The Sun. — London, England, 1863-01-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, T Prison Discipline and theHampshire:County- Magistrates. WINCHESTER, MONDAY. The Epiphany Sessions for the county of Hants were opened to-day at Winchester Castle, when, it being known that the Earl of Carnarvon was going to bring forward a motion opening up the whole question of prison discipline, an unusually large number of magistrates were in attendance. Viscount Eversley presided, and among the more prominent members of the county Bench present were the Earl of Carnarvon, Lord H. Cholmondeley, Lord Cal thorpe, Sir J. C, Jervoise, M.P., Mr. B. Carter, M.P., Mr. Beach, M.P., the Hon. J. F. Dutton, M.P., Mr. J. S. Booth, M.P., the Hon. J. Carnegie, Mr. W. Long, Mr. M. Portal, &c. The 'business relating to the county rates having been disposed of, Lord H. Cholmondeley brought up the Visiting Justices' Report, which having been adopted, The Earl of CARNARVON said,—My Lords and Gentlemen, I rise to move for a select committee to consider the system of prison discipline in this county and the expediency of any changes therein. Considering the extreme importance of questions referring to the penal system at all times, and par ticularly at the present moment, it would be a mere waste of time upon my part if I attempted to im press upon you the deep interest which the c ountry at large feels in thi s quest i on of prison discipline, nor will it be n ecessary to remind my no ble fr ie nd who has just rea d t h e report of the Visit i ng Justices that I am in no way desirous of usurp ing th e prov i nce which he so ably fills, nor do I d es i re i n re ference to this question to act in any spirit antagonistic to that committee. My no ble friend will see that th ese d ut i es of the committee of which he is a member, and the duties of the one I move for, are quite distinct. The conanaittee over which my noble friend presides is intrusted with the duty of m a i n t a i n i ng continually the prison disci pline OH the system on which it has been established, while the duty of the committee for which I move will be to take a broader view of the question, and the members of it will address themselves to the principles rather than to the de tails of the penal system upon which the discipline of prisoners in this county is based. I am therefore quite sure that my noble friend will not consider that any personal slight is intended either towards him or the Committee of Visiting Justices, when I ask the Court to consider a question to which the whole attention of England is at the present moment directed. Putting aside all personal considerations, the question of the present system of prison disci pline and its mode of administrationis of the greatest possible importance to the welfare of the country at large. It is not my intention to enter into any ques tions which have reference:to sentences exceeding two years' imprisonment, because they all come under the term of penal servitude, and Parliament next session will be called on to decide what course the central Government shall pursue with regard to them. It is rather with reference to a class of sen tences much more numerous, but in which the per sons sentenced are, I am afraid, just as criminal as those sentenced to a longer term, and with which sentences this Court has to deal, that I wish an in quiry should be instituted ; for I think it is the duty of each county from time to time to examine the basis of its prison discipline, and the principles upon which that prison discipline should be carried out—(hear, hear)—and I think that on this general ground there is quite enough to justify me in asking the Court to agree with my motion for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the whole subject of prison discipline in this county. It is now about 15 years—nearly half the lifetime of the present generation—since a committee, of which your lordship was the chairman, laid down the sys tem upoit which prison discipline in this county should be based. It was established at a time when the question of prison discipline was much dis cussed, and when its principles could hardly be said to be settled. Since that time committees of both Houses of Parliament have sat, commissions issued, reports published, and a very abundant and volu minous flood of evidence has been brought forward upon this particular subject; and therefore it would be preposterous to jump to the conclusion that, however well the subject was deliberated by the committee to which I have alluded, its conclusions ought to be ir vested with any degree of finality, so as to preclude the idea of a reinvestigation at the present day. During these 15 years various changes have been made in the mode of administering pri son discipline, and although it may be true that in themselves none of these changes have been great revolutionary changes, yet taken in the aggregate they really do, in consequence of their uniform ten dency and operation being all in one direction, constitute a very considerable change in our prison discipline. If the present committee is granted, I shali be prepared to show you that there has been A very considerable departure from the conclusions of the committee of 1847, and that the various changes made have exercised very considerable in flue lace upon the amount of hard labour, and the dietary of our county gaol, which the Court will remember is just as much a part of the sentence as the hard labour itself. To bring the matter shortly and clearly before the Court, I will addrese myself to three points. In the first place, hard labour as a part of the punishment of offenders was intro duced here in 1848. After considerable discussion by the committee of which your lordship was chair man, it was decided to make hard labour an inte gral part of the prison system ; but the only method of carrying that system into effect was by means of certain cranks let into the walls of the cells, and it was required that each prisoner should perform a certain num b er o f revo l ut i ons . It was soon round that, owing to the construction of the cranks and the small spaces in which they were worked, they wore open to objection, and very soon afterwards a series of cranks were constructed on improved prin ciples and set up in an open shed in which the convicts worked. About the year 1853 great diffi culty began to be felt in carrying out the sentences. I do not think there were more than 50 cranks in the shed I have described, and at the Michaelmas session in 1854 the question was brought before this Court, and an order was obtained for the erection of two tread wheels, so that prisoners might ful fil their sentence of hard labour. lam sorry to say that, from that time down to November, 1861, this order of the Court remained a dead letter, for it was not till November, 1861, that, the com mittee of which my noble friend was chairman en tered into a contract for a tread-wheel, W hi c h ought to have been in full working order in the middle of 1862. It was, however, found that, owing to the faults , construction of the machinery, the re volutions of the wheel were so unequal that it was quite impossible to apply it to the ordinary pur poses of prison punishment. I felt so greatly the importance of the subject that at the Midsummer Sessions I pressed my noble friend upon the matter as earnestly as I could ; but no step was taken in it till within the last fortnight. lam very glad to hear by the report of the noble lord that steps are now being taken to render thi s operative for the purpose of in fl icting punishment. It is true that the wheel is not wholly operative; it may be par tially applied for the purpose of grinding corn, but as it is only used for the prison supply it would, if continuously worked for that purpose give two hours labour to the men a day, and if you compare that amount of work per day with the original rule laid down by the committee you will find a very great relaxation in the labour of convicts. That commit tee laid down most distinctly that while all proper means of moral reformation ought to be tried, yet that it was essential that every prisoner should un dergo a certain amount of penal discipline before those moral means of reclamation were to be used. For thi s purpose the prisoners were divided into four