August, addressed to Mr. Alex. Dunlop, M.P. There was a pamphlet and not a letter written by Mr. Lever. I have a sort of recollection that Mr. Lever gave me a pamphlet, but of the contents of that pamphlet I have no knowledge whatever; I did not pay much heed to it. It went into my waste-paper basket, or Heaven knows where. I have not looked for it, and I do not intend to look for it. Mr. Sturgeon—You had a notice to produce that pamphlet, had you not ? Witness—l had a notice which I thought a very impertinent one. Mr. Sleigh—Were you present in the House of Commons lately when, in the absence of Mr. Lever, a petition was presented against him con taining insinuations of a very defamatory nature ? Witness—T was, and gave my opinion both as to the petition and the petitioner. Mr. Sleigh—That petition I believe the house re fused to receive ? Witness—They did not refuse to receive it, but they refused to act upon it. Mr. Sleigh—l believe on that occasion certain members of the house expressed themselves in any thing but a complimentary manner with regard to the petitioner ? Here Mr. Sturgeon interfered, protesting against the importation of any irrelevant matter into the case. In cross examination by Mr. Sleigh, Mr. Irwin said the first interview he ever had with Mr. Lever was in March, 1858. He did not then introduce him self to him on board one of his own vessels. Any statement that he did was false, indisputably false. He might have inquired about him, and asked him to take on board a parcel for him, directed to Gal way to Colonel Ormsby, his cousin. He did take it for him, and it was very kind of him. Mr. Sleigh—Will you answer the question put P Did you introduce yourself to Mr. Lever ? Witness—Yes, I asked him to take the parcel. Mr. Sleigh—That is an answer at last. Now, did you not on that occasion proffer your services to him for the purpose of carrying out the Galway Mail Steam Packet Company ? The witness, instead of answerin g th e ques ti on , here became very excited, and ad ver t e d t o a ll man ner of unintelligible things. Mr. Sleigh, again addressing him, said—l ask you once more, did you not proffer your services to Mr. Lever with relation to this company ? Witness—Certainly not—that is your answer, eir. You are stating what is utterly false and untrue. Mr. Sleigh here reminded the witness that he was in a court of justice, and added you are described as a barrister-at-law, and don't know the commonest rules in giving evidence, but talk all manner of rub bish and do anything rather than answer a question frankly and properly. Pray be a little cool. Now, subsequently to this introduction to Mr. Lever, did you at any time proffer your services to him in form ing this company ? Witness (in an excited manner)—No, it's false. I never did. I asked him, or rather I endeavoured to induce him to send one of his ships from Galway to America ; it was the Indian Empire. That had no thing to do with Galway - . That was not in March ; that was in the latter end of April, and anybody with any sense knows that March is antecedent to April. Witness again was travelling into irrelevant mat ter and throwing himself almaf in an excited man ner, when Mr. Sleigh, Mr. Sturgeon, and the magi— trate all interfered to get something like answers from him. Mr. Sleigh continued—Your counsel has told us you had a misfortune in early life; was that misfor tune a conviction for forgery ? Witness—l was indicted for forging a resigna tion of a Mr. Johnstone in Ireland. They kept back his autograph letter. Mr. Sleigh—That is not an answer. Were you in 1834 convicted of forgery ? Witness—Certainly not ; it's false. I was not taken into custody for forgery. I deny it. They kept back my most important evidence. The Irish Government of that time made out an indictment against me without taking me before a magistrate. Mr. Sleigh—Will you answer me, sir. You call yourself a barrister, and behave like this. Mr. Sturgeon—Pray answer quietly. Witness—l won't be lectured by him. Mr. Sleigh—You'll not tire me out, so do not think it. Again I ask—Were you convicted in 1834 of forgery ? Witness—l was not taken into custody on that charge. I put bail in to any amount. Here, and again and again, Mr. Sleigh had to put the question many times in wearying succession without obtaining a direct answer. The complain ant's manner and demeanour at this point, and throughout the whole of the latter part of the in