The Sun. — London, England, 1856-03-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS—(`imaDAr). The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat oa the woolsack at five o'clock. PETITIONS. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented petitions from Weston-Super-Mare and other places against the opening of places of amusement on the Lord's-day. THE FRAUDS IN THE SUPPLY OF MORTARS. The Earl of DERBY—My lords, seeing my noble friend the Secretary of State for the War Department in his place, I will put the question to him of which I have given notice, hoping that it may be for the convenience of the public service that I should have an answer. And I hope I may be forgiven if, in putting the question, I should be guilty of a slight irregularity in referring to what is reported to have taken place elsewhere upon the subject to which I wish to direct attention. My lords, it is said that on Friday last the Clerk of the Ordnance, in his place in Parliament, when assigning reasons why the Government had taken upon itself the manufac ture of arms, stated, amongst other things, with regard to the supply of ordnance and artillery, that he had greatly to complain of some of the contractors to whom the Government had been compelled to resort for the sup ply of artillery, but that more especially there was one firm—whose name the right hon. gentleman did not dis close—which hat supplied for the use of her Majesty's troops no less than five mortars in which there had been inserted pieces of iron for the purpose of concealing flaws that had taken place in the casting of them. Now, I a m quite your lordships will be of opinion that charges of this kind should not be made unless they are capable of being re-affirmed and entirely substantiated. On the other hand, I am sure you will equally agree that if such charges can be substantiated, there is no punishment too great for those who have trifled in such a manner with the most sacred duty by exposing the lives of her Ma jesty's troops to the most serious consequences. (Hear,) Your lordships will, no doubt, recollect the excitement caused some few years agO at the charges brought in this house by the noble duke then Secretary of State, in connection with certain contracts for hay aid straw intended for the troops on foreign service. Serious, however, as such frauds were, they are compa ratively innocuous when put in comparison with frauds practised in reference to the heavy artillery and mortars, upon which the whole operations of war might be de pendent for success. And not only do frauds perpetrated in such instances render the particular implements of war entirely unfit for the public requirements, but they actually render their service a task of imminent danger to her Majesty's troops. My lords, all I can say is this, that the parties guilty of such frauds are guilty of a crime, little short, if at all, of high treason. (Hear.) Well, I think this accusation having been publicly made, I am justified in asking my noble friend—first, whether he is prepared in his place in Parliament to re-affirm.and substantiate the charge ; and, secondly, whether, if the. charge can be substantiated, he has any objection to euention the name of the firm guilty of so gross a viola tion of duty. Isay that is due, not only to the firm that is inculpated, but to all the othet firms that may have been suspected of having neglected their duty. I will ask, then. is it trim that mortars have been sup plied to her Majesty's Government by a contractor, in which pieces of iron have been let is for the purpose of concealing flaws in the casting of them ? And, next, what is the name of the firm guilty of so criminal a dere liction of duty ? But, my lords, I would go a little fur ther to say that, whatever may be the countervailing ad vantages of the contract system, it is clearly more open than any other to fraud and abuse. You may very often find that while you think you are applying to the cheap est market you are in reality buying in the dearest mar ket, on account of the inferiority of the article that is purchased. Take care, then, to remember that there is no system which requires so much careful and accurate supervision as the system of Government contracts. For my own part, I think that frauds of such a character as this could not for a moment escape detection. The whole thing appears to be so bungling an operation, that it is beyond possibility to expect it would pass without detection. Now, I wish to know, in the next place, when the discovery of the fraud was made, and by whom it was made ? Whether it was before the mortars were sent out for the use of the troops in the field ? And, lastly, I will ask what steps her Ma jesty's Government have taken to bring the guilty par ties to condign punishment ? (Hear.) Lord PANMURE—My lords, I quite agree with my noble friend that a fraud of this description is one which cannot be passed over without, in the first place, the strictest investigation ; and without, in the next place, if brought home to the guilty parties, having the names of those guilty parties publishel to the world. I am sorry to say there is too good ground for the statement made by nay right hon. friend the Clerk of the Ordnance on Friday night. That statement was to the effect that some mortars which had been ordered from a certain firm had been de livered in an incomplete state, and were found to have been tampered,with in order that they might escape the vigilance of the authorities of the department. My lords, the history of the case is as follows. But first I would mention that happily no injury. has occurred to any of her Majesty's troops in con sequence of the fraud which has been practised. Nor has it appeared that a single mortar that has been ap proved of on examination by the authorities has after. wards been discovered to be in any way incomplete. Now, with respect to the five mortars to which my right hon. friend alluded to on Friday night, I may state that on Thursday experiments with regard to them took place ; and it was the result of tho se ex p er i men t s t h at induced my right hon. friend to make mention of the matter. These five mortars formed part of a contract entered into by her Majesty's Government with the house of Messrs. Grisell, of the Regent's Canal Iron works. One of them went so far as to be able to stand the proof to which it was subjected at the Woolwich Arsenal. And after undergoing that trial, it and another were sent down te Shoeborynees, there to be submitted to further proof before being put into store for the pub lic use ; after ten rounds had been fired one of them burst ; it did not go to pieces, but it opened out, and that led to the detection of the insertion of a piece of iron behind the breech of the gun—a piece of metal introduced in the roost skilful manner to cover a fraud. The noble earl says that this could scarcely be done without incurring the risk of certain detection : but I cm assure him that the piece was Jet in with so much skill that nothing short of the utmost vigilance could detect the insertion. This experiment led to the immediate examination of the other mortar, and there also it was found that a piece had been inserted at the same point. A third out of the five bad been already rejected by the authorities at Woolwich Arsenal, whilst regardsas the fourth it showed th e same ev id ence o f fraud as the other=. As to the fifth and last, it burst altogether in an experiment, not because of any flaw proved to have existed in it, but because it was made of metal unfit for the purpose. My lords, such are the facts of the case, and the result is this : in the first place, as a matter of course, these mortars are rejected ; and in the second place, as a matter of course, the firm inculpated has been erased from the list of contractors to whom future Government contracts may be open. But whether it will bo in the power of the Government to proceed legally against the parties is a point which I have not as yet been able to ascertain. I may add, I believe my right hon. friend mentioned this fact, not as a reason why the Government should establish a foundry of its own, but rather in justification of their having taken that step. I think that is a plan which it would be well to adopt even if no fraud had been perpetrated. I am not prepared to go so far as to say that either in the manufacture of great guns or small arms the Govern ment should entirely trust to its efforts. To a c rtain extent certainly it should he independent, but to a certain extent also it should be in a condition to employ the trade, so as to keep pace with the trade, and become acquainted with all the improvements that are going on. The intention of the Government is to establish at Wool wich a foundry in which they may cast their own mor tars and their own heavy armaments, and to be able, from the mode in which those armaments are there tested, to feel assured the guns and mortars issued thence will bo fit for the service marked out for them, without having to go through the very hard trial to which they are now submitted under the contract sys tem, and which requires that they should be fired off a great number of times. We hope so to test the metal of which the mortars may be made—we hope so to secure the mode in which they are cast, that by taking one mortar in twenty and testing it until it bursts, we can rest assured as to the trustworthiness of the remaining nineteen. And it cannot be denied that this matter of testing is accompanied with great difficulty in the case of other articles besides artillery. My noble friend oppo site (the Earl of Hardwicke) knows very well that it may be the last feather that will break an anchor. An anchor may go to sea thoroughly tested, and after all prove so unreliable that it snaps on the first strain. I have, how ever, no hesitation in Paying that under the circum stances I think my noble friend was quite justified in demanding that the name of the contractor should be given up, and Ilikewise in requiring an assurance that that contractor shall not be employed again. But I am not prepared to say, not being sufficiently informed, whether th e v i olation wh i ch h as been perpetrated aelounts to infringe„ eiat of the law. Having made this etatemeat, I feel it my duty not to forbear from saying, that, with reference to two other persons with whom we have dealt largely, no ground of complaint can be alleged--I refer to Mr. Hood, of Lowmoor Ironworks, and Mr. Walker, of Oakleaf Ironworks. Both of these gentlemen have executed contracts for heavy armaments with perfect success, and their guns and mortars have withstood the severest trials to which they have been sub itted. The Earl of DERBY—I confess, ray lords, th a t th e statement of the noble lord would have been more satis factory to me if he had gone further, and told us what had been done with a view to proceeding against the con tractor implicated ; and if it should turn out upon in quiry into the state of the law, that the law allowed of proceedings being instituted, we might rest assured that that step would be taken. Lord PANMURE was understood to say that the matter was still under inquiry. AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS BILL. Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY, in moving the oecoud reading of this bill, thought it only neeessary to call their lordships' attention to its important nature, affecting as it did 18,090,000/. worth of property. At present these statistics were known only to a few; but lo great was their national importance that they ought to be open to the entire country. The noble lord then THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY Ev E iNGI, MARCH 12 1856. read a long letter from Mr. Paul Fosk et t, setting forth the many advantages which would mist) from a system of agricultural statistics. tip to the present time all calculations on the subject of agriculture had been based to a large extent upon conjecture, more especially in England. In Ireland the constabulary returns certainly furnished some reliable information ; and in Scotland also the state of agricultural statistics was more satisfactory. England was the only country in the civilised world which did not possess this kind of informations In France, Bel gium,Holland—nay,jeven in Russia—there were the most minute agricultural statistics. The machinery of the poor law board had been especially tried exec) 1853 in two counties, Norfolk and Hampshire. In. the latter county many farmers exhibited a great indisposition to make re turns. An impression appeared to exist among them that it was an inquisitorialattempt to obtain a knowledge of their affairs, made with a view eit'her to the imposi tion of additional taxation, or the raising of their rent. With regard to the first point, he should have thought that no person in his senses could really believe that the information obtained by the Government would be used for that purpose ; with regard to the second, he thought that landlord mast either be very ignorant himself, or nsustl be very ill served by his steward, who had not an ac curate knowledge of the state of the farm and the amount of stock. The experiment made in Norfolk and Hamp shire, though not so successful as the experiment in Scot land, was not by any means unsuccessful, the failure in making returns amounting to about 7 per cent. After these attempts had been made the matter was referred to a committee of their lordships' house, and it was worth their lordships' while to consider attentively the evidence given before that committee. With hardly a single ex ception the inspectors reported that the poor-law machi nery was well adapted for the purpose ; but they also de clared that it was useless to attempt to collect agricul tural statistics without power being given to impose a penalty on farmers who declined to fill up the schedules. In accordance with this view the committee recom mended that compulsory powers should be granted re sembling those which were provided in the case of the census. Is justification of such a provision, he might observe that many farmers had stated that if the thing were done in a constitutional manner, that is on the autho rity of the law of the land, they would have no objection to give information, and it was his own belief that if this bill were passed there would be no occasion to exercise the compulsory powers, and that the information sought would be obtained without difficulty and without grumbling. The noble lard then read extracts from the evidence of the isspectors, in support of the compulsory powers proposed by the bill. It was intended, he said, that two classes of returns should be made, an nually, the estimated return and the actual return, and that the bill should not extend to holdings under 20 acres. The provisions of the measure were these : In the month of Feb. every year the overseer of the poor was to send to the Poor-law Board a return from every occupier of the parish, including the nature of the occu pation. In May a schedule was to be issued, which was to be returnable on the Ist of June, such schedule to con tain the acreage and the different descriptions of live stock. The schedules thus obtained were to be sent in the first instance to the Poor-law Board, and by them were to be transmitted to the Board of Trade for classi fication and arrangement. For the purpose of securing these returns compulsory powers were given, under which any person declining to fill up the schedule might be summoned before a justice of the peace, who would be authorised to inflict a penalty. In the event of an ultimate refusal to make any return, the magis trate was to be empowered to appoint a person to enter on the farm and make a valuation. There • were to be two penalties, one Si. and the other 40e. Toe first would be applicable solely to overseers and their officers who neglected to perform their duty ; and, on the other hand, farmers declining to fill up the sche dule were to be liable to a penalty not exceeding 405., to be levied on the authority of a magistrate of the dis trict, and to be paid to the parish in which the offence was committed, on account of the relief of the poor. These were the principal provisions of the bill. With regard to the estimate, it was not thought desirable to make that compulsory. It was to be left to the discre tion of the officers of the Poor-Law Board to frame such an ultimate as they might deem expedient. The occu pier was not to be required to make a return in June of the produce of his land, but merely of the acreage and the different descriptions of crops. The esti mate after harvest might be obtained by different means, among others by testing the quality of the crop, and thus arriving at an average. That, how ever, was a matter which was left for subsequent arrangement. It should be observed in regard to the employment of the machinery of the poor law that the Poor-law Board in London were not to be required to employ any of their official agents in the c iuntry if I they did not consider it expedient to do so. The board might employ clerks of the union, overseers, and other F local officers, if they thought proper ; but if there was r any reluctance on the part of local officials to act in the matter, it would be competent to them to employ other persons to carry out the object of the bill. The Earl of MALMESBURY inquired by whom the person appointed by the board for that purpose was to be paid ? Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY—By the Poor law Board. The Earl of MALMESBURY—Out of what fund ? Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY—By a vote of Par liament. Having thus stated the substance of the mea sure, he would now:ask their lordships to assent to the second reading. The obtaining of the information in .question was, he really believed, of the greatest im • port ince to the country ; and while it would confer • inestimable benefits on the country at large, it would be • especially beneficial to the agriculturists themselves. On the question that the bill be read a second time, Lord DUNGANNON said he considered the b:11 which had just been brought before their lordships arbi. trary and inquisitorial, and believed it would annihilate the independence of character and position which he for one wished the English farmer always to enjey. As a landlord, he should deeply regret his tenants being com pelled to submit to the provisions of a bill which autho rised intru.ion into their private affairs. He must re mind their lordships that one year the crops on a farm might be very large, and the cattle very numerous, and the next year they m i g ht b e ver y sma ll ; an d yet by this bill the farmer would be compelled to make a disclosure of his private affairs. Such a bill as this was not neces sary for the attainment of the object, which might be secured by means of a return of the number of acres cul tivated, and of stock kept, throughout the country. He hoped that some time would be allowed after the Easter recess, before the bill went to a committee, in order tbat the farming interest might have an ample opportunity of considering its hearings and expressing their opinion on the subject. The provision that a farmer who failed to make a return within a limited period might be brought before a justice of the peace and fined for the omission appeared to him to place the farm3r on a level with the keeper of a beer-house ; and though he admitted that it was desirable that the information in question should ke obtained, he thought it should be sought with out resorting to an arbitrary course of proceeding which would degrade the character of the British yeoman. The Earl of DERBY said—My lords, as to the appre hensions of my noble friend, I think, if he felt them strongly, it was his duty, not only to offer his objections to the bill, but to resist the second reading of it, inas much as it appears to me that the objections he has urged went to the whole principle of the measure. I fear that the observations made by my noble friend will rather tend to increase that feeling of jealousy in respect to the powers referred t), which it ought to be our object as much as possible to allay. I have been for a long time satisfied of the great importance—and to the farmers more especially --of obtaining as far as possible accurate statistical infor mation as to our agricultural prospects. And I may men tion this fact in corroboration of that statement, that is a few days after .I took office in 1852 I wrote a letter to my noble friend the Duke of Richmond, urging upon him the importance of obtaining accurate agricultural statistics in the counties with which he was connected, and pressing upon him the wisdom of obtaining from the Agricultural Society of