classes —those serving their first month, to w ho m was allott e d a m i n imum of eight hours ' hard labour a day, toit bein g p rov ided that over and above that they were receive what instruction they could obtain from the schoolmasters and c haplains; the second class, th ose serving the second month, were to be employed six hours a-day in hard labour; the third class, serving their third month , where to be employed four hours a day i n hard labour ; and the fourth class, wins had served th ree months ' were to What is be employed three hou r s in eac h day. the case now ? The first class, instead of receiving a rainimum of eight hours hard labour a day, receive a maximum of 3 hours ; the second, the third and fourth classes, instead of receiving respectively a minimum of six, four, and three hours, receive a maximum of about two hours a-day. Well, then, I ask is it not idle to talk of sentencing a prisoner to hard labour if this is to be the state of things in the prison ? What is the result ? Look at it in any light you please—either as respects the prisoner, or as regards the judges—it must have a bad effect. With respect to the prisoner, the sentences of hard labour now passed are a perfect mockery, for no hard labour is inflicted ; and, notwithstanding that the sentences may be pass e d w ith a ll the solemnity and formality which the C our t can importinto them, they go for nothing in the m ind of the pri soners who have been committed —like those I had last before me-18, 20, and 25 times. (Hear.) The sentence of hard labour has, indeed , be come a mere It is the duty of the judge to make his senten ce , as far as he can, absurdity. Then look at it as r egards the judge. comm ensurate with the offence w hi c h 1 committed; but, knowing th e extraordi nary modificat ions which h ave taken place in prison has been he is compelled to ex t en d the time, and would, under a s t r i ngent system, have discipline, where h e s entenced a prisoner to 12 months, he now sentences him to 18, which, of course, inflicts upon the county an additional expense to the extent of half a year's maintenance of the prisoner. Take it in another point as regards :the judge. All offences which come before him are placed, according to their gravity, in different categories ; if he does :not choose to sentence a man to penal servitude he is limited to a maximum of two years' imprisonment, and, therefore, when he sentences a man to two years, on the principle that practically his sentence is remitted by the prison discipline, and that if it had not been he would have only sentenced him to 18 months, he is compelled to put him in the same category as a man who had committed a, in a moral point of view, much graver and more dangerous offence to society. Well, then, as respects the prisoners, you must remember that just as you diminish the amount of hard labour you must find some substitute for it, because you cannot take a man in the prime of life, as the majority of the prisoners are, possessing full bodily vigour, and clap him into a cell, however warm and comfortable, for the best part of 24 hours every day, without absolutely endangering his life; consequently, it has been found necessary to give the prisoners open-air exercise to such an extent that not only is it no punishment at all, but it tends greatly to aggravate the difficulties of carrying on the prison discipline. You have either to increase the number of warders or make them do double duty; in either case an injustice to the men and an increase of expenses to the country. Let me now say a few words upon the diet, which is, as I have said, just as much a part of the sentence as the hard labour. I am not one of those who are in favour of harsh and cruel measures towards criminals. I am not in favour of a starvation diet, but I think that what has hitherto been forgotten or practically ignored in these discussions is that there is a me dium between a starvation and an excessive diet. While I would give such a dietary as would sustain fairly the bodily vigour of prisoners I would studi ously refrain from giving anything like a luxurious diet. I certainly think that the scale of dietary laid down in 1848 did not err on the side of starva tion, but even if it did that dietary has been re vised, and you will find that all the changes have been on the side of relaxation, and there has been a considerable increase in the amount of the meat given to the prisoners, who now have meat five days out of the seven. But this is not all, for there exists a system of extra diet, and that has grown to such an extent that, out of 300 or 320 prisoners, the number on extra diet is no less than 59. I do not say .that extra diet is wrongly given, but I do say that we ought thoroughly to understand the principle upon which it is given, for I assure this Court that if they compare the prison diet with the workhouse diet it will be found that the comparison is far from being in favour of the workhouse diet ; and I must say that when a poor man, without a blot on his repu tation, who has, perhaps, lived a long life without the slightest shadow of suspicion attaching to him, is at last obliged, either through misfortune or old age, to resort to the workhouse, and receives hardly sufficient to keep body and soul together, while the sturdy felon, who has been committed and recom mitted over and over again, is well fed and comfort ably cared for, it is dealing with guilt and innocence in a most unsatisfactory manner. (Hear.) I now come to the general changes affecting prison disci pline, and I am sorry to say that I can number se veral cases in which the relaxation of prison disci pline has led to increased evils. In the first place, the extension of the open-air exercise has been un satisfactory. As I have said, where open-air exer cise is permitted to excess, imprisonment is no longer a punishment ; but you have stripped it of the very semblance of punishment by removing those re straints which prevented large numbers of prisoners being brought together for open-air exercise, be cause by enlarging the space you have rendered it almost impossible for the warders to prevent that which is subversive of all prison discipline —namely, a free communication between the prisoners. You allow the prisoners now to be employed in agri cultural operations, especially in spade labour. If your prison system had been one of the soundest, I should not have been disposed to complain of that ; but, in fact, your prison system is almost entirely made up of recreation and relaxation, not only out of doors, but in doors Quite recently there has been an extra allowance of pudding. By the old rules a prisoner was allowed a rug, a sheet, and a blanket, which latter, being large, could be doubled down. He is placed, remember, in a cell only 12 feet by 8 feet in width, which is warmed by hot air, and which he himself has the power of ventilating as much as he pleases. You have now allowed him in the daytime an additional waistcoat and at night an additional blanket, and not only that, but, in order to keep his feet off the asphalt floor, and save him from any draughts that may creep through the exceedingly well-fitting door of his cell, I perceived on a recent visit to the gaol that you have actually accommodated him with a footstool. (Laughter.) Then, again, in order to provide for his amusement and instruction I observe you have a very admirable library, one-half of which is composed of works of purely religious instruction and of a serious character, and the other half is made up of works of fiction and works of entertaining, in teresting, instructive, and amusing knowledge— (laughter) —such books, certainly, as are far beyond the reach of the poor. Ido not wish to throw any slight on the system of having a prison library ; on the contrary, I think there ought to be one, but I t c h er o t s a e in l l s y a d w i di in the ot e countyxpect t g o a find i. I a such find dbooksworks nh i it as s- tory, on ancient E g y p t and Greece, treatises on mo dern astronomy and astro-theology—(laughter)-- books of fiction, such as " Frank Leverton" and the "Dairyman's Daughter"—books of travels, such as Dr. Livingstone 's " Travels in Af r i ca ;" and lastly, popular poems and prize essays. (Laughter.) Now, Ido not wan t to cut off from these unfortunate