quiry, were most excited and extraordinary. By turns he laughed, vociferated, gesticulated, and ad dressed remarks, occasionally of a very offensive character, to persons whom he pointed to in court, and the oft-repeated entreaties of both the magis trate and Mr. Sleigh, together with that of his own advocate, to compose himself were of no avail. The answer to the last question we have quoted was, at length—l was convicted on an indictment ; and in a truckling, dishonourable, perfidious, and lying manner, they brought an indictment against me, and withheld the original letter of Mr. John stone, the assistant barrister in Mayo, which would have established my innocence. After they had ob tained a verdict, and I was convicted, the Lord Chief Justice of Ireland wrote to me, saying as he was a Bencher he could not interfere ; but I had been convicted unjustly, and those who withheld the letter ought to be prosecuted. ' Some interlocutory conversation followed, when Mr. Dayman said—What I understand is, you were convicted of forgery, owing to the withholding of a letter which would have satisfactorily excul pated you. Witness—Just so ; and my innocence was clearly shown by what Si?R. Bethell subsequently wrote. Mr. Sleigh—Upon being convicted, were you s • tented to nine months' imprisonment ? Witness—l was. Mr. Sleigh—You have sent in a petition of right. Now, on your oath, did you present that until some years had elapsed ? Witness—Not till 1841, and subsequently to that I obtained an order to commit Lord J. Russell to prison —(a laugh)—about the autograph letter. Mr. Sleigh—Did you not, upon a recent inquiry before the House of Commons, upon being asked a question as to whether you had been convicted of forgery, distinctly deny it ? Witness—Certainly not. Mr. Sleigh—Now, be cautious, for I have the re port before me. Witness—The report is incorrect. Mr. Sleigh—Did you not, in answer to Mr. Ser jeant Shee, swear that you had not been in Kil mainham Gaol. Witness—Certainly and indisputably not. Mr. Sleigh—Upon your oath, were you not asked by Sergeant Shee, " Were you not in Kilmainham Gaol for forgery ?" and did you not give the an swer, " No, this is the petition of right case." Witness—No, 1 never did. Mr. Sleigh—Did not the Lord Chief Baron in terfere and say, " First answer the question, if you are minded to answer it ;" and did not Mr. Shee repeat the question, '° Were you not in Kilmainham Gaol nine months, on the sentence of a judge of a superior court in Ireland, for forging the name of Mr. Johnstone, the assistant barrister of Mayo ?" and did you not reply, " Certainly not; it was a petition of right case, in which Sirßichard Bethell says there was grievous injustice done to me ?" Witness—Certainly not. Mr. Sleigh—Will you take upon yourself to say upon oath that that question was not put to you in the way I have deseribed ? Witness, evading a direct answer for some time, at length replied, " No ; I admitted I was in prison." Mr. Sleigh—Did you ever give your address at the Burlington Hotel, Castle-street ? Witness—l did. Mr. Sleigh—Did you ever sleep at the house be fore on any occasion ? Witness—No. I had permission to have my letters addressed there. • -- Mr. Sleigh—Was there anything more than an arrangement to receive your letters ? Witness—l asked for permission to have my let ters left there and was allowed to do so.; Mr. Sleigh—Did you ever represent to Mr. Lever that Baron Rothschild was a friend of yours ? Witness—l had an interview with the Baron about the 17th of May, and was introduced to him by his cousin, with whom I was on terms of inti macy. Mr. Sleigh—ls it true or false that you were acquainted with Baron Rothschild ? Witness—lt was on the 17th of May that I was introduced to the Baron. Mr. Sleigh—Were you on terms of private inti macy with Baron Rothschild ? Witness—Not of private friendship. Mr. Sleigh—Had you any correspondence with Baron Rothschild before the 17th of May ? Witness—Certainly not. Mr. Sleigh—Was it then or afterwards that you told Mr. Lever that you were on terms of intimacy with Baron Rothschild ? Witness—lt was subsequent to the 17th of May. The witness was then asked as to the accuracy of the minutes of evidence in reference to his acquain tance with Baron Rothschild, as they appear in the printed appendix to the Second Report from the Select Committee of Packet and Telegraphic Con tracts of June 26, 1860, and his ans w er was, " The