England their concur rence in this proceeding, so that by their intervention they might induce the farmers to supply that information voluntarily ; and I promised the noble duke that the as sistance of Government in effecting this object would be given in every way possible. It is not, therefore, now for the first time that I have expressed this opinion; but having read the report of the committee of last year upon this subject, and of that of the committee of 1854, I have come to the conclusion that to obtain accurate agricul tural statistics is a matter of extreme importance to the country generally, and to no class of greater importance than to the practical agriculturists themselves. (Hear.) I must confess, also, that I have come to the conclusion, from reading the evidence before last year's committee, that if you are to obtain this information in England you must obtain it by means of a compulsory measure. I further and entirely concur in the opinion expressed by the witnesses examined before such committee, that if you desire to obtain full and accurate informa tion the farmers themselves would rather give it in obedience to the law which all persons will be equally bound to obey, than give it under circumstances which made it optional for each individual to supply such in formation, and which left the farmers uncertain as to whether the same information will not be also given by others of their class. It is manifest that if the informa tion be not given generally the result will be fallacious. I am convinced, then, that it is in the first instance of great importance to obtain accurate agricultural statis tics, and in the next that to obtain such information with the least amount of dissatisfaction from the farmers, some cen3pulsory power must be resorted to. My noble friend behind me has spoken of the degradation which would be inflicted upon the farmers by sending:parties into their houses requiring them to make returns of their live stock and produce. Now, I confess I see no degradation what ever on the part of any farmer or occupier of land in mak ing a return of that which it is obvious may be ascer tained by any of his neighbours, or by the slightest in spection which the landlord has the opportunity of making either by himself or by his steward ; or which may be obtained without the landlord seeing the land at all, by his simply knowing what rotation of crops had been pre scribed for the land in question. My opinion is, that of the two modes of obtaining this information—namely, whether the statement is to be made for the farmer or by him —that that must be the most satisfactory to him which is made by himself. Now, what was the farmer called upon to state ? He was not called upon, as my noble friend has stated, to disclose any of his private af fairs. He is only called upon to state that he holds a certain number of acres, and he is then to say how much of his land is laid down in wheat, how much in barley, how much in oats, and in other descriptions of produce. And while I am on this subject I wish to tbrow it out for the consideration of the Government whether the co lumns of their proposed schedule are not unnecessarily bill it might be so framed as to meet the wishes of the agricultural body. (Hear.) The bill was then read a second time. THE MUTINY BILL. _ _ increased, and whether it would not be advisable to re duce the numbers. I think for all practical purposes, fur example, all grain crops might be included in one co lumn ; turnips, mangold-wurtzel, and all similar roots might be included in anothercolumn ; and vetches,clover e Zee., might be classified under a third column. lam disposed to think that so many columns as the schedule now contains are calculated rather to confuse the farmer's mind, and to induce a disinclination to fill them up. My noble friend seemed to think, when supposing a case, 'that in one year a farmer might have a very large amount of produce, while in the following year it might be very small ; that under this bill he would have to make a dis closure that would be injurious to his interests. Bat such an objection may be easily answered by reminding my noble friend that there are very fe w farmers who, in a succession of years, have the same amount of stock. I as well as others of your lordships have very large parks, and we are in the habit of taking a quantity of what is called lay cattle to feed upon the pasture. Well, in making a return under this bill, we shall return all those cattle found grazing in our parks in June ; but that would not show that all such cattle are our own. There may be only 5 head of cattle my own, and yet I shall return 50 head,.in case I shall find that number in my park at the time I am making my return. With regard, then, to the return which the farmer will be called upon to make, I cannot conceive that it will in the slightest degree expose his private and domestic circumstances, or that it will occasion any round for jealousy on his part. Ido not doubt but that the mea sure, in the first instance, will be regarded with some suspicion ; but it will be the duty and the object of us in our respective districts to endeavour to allay such a feeling by reason, rather than to excite it by the ex pression of fear. (Hear.) I think that the Government had better consider in what manner they shall best allay this feeling of jealousy on the part of the farmer. It is obvious that in order to do this the provisions of the measure must be carried out in a way the least unsatis factory and displeasing to the farmer. Now, looking at the measure in this point of view, I cannot say I think that the machinery of the Poor-Law Board is the most desirable. In the first place, you will be throwing upon that bOard a business they are not at all acquainted with, and one which does not properly belong to their functions. In the next place, Ido not think that the machinery of the guardians under the Poor-Law Board would be at all satisfactory. I should venture to sug gest to the Government another mode of proceeding, which I think would prove much more satisfactory. would ask your lordships whether this information may not be muck more advantageously and conveniently tamed through the medium of the petty sessions. If the returns are furnished from the Board of Trade to the quarter sessions ; to be sent then to the magistrates at petty sessions, they will be mach better calculated than the overseers under the Poor-Law Board to obtain from the farmers in their several districts the necessary infor mation. More than that, I think that the magistrates, being interested themselves in the subject, will be likely to co-operate with the farmers in supplying the infor mation required. And as to the objection of my noble friend about the disclosure of private circumstances, I do not think that it is necessary for each individual to go further than to the petty sessions with his return. The petty sessions having ascertained that all the returns have been sent in, it will be perfectly com petent in the magistrates *ere to sum up, without the names of the parties, the totals of the several accounts, ascertaining the number of acres under cultivation, with the amount of the estimated produce. And then they can return the abstract so made up to the magistrates at quarter sessions or to the Board of Trade, who will in such case be able to make up a summary of the inrorma tion it was desirable to obtain. With regard to stock it does not matter whether the number of sheep be greater in Scotland or Ireland than in England. The great ques tion to be ascertained is the amount of meat there is for the consumption of the country at large. So in regard to crops, we do not want to know how much of a particu lar crop is grown in Lancashire. in Norfolk, or in Hamp shire, but what is the whole tor suet that is available for consumption. As the first step towards ascertaining this fact we must, of course, know the exact breadth of land sown. I wish, therefore, to see such a measure framed as will obtain for us till information, and at the same ROUSE OF LORDS—MARCH 11, time will remove every o bj ec ti on f rom t h e f armers in re• lbot, Esq., of . ofoun, a spect to it. New, lam o f o pi n i on t h at nothing can be This was a petition of John T P more advantageous t o th e f armers t h an such returns as T a lb o t , in the county of Roscommon,pray ing that his these. And so far as I h ave any i n fl uence, my best influ- marriage with Marianne, his now wife, might be cis ence will be direct e d t o d o away w i th every other feeling, so l ve d, an d t h at he might be enabled to marry again. Certain farmers may, no doubt, imagine that this is At the opening of the house, some project on the part of the Government for taxation, ...Mr. Sergeant Wrangh am , wi th w h om w • - c Mr' Edwin er to enable landlo r d s t o o b ta i n i nformation into the pri- James, Q.C., and Dr. Ball, of the Irish ecclesiastical b vate affairs of their t enan t ry , w i t h a v i ew to the raising bar, said that he wished t o s t a t e t o th e i r l or d s hi ps that of their rent. But no thi ng can b e more i mport int th an appeared. he to oppose this bill, not on th e i ns t ruct i ons the removal of thes e m i sappre h ens i ons b y calm reason- of the wife, who was incapable of giving any instructi ons , ing, and lam d e si rous th at t h e measures should be so b u t on behalf of those under whose eye and roof she had framed as to leave th e l eas t poss ibl e ground for such been for the last four y eare res id en t , name l y, her sister and her sister's husband, Mr. Thomas Tertiu s P age t. impressions. Ido n o t see any exact prov i s i on laid It was difficult to say now u n d er w h ose care s h e was, down in regard to th e es ti ma t e o f pro d uce. I think for on Tuesday last she h a d b een remove d , an d h e did not that the Government on re fl ec ti on w ill agree i n opinion with me, that the estimate of the value of amount of know where she was. He appeared for those who h a d the probable yield of a h arves t i s h ar dl y a matter for the maintained her caus e e l sew h ere with her consent. Their consideration of the P oor -L aw B oar d . Th ey are not lordships had heard of th e ma tt- r i nc id ents ll y on F r i day l the persons best q ua lifi e d t o o bt a i n t h e i n f ormation. I last, when an applicati on was ma d e t o a ll ow service of think