per- I think might be f a i r l y a ll owed sons anything which them, or to make their existence more miserable than crime has made it, but I think it very questionable how far you should allow prisoners to withdraw from the library works of the description I have named for the purpose of relieving the tedium of the prison, which, with the single exception of the restraint on their personal liberty, now remains the only part of their punishment left, and thus render their condi tion far better than the poor, but honest, labourer. (Hear.) Why, my lord, I saw in several cells such books as " Livingstone's Travels," and works of that character, and in one a publication certainly in the nature of a newspaper, though it might not have been of so interesting a character as the Times or the Saturday Review. Lastly, you have afforded an indulgence which I consider subversive of all prison discipline, by pulling down the partitions in the chapel and the walls in the exercise ground, thus allowing the prisoners means of communication with each other, and you have so altered the distribution of the hours within the gaol that prisoners are con tinually passing and repassing along the corridors of the gaol, rendering it almost impossible for the war ciao to maintain an efficient discipline. What has been the result Why, that within the last two weeks we have been on the brink of a most serious conspiracy among the prisoners, which might have led to a violent outbreak, which outbreak mist have led to bloodshed if not to loss of life. That conspi racy first originated in chapel, in consequence of the unrestricted communication of the men, and the very first step the Governor took was to dis continue the open-air exercise, thus proving con clusively that he thought it a source of danger. This has not been an easy task for me to undertake. I feel sorry appearing in th e s li g h es t d egree to be in even in opposition to the Visiting J us ti ces , b ut when I find a h ar d ene d felon, who has perhaps committed some brutal outrage, and who has by some mere technicality only escaped from penal ser vitude, or, as in time past, transportation, enjoying his ten hours of sleep and two hours of labour a day—and we cannot even call it hard labour, con sidering the amount of open-air exercise and the recreation he has—l cannot forbear from noticing what I conceive to be a weak and dangerous point in our present prison system. (Hear.) When I find him comfortably wrapt up in his warm cell, with an extra waistcoat, with his feet on a footstool, when I find him enjoying the luxury of reading Livingstone's " Travels," or deeply engaged in the study of astro- theology—(laughter)—and compare his condition with that of the poor, but honest labourer, who, after a long life struggle, goes at length to the workhouse, I say that the present system is most unjust in every part of it as regards him, and most unsatisfactory in a moral point of view. (Hear, hear.) No doubt my noble friend will tell us that the laxity permitted here is no greater than is permitted in other county gaols, but I cannot say that I care whether it is or not. I am aware that Sir Joshua Jebb, in his last report, alluding to the moral efforts at reformation in Pen.. tonville, says, "The period of imprisonment had been reduced from eighteen months to twelve, the daily amount of open-air exercise had been in creased, and a more healthy and exhilarating kind of exercise had been substituted for the listless walk in separate yards." . . . " Since this was written other important alterations have been attempted, having for their object the moral improvement of the prisoners. The term of imprisonment in separation has been re duced to nine months, the separate stalls used for chapel and school purposes have been abandoned, and the prisoners consequently are associated in chapel and at school time." No doubt Sir J. Jebb congratulates himself upon that state of things, but I have read that passage in his report with great pain, because I conceive it to be a perfect subversion of prison discipline, and I cannot doubt that what we see in Winchester Gaol is a perfect reflex of what has taken place in every other county gaol, as the result of a system which at all events the good sense of the public is at length determined to ques tion. By all means keep the reformatory element in your prison discipline, and make good use of it, but do not let it subvert everything else ; do not abandon that straightforward rule of right for what is at best but a theory, what I believe to be in flicting real service to the prisoners th emse l ves , but is a grievous mischief and a great wrong upon society at large. Ido not advocate the adoption oe harsh or cruel measures, but I want to see the sys tem of prison discipline brought down to that level to which it ought to be. I blame no one for the present state of things, because I believe we have all been carrying out a system which has grown up year after year. We have rushed, as it were, from a system of excessive severity into one of excessive lenity and indulgence. I ask this Court not to pre judge the question, not wholly to depart from a system which may be a good one if carried out in a properly modified form, and I ask for this committee with a view to inquire into the general principles upon which prison discipline is now based, and for the purpose of inquiring how far it is answering the purposes for which it is intended. (Hear, hear.) Lord H. CHOLMONDELEY acknowledged the cour tesy with which Lord Carnarvon had brought this question forward, but he could not help feeling that, in plain English, it amounted to nothing more nor less than this—that the Visiting Justices were an earnest and well-intentioned set of gentlemen, but that it was perfectly clear they did not understand the management of prison discipline. He did not complain of the noble lord, but this motion was a vote of censure, and as such he accepted it. If the noble earl was animated with a desire to make any alteration in the prison discipline, why did he not make a representation to the Visiting Justices on the subject before coming to this court ? They might then have gone into the whole question of prison discipline, and have had the advantage of the assist ance of their noble chairman. The noble earl might then have investigated the whole subject, but by coming forward with this motion he had placed the Visiting Justices in a very unpleasant predicament. In a speech of so general a kind it was impossible to make an answer to every point, but he thought the noble earl had fallen into some errors. In the first place, the committee of 1848 did not introduce hard labour into the gaol with a view to prison dis cipline at all, and it was only in cases where, from the shortness of the imprisonment or other causes, reformation through moral means was hopeless, that they recommended the punishment of hard labour, and it was with that view that they classi fied the prisoners. It was clear that that committee were in favour of a distinction between the treatment of those sentenced to long terms and those sentenced to short terms of imprisonment. At the time the rules were drawn up the whole management of the gaol was new to magistrates, and it was found that many of the original rules would not work and had to be modified. The magistrates were not to be blamed because the treadwheel did not work as well as it ought, and their successive reports showed that they had been constant'y using the best means they could to make it. With respect to the hard labour power of the g4ol, they must remember that within the last two years they had had a great number of military and naval prisoners, which it was to be hoped they would not have again. He did not agree with the noble earl that they ought to look at their position, and compare it with other gaols. They had now hard labour power to em ploy 100 prisoners, their average number being about 220. He had taken the trouble to ascertain what was the hard-labour power in several other gaols, and he found that while in Coldbath-fields prison they had 1,500 prisoners they had only treadwheels for 160, or 1 in 9. At Wakefield, another considerable prison, they had neither I treadwheel nor crank, but employed the prisoners in picking oakum. At Stafford they had 400 pri