report in that instance se( med to be correct." Mr. Sleigh then examined him upon his action against Mr. Lever, in which he received £l,OOO, and asked—Was a new trial moved for, Land a se cond trial had ? Witness—Yes. Mr. Sleigh—Was not your case concluded, and Sergeant Shee addressing the jury for the defence, when your counsel elected to be non-suited ? Witness—No. I had not all my witnesses there, and not wishing to allow my lawyer to take £5OO when I ought to have had £l,OOO, I consented to be non-suited. Mr. Sleigh—You have told the magistrate that you consented to be non-suited, as you had not all your witnesses. Now, I ask you, upon your oath, had not all your witnesses been examined, and was not Sergeant Shee addressing the jury on the part of the defendant before you consented to be non suited ? The witness, after fencing with the question for some time, at length answered, " Sergeant Shee had finished his address." The witness was here cross-examined upon his action against Mr. Lever, and said—The case is still pending. I have moved for a new trial, and recommenced proceedings. I have instructed Mr. Digby Seymour to proceed with the case. Mr. Sleigh—When you were non-suited, were you not adjudged to pay costs, amounting to £263. Witness—l was. Mr. Sleigh—On that very bill of costs were you not taken in execution ? Witness--Yes. Mr. Sleigh—Did you not state in the Insolvent Debtors' Court, where you have to appear to-day, that you could not as you were summoned ? Witness—No. I said I had summoned some one. Mr. Sleigh—When you petitioned the Insolvent Debtors' Court did you give your place of residence as the Burlington Hotel ? Witness—l did. Mr. Sleigh—Did you in 1856 petition the Irish Insolvent Debtors' Court? Witness—l did, but I did not get my discharge. Mr. Sleigh—Did not the Commissioners remand you for another nine months ? Witness—You are right. Mr. Sleigh at this stage of the inquiry had some papers put into his hand by Mr. Valiance, when, after telling the witness to be cautious as to his re plies, said " Did you petition the Insolvent Debtors' Court in England in 1856 ?" Witness—Certainly not. Mr. Sleigh—What ! Did you not petition for debts amounting to .£7,000 ? Witness—l did petition, but not for quite so much. That was the cause of my coming to England. I was on that occasion remanded for three months. That was the cause of my coming to England. Mr. Sleigh—Are you not a debtor to Mr. Lever; has he not in hard cash lent you above £lOO ? Witness—Certainly not; he is considerably my debtor. Mr. Sleigh—Has he not ad v a nce d you certain sums of money at various times. Wit ness —Yes, to pay my expenses o n hi s account. Mr. Sleigh—Has he not lent you money for your own use ? Witness—Certainly not. Mr. Sleigh--Did you not gi ve your acceptance for £ 5O lent by him ? Witness—No, that money Was advanced for his own transactions. Mr. Sleigh, producing the bill, exclaimed it was not likely he wou.d uttve given ttig !weep! ince tn hill trona which ht. Itdd tiot rt ceived benefit Mr. Sleigh—Upon your oath, did S ou uot, make that bill for Loo payable at Messrs. While's in the Haymarket, when you had not a single farthing in their house? Witness—Certainly, and they owe me money now. Mr. Sleigh—Did not Mr. Lever lend you various sums of money for your own private purposes ? Witness—No ; that was to go to various places, Manchester, Southampton, &c. for him. Witness here launched out into incoherent invec tives, as before, against the defendant, describing his conduct as hat of a thimblerigger and swindler, who had sent out rotten ships, and victimised the unfortunate shareholders in the Galway company, by which he alone had reaped any benefit, until he was stopped by Mr. Sleigh's final question, " Did you not give Mr. Lever this I 0 U for £5 ?" (pro ducing it), to which he replied, " Yes, and I paid him, and he had not the honesty to return me my I 0 U. He is an atrocious swindler in this as in all other transactions." In re-examination witness said that his only debt to Mr. Lever was the £263 before alluded to, the costs for which he was now going through the Court, and if that were deducted from £5,000 owing him by the defendant, it would leave the latter con siderably his debtor. Mr. Sturgeon having solicited an adjournment , Mr. Sleigh briefly addressed the Court for the defendant. He thought it most disgraceful that a gentleman like his client should be