it will be i n fi n it e ly b e tt er t o l eave t h e matter to certain documents on th e meat o f th e person f or w h om the magistrates at p e tty sess i ons t o b e d e t erm i ne d upon, he now appeared, and it was soug ht t o prevent t h e i r who in obtaining thi s es ti ma t e f rom t h e f armers them- being hoard against the bill by th ose w h o h a d i nstructe d selves will be b e tt er a bl e t o wor k ou t t hi s f act t h an any his learned f r ie n d s on th e p ar t o f M rs . T a lb ot w i thout officers under the P oor -L aw B oar d. M y l or d s, I w i ll her knowl e d ge or consen t. offer no oppositi on t o th e secon d rea di ng o f t hi s bill. Mr. Merew e th er , On the contrary, I thi n k th a t th e o bj ect i n v i ew is of said they appeared, Q.C, with whom was M r . D enman , . instructed by Messrs. Fr e shfi e ld, on such importa nce th a t i n or d er to secure accuracy and behalf of Mrs. Talbot, to o pp ose th e bill, an d h e was pre uniformity in the returns, the compulsory power pro. pared to tender the authority under which he appeared, which would leave no doubt that they were th e on l y posed to be gi ven i s a b so l ute l y necessary. Though I express some hesitation as to the machinery for carry- persons entitled to appear on her behalf. ing out the object of the bill, I think that that is a The Lord Ceancellor said the house would Mr hear both matter that may be b e tt er consi d ere d at another time. • Merewetber and Mr. Serg ean t Wranigham in oppo- Itt net, , however, that the Gover n m en t w ill perm i t the sition to tee Lill. agriculturists themselves to have a full opportunity of Lord Broueham--You must take care that there is no considering the bill b e f ore t h ey proceed to its final appearance of collusion betwe en y ou , as th at wou ld put to the bill. stage ; for by so d o i ng l am conv i nced that they will anend go far to remov e an un f oun d e d a l arm i n respect to what Mr. Merewether said th a t M rs . T a lb o t was w i t hi n the Precincts of the house re a dy t o s t s t e t h at h e represented may appear a t th e t ime t o b e an unpopular measure, Lord WYNFORD said that these returns would press her. Mr. Sergeant Byles ( w ith w h otn * were M r. M ontague more heavily in some di s t r i c t s th an i n ot h ers, more espe cially in districts where breeding flocks were kept. Smith, Q.C., and Mr. Honeyman) appeared on the part Lord COLCHESTER obser ve d th a t h e h a d b een a of the petitioner, and said th a t th a t gen tl eman was the second son of the Rev. John C ros bi e , w h ose name was member of the committ ee o f l as t year — a comm i ttee im- formerly Talbot, but who assumed the name of Crosbie , partially constituted, and numbering many noble lords u n d er th e provisions of the will of the Earl of Glendore, who had advocated the cause of the Protectionists, as b u t on jeweli ng , to certain property again resumed the they were called. There was no difference of opinion na me of T a lb o t, He was formerly in the army, and in that committee as to the policy of granting any cotn• held a commission in the 35th Infantry, which service pulsory powers under such a bill as- this, lie was pre- he quitt e d, and in 1844 became acquainted with the pared to support the principle of th e bill beforethe house, family of Mr. Marcus M`Causland, of Fruit-hill, in the the only compulsory portion of which had reference to county o f Dsr e y, a gentleman of fortune and respecta• returns of the quantity of land under cultivation. It was bility, who had six daughters and one son. Mr. Talbot proposed to carry out the machinery of the bill by means married Marianne, the eldest daughter, in January 1145, of the poor-law commissio ners an d th e board s of guar- at Balteagh Church, in the county of Derry. After the diens, but a noble e ar l h a d sugge s ted that it could marriage they went abroad, and returned in 1847, and better be carried out by the magistrates at petty resided at Summer-hill, near Mallow. Mr. Talbot's cir sessions ; but the committee were of opinion that cumstances were humble—he not having more than the poor-law commissio ners aff or d e d a better medium. 5001. a year, and his household was on a modest scale. He would reserve any remarks on the details of fn November, 1848, he hired a man named William the measure until it was in committee ; but having been Mullao, as groom and out-door servant at 4s. a-week-- a member of the committee of last year, he was anxious which was afterwards raised to Gs.—who slept out of the now to state hie general approbatio n of the ineamra. house. Mrs. Talbot evinced a partiality for Mullen Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY expressed his great while at Summer-hill, and was in the habit of supplying satisfaction at the general concurrence which this bill him with wine, spirits, jam, biscuits, cream, and other had met with at the hands of their lordships. It was only delicacies. By means unknown to Mr. Tait) , t, Mullah by hearty co-operation and good-will on the part of all was introduced is sleep in the house. In August, persons concerned that the measure could be properly 1850, Mr. Talbot's elder brother, who lived in the carried out. There was some division of opinion as to county of Kerry, lost his wife, and Mr. Talbot left whether the poor-l aw comm i ss i oners or the magistrates home for seven or eight days. During his absence, this in petty session constituted the best medium for giving unfortunate lady was in the habit of sitting till half-past effect to the measure; but he inclined to the former body. 10 at the drawing-room fire fete-a Me with the groom, Already the principle of the bill had been applied with who was also seen with her in Mr. Talbot's bed-room. partial success. He assured their lordships that there was She gave him wine m the bed-room, which one of the no intention on the part of the Government to press the servants attempted to taste, and was sharply reproved bill unduly. During the recess the country would h ave by Mrs. ToObot, on which she retorted that "she had an opportunity of considering it ; but he thought their as much right to it as Mullen." Mrs, Talbot re lordships would agree with him that it was desirable to plied that " she would tell her master of her imper pass the bill into a law at as early a period as possible. tinence," but, instead of that, she afterwards asked The Earl of ELLENBORO UGH stated his conviction the servant not to mention the subject to her master. While living at Summer-hill M r . T a lb o t nee d t o si t over that this bill wou ld b e unpopular in the last degree, and would be greatly i m p e d e d b y t h ose who would be called his wine after din ner , and Mrs. Talbot at that time was in th habit of ointe 's bed-room and ting upon to sign th e sc h e d u l es, un l ess an assurance were theree for an hour at g a timeM ullan. He was also seen with ay her given that the returns should be made in complete iu a dressing-room where there was a bed. They left secrecy. (Hear.) It was absolutely necessary that the re- Summer-hill and removed to a place called Eden-hill, turns should not be seen by th e b oar d s o f guardians, but where the clergym an were intimately acquainted with the T a lb o t s . Mr. Williamson, his wife a n d that they should be im me di a t e l y sen t up to London. In daughter , lBsl Mr, Talbot, of Mou n t T a lbot, di e d, and Mr, gain absent from home. This was a bill of th e p o liti ca l econom i sts—(hear)—but it Talbot, the petitiemer, was ao. would be considered by th e f armers as a l an dl or d s ' bill— Mr. and Mrs. Willi amson naked Mrs. Talbot t o s t ay a (hear)—to e na bl e th em t o co ll ect i nformation as to the circumstances of each individual f armer , an d . ra i se , his few days with th em , w hi c h s h e d ec li ne d. R umours hav ing reached them, Mr. and Mrs. Williamso n ( t hi s was rent. The only m eans o f p revent i on would b e to secure in May, 1853) wen t t o p a y Mr.:. T a lb o t a v i s i t, and on the secrecy of th ese re t urns . H e f eared that there would driving up to the house found the parlour window blinds be a failure in the renderieg of these returns, owing to down, and were told she was from home. They drove the difficulty in filling them up. Men would be exposed on, and on their return saw Mrs. Talbot's child, a girl to a penalty, not because they were unwilling, but be. of fire or six years old, playing before the door, and they cause, they would be unable to fill up the returns. Te obviate the diffi cu lt y , h e wou ld recommend the went in. Mrs. Talbot was again denied, but after a ti me she appeared at the drawing-room door, that room the adoption of two schedules one referring to the blinds of which had been drawn down, in a state of great cultivation of arable land, and the other relating to stock. A wide spac e oug ht a l so t o b e l e f t i n the mar excitement, and refused to let those la - lies go into it. gin They after a s t rugg le forced th emse l ves i n mad found no of these schedules. F armers were remarkably bad one there, but remarked that the windows were then writers. (A laugh.) The ablest farmer he had ever open. They told her of the reports afloat with regard known could not write his name, and that wee the case to with some of the abl es t f armers i n the part of the coup- be her intimacy with the groom, an d s h e as k ed i f they believed it. Miss Williamso n replied, °i If you deny it try with which he was connec t e d . If this facility was vv® do not believ e it." Mrs. William son t o ld h er t h at not afforded, he f e lt assure d th at t h e measure would not her housemaid had said that she had seen the groom only be unpopular in the country, but that its intentions take liberties with her ; upon which she said, "If it would be defeated. cosies to John's ears, I do not k now w h at I s h a l l de. " The Earl of HARDWICKE sa id t h at s i nce the repeal No further i n t im a c y with h er was kept up by the Wil agriof the corn laws stics he had invariably urged the necessit of more yof liamsons ; but after deliberati ng w h a t was to b e done, cultura stati as being importance now it was resolved to communicate with her father and than before the withdrawal of protection. The farmers mother ; an interview was arranged to take place at Bel were of opinion that by means of returns