soners, and they only had treadwheels for 88 and cranks for 57. In Kent, where there were 328 prisoners, there was a treadwheel for 100. At Durham, where there were 229 prisoners, no ma chinery of any kind was employed. At Glocester, where there were 200 prisoners, there was a tread. wheel for 60 only. At Worcester, with 200 pri soners, there was a treadwheel only for 58, and cranks for 14. So that it would seem that at Win chester there was really more hard labour power than in other gaols. With respect to the dietary, tolavreerfrseed w h d o . rt asso far from was, that the extra diet was order e d i nvariably by the surgeon, and that it was ode aproroofmthtabr beingteithep rison w e e r r s se we t r r e ea n te o d t than people in the union, he had found on inquiry that the cost of a prisoner per week was only ls. 91d. per head, while for each person in the workhouse it was 2s. 51-d. The surgeon had also, on the ground of health, ordered the extra open air exercise, and had stated that if he had not done so he must have ordered an increase of diet. With regard to the extra clothing he reminded the Court that most of the prisoners had guernseys when they came into gaol, and it was felt as a serious deprivation to take them away without any substitute. There fore, the extra clothing had been allowed. He con trasted the num ber of recommittals in Hampshire with those in other southern counties, and he de fended the general discipline of the gaol, observing that the report of the intended conspiracy alluded to rested solely on the unsupported testimony of two or three of the prisoners. Mr. DOYERELL said that the fact could not be doubted that publie attention had been called to prison discipline, and that an impression existed that it was far too indulgent. He certainly though t that the adoption of the noble cure motion as it, 'ESDAY EVENENG, JANUARY 6, 1863 , stood would imply a censure on the visiting jus tices, which the noble lord expressly repudiated, and he therefore moved as an amendment that a committee of magistrates be appointed to confer with the visiting justices. A lengthened debate ensued, in the course of which, Sir W. HEATIICOTE, M.P., said that the speech of Lord Cholmondeley was an entire defence of the present system and a justification of the in quiry. No censure was intended whatever on the Visiting Justices, the object of the noble earl being to call attention to the present lax system which had grown up in every county in England, and which was fraught with evil. For his part he thought that the prison discipline of the country was in so deplorable a state that its operation as a punishment was entirely delusive. He therefore supported his noble friend's motion for a committee of inquiry, which he hoped would not be refused. Mr. ESDAIL opposed both the motion and the amendment, on the ground that the adoption of either must necessarily imply a censure upon the Visiting Justices. Mr. DONEIAM CARTER supported the motion for a committee, and pointed to the fact that so serious had the question become in an imperial sense, that a Royal commission had been appointed on the sub ject. His belief was that the sense of the severity of punishment was gradually decreasing in the mind of the criminal class, and that the plan of in flicting a long term of imprisonment, instead of a shorter and more severe one, was pernicious in principle and non-effective as a deterring agent. After some farther discussion, in which Mr. Chute, Mr. Stanley, and Mr. Sclater took part, The Earl of CARNARYON expressed his willing ness to adopt the terms of the amendment, and again expressed in the most emphatic manner that he had no intention of casting the slightest slur on the Visiting Magistrates, his motion being entirely aimed at the system. Lord H. CUOLMONDELEY expressed his intention of dividing, because, disguise it in what way they might, it would be considered by the county a vote of censure. The Court then divided, when the numbers were For the appointment of the Committee .. Against Majority The committee were accordingly appointed, and a quorum of three constituted, after which the Court passed to the ordinary business of the session. Mr. J. W. Henley, M.P., and Colonel North, MP., at Oxford. At the Quarter Sessions held at the County -hall in Oxford, yesterd a y a f ternoon, before t h e chair man, the Right H on . J . W. Henley, M.P., and a large number of m ag i s t rates, among w h om were th e other representatives of the county, Col. North and Col. Pane, Lord Churchill, Sir H. W. Dash wood, Capt. Fane, the Hon. J, F. T. W. Fiennes, Mr. H. Hamersley, vice-chairma n , the Walden of Merton College, Oxford (Dr. Marsham), Col. the Hon. R. C. H. Spencer, &c., a letter was read to the Court from the Mayor of Oxford, proposing to place the two Sebastopol guns now in the possession of the corporation of that city within the enclosure in front of the County-hall. It may be recollected that on the capitulation of Sebastopol a large number of guns were sent to England. Lord Panmure, who was then Secretary at War, offered them for distribution throughout the country, and among many other places Oxford became a recipient. Two of the guns wire sent there on the application of the alderman who was then mayor, but from the date of their arrival a series of mishaps and delays have been their fate. At first there was a dispute about the payment of the cost of their carriage, the gun; being directed to the Mayor of Oxford, while the applicant for them had relinquished that office. Subsequently the Town Council refused to go to the expense of mounting them, and the guns were cast into a small shed in the Town-hall yard, generally known by the name of the City Coal-hole. A penny sub scription was started in order to defray the expense of mountin g, and a considerable sum was collected, though not sufficient for the purpose. The guns have remained in their seclusion until a few weeks ago, when the newly elected Mayor of Oxford sent them to a foundry in the city, and now asked the Court of Quarter Sessions to allow them to be placed in front of the County-hall. The right hon. chairman explained to the Court that the present Mayor of Oxford, soon after his election, addressed to him (the chairman) a letter, asking a question about placing the Russian guns, which, until then, had not been in a very dignified position, in front of the County-hall. He gave no opinion about it, but directed his Worship to make a formal application through the Clerk of the Peace. He added that the site in question was not within the city, but actually in the county. It would be for the Court to deal with the application as they thought fit. The chief question, however, which they would have to consider was whether they thought it desirable that such things should be placed anywhere. (Laughter.) That was a very large question. Col. NORTH, M.P., said that he understood from the Mayor's speech the other night at the Druids' dinner that 4,000 inhabitants of Oxford had sub scribed fur the purpose of putting up these guns. He felt that it would be uncourteous in him, and he should regret excessively to say one word which should prevent the wishes of the inhabitants of this city and the especial purpose of the Mayor himself from being gratified. But at the same time he could not help expressing to the Quarter Sessions what he knew to be the feeling of the army and navy at large with regard to those Russian guns. There was but one feeling, and he (Col. North), as a mem ber of the United Service Club, had had every op portunity of ascertaining that feeling. That feel ing was one of disgust at the manner in which those guns had been ecattered over this country. (Hear.) It was perfectly without precedent. Notwithstand ing the war carried on by the Duke of Wellington in the Peninsula there was not a French gun to be seen in this country. They sawon the Horse Guards' parade a gnn which was placed there after the cam paign in Egypt. That gun, however, was placed there as a work of art and a great curiosity. If it was a thing of which they ought to feel proud no portion of her Majesty's subjects ought to feel a greater pride in the possession of those Russian guns than those branches of our fellow countrymen, the army and navy. But, without exception, every one to whom he had spoken had expressed the greatest contempt and disgust at their exhibi tion. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, the Russian army, which was opposed to them, was as fine an army as the world ever saw. They did their duty gloriously towards their own Sovereign and coun try, and he believed that thero was not a man in either the army or the navy who embarked to re turn to this country who was not impressed with feelings of the greatest admiration for the Russian army and for the manner in which they had upheld the honour of their country. If those guns had been melted down and formed into something to bo erected in some such public place as the Place Ven dome, ho could have understood the thing. They had named a metropolitan bridge and other places after their great victories. But now no Russian gentleman could go to shoot grouse in Scotland but whose feelings were insulted by seeing Russian guns. The feeling of the army was that it was against the feelings of Englishmen and brave men. The army above all were always ready and anxious when the battle was over to shake hands with the enemy and forget that a battle had been fought. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) Now, with regard to Russia, in the very first month of the war the Tiger frigate was taken. Where were the guns of the Tiger? Were they so scattered over Russia that an Englishman could not go to that country without seeing them ? So far from that being the case, within the last six months the Emperor of Russia had forbidden the anniversary of any great battle, and he had done so for this reason:—that, the battle over, he was anxious that everything that had taken place should be forgotten. (Hear, hear.) Only about a month ago a friend of his (Colonel North), and a person, too, of high military rank, had returned from Russia. He asked that perso❑ what was the feeling in Russia with regard to Eng land, especially after our campaig n , He said, "11 _ - give you my word that the fact of an officer wear ing a Crimean medal is made an excuse for show- ing every possible civility to him." And the Court should remember another thing. The circumstances of the case were not now as they were when, in the heat of the moment, those Rus sian guns were first scattered broadcast over the country. The war then was going on. Our countrymen had since felt proud and glad to see the termination of the war. But several years had since elapsed, and he only asked whether it was English like that those guns, at the end of seven years, should be dragged out of a coalhole and mounted as a sort of insult to a great nation. He mentioned this subject in the House of Commons at the end of last session. He took upon himself to d 3 it be cause, in the first place, the army felt that those guns were their property. If the army had been consulted upon the matter, not a single gun would ever have been sent to this country. It must be borne in mind also that these were not guns which had been take❑ on the field of battle, but they had been obtained by capitulation. (Hear, hear.) His gallant friend (Colonel Pane) knew that a gun with the Artillery was as the colours with a regiment. There was not a single precedent ; he had made in quiries in every way, and was not aw re that such a thing had ever yet been done. There never yet had been a war in which we had unnecessarily in. suited a great country and an army in such a way as had been done during the last five or six years. He could only say that the kindness he had received in all parts of the country (and particularly in the city in which he was then speaking) made him re gret the necessity of having to say one word in op position to the wishes of the citizens of that great University city. He would only ask the court, if those guns were placed in front of that hall, what would be the feeling of the Emperor of Russia if ever he should come over to this country ? That city was one of the greatest in the world in the es timation of foreigners. Go where they would fo reigners were always mating inquiries about the University and the old city of Oxford. Foreigners on coming to that city then would not be able to get into the town without having those guns paraded before them. He put it to the court whether that would be dignified. He knew that there was a considerable feeling of contempt at the manner in which the guns had been treated. He had re ceived letters from people whom he did not know from Adam thanking him for having mentioned this circumstance in the House ci„malons. It was one which was quite unworthy of this country. Of course, the question was one for the Court's decision ; but, feeling as he did the wretched, contemptible character of the proceeding, he could not refrain from expressing himself as he had done. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) The CHAIRMAN said he apprehended that as they were only trustees for the county property they could not entertain the question. He agreed with his gallant friend in opinion that, the battle being over, the sooner they shook hands and forgot it the better. He had no fondness for things of that kind. (Hear, hear.) Some conversation ensued, but the Court were unanimous in refusing to allow the guns to be placed in front of the County Hall. inspected Poisoning at Marehani-le-Pen, Lincolnshire, Various rumours having been afloat for some time past respecting the death of Jemima, mother of John Garner, grocer, &c., of Moorhouses, in the parish of Mareham-le- Fen, near Horncastle, whose death occurred in December, 1861, the coroner (Dr. Clegg, of Boston), at length issued his warrant for the exhumation of the body. It had been buried in the churchyard of the adjoining parish of Revesby, and was exhumed on Thursday, the 27th of November last. A post mortem examination having been made by Dr. Boulton, of Horncastle, and Mi. George, surgeon, of Revesby, and the body identified by the sexton of the parish and the joiner who made the coffin, the coroner ordered the stomach, &c., to be placed in sealed jars, and conveyed by Police-Sergeant Lampton toProfessor Tay lor, the celebrated analytical chemist, at Guy's Hospital, London, and then adjourned the inquest, which was re opened on Tuesday, the 16th of December, at the Red Lion Inn, Reversby, before Dr Clegg, coroner. The evi dence of William Taylor, sexton, and William Weldon, carpenter (taken on the 27th of November), proving the identity of the body exhumed, was read over, and the fol lowing additional witnesses called : William Lampton—l am sergeant of police. On the 27th of November I received three jars, sealed, and took them to London. I delivered them tv Professor Taylor on the 29th, with the seals unbroken, and he gave me a receipt for them. Dr. Boulton—On the 27th of November I saw a coffin opened containing the body of a woman, and made a post mortem examination. I removed the viscera of the chest and abdomen, some of the blood, and a portion of the spine. The tissues of the spine were deeply tinged and saturated with a bright yellow colouring matter. I placed the whole in jars, which I sealed, and gave them to Sergeant Lampton to convey to Professor Taylor. There was some difficulty in removing the lid of the coffin. There was no earth in the coffin. The outer part of the body was in an advanced state of decomposition. Hugh George—l am a surgeon residing at Revesby, and was present on th© 27th of November when a coffin contain ing the body of a woman was opened. I can corroborate the evidence of Dr. Boulton. Yellow stains were also on the coat of the stomach and muscles of the abdomen. The jars were sealed and delivered in my presence. The last time I attended deceased professionally was on the 18th of December, 1861. She was suffering from vomiting. Did not see her next day, but sent some medicine. Saw her again on the 20th. Had often attended her before. The symptoms were consistent with death from irritant poison. Ido not know on what day she died. I sent in a medical certificate of death "after six days' diarrhoe i." I did not see her between August and December 18. The medicine then sent was for purging only. Dr. Taylor—l am a Fellow of the Royal College of Phy sicians, and Professor of Chemistry and Medical Jurispru dence at Guy's Hospital. On Saturday, Nov. 29, I received at the chemical laboratory, Guy's