dragged there that day to answer a charge totally unsupported by a tittle of evidence that would justify such a pro ceeding. Mr. layman observed that the case for the pro secution had not even been launched by evidence. There was nothing before them to ground any case on, and the summons was therefore dismissed. ALLEGED MURDER AND SUICIDE. Rumours have for some days past been circulated in the neighbourhood of Clapham that Mrs. Amelia Littleton, the wife of a gentleman of independent fortune, whose body was found in the Long-pond at Clapham-common, had been murdered by her husband. It was reported that they had been seen near the spot quarrelling with each other at an early hour in the morning, and that cries of " Mur der" had been heard on the same night by the in habitants living near the common. These rumours were considerably strengthened in consequence of the husband having subsequently committed suicide pending the inquiry as to the cause of the death of his wife. The inquest was commenced a few days ago by Mr. W. J. Payne, the coroner for the Duchy of Lancaster, at the Cock Tavern, Clapham. The evidence given on the first day (the body not then having been identified), was almost confined to that of the finding it in the Long-pond at about 5 o'clock on the morning of the 22d by a gentleman who went there for the purpose of fishing. Two witnesses were also called who deposed that they heard cries of murder, apparently in the direction of the common. According to the evidence of a surgeon who was called, there were no marks of violence on the body. She was elegantly dressed, with several rings on her finger, but the flesh having greatly swollen by being in the water, the rings had to be filed before they could be removed, An adjourn ment of the inquiry then took place, and on the following day Mr. Littleton came and identified the body as being that of his wife, and it was interred on Saturday, Mr. Littleton following her to the grave. Yesterday, on the re-assembling of the ury at the Cock Tavern,:it was announced that M r. Lit tleton had committed self-destruction by cutting his throat on Sunday afternoon. The first witness was Mrs. Collins, who stated that she was cook and housekeeper to Mr. Littleton, and had been in his service for upwards of five years. Her master and mistress were in the din ing-room in the afternoon of Sunday week, and when witness came home from church her mistress said they had had a few words. Her mistress went out twice in the course of the evening, and at 10 o'clock witness went to bed, leaving her master and mistress in the dining-room together. About 10 minutes past 12 her master came to her and asked if her mistress had come home. She told him that she did not know that she had been out. He told her that she. had gone out in a great passion, and that he had followed her, but, stopping to close the door against the dog, that she had got a-head of him, and he could not tell which :way she was gone. He went out again to look out for her, but could not find her, and returned at two o'clock. Nothing was ard of her that night. Michael Hollins, in the service of Mr. Ellis, said he was on the east side of the common on Sunday night, and was going home to his supper. It was a bright moonlight night. It was then nearly 12 o'clock, and, taking a circle, he saw a man and woman under the trees. They were violently quar relling, being then about 30 yards from him, and about the same distance from the Long Pond. Ha heard the woman say " Oh, will yo-!; oh, will you 9" The woman wore a light brown dress. They had not hold of each other, but were close together. He left them under the trees and went home. William Barton said he lived on the east side of .. _ the Common, directly opposite to the Long Pond. On Sunday night, the 21st, at about half-past 12, he was awoke by hearing a loud, long scream. He told his wife that it seemed like the scream of a woman in distress, but, as such noises are often heard on the common, he took nofurther notice, and went to sleep again. Early next morning he saw the body of the deceased (Mrs. Littleton) taken out of the pond. Mr. Blewitt, a juror, said, as he was the last per son who had any conversation with Mr. Littleton before he committed suicide, he wished to make a statement of what passed between them. The Coroner said he thought he might receive this evidence, and he was accordingly sworn. Mr. Blewitt said—l have known