large profits in fast for that purpose. After that Mr. and Mrs. Talbot, corn would be at once published to the world ; but the New, both came to Mount Talbot, and remonstrated with average was as well known abroad as at home. This her (as we understood). On the death of Mr. Talbot, Mount country was now a refuge for the destitute. Every Talbot, that property cattle to petitioner and he and his wife other country had a corn law, and as England was went to reside there. The same improper conduct with without it was certain that, whenever high prices were the groom was continued there. In Oct., 1851, Mr. Tal offered for grain, the country woold be wooded by corn. bot was again absent, and during that absence a servant The only way would be to have a cl ear statement of named Maria Owen, one evening after 8 o'clock, having what corn was in the country, the question being as to been previously told by Mrs. Talbot not to attend to her the best mode of proceeding. He agreed in the opinion fire, but nevertheless, going to her bedroom, saw Mrs. that the least popular board would be the board of guar- Talbot and Mullae on the bed together, in such eircunt diens, as farmers would be more jealous of letting their stances as to leave no doubt of their criminality. At that affairs being known to such bodies than to th e Govern- time Mullen slept in a room over an out-house, the laun ment of the country. The magistrates were the gentry dry, and it would be shown that Mrs. Talbot was in the of the country, and if on the receipt of the papers the habit of going to his room, sometimes taking her daugh compilation was made and sent to the Board of Trade, ter with her, but at others taking her into the yard, and and the papers destroyed, he thought the machinery sending her with a servant into another out-house on wou!d work easily ; but care should he taken to avoid some pretext. She was seen through the window to be giving the names of individuals. (Hear.) There was in the room, and heard there by persons in the room hardly a poor-law inspector in the country who did not underneath. She was very particular about Mullan's bear testimony to the unpopular character of boards shirts, seeing that they were as good as her husband's, of guardians for such purposes as were contemplated by and paid extraordinary attention to his linen. lii April this bill. Without entering into the details of the mea- or May, 1852, Mr. Talbot took into his service a person sure, he would simply urge that the returns should named Halloran, who was the first to communicate to his be made through the medium of the magistrates of master what was going on, and it was arr ange d t h a t Hal petty sessions, and not o f b oar d s o f guar di ans. That loran and one Finnerty should watch the parties, and it course he believed would be both cheaper and better. Ile having been ascertained that Mrs. Talbot bad gone into trusted that after the recess, and when the public had Mullan's bed•roons, Mr. Talbot went with Halloran and had an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon the linnerty to the door. One of them said, " Mullan are you On the motion for the second reading of this bill, The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH inquired of the Se. cretary of State f,r War whether there was any reason why the army 'estimates should not be made out in the same manner as the navy estimates, as regarded the actual amount of the effective force of the country. By the army estimates, as they were framed, no means were afforded for knowing what that force was. He could see no reason why the truth should be concealed from the country, which he felt assured had every disposition to meet demands upon it. To say that there were 200,000 or 300,000 effective men in the army was a deception on the country, for which there was not the slightest ne cessity. He thought it consistent neither with the credit nor the advantage of the country that the truth in this respect should be withheld. _ _ Lord PANMURE said that owing to the difference of time at which returns 11.4 to the amount of men came from the provinces and from distant possessions, it would be difficult, even in time of peace, to give the actual state of the army in any particular month. But he saw no difficulty in the way of letting the country know the state of the army from time to time. If the estimates wall be put in any better form than they were at present, as regarded the actual force of the country, the attempt should be mad• to improve them. Earl GREY begged to remind his noble friend (Lord Panmure) that during the struggle with France in the last war, the Minister of the day on several occasions laid before Parliament elaborate statements with respect to the results of recruiting and the actual state of the army. If such statements had been made before, surely they could be made again. The Earl of EGLINTON complained of the system of billeting soldiers in Scotland. Considerable dissatis faction was felt in Scotland as to the manner in which soldiers were billeted in private houses. He did not wish to raise any difficulty with regard to the present bill, but called attention to,the grievance to:which he had referred, in the hope that the Government would devise a remedy. The bill was then read a second time. The Marine Munity Bill, the Consolidated Fund (26,080,000/.) Bill, the Drainage Advances Acts Amend ment Bill, and the Delamere Forest Bill were respectively read a second time. LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. COUNTY COURTS ACT. On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, a bill was brought in and read a first time for the amend• went of the County Courts Act. Their lordships then adjourned at seven o'clock. NOUSE Oh' COMMONS.—(YBsrBitDAT.) The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock, but 40 members not being present the house adjourned. THE COUNT OUT. The following members of Parliament were present when the House of Commons was counted at 4 o'clock yesterday :--- ♦shford Wyse W. B. Hughes Hindley Wilson Locke King Pellatt Black Heywood Hastie (Glasgow) Baxter Anderson Thornely Brotherton Perry Greene Freshfield Deedes Baird Pi inch Ls.agton Willoughby Phillips Barrow Wilkinson Greenall W. A. Agnew Walmsley Bignold E wart Gurney TALBOT'S DIVORCE. there I" and on no answer being given, the door, which was fastened, was broken open, and Mullen and Mrs. Talbot found there, and the child also standing behind the curtains of the bed. No one could suppose that cri minal intercourse took place in the presence of the child, but she had been previously in the room with her mother, and been sent away, and if any familiarities took place on this occasion, they would probably be such as would not attract the attention of a child of that age. Mr. Talbot immediately left the house. The groom was paid off and discharged, and 201. sent to Mrs. Talbot. She remained that night in the house, and the next day Mr. M'Clellan, the vicar of Mount Talbot, saw her, and on stating what he had heard, she never said the imputations against her were false, but made no answer. When she was asked if they were false, she expressed a strong wish to go away with Mullen, but Mr. M'Clellan removed her to Dublin, and she was placed at Coppin's Hotel there. Mullan also went to Dublin and called at the hotel, inquired for Mrs. Talbot, and left a letter for her, stating that " William Mullan was at 15, Dominic street." When be was not allowed to see her he said he was going to America, where, in fact, he had since gone. She afterwards made a full and free confession of all the details of her crime to Mr. M'Lellan. In consequence of the agitated state in which she was, Dr. Walsh, an eminent practitioner in cases of insanity, was called into her. It should he said that neither in her, nor in any of her family, bad there ever been any trace of insanity. Dr. Walsh, after ivisiting her for several days, found nothing the matter with her, and, as he said, " dismissed himself." There was no pretence, therefore, for saying that she was insane. The Rev. Mr. Gage, the clergy. man who married her, also saw her, and to him she made, unreservedly and in detail, a full confession of her guilt. She also did so to Mr. APCauslend, her brother, and to him, in reply to a question whether "she made the first advances," she said, "How could you think I could do so I" He asked her if he forced her, and she said, "No ; he did not do that." The Rev. Mr. Collis also visited her, and he raid that, being perfectly sane, she made t o 'hi m a s i m il ar unreserve d confession. he was then removed from Coppin's Hotel to a lodging, and there was visited by the Rev. Mr. Kemmis. Her relatives had her removed to England, and she was placed in the establishment of a lady named Tennant, at Clewer, near Windsor, where ladies in her unfortunate condition were received. Here she stated to Mr. Kernmis that she was lost and degraded, and had dishonoured h er f a th er , an d wishe she had acquainted her brother with what she had done, and asked him to beg his wife, if she could do so for a wretch like her, to pray for her. Mr. Talbot brought an action at law, in which judgment went by default, and damages were assessed at 2,0001. He then applied to the Consistorial Court in Ireland for A. divorce, a menet et th,oro, and the case having been heard and re heard, a sentence of divorce was pronounced, which was subsequently confirmed on appeal by the Court of Dele gates. consisting of Mr. Justice Torrens, Baron Greene, Mr. Justice Moore, Sir Henry Meredith, and two other civilians, doctors of law. Their lordships had perhaps heard ex parte statements of this case complaining of that judgment, in which the most cruel imputations had been made. Lord Brougham—A. pamphlet has been sent me on this subject, which I have not opened. The Lord Chancellor and Lord St. Leonards both said they had received such pamphlets, which they had carefully abstained from reading. Mr. Sergeant Byles said that they contained the most cruel imputations on Mr. Talbot, stating that he had been a party to a conspiracy to get rid of his wife, in order that he might have an heir to his property ; bet he had not cendeseended to notice them, and he came to that house with evidence in support of his case, to sup port the claim he had made out in the courts below. The witnesses to be called were not willing