Hospital, from Sergeant Lampton, three jars well secured and sealed. These were kept locked up until the analysis was made. I have em-. bodied the results in the following report : " Small Jar-7oz of bloody liquid in a putrescent state. It was tested for mineral poison, but none could be found in it. Large Jar (containing viscera of deceased) --On open ing this jar there was found in it the liver, heart, lungs, spleen, kidneys, stomach, and intestines, with a portion of the bones of the spinal column (lumbar vertebrae). These organs were in a good state of preservation, so that all tho structures would be easily recognised. The heart and in testines were so preserved that they appeared as if they had been taken from a person recently dead. The liver was shrunk, small, and of a dark slate colour, It weighed about 11b. Its structure appeared healthy. The heart was of the usual size, scarcely altered by putrefaction. Its cavi ties were examined as well as the valves. There was no ap pearance of disease in any part. The lungs were more de composed than the other organs. They presented no unusual appearance. The stomach and intestines presented on the external coat or membrane patches of a deep yellow colour. The most extensive patches were on the stomach, and chiefly on its under or posterior surface (that part which is nearest the spinal column) ; ono of these, covering abou t five square inches, was found in the fat of the mesentery, surrounding the intestines. The stomach was more decom posed than the intestines. The stained portion was firm, but other portions had given way in one or two places. The interior was then laid open. There was no fluid contents in it, but the inner coat or lining membrane was covered with a thin dark substance, in which were numerous small particles of a bright yellow colour. This substance when placed in water gave to the liquid a reddish brown colour resembling that of decomposed blood. It was examined by the microscope, but presented no other appearance calling for remark. The coats of the stomach were thinner than natural. This is the usual condition when bodies have been buried for many months. 'The coats of the intestines were thinner than natural (a result of changes in the dead body). In addition to the yellow stains, they presented a well- marked redness in the upper portion, such as would be caused by inflammation, &c., taking place during life. They were quite empty, and entirely decomposed at the lowe; part, but at the upper part they were fresh and firm. The por tion of the spinal column in the jar presented a remarkable appearance. There were in the soft parts which covered the bones in front several patches of deep yellow colour, re- sembling those found in the stomach and intestines. These stains wore firmly incorporated with the membrane and ligaments covering the bones of the spine, and some were found dyeing the flesh still attached to the vertebrw. The fish was red and firm, and had undergone but very little change from putrefaction. "Analysis.—The first was to determine the chemical na ture of the yellow stains or patches of colour on the stomach, intestines, and spine. Portions of the colouring matter were removed from these different structures, and separately examined. They did not contain any bile or biliary matter, but consisted of orpiment of yellow sulphate of arsenic, mixed with arsenic in. a soluble form. This is a mineral poison. All the stains examined were due to this substance, which had penetrated into and had become in corporated with the soft structures of the body. A small portion of the yellow colouring matter was removed from the front of the spine and reserved. Au unstained portion of the coats of the stomach was submitted to chemical ana lysis, and was found to contain arsenic in a form in whic h it WAS soluble in water—that ifs White areezzie, parted:A the stomach examined contained arsenic. Portions of the intestines were examined and were found to contain arsenic. The quantity of orpiment found in or upon the stomach, intestines, and spine was estimated at from six to eight grains, correspondin g to five or six grains of white arsenio of the shops. Two analyses were made of portions of the liver, and arsenic was found in each case. It was present in corresponding large proportions. The conclusions, the results of the analyses, are -1. That arsenic was present in the stomach, intestines, liver, and heart of the deceased, in all the parts of these organs submitted for examination. 2. That the arsenic was contained in the stomach, intestines, and in the flesh and ligaments of the spine, partly in a soluble told partly in an insoluble form, that is—as orpi ment or yellow arsenic. 3. That the orpiment or yellow arsenic which causes the patches of colour in the stomach. bowels, and the spine has probably been produced by a the mical change in the white arsenic contained in the stomach and bowels at the time of death. 4. That the yellow stains found on the spine were pro iueed by arsenic escaping through the coats of the stomach after death, and the yellow stains on the mesentery were caused by arsenic escaping through the coats of th 3 intestines. 5. That the quantity of yellow arsenic altogether was probably not less than six or eight grains, equivalent to from five to six grains of white arsenic. 6. That the discovery of arsenic in the substance of the liver and heart renders it probable that the deceased :had taken the poison some time—that is, one or two days before death. 7. That the quantity found in the body would be fatal to a human being, and in the absence of any other apparent cause, would be quite sufficient to account for death. The third jar contained earth from the grave, and in this a small quantity of arsenic was found, but the arsenic here was in a form perfectly insoluble in water, and it could not in any way account for the arsenic found in the body of deceased. It was not in the state of orpiment or yellow arsenic," The symptoms described by Mr. George would be those of poisoning by arsenic. I should say that deceased must have had arsenic in several doses for two days or more prior to death. Susan Jenkinson—l have known deceased for many years. She died on a Friday, and I saw her the Saturday before. She complained of sickness and purging, with great pain in the back and cramp in the stomach. She said she had never suffered so much before, I did not do anything for her then. I saw her about occasionally afterwards, but she said she was very sick and much purged. I next saw her about noon on the day she died. The servant Elizabeth Whittaker (since married to Mr. Garner, called me in to sit with the deceased. I went in and found her very bad. She said she was dying. Mrs. Metcalf and Mrs. Roberts, two neighbours, afterwards came in to see her. Whittaker asked her if she would have some fried potatoes, but I ob jected to her having any, and she also refused them. Some arrowroot was then made for her. She asked for some brandy, thinking it would prevent her sickness, and I sent for Mr. Garner, but he refused to let her have any, saying he believed she was drunk then, adding, " You have troubled me about dying these thirty years, and are afraid because your Wesleyanism is giving way. She re• plied, "My dear boy, lam comfortable now, I am dying. My Wesleyanism has stood by me all my days." After some further conversation he left the room, and I re mained with her. I sent again to the beerhouse for him twice, because she was dying, but he refused to come. Whittaker came to the chamber door, but said she was afraid to see her. There was no one in the house but deceased, Mr. Garner, myself, Whittaker, and her mother. Mrs. Garner complained of thirst, and drank a quantity of cold water. Mr. Garner and Whittaker mixed the arrowroot between them. It was fetched out of a box or drawer in the shop. When it was ready Whittaker gave it to me and I fed her. She was very sick afterwards, and her retching could be heard all over the house. She could not lift up her hands. The second time I sent for Mr. Garner he said, " She may die and be ---, I must go and weigh some coals." She was dependent upon her son after she left the Revesby bedehouses. I have heard her complain of being Mused. She said she dared not say her soul was her own —also that her son beat her, and