Mr. and Mrs. Littleton for six years. They always appeared on very affectionate terms. I saw Mr. Littleton on Saturday last, and I followed his wife to the grave on that day. I was in the back parlour after the mourners were gone. Mr. Littleton asked me to come into the front parlour. He said, "You were on theinqueat (alluding to the inc l urrt on Mr. Lit. tleton)—what reports have you heard about it ?" I said that I had heard many reports. He said, " They say that I pushed her into the pond, but I declare to God I never saw her from the time she left the house until I saw her dead, and I will tell you how it occurred." I said, the worst is over now. He said, "Oh no, Monday I dread." I said, you have nothing to do but to speak the truth. He said, " I will tell you how it occurred. It was a most simple thing. I went into the front room after dinner with the paper, and I found a tremor come over me. I felt fainting and could hardly get to the settee. She (Mrs. Littleton) was in the room and she took no notice of me for some time. 'After I had come to a little, I said ' Amelia, how unkind you are.' She looked sternly, and said, ' You are always telling me lam unkind.' She got me some water and left the room. She dressed herself and went out. She returned, took off her chains, and left a lock of hair behind her." He said again, " I declare to God I never saw her from that time until her body was found. I went out once and returned, thinking to find her at home. I went out again. I went on to the common, and called her until I was hoarse." I asked him if I should send for his friends, and he said "No ;" adding, " but Monday I dread." He committed suicide by cutting his throat on Sunday. The Coroner summed up the evidence, and said that he bad gone into this case with great care on account of the rumours which prevailed that Mrs. Littleton had been murdered by her husband by being pushed into the pond, but they had no direct evidence that such was the.case, and the cries and quarrelling that were heard on the common might have come from the two persons who are now dead. Mr. Littleton was beyond any human tribunal, and he would leave the jury to return such a verdict as the evidence would justify them in doing. After a short consultation, the jury returned the following verdict :—" That the deceased came to her death by drowning, but there was no evidence to show how she got into the water." Last night Mr. Wm, Carter, the coroner, hel3. an inquest at the Falcon Tavern, Cllpham-road, on the body of Mr. John Littleton, who committed suicide on Sunday last. Baker, 290 P, proved being called to go to the house of deceased in Foster-place, and finding a room door locked inside, he forced it open, and on entering the worn he saw the deceased lying on his left side on the floor, near the bedstead, with a razor about a foot from the body. He was quite dead. There was a great quantity of blood on the floor. Mr. Cooper, the surgeon, was sent for, and, on his I coming and the body being turned over, there was seen a deep wound in his throat. Mr. Cooper, surgeon, of Clapham-rise, was next called, and said he saw the deceased lying on the floor, with blood on his hands. He raised his head, 1 and on the left side he found a jagged wound in the throat, extending from left to right, about five inches in length and four inches in depth, which had divided the carotid artery, and slightly cutting into the larynx. An open razor with blood on it was pick& dup from the floor. There was no doubt it was the man's own act end deed. Inspector Molloy, of the P division, produced a razor covered with blood, which was picked up in the room. He believed the deceased committed the 1 act in front of a looking-glass, as there were several spots of blood on it. He had no doubt it was an act of self-destruction. Mrs. Sarah Collins, servant to Mr. Littleton, said the deceased was about 60 tears of age. He was an independent gentleman. On Saturday night wit ness went to bed at 10 o'clock, leaving her master in the dining room. At half-past 8 o'clock the next morning he called witness and told her to get her breakfast, and said he wanted to lie a little while and be quiet. She expected him to breakfast, and at 11 o'clock she looked to see if his bedroom door was open, but not finding it open she closed the door again. Some time after she knocked at the door, but receiving no answer she turned the handle of the door and