witnesses, but they could give direct evidence of adultery, which, taken in conjunction with Mrs. Talbot's own confession, would be conclusive of the case. He then urged that there was no pretence for setting up the insanity of Mrs. Talbot, and that she had made these accusations against herself under the influence of insanity. He concluded, after stating that she had been under the care of her own friends since the discovery of her guilt, by urging his belief that the evidence would entitle the petitioner to the relief he sought, The ordinary service of the bill, &c., wero first proved. The marriage at the parish church of Baltesagli, in the county of Derry, on 2d January, 1845, was proved by the Rev. Mr. Gage. Mary Ann Beim said she lived now in service at Monlo•town, near Cork. Formerly lived with Mr. and Mrs. Talbot—that was in 1850. Lived thin) one year. ' Left in Oct., 1851. Was heusemaid, There were 4 inside servant-4. Her sister, &man Benn, was the cook ; one of the others was lady's maid. They were living at Summer-bill, county Carle. Mr. and Mrs. Talbot seemed a much united couple. Mr. Talbot was seldom absent, except once. Mullen was in their service when she went, and continued while she was there. Tie was coach man, He slept at his mother's, about half a mile dis tant. Saw Mrs. Talbot treat him different to the other servants. She often gave him things--eatables of diffe rent kinds. She saw her give him the things. Bread, butter, cheese, jam, wine, and cider. Saw her taking them to him. Did not know where she got the wine. He was ire his bed-room when she took them to him. He slept in the house then. He was permitted to sleep there. Heard Mrs. Talbot telling her sister to prepare a bed. Saw her take wine to him more than once. The door of the room in which he was opened into witness's room. On one evening saw Mrs. Talbot in the drawing room. This was two months before witness left. It was about ten o'clock in the evening. Mr. Talbot was not then at home. Witness went in'o the drawing-room, and there sew Mullen and Mrs. Talbot. They were sit ting by the fire. She deeirel witness to bring her a cup of milk, but she did not return again to the room. By the Lord Chancellor—Mullan was sitting on one side of the fire, and Mrs. Talbot at the other. Examination continued—She did not take in the milk, because she was indignant at seeing Mullen in the draw ing room. Mre. Talbot next morning told her not to mention the matter to Mr. Talbot. Witness's sister was present on that oecaeion. She told her not to say anything to Mr. Talbot about the wine. Mr. Talbot bad a dressing-room. Saw Mullan there with Mrs. Talbot. That was about three o'clock in the day. The room ' was up stairs. There was a bed in it. Witness had occasion to go past the room. The door was open, and when she returned it was closed. Mrs. Talbot after ' wards left the room. This took place when Mr. Talbot had gone to Kerry to attend his sister's funeral. Some time before she (witness) left, noticed Mrs. Talbot occasionally leave her husband after dinner. She went to Mullan's bed-room. Rad seen her do that more than once. Saw her first do it two or three months before she (witness) left, Saw her go to Mullan's room very often. She remained there generally about an hour. The door was shut after sho went into the room, but not on all occasions. Had seen her leave his room—that would be about 7 o'clock in the evening. , By the Lord Chancellor—Didn't think Mrs. Talbot took a candle with her to Mullau's room. By Lcrd St. Leonard's; —Thought Mrs. Talbot had seen her (witness) observe her go to his room. She had to paws witness's room in going. By Lord Brougham—lt was a time of the year when there wire fires in the drawing room. Examination continued—Mrs. Talbot continued to go to Mullan's room until she left. Mullen remained after she left. Had been in service ever since. Cross examined by Mr. E. 'James—Was in the service of Mr. Talbot from May, 1849, until October, 1850. Mr. Talbot was living at Semmerhill when she entered his service. Was housemaid. There was Rebecca Mor gan, the lady's maid, and witness's sister who acted as cook. There was also the butler, and Mullen, the coachman. Those were all the servants. Had been in the service nine months before she saw Mrs. Talbct and Mullen together in the drawing-room. She (witness) went there to bar the shutters. Nobody else was in the room, No other servant but herself and sister was in the house at the time. Told wbat she had seen first to her sis ter and her father and mother. Mentioned it also to two ladies who were now dead ; one was Miss Barton, and the other a Mrs. Newman. Cauldn't say who cleaned her master's hoots. Thought the butler cleaned them. After he left could not say who performed that duty. Supposed she took them up to the dressing-room herself, but they were not cleaned by her, Forgot who gave them to her. Neither brushed Mr. Talbot's clothes nor cleaned his boot'. Would not swear that Mullan brushed his clothes and cleaned his boots, and took them up to his dressing room. There was a gardener and a boy after the butler left. Could not say whether they did it. Mullan was brought into the house when the butler left, and he oc cupied the 'eutler's room. When the butler was there, be brushed the clothes and cleaned the boots, and took them into the dressing-room. Would swear she did not see Mullan perform that duty after the butler's . departure. No other butler came while she was in the house. These occurrences took place in 1849 and 1850, but she did not mention them to the persons csnnec:ed with the legal proceedings until 1853. Mrs. Talbot did not refuse to give her a character. Did not tell her brother that she had lost a situation in consequence of Mrs. Talbot refus ing to give her one. Lost it in consequence of her not writing to the lady. She, however, did receive a character from Mrs. Talbot. Could not swear seeing Mullen in the dressing-room until the butler left. The butler's room was next to witness's, and opened into the same passage. Mrs. Talbot was sometimes left to herself. She passed more time in the kitchen than mistresses generally did. She was kind to all the servants, and ales to witness. She gave the jam and other things to Mullan openly, and in the presence of witness and her sister. She gave them to him sometimes upstairs and sometimes in the kitchen. When Mullen was in the dressing.room the door was open. Only saw him there once, and that was in the broad day. The door was then open. When she first mentioned these things it was to two gentlemen who came on the part of Mrs. Talbot, Forgot what they said to her, and did not know their names. R.len-hill to invite her to coma to their house for a few days. Tuey drove over to the house in an Irish car. They went at the request of witness's father. Oiiserved that the blinds of all the windows were down. On their arrival a maid-servant told them that Mrs. Talbot was out. They then took a short drive, and on their return saw Mrs. Talint's child playing at the doer. Was then induced to call again and ask whether Mrs. Talbot was at home. The maid-servant said she was not at home, but they said they would go in and wait. They then sat down in the passage. Mrs. Talbot came out of the drawing room in rather a hurried manner. The door was closed immediately after her, but whether by her self or by some other person she could not say. Wit ness wanted to go into the room. She said, " You shan't go there." Her mother, however, opened the door. Mrs. Talbot then said, " There is the room, and what do you see now ?" One of the windows was open. Witness and her mother then went to the dining-room at the other side of the hall, and before saying anything unpleasant strongly urged Mrs. Talbot to go with them. She refused to accompany them, and then she was forced to tell her why her father had sent them over. She told Mrs. Talbot that her servant. Mullan had taken great liberties with her name ; that was the reason sha gave for their coming. She replied, " How ungr a t e f u l ! do you believe it r Witness observed, "If you say it is not true, I will not believe it." Mrs. Talbot said nothing in answer to that, but cried. She did not deny what witness said. Wished she had. She leaned on the table and cried, and said, " I don't feel for myself, but I feel for John" (meaning her husband). She repeated that twice. She sail first she would accompany them, but she did net. She said she would come next day, but she never arrived. Saw her again four or five days after wards ; that was the last time she saw her. Cross-examined by Sergeant Wrangham—The first visit was in May, 1851. It was in 1852 that she first beard of proceedings by Mr. Talbot against his wife. Mr. Talbot was a cousin of witness. Never communi cated to him or his solicitor tie evidence which sh, , gave their lordships for the first time to-day. Mr. Sergeant Wratigham remarked that this was an entirely new charge against Mrs. Talbot. Witness—The house at Eden-hill faced the south. It was on an afternoon in May that they came over to the house, and saw the blinds drawn. Mrs. Talbot was agi tated, and so was witness's mother. Mrs. Talbot forced her to say that her servant was talking lightly of her. Mr. and Mrs. Talbot left Eden-hill about a fortnight after this visit. Witness was then unmarried. It was in the agitation of the moment that she wished to force herself into the drawing•room. Having heard Mrs. Tal bot lightly spoken of, she did not know what to think when the door was slammed in her face, and she went into the room, but the hope of making a discovery never entered her head. Her dress was torn in forcing her way into the room. By the Lord Chancellor—Thought from Mrs. Talbot's agitation that there was some one in the drawing-room. Re-examined by Mr. Servant Byies—First disclosed the circumstance when she received a summons to attend there. Heard fir.t that Mrs. Talbot was lightly spoken of from witness mint, bli s By the Lord Chancellor—The end window of the house was open, the rest were all closed, when we drove up. Meg. Williamson, wife of the Rev. Mr. Williamson, of Morton Abbey, in the county of Cork, said she knew Mi. and Mrs. Talbot when they resided at Eden-bill, and was intimate with them. In May, 1351, went in company with the last witness to call upon them. The anproach to the house was along an avenue. The blinds of the windows were