Whittaker helped him to turn her out of doors. The latter told her to go into the Union, for they would not have her. She then stayed with her granddaughter three or four weeks. This was in Sept., 1861. They frequently had words, and the servant (Whit taker) said she wished her mouth was full of mould. My son's wife was with me when she died. She had had two quarter-pints of brandy during the week, but it was refused her that day. It was brown sugar Mr. Garner put into the arrowroot. Ann Shepherd—l live at Marehasn-le-Fen, and have known Jemima Garner 13 or 14 years. I was ill in bed when she died. She was in my house the Tuesday night previous. Have heard her complain of the girl abusing her, and was present once. I heard deceased tell her son that the servant had some muslin and other things secreted in a churn, and heard a disturbance about it in their own house afterwards. Eleanor Lightfoot---I live at Moorhouses, and have known Mrs. Garner two or three years. I saw her about 14 days before her death. She was then very ill from vio lent sickness, with pains in the back and kidneys, and told me she was often ill in that way. I was mending sacks for Mr. Garner. She told me he ran her out of the house and kicked her, telling her to go to the union, for he would not keep her. I saw him kick her. I heard the servant say she would stop her going to Mrs. Shepherd's and telling tales, but do not know what was ahuded to. I did not see her use any violence to Jemima Garner. About 10 or 12 days before she died I had some pudding at Garner's, with Mrs. Garner, William Weldon, and his son, Mr. Garner was from home, and Whittaker did not eat any pudding that day. All who did eat of the pudding were taken violently sick very soon after. I took my own dinner with me, but they gave me some pudding. I went to work in the after noon, although I was very unwell. William Weldon—l am a carpenter residing at Mare ham-le-Fen. I knew Jemima Garner nine or ten years, and last saw her alive about three or four weeks before she died. She was then in her usual health. I know nothing about the cause of her death. She said to me, "I am sadly in the road for them." I said I was sorry to have to move her from her own home at Revesby bedehouses. John Garner wished her to take care of his house when his wife died. I dined at Mr. Garner's when I worked there, and had some rice pudding one day, I have heard that Mrs. Lightfoot was sick after dinner. I had a strange burning sensation in the throat and stomach before I was sick. I could not eat any more dinner. Elizabeth Whittaker did not eat any pudding. I heard no abuse. John Garner said to me he was surprised she had died in the same way his wife had, but he could not account for it. Susan Forman—l lived with Mrs. Shepherd at the beer house next dour to Garner's. I knew Jemima Gamer from July, 1861. I saw her on the Tuesday night before she died. She came in to ask if Mr. Shepherd was going to Revesby to 'fetch some medicine for Mrs. Shepherd, as she was very ill herself. I never saw her ill-treated. Ido not know that Mr. Garner broke a bottle against the house wall. I did not hear any complaint about a white powder. I have heard people say that Whittaker said she would be "out of the old woman." John Stennett, nephew of the deceased—l live at Moor houses, and have known Jemima Garner all my life. I last saw her alive within about a month of her death. Her health was failing fast She made no complaint except of being very poorly, and said she thought she should not live long. On the 16th September, 1861, I had some words with John Garner, and when he went home he kicked his mother out of the house. I heard her complain about three weeks before she died of being very uncomfortable, and wish she had not given up her home. She did not tell me she had been turned out of the house in the middle of the night, She complained of Whittaker, but said she did not wish to make any disturbance. John Garner and she had some words, and she told him to look into the churn for himself if he were not satisfied. John Thorsby—l am superintendent of police. Last Saturday evening, about 8 o'clock, I apprehended John and Elizabeth Garner at their own house. When I read over to him, downstairs, the warrant charging him and his wife with administering poison to, or causing it to be taken by the deceased, J emima Garner, he said, " I am innocent. My wife that now is and Mrs. Jenkinson waited upon granny in her last illness, and if we are taken she ought to be taken too. She would be as likely to poison her as any one else. It's a strange thing; I can't think she was poisoned; if she was it was between my wife and Mrs Jenkinson. If I thought she had been capable of doing so I should not have married her, as I should expect she m i g ht . . serve me the same." I went into the room where Garner was in custody last night about 12, and he then said, " Pro. lessor Taylor may say what he likes; I do not believe granny was poisoned. Poison makes things struggle when they die, the same as my three horses did last year, but she died like a lamb." The woman was in bed upstairs, and when I read the warrant to her she said, " Thank God, I am innocent, the Lord be praised." Superintendent Thorsby now applied for the inquest to be adjourned, in order to procure other important evidence, and Friday, the 2d of January, at 11 a.m., was named as the time for re-opening the inquiry. " The adjourned inquest was accordingly re-opened on that day, at the Red Lion Inn, Revesby, before Dr. Clegg, coro ner. Mr. C. Dee, of Horncastle, appeared on behalf of the prosecution. Similar evidence to the above having been given, The Coroner addressed the jury, remarking upon the most important parts of the evidence in a clear and impres sive manner, and then left tjie issue in their hands. After about half an hour's consultation, they returned a verdict of wilful murder against John Garner and Elizabeth his wife. The coroner then made out his warrant, committing them both to take their trial at the next Lincoln Assizes. They would b o th b e brought before the magistrates also be yesterd ay (M onday, the sth), and by them be committed t o t h e next Lincoln Assizes. Both prisoners exhibit the greatest coolness and apathy. EXHUMATION OF A SECOND BODY. A warrant having been received by the Horneastle super intendent of police from the Secretary of State, authorising 1 the exhumation of the body of Hannah Garner (first wife of the male prisoner, John Garner), on Monday morning, December 29, the body was removed from the churchyard at Mareham-le-Fen to a adjacent building, where a post mortem examination was made by Drs. Buulton, of Horn castle, and Clegg, of Boston. '1 h e var ous internal parts were placed in jars and sealed, and forwarded to Dr. Alfred -Swaine Taylor, Professor of Chemistry at Guy's Hospital, London. The result of the analysis by that gentleman has since been received, and a considerable quantity of arsenic found in the stomach, although not so much as in the body of JeMilia4 tanner, SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. TATTERSALL'S.—VESTERDAY. Although the attendance was somewhat numerous for the period of the year, the transactions were not of an im portant nature. The leading favourites were not strongly supported, but no more than 13 to 2 could be obtained about Lord Clifden, layers seeming disinclined to spring half a point about Lord St. Vincent's colt. Saccharometer was occasionally inquired after during the afternoon, and towards the cloe 900 to 100 was booked about him. Hos podar's nominal price was 100 to 8. Business, however, lay chiefly with the favourites; and, independently of those quoted below, arrivals hitherto unheard of in connection with the Derby—Moorcock, Onesander, sc., for instance-- were inquired after, and offers made to accept 10,000's to 5, and I,ooo's to 3, Automaton was in demand, one well known "commissioner" booking 22 to 1 to £9O, and offer ing to go on at that figure, but no more than 20 to 1 was subsequently offered. Carnival was supported, but to no considerable amounts, at 25 to 1. His stable companion Pratique, was also re-introduced into the market, and backed at a price which represented in the aggregate 45, to 1. Another of Mr. Naylor's, Maccaroni, was also backed—in the I,ooo's to 10 division—and 1,000 to 70 was taken about Godding's three, Carnival, Pratique, and Maccaroni. 