found it was locked inside. She then be came alarmed, took the key, and told the landlord of the house, who went back with her. He tried the door, but could not open it, and upon that he fetched a policeman, who forced open the door. There was no doubt he caused his own death. On the Saturday he was greatly distressed in mind, he having been to her mistress's funeral. He paced about the room and said," Oh, cook, what have I done to cause this P This will break my heart; this will be my death-blow." He was greatly distressed, clasped his hands, and appeared like a madman. He clasped his do(' round the neck, and said, " Oh, Mrs. Littleto s ti l s e The Coroner then r m o y om poor doe leavingle continued to walk about the until she went to bed. He was very much at tthaceh:vditdoelisliers. Littleton. The witness here repeated jury returned stroyed his own. life e ' ' gave at the former inquest as to the house, and its results. a ye n rd sh t mTe l d i up the case, and the That the deceased de stroyed while in a state of temporary derangement." STATE OF TRADE. MANCHESTER, July 30.—The tone of the market continues almost equally stiff as it was last week, some kinds of yarns being even dearer, and prices of cloth remaining much the same as they were, though in some cases perh a p s wea k er ; but the amount of business seeming to dimini s h. N e ither manufacturers or spinners are disposed t o sell, except at very high rates, which can only be ob tained with difficulty. The cotton-market being rather easier, there is apparently less animation in consequence in the market for piece goods. There is less doing in cloths for the home trade than might have been hoped for. The advises to hand from the East have given no impulse to the demand for that quarter, and in fact there is less doing than last week, owing to the stiffness and high rate of quotations. There is good demand, however, in cop yarns for the home trade, at full prices, and in some cases at a slight advance on last week, especially in Bolton numbers, 60'0 70's, and 80's. Bundle yarn is not very active. There is less doing for the continent. The following is the weekly report of Messrs. J. Slagg and Co. :—" From Tuesday last to the close of the week, owing to the excited state of the cotton market, a large speculative demand sprang up for goods, under the influence of which prices advanced, say lid to 3d per piece on India shirt ings, and on other goods in proportion. Yesterday and to-day the demand has been less active, but the advanced prices are firmly maintained. LEEDS, July 30.—There was no new feature to notice in the woollen cloth markets here to-day. There was a moderate attendance of buyers, but they bought sparingly, and no great bulk of cloth left the halls at the close of the market. Prices were steady, and the reports from the chief manu facturing villages are as good as last week. ROCHDALE, July 29.—The flannel trade still con tinues dull, the period of the year considered. To day there was a small attendance of buyers, who purchased cautiously. Lower prices were in many instances offered, but not accepted by manufacturers. Indeed, prices, upon the whole, were firmly main tained. A few manufacturers are working to order, but the most are engaged on stocks, which, it is understood, are not very large, though a little in excess of what is usually found in the possession of manufacturers at almost the advent of autumn. Not much activity has been shown in wools to-day, but last week's prices were maintained. COUNTRY 31Ali.liBTS. LIVERPOOL-JULY 30. There was the usual attendance of the town and country trade at this morning's market; and we had a very active business doing in wheat; sales for best sorts at fully 2d per cental advance on late quotations ; inferior also 2d up. Flour was scarce in good sorts, and brought more money, but inferior sorts were scarcely saleable at former prices. Beans and peas declined 6d on the week, but were in slow request. Oats and oatmeal at Friday's prices. Indian corn in good demand at an advance of 6d to 9d per qr. BRISTOL-JULY 30. At our market to-day there was a fair attendance of millers, who were buyers of wheat at an advance of 2s per qr. Oats and barley also lather dearer. LEEDS-JULY 30. The business done in wheat to-day was entirely confined to good fresh samples, with sales to a fair extent, at no reduction upon last week's currencies. Beans and oats support last Tuesday's