all drawn close down. (The witness here corroborated some of the evidence of herdaughter.) Her daughter told Mrs. Talbot that Mullan had men tioned her name as he ought not to have done, and that they had visited her to take her away with them. She said Mullan had boasted that he could take liberties with Mrs. Talbot. She also added that she could not believe it. Her daughter asked her if it was true, and she first said it was not, but afterwards admitted it. She said first, " It is not true," and afterwardsexclaimed, "What will John (her husband) do ?" Witness told what had happened to her husband, and also to the Rev. Mr. Collis. Since the occurrence the iutimacy between her family and Mrs. Talbot had been discontinued. Cross-examined by Dr.Ball—Mr.Talbot was witneis's first cousin. Neither herself nor husband communicated the confession of Mrs. Talbot to Mr. Talbot. They avoided doing so. Was never examined before in any court on the subject. The Rev. Mr. Gillis married Mr. Talbot's sister. Re-examined by Mr. Sergeant Byles—The reason she dtd not tell Mr. Talbot what occurred was, that she disliked being the first to communicate so disagreeable a circumstance. Maria Mooney, wife of John Mooney, residing in Roscommon, examined by Mr. M. Smith, said she went into the service of Mr. Talbot, at Eden-hill, in August, 1851. Mullen was then living there. Recollected Mr. Talbot being- invited, with others, to dine with Mr. Mahon. Mrs. Talbot did not go. Witness went to her ')ed•room•about five o'clock in the evening, to light the fire. Mrs. Talbot was lying on the bed. She said wit• ness was not to bring any hot water to her, as she had a headache, and aid not intend to go nut. The other gentlemen and her husband went. Proceeded to her oom again, in the course of the same evening, between eight and ten, as she was '° making up" the hou'e. Found the door shut closely. opened the door, but did go in, because Mullen was in the room with Mrs. Tal bot. They were both on the bed. Saw what they were doing—they were in the act when she saw them. Wit nessdrew back:. There was a light in the room. After wards went down stairs. Subsequently she went up again, and saw Mullen coming out of Mrs. Talbot's room. Ibis was ten minutes after she saw them on the bed. This occurred about six weeks before she left the service. Remembered Mrs. Talbot giving her wine to take to Mullen. She gave her four Inttles, and said, " Take them to William's room." Knew they were wine, for she broke two. Saw Mrs. Talbot take the bottles out of the cellar. Left the other two in Mullah's room ; he was not there at the time. His room was out in the lodge, over the landing. Cros , ,;(annined by Mr. E. James—Was quite sure this happened at the time when the dinner party was given by Mr. Mahon. Drew back when she saw them on the bed, and left the door open. That did not appear to disturb them. The lady's maid was in the kitchen at the time. Did no know where the butler was. After wards went to live with the land agent of Mr. Talbot. First disclosed the circumstance to Mrs. Barlow, who was the wife of that gentleman. Mrs. Barlow asked her if she knew all about it, and sbe replied, she knew very well that it was the case. Told Mrs. Barlow that what she had seen was the reason of her leaving. Remained about three weeks afterwards. Left in September, 1851, and never mentioned it to a human being until. Septem ber, 1852. The child slept that evening in her mamma's room. Could not say whether she was in bed when she opened the door. She generally went to bed about eight in the evening. Did not know where Mullan went after she saw him leave the room. Mr. Barlow, in May, 1853, took down her evidence in writing. By Lord St. Leonards—The lady's maid told Mullen to go up to her mistress. He said " Where is she ?" and the lady's maid replied, "In her bed-room." At half-past four the further proceedings in the case were adjourned to Thursday morning. LA IV INTELLIGENCE.—March 10. By Lord Brougham—lt was about a fortnight after the butler left that she saw Mullan in the dressing•room. Witness—Did not recollect telling these gentlemen that she never saw anything improper on the part of Mrs. Talbot. Said she did not like how Mrs. Talbot got on. Would not swear she did not tell them that she saw nothing improper in Mrs. Talbot's conduct. Reexamined--Mrs. Talbot gave her a written cha racter. Got a situation shortly after. St3e lost the one she had mentioned. Had held her present situation Si years. Mullan slept in a room up stairs. • By Lord Broughatn—When she saw Mrs. Talbot and Mullan in the dressing-room they were some distance from the door. By the Lord Chancellor—The dree,ing•room was small. It contained a good-sized heel. Mrs. Konri&r, examined by Mr. Honeyman, said she was the wife of the surveyor -general of the post office for the Cork district. Her father, Mr. Williamson, was a 1 clergyman, who resided about 2} miles from Eden-hill. Her family were on intimate terms with Mr. Talbot and his wife. In May, 1851, she was living with lier father. Mr. Talbet's uncle, Mr. Talbot of Talbot-mount, died, And-ohe and her mother went over to Aim Talbot M VICE.O HANC EL LO ItS" COURTS.--ArAucEi 10. (Before Vice-Chancellor Sir W. P. Wood.) LEVY V. LAMB. This was a motion on behalf of the plaintiff to restrain the defendants, G. H. Lamb, 11. Lamb, and T. Lamb, from completing or taking any further proceedings to wards completing the sale of the Sunday TinteB to the defendant, T. E. Smith, and from assigning or transfer ring the newspaper or any share therein to Smith or any other person without the plaintiff's consent. It appeared from the etalements in the bill that the plaintiff had been requested in October, 1854, by the defendants Lamb, who were the proprietors of the Sunday Tones, to undertake the management of the paper. The plaintiff stated his terms in a letter of the 25th of October, 1854, and in November, 1854, it was agreed, in an interview bet -veen the plaintiff and the defendant George Lamb, that the defendants should engage lain for the term of three years at five guineas a-week to manage and con duct the Sunday limes, this salary to be increased to eight guineas a-week as soon as the profits of the paper should be increased to the extent of 1,0001. per annum, and that the plaintiff should have the option at any time during the term of three years of purchasing a quarter of tile newspaper for 2,0001. This agreement was, at the request of George Lamb, reduced into writing by the plaintiff and signed by him in duplicate. Two copies of this agreement were sent to George Lamb for the sigea ture of himself and brothers, and several ineffectual attempts were made by the plaintiff in 1855 that the agreement should be returned to him signed by the de fendants. Towards the end of 1855 the plaintiff was invited to purchase the whole of the newspaper, but declined to take upon himself so large a responsibility. Having subsequently been informed that the defendants were determined to sell the paper, lie wrote to the de fendant H. Lamb, on the 28th of January, 1856. ex pressing his surprise at what he had heard, especially after the arrangement between them that he should have the right to purchase a quarter of the paper within a given period. He admitted that the agree ment, with only his signature attached, had been lying in the hands of George Lamb, at whose request and upon the groand that there was rarely an opportunity of getting half an hour with the defendants on the affairs of the paper, he had allowed the completion of the agreement to stand over, and that he had not objected to this, knowing the agreement to be morally and legally binding, at the same time urging them at once to com plete the document,: and settle the arrears of his salary. Oa the• following day Henry Lamb called upon the plaintiff and made cart tin propositions to him about purchasing half of the paper, and did not, according to the plaintiff's statement, dispute or question his right, under the agreement, to purchase a quarter of the paper; but, on the contrary, admitted his right. After sonic further negotiation, the plaintiff, on the 21st of Febru ary, offered to purchase the paper for 3,0001., to he paid by instalments. On the 25th of February the plaintiff was informed by the defendants that they could not accept his offer, as they had had one more advan tageous. As soon as he learnt that Mr. E. T. Smith, the lesee of Drury-lane Theatre, was the intended pur chaser, the plaintiff, on the 27th of February, gave him notice of the agreement of 1854, and that proceedings would be taken to restrain the assignment or transfer of the paper. The plaintiff, who had filed his bill on the 3rd of Marob, had on the sth obtained an inle iru order restraining the defendants George, Henry, en I Thomas Lamb, until after Saturday last, from comple:- ing the sale, or lignin e or transferring the paper to tk,e defendant E. T. Smith'. T;ie &feedlots had filed affi davits denying many of the plaintiff's statements, an' stating that they looked upon the agreement as a pro posal by the plaintiff; that it had never been signed, from its containing a stipulation to engage the plaintiff for three years certain an d an option to the plaintiffol cha-ing a quarter of the new, , paper, to both which pulations the plaintiff was well aware that the (I° dants positively objected, and that the proposed a meat was accordingly laid aside, and never she'll Henry and Thomas by George Lamb. Mr. Dolt and Mr. Speed now moved for an irj' tion, and rcontended that the agreement of Dere' 1854, had never been repudiated by the defenciantst ° had clearly assented to it by their course of dealing the plaintiff, and that they were bound to adhere t° provisions. The defendant Smith bad clear noted all the circumstances, and could not be allowed to plate his purchase to the injury of the plaintiff's riF which were those of a partner ; nor had the Lambe right to sell their three-fourths of the concern W itt° the plaintiff's consent. Tile Vice-Chancellor (without calling upon Mr. D and Mr. Cottrell for the defendants) said that the P tiff was not entitl e d t o th e i n j unc ti on as k e d fore the present time there was no sufficient agreement tablished. A verbal communication bad taken P between the parties towards the end of 1854, and sis was sent in October of that year by the plaintiff, eta hie terms, in which