600 to 20 each was taken about National Guard and King of Utopia. Blue Mantle was inquired after towards the close of business, and offers made to take 30 to 1, but that price not being obtainable, 25 to 1 to a "century" was at last accepted. Tom Fool had two or three firm friends, and 25 to 1 was backed for close upon £2OO. Giles the First, Tambour Major, and Woldga were backed for small amounts. Among the 50 to 1 lot an en tirely fresh candidate was introduced in the colt by Tadmor —Glenochty, about whom 5,000 to 50 was taken. 1000 to 400 was taken about the three first favourites, Lord Clifden, Saccharometer, and Hospodar. The Two Thousand was barely mentioned. 4 to 1 was currently offered on the field, these odds being booked once to £4O about Hospodar. Clos ing prices : TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS. 4to 1 agst Count F. de Lagrange's Hospodar (t & off) DERBY. 13 to 2 agst Lord St. Vincent's Lord Clifden (off) 9to 1 agst Lord Strathmore's Saccharometer (t & off) 100 to 8 agst Count F. de Lagrange's Hospodar (off) 22 to 1 agst Lord Stamford's Automaton (t freely) 25 to 1 agst Mr. E. Brayley's Toom Fool (t freely) 25 to 1 agst Captain Lane's Blue Mantle (t) 25 to 1 agst Mr. Nayben Carnival (t) 30 to 1 agst Mr. Watts's National Guard (t) 30 to 1 agst Mr. Whittaker's King of Utopia (t) 50 to 1 agst Sir J. Hawley's Woldga (t) 50 to 1 agst Count Batthyaßy's Tambour Major (t) 60 to 1 agst Mr. Naylor's Pratique (t) 50 to 1 agst Mr. John Scott's Michael Scott (t) 50 to 1 agst Count Henckel's Giles the First (t) 50 to 1 agst Sir H. Des Vceux's Taje (off) 1000 to 10 agst Mr. W. Day's Tadmor c—Glenochty (t) 1000 to 10 agst Mr. Capel's Bright Cloud (t) 1000 to 10 agst Mr. Naylor's Maccaroni (t) GAINSBOROUGH STEEPLECHASES _MONDAY. The United Handicap of 5 sovs each, 2 ft, with 40 added. Winners extra. Three miles and a half. (29 subs.) Mr. H. Frances's Corkscrew . , aged, lOst Blb (Mr. Wood) 1 Mr. Colton's Canteen, aged, 10st 31b (W. Marson) 2 Joe Maley, Multum in Parvo, and Victress also ran. Betting —6 to 4 agst Corkscrew, 6 to 2 agst Multum in Parvo, 3 to 1 agst Joe Maley, 6 to 1 agst Canteen, and 6 to 1 agst Victress. With the exception of Canteen, the lot alternately held the lead, and on passing the stand the third time, Joe Maley ran from the rear to the front, was never afterwards headed, and won by a length and a half, a neck separated the second and Corkscrew, Canteen was fourth. An objection against the first and second, on the ground of having gone on the wrong side of a post, was heard by the Stewards, who disqualified Joe Maley and Mul tum in Parvo, and awarded the Handicap to Corkscrew ; Canteen being placed second. The Union Hunt Cup of £5O in specie, by subscription of 5 soya each; 12st each; gentlemen riders, professionals extra. About 2 miles and a half, 12 subs. Mr. C. Coburn's Joe Maley (late North Lancashire) 6 yrs, I let 91b (Mr. C. Arden) 1 Mr. H. Frances's Corkscrew, aged, 125 t.... ( Mr. Wood) 2 Mr. Colton's Canteen, aged, 12st (Mr. Hornby) 3 Betting—Even on Joe Maley, who took the lead half a mile from home, and won in a canter by ten lengths. Two lengths between second and third. _ _ _ The Stand Plate Handicap of 20 sous for all ages. About 2 miles. 14 subs, Mr. S. Wain's Miss Taft, 4 yrs, Bst 71b (Weston) 1 Mr. Ward's Holdersyke (late Crinoline) 6 yrs, 9st 131 b _ (Berkeley) 2 Mr. Spafford's Sporting Jenny, 5 yrs, 9st 121 b ..(Pears) 3 The race was run in the dark, and no betting took place upon it. Miss Taft made nearly all the running, and won in a canter by five lengths. COUNTRY MARKETS. -1,-. COLCHESTER—JAN. 3. Best samples of wheat may be quoted about is above last week's quotations ; other sorts were dull. Fine barley was scarce, and is over last week's rates. Beans and peas are not in demand. Wheat, white 46s red 424 Barley Oats 528 Eleams,Mazagan 348 36' 48s middle & annall 36s 420 39s Peas, white 42s 44s 268 gray 388 421 GLOUCESTER-JAN. 3. To-day there was a fair supply of English wheat, which advanced is per qr on last week's rates for best qualities. Foreign and American wheat in brisk request. Malt was up. Barley rather firmer. Oats and beans remain much the same as last week. CHELMSFORD—JAN, 2. Ihe trade in wheat to-day at our market was very slack, although the prices assumed an upward tendency, and may be noted is per qr advance. All other articles were about the same. Wheat, old white 37s 53s new 37s 50s old red 42s 49s new 38s 47s Barley 2 4 s 35s Chevalier ..28s 38s Grinding 22s 30s, Malt. Chevalier 64s 69s Oats 20s 28s Peas, nutridge 378 408 White 398 408 Boiling.. 40s 43s Dun 358 38s Ditto new .. —8 —s Beans, Tick, old 348 398 new —s —8 Harrow Ticks 358 408 new --8 --a Mazagan .......30s 38s KIRKCALDY GRAIN—JAN. 3. A good supply of grain at market, and the trade ra ther brisk ; wheat and barley sold at n arly is per quarter advance, and oats much the same as last week. Wheat. Barley. Oats. First....2Bs Od l9s Od I 17s Od Second ..40s Od 24s Od 20810 d Third....—s Od —s Od —s Od COAL 1V (Primo of Coal per Ton a' ARKET. the dose of the market. s. d. Bell's Primrose .....13 6 Carway and Duilryn Malting Do. Anthracite 20 0 Tanfield Moor 13 6 ranfield Moor Bute l3 6 Craighead Steam 14 '0 Cowpen Hartley l4 9 Bate's West Hartley 14 6 Eden Main Hartlepool West Hart- I 8. d. Buddle's West Hartley 14 9 Walls End. Eletton ...... .. lB 0 Cassop . l7 0 South Hartlepool 17 0 Trimdon Hartlepool l7 6 Eleugh Hall 16 9 Stewart's 17 6 Tunstall South Kelloe. l7 6 Whitworth 16 3 :t, 60 ; sold, 37. Ley ...14 31 Ships at market Foreign Mail Packet List. MAIL - g - DUE. ,kunralia and Mauritius, via Southampton Jan. 18. via Marseilles Jan. 12. Brazil and Cape Verds, by British packet Jan. 4. Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena Feb. 1. China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton Jan. 18. Falkland Isl a nd s via Marseill es ...J an. 12. Gibraltar, via S ou th ampton .. Jan. 4. India (Calcutt a ), an d Ceylon, via Southampton Jan. 18 . . via Marseilles Jan. 12. India (Bombay), via Southampton Jan. 10. via Marseilles Jan. 4. Portugal.... Jan. 4. Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Jan. 10. Newfoundland Oporto and Vigo U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet.. • . J an. 7. by U.S. packet.... by Canadian packet. Jan. —. W.O. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe .......... J an . 10 . Mexico Bahamas, via N ew York ..................... . Jan. 15. All parts of West Indies, including Chili, • Peru, ....Jan. 28. California, a n d British Columbia.. 1 Jan. 28. B. TEMPEST.—On th e 4 t h inst., ir at ths 33, Chester•square, Lady Susan Vane Tempest, of a son. VERNON.—On the 4th inst., Lady Harriet Vernon, of a daughter. WEBBER.—On the sth inst., at East Dulwich, Mrs. R. P. Webber, of a son. Marriages. DEELEY—NORTON.—On the 2d inst., at St. Mark's, Ken nington, Arthur Charles Melton, third son of Richard of Vauxhall, to A nn J ane, the youngest the late John Nort on, E sq., of Wandsworth r d D o a e a u e d gl . e h Y t o s fq RUSSELL —WILSON.—On the Ist inst., at Hove Church, Brighton, Sir William Russell, Bart., to Margaret, only child of the late It. Wilson, Esq. Deaths. CARY.—On the 2d inst., at Norwood, Surrey, Mary Ann, the beloved wife of Rear-Admiral the Hon. P. P. Cary, aged 44. HIGGS.—On the Ist inst., at Instow, North Devon, Com mander Joseph Higgs, R.N., aged 74. JOHNSON.—At his residence, ew-street, Hanley, Robert Johnson, late of Crowgutter, Ipstones, aged 83. JONES.—On the 4th inst., at Fartherwell House, near Town Mailing, Kent, Thomas Jones, Esq , aged 94. MARSHAM,—On the sth inst., at 2, Grosvenor 'place, Lady Amelia Charlotte Marshall], aged 81. WINMILL.—On the Ist inst., at Sellindge Vicarage, Mrs. Sarah Winmill, aged 85. ion : Printed and Published by WILLIAM ANDREWS, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TUE SuN Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County AUMUOICE.--autoday, Jaunt Lon , Bho alio , Tw, Tvil (hei Litt Gag ItUZ V baco larg her Of tl The 11 how to gl Tal ten I lithe and Th e B; Colt Sp el ease host WO CBI 01r, The T 1 The Tho TI and teed; ColU cloy Seen Seen Sto n Al Pi half , Ntl: T Mar] from whet M.P Win Pete unk on: mei eivi Tot titu NA! Cal by Wl2( th e tio t TrE X, A Cott