prices. NEWCASTLE-UNDER-LYNE-JULY 29. At this corn market there was a limited show of wheat. The trade ruled inactive, and the prices were at the extreme rates of last week—white making 60s to 665, red 56s to 635. The demand for barley was very slow, and un changed in value. Oats were in limited request, with firm sale, from 24s to 30s per 24 stone. Beans met with a steady.sale, from 44s to 50s per qr. NORWICH CATTLE. The show of store cattle to-day was moderate. The sales were limited, and but a small attendance of buyers. Last week's prices were maintained. Scots, 4s Od to 4s 6d ; shorthorns, 35 Gd to 4s ; Irish, 30 Od to 3s 6d ; Devons, 48 to 5s 6d (estimated weight when fat). Fat beasts a small show and sales brisk,'at 8s Od to 8s 6d per 141 b. - Sheep—There was titn excellent supply of sheep in the pad; and of lambs:again more than equal to the demand. Fat sheep, 8s Od to 8s 6d per stone; prime, 9s Od , with out a clearance. Pigs—A fair supply. Store pigs, 15s to 20s; fat pork, 7s Od to 7s 9d per stone. THE MAILS. MAILS DUB. Australia, Ceylon, and Mauritius (via South ampton) .. .. .. Aug. 18_ (via Marseilles) Aug. 12. .. Aug. 4. Do. Brazil and Cape Verds Buenos Ayres, Monte Video, &c. .. • • Cuba and Mexico .. • • • • Jul y Canada, &c. (via L'derry) • • • • • . Overdue. Cape of Good Hope, &c. .. Aug. 1. China a .Penang, and Singapore (via S'ampton) Aug. 2. v Do (via Marseilles) July 27. Gibraltar (via Southampton) .. • • .. July 26. India(Calcutta), Ceylon, &c. (via Southampton) July —. Do. (via Marseilles) July 27. India (Bombay), (via Southampton) .. July 26. Do. (via Marseilles) .. Aug. 4. Lisbon .. .. • • .• .. Aug. 1. Malta, Egypt, and Aden (via Southampton) .. July 26. Do. E(via. Marseilles) July 27. Vigo, and Oporto .. .. Aug. 1. United States, California, &c. Aug. 1. Western Coast of Atrica, Madeira, T ener iff e Aug, 10. West Indies and Pacific, Carthagena, Cuba, &c. July 29. ALPINE CLIMBING.—It may be interesting t° some of our readers to learn that the Piz Bernina—th e highest point in the Grissons—has been for the first time ascended by a person not a native of the country. A gen tleman named Hardy reached the summit at 11 a.m. on the 23d inst. BIRTHS. ATTWELL.—On the 26th inst., at Nassau House, Barnes, the wife of Professor Attwell, K.0.C., F.R.G.S., of a daughter. BRADBY.—On the 27th inst., at Harrow, the wife of the Rev. E. H. Brad by, of a daughter. DALE —On the 28th inst., at Lee, Sent, the wife of JameS Murray Dale, Esq., of a son. MARRIAGES. MEXTIOROUGH—CAITIEL—On the 27th i nst., Mary's, Bryanston-squar e, the Ear l of Mexborough, to A . Agnes Louis Elizabeth , y oun gest daughter of the late John Raphael, Esq. ROWE—HAMMOI , II3.—On the 25th i nst., at Cranwort b. Church, Mr . Thomas Rowe, of Cambridge, to Rebekah, daughter of the late Mr. John Hammond, of C ran wortht Norfolk. at Saint BB L. Rue E sumi Esq., Esq., Sevres , a. On. tuheea29th Paris,in s t . , Georgeat his residencevictor , 13 17 1u i G na r : e li r d g ° , DEATHS. , dE a eß ged 70. R.N of HWAITE.—On the 26th inst., at Croydon, El i " B.sell, youngest daughter of the late Miles Braithwaite, ~ Hythe, aged is. FlLANkym.—O n th e 25th inst., at 12, Sussex-place, New K ensington, Henry H o ld en F rankum, Esq., age d 53. GROVER.—On th e 30 th inst., at New Peckham, John T hos. Grover, Esq., or B e dford-row, solicitor, aged 56. OGILVY.—On the 28th inst. , at Baldovan House, Du ndee, the Lady J ane O g il vy. OVERTON.—On the 30th i ns t. ) at Sutton, Surrey, Mr. S• Oveiton, aged 89. PROWSE,—On the 27th inst., at 10, Pembroke-road, lell sington, W., William Henry Prowse, Esq., of Birken head, aged 29. SWINBURNE,—On the 27th inst., at his residence. Up ton, S3uthampton, Major-General John Swinburne , aged 73. STEDMAN.—On the 27th inst., at Horsham. D. Stedman, Esq. LONDON : Printed and rublished by MURDO YOUNG, at No. 112, Strand, printer, at TIE SUN Office, No. 112,Stran d, in the Precinct of the Savoy, Ili the CPUnty 01 Middle' Wednesday, July 31, 11301. RE. With ~ ommi -nairra e Ite•srs Scin - 4 -_____: G( T H Pr , , N It le abo undc rest. "I . 1 3y spv e Oe obta 11° 2'9 Subeel ATEthe R P r r n pm liberali CP' Re my C harles Charles / . 'ranoi s Eir w ai 7 horo g Joh n Sohn G JO hn L 'Lem°htt, Thorat TIFF Aer ttire op rt , pirteioi rrolits. A 81 12ce " rashmoun Val ...otiuse; After 48 8tirat ttnount Branch EXceede LOC/ cXtra IN VA I, OAI talucg, tei4yeBdBl' 9 3 at then, thai Sur Co§; At