no definite time was fixed dil l which the engagement was to be binding upon the ties. A n agreement, signed by the plaintiff in dupil', had been handed over to one of the defendants, was certainly a remarkable circumstance that the ag, went should not have been shown to the other a il dents by George Lamb. It was stated that the fendants were not disposed to bind themselves to terms. At all events it was not signed, and it vies, prising that the plaintiff should have been ce nter' allow it to remain unsigned. He had entered yr° management of the paper at five guineas a week!, continued in that position until ho received an 'ID tion of the sale of the paper. At all events he h right to consider himself aggrieved at the treaty b$ been entered into without his own proposal having definitely settled. There was much to show that 0. had in a great measure acquiesced in the plaintifl'e l o of his claim ; at the same time, the letter of the 2 0 , January indicated that the agreemen t was no t con & by the plaintiff as finally adjusted and concluded. highest that the plaintiff had brought his case t°,,i that the defendants wished to hav e hi s serv i ces , this' them of value, and were willing to retain them of the actual sale of the pave-, but that the agreement not been signed, and in his own view it had not Ws its actual completion. Thomas Lamb was in no j affected, nor was it nec essar y upon t h e presen t o," 1 sion to consider the position of S m ith. Th ere wo nt no order upon the motion, and the costs would be in the cause. Country Markets. LIVERPOOL—Nana 11. ,1 Te-day there was a fair att e nd ance , an d a moderth4o mand for wheat and flour, at an a d vance o f 3d p e r 1 1 :d 1 and is per sack and barrel on prices of this day Oats and oatmeal an improved demand, and the 0 0 ,, favour of the sellers. The same remark applies to bn beans, and peas. ludian corn in fair request, 33i °;'l paid for prime mixed Americ a n. A mer i can re d wheP 9d to 10s 3d. Irish flour, 50s to 565. LEEDS-MARCH 11. The arrivals of grain are only moderate, and the s l2 ° l/ wheat very limited. The market fully r e c over s tkil dine noted on Friday last, with a good demand for 0.,1 qualities. Fine barley held for rather more money. and oats steady. Other articles unaltered. IPSWICH—MARCH 11. We had to-day a very short supply of wheat, and J fully 3s to 4s dearer. A better sale for foreign. in good request. Beans is dearer. Oats of fine qi more ready sale. Linseed firm ; quotations up f o r C The market unaltered for bones. PER QUARTER. PER Q-- 010 Wheat, red (old) 66s to 686 Barley, grinding ... 365 te Ditto (new) Ditto, white 7os to 72s P eas Ditto (old) Barley, malting ... 40s to 4.26.!F10ur, per sack AVERAGES FOR THE WEEK ENDING MARCH 8, 1856. Wheat Oats Peas Barley Beaus - - 8 11, HULL—iNIARciI 11. The supply of wheat has quite vanished ; the go ,J hold very firmly to their prices, and the few sales t il r o were at 33 per qr. advance on last week's prices. 13 .t,1 in very limited supply ; the trade for the b es t qualit l ',; malting was 2s dearer, and such sold readily at OW vance. Beans and pc ms each 1s dearer. El 8 1 Wheat, English, red 65 to 70;Peas grey and blank v. Ditto white 72 to 7. ! Linsee - d, - Black Soa... 8- A tO „: Dantzie and Konigs- Ditt o P c t ers b urg h ... 58 ' berg - _...t4 Pomeranian and Ham- angel burgh Danish, Holstein, and ( Momel 54 ' Friesland 65 to 70 ( PO Russian and Odessa 60 to 64 Line. c., Hull /Od to ill Oats, English Ditto Danish 26 to 2b i Ditto inf. for. 01 Os Od te: Ditto Friesland Ditto Russian 26 to 30;11~ape cakes —s Od to 1:35 Barley, malting Ditto grinding 36 to 38'Ditto foreign Beans Ditto foreign 0 1 Peas, white and yel. 40 to 45itye Meal SEABORNE MAILS. (X signifies that the malls are sent from the General roe *3 , the night—and. M by the morning—eespatch.) !Day when mad° 4i , Irma Icis in 00n , ....ral Post- , Por. Office, London.. I Disp.tchk,. COUNTRIES Every Friday . tmerica(byßrit.pack)N A.meric.r.kby United Sts. packet)• tmerica (by U. States packet) ..........N t ustralia (via South ampton) ..........M Ditto (via Marseilles) NI Ditto (via Cape of Good , Hope) ............N Africa (West Coast) ..103d of the month Ai exandria..........N,8, 9, 24, & 30 of n !4th & 20th of moi B a h amas ~, ,„ „„ m 'l7th of the montl Belgium „, , N. Daily „„ „, , Brazil „„ , „im,9th of the month.. Buenos Ayres lath of the rnont.... Cape of Good Hope ..N Cape of Good Hope Cape de Verde 9th of the month Ceylon (coo Intia) Ceylon.. ...... Channel Isles Men.,lVed.,BcFrl), 7,1,2 d & 17th of ;unlit; China ,„ (ince a month.... Constantinople 5,13,18,23,ttym oi Constantinople „„ „ ,I4th & 20th of 111,,, Cont. of Eurtve M & N ITwine daily Egypt (see India) France ........ M & Twice elailY • • Gibraltar 31,4, 7, 17,20, 27 • f Greece (zee India) Greytovin ......., „ &f:2rid & 17th of mon. Hansinirgh „ „N,Tuesday & Frid,Q a ava nnah „, m , 2nd of the montl Holland .. •. ~MiDailY•• •• • • • • • • • • H onduras c the mont h. m;Sth 20th of moth India tviaßoathampt.i India fvta pea 25tlt of month lonian Isles (see india); 7, 17 , & 27 of mon Ireland ...... ••M & N Lisbon—. ...; Ml 7, 9 , 17 , &• 27 of to , Madeira sth of the month Madeira „, ~ „,N23d of month . Unita (see India) Malta ........., ,„N:8, 18. & 28 or mon. Mauritius (see India) Kam-awe „ „ • cf the mouth, maxim) „.„ „ „Id '2nd of the month.. , .. .. .. .. N sthlsth2sthofnacit.i Now Granada .. .... 3i 2i &- 17thof month! acw Zealand.... ,„ „„ 'By pate skip Papal States „1,,j ri7 stii I Athifithofmon. Peninsula „ „miTthrth27thoftnon. men. Fort N a t a l ,„ „Nlßy private ship... Sicily .N,sth I eth2Athoftnon, Tuscany ..„. „,„ „N!sthlrdh2sthofmon,, Venezuela .. „11/Mg:l7th of mon th van Diemen's • L ' and (see Australia) west Indies. , a t' 2dBs 17th 0: month ILiverpoo! 'lLiverpoo , fioutham , t• ISoutharapto,, IDover Entr i " 3101'. i afar. d • I ro t Aftir , lune°, . " ,iPtyruoutl, Dover Southamo,.„ Southansp Dover pailf Southp.mpt, Mar. IT Southant.),. Mar. 1 1 Various por, Nucor' . ISoutharnotm Idouthatilpt,, co louthampto 'MAT. , Dover ..1 - 131othampt IDover 'Dover !L0nd0n..... 'Boothers:l)f, April 1. I , oj l6thotil •Plyznotitil .. 4 & , inover Dover.... • • filo! , head 'rw,v• t r 48°i:that/Into- Mare li3outttampto. (Liverpool ...1 (Dover !4 & 200 !Southamptcli !Dover „ i Arril 1 i Southampto• Various port Dover . ..... routharaPinn . Southampton , Various ports Dover .... Dover .... Itionthamoton ithainpton :llncsr .l 'Utkeertio' mono !I & 1 6 Of' When any of these dates fall on a Sunday, the !naffs ipatched on the following day, with the exceptien of the In I! , (• 1 , eouthsmpton), and the Malta, both of which will he despatch= preceding day. BIRTHS. OP A PON. On the Bth inst., at Grey Abbey, the Lady Charlett. Montgomery. On the gth inst., at Wild= Rectory, Beds, the wifo of the Rev. R. G. Chalk. OF A DAUGHTER. On the 10th inst., at Edinburgh, the wife of Williera Forbes, Esq., of Modwyn. On the 10th inst., at 16, Blomfield-terrace, Harreir road, the wife of Augustus Mason, Esq. MARRIED. On the 10th inst., at St. Luke's, Chelsea, Charles, elclesi eon of C. R. W. Watkins, Esq., late Captain H.E.1.C.5. , to Mary Elizabeth, only child of the late Robert Harvey' , Esq., of the Treasury. On the 11th inat , at Trinity Church, Captain Cowpox Phipps Coles, Royal Navy, son of the Rev. John Coles Ditcham-park, rector of Silchester, to Emily, third clang , b' ter of the late Henry S. Pearson, Esq. DIED. On the 9th inst., at Nice, the Hon. Thomas Liddell, the second son of the late Lord Ravenaworth. On the Bth inst., at 49, Chancery-lane, Charles Honblon Grove, of the Chancery Bar, aged 49. On the 9th inst., at Lee, Kent, Wm. Denison,'Esq., of 10, Portland-place, Wandswerth-road, aged 55. On the 10th inst., at the Hermitage, Blackheath, Eliza beth, widow of the late Mr. James Adam, of Pudding lane, aged 57. On the 10th inst., at Commerce House, Walworth-reado Sarah, wife of Mr. Joel Tike, aged 72. On the 7th inst., at Grimston, Anna, wife of the ReY• A. Gilbert, vicar of Binham, Norfolk. On the sth inst., at Prebend place, the Rey. Joseph Chamberlain, aged 78. On the sth inst., Alfred Batson, Esq., of Ramsbnry, Wilts, aged 72. LONDON : Printed and Published by WIRD° YOTTNO, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at 27rd Sun Office, No. lilt Strand, in the Precinct of the Semen In IS c f Dirdirose s Witzeathiy, WO% 12, lati MAI rexPeetfull, given for t 1 rirES INC Gokischmah of May nes $OO perforr Stalls (Nu (Body of t 'West Galle O'clock pre( artier of atil Yeniently a With the Ti Libr/ in'; 0 c ock, an Stalls, fB. ; ARGI NO a Piston, l'sd Laurent's n R. Fi and Costun Camille In ' formance awl malls TT graphic-h al I D R Mt gentlemen Motiels an Frame in II turea d'tliee Past Seven, Eight, by I) HEN -- - - Tuesday, 1 22d. Emu! I .lntPrtainro relate his A Strike !" ah " The Ship Zitertainm, LIFE in Ft Lim-elf on expressly m " Lord and Ireland, 117th Instant Persons as m ter Majesty' BIIOES. Tenders m Their Lon tiers are opet thereof only not contract. No tender 'tided for the the said of l or to Comm or to the Cot Tenders w but separate Will be paid Patterns Victualling I The condi tion is genet at Gosport a No tender and it wilt n( hie behalf sh result of the to him and 1 Every tent OM bear in t Must also he THE ST rIPIIIR TN( COMPAN on Fridar, Gtoßsz 1201 THE FOl TIIE REPORT b tress. ANNU.t] titled by thi the Compar. REPORT aild Accent THE FC The Boar tieu in mee' have it in t has been th business in November 1 Previous qu The Itesu Nov,moer, SrUs Pnoro NEw AssuiL CORRESPOND] A ssuranc ‘ CLAutts EY I of Bonus AXNuAL INC From Pr( Prom lot TOTAL Am° No cube 141 ' 03 E11 OF , When the 48 55, is uni Great Brita for them to co mpany ,. baatio, ; be result of a ° f a conti steady imps t e, lopment ' 85 5, that 11111-1 3''s exi•l A nt: FOLD Yearg ending 1 5th IS'ov. .....______. 184,3 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1 852 1853 1 854 855 Total .lif•Nv Assur- lILCC. hi io Ce p IS uln prop 6 1 8 08,075/ Raving I Past year, date of bal: t he Comp Pleasure of of the inv, No vember, then bo ab last fi ve , ye c alculation b een appoi: r eport on t the o wn pa The Rei , - ; oairrnan ti on of th journed me Will be belt Pr ilE re ti on, and t ° f the c o follows His G The ] Thou Joh n Alexa Alexa Joh n Rir A, Pram A vote Winch the London, Zpr,„„_ 1 40., ; 1 ;;u ,z ner1 1 J111,1;, • • • • gl,A IRk9w • •