The Sun. — London, England, 1863-04-30 00:00:00

The late Volunteer Review at Brighton; (Copy.) War-Office, April 24, 1863, Sir,—l am directed by the Secretary of State to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th inst., giving cover to a copy of one from Major- General Lord William Paulet, C. 8., with a plan enclosed, and I am to assure you that the Secretary of State fully participates in the satisfaction felt by his Royal Highness the Field - Marshal Command ing-in-Chief at the very favourable report which has been made by Lord William Paulet upon the volunteer force reviewed by him at Brighton on Easter Monday.—l have the honour to be, sir your obedient servant, (Signed) EDWARD LIIGARD. The Adjutant-General, Horse Guards. Horse Guards, S.W,, April 14, 1863. Sir,—l a transmitting the accompanying copy of a letter from Major-General I ord William Paulet with its enclosure, I have received the commands of the Field-Marshal Commanding-in-Chief to re quest that you will express to the Secretary of State for War the satisfaction with which his royal high ness calls attention to so favourable a report as that now made by Lord William Paulet upon the force of volunteers reviewed by him at Brighton on Easter Monday.—l have the honour to be, sir, your obe dient humble servant, (Signed) J. YORKE SCARLETT, A.G. The Under Secretary of State, War-office. Government House, Portsmouth, April 10. Sir,—l have the honour to report for the infor mation of his Royal Highness the Field-Marshal Commanding-in-Chief and the Right Hon. the Se cretary of State for War, that, in accordance with your instructions, dated Horse Guards, March 26, 1863, I put myself in communication with Colonel M`Murdo, C. 8., Inspector-General of Volunteers, and with him inspected the ground near the Brighton race course, allotted for the volunteer review on Easter Monday. According to his wish I met the divisional and brigadier generals at the War-office on the previous Saturday, and communicated to them my ideas as to the manoeuvres I intended to perform. The troops had all arrived at Brighton on Monday morning by 11 o'clock, and formed their brigades in the Levels—different Levels being allotted for different brigades—in the moat regular manner; the 9th Lancers and Mounted Volunteers assembled near the Race Stand, where the guns of position had been previously placed. The field artillery and infantry commenced moving out of the town along the Marine-parade, and turn ing up Bedford-street to the race-course soon after 11 a.m. On the arrival of the head of the column, I took up my position opposite the Grand Stand, accompanied by Lord Chichester,the lord lieutenant and the troops commenced marching past, left in front, the order in which they left the town, pre ceded by the cavalry and guns of position. The troops, after marching past, continued their route along the race-course to the ground selected for the first position. A plan of the positions oc cupied by the enemy and the attacking force is herewith enclosed. The troops were forbidden, in consequence of cul tivation, to cross the ground between the Race Stand and the last position occupied by the enemy. I selected Colonel Brewster, the commanding officer of the Inns of Court Volunteers, to command the enemy, under whom I placed the sth brigade of the Ist division, with his own battalion, a field bat tery, and four 24-pounder guns of position. This officer carried out my instructions in the most correct manner, and made the most of the force under his command ; his retreat from his first to his second position was conducted in the most soldier like manner, during which time he was harassed by the cavalry, commanded by Lieut.-Colonel Drys dale, C. 8., who handled this force in a most satis factory way. The remainder of the troops, after marching past, took up the first position as marked in the plan ; the 2d division was formed in a line of con tiguous columns of brigades at deploying distance, a battalion of each brigade covering its front as skirmishers, the Ist division supporting in a line of contiguous columns; artillery on each flank and centre of the first line. The attack was commenced by the Ist Hants Light Horse, who threw out skirmishers and found the enemy, which they did in a very soldierlike manner. They were supported by the 9th Lancers. The two lines advanced in direct echellon of bri gades from the left, each brigade being in echellon of battalions. The cavalry having been driven in, the whole formed squares ; on turning the enemy's right, the first line changed position to the right, the supporting line conforming. The enemy commenced retreating from the right flank in rear of the left, to their 2d position; the Ist line deployed and advanced, and arriving on advantageous ground halted and commenced firing at the retreating enemy. The Ist division then supporting, deployed, advanced to relieve the first line, took up a position, and opened fire. It tieing past 4 o'clock, the " cease fire" sounded, and the troops assembled to march back to Brighton down the Marine-parade, which they did in the most compact order, to their different rendezvous. The divisional generals, Major-Generals Russell and Sutton, afforded me every assistance, as also Colonel Ormsby, R.A., who had the direction of the Volunteer Artillery. The different brigades were very ably commanded by officers selected from volunteer corps. The artillery far surpassed my expectations ; for on commencing I feared they would confine my movements, being heavy guns of position, some 24 and 18 pounders, but to my surprise moved like field artillery, and took up different positions, as required, and were most efficiently worked; The skirmishing of the infantry was particularly good, the firing being well sustained ; and the general movements were performed in a very sol dierlike manner. The arrangements made by Colonel M'Murdo are deserving of the greatest praise, and I found him a moat useful staff officer. From my observations during the evolutions, I cannot conclude my report without stating th at consider the volunteer force a most valuable institu tion, in a defensible point of view, for the country. The total strength assembled, according to re turns teceived from Colonel M‘Mardo, amounted to 14,625 of all ranks.—l have, 8.7 c., W. PAULET, Major-General Commanding S.W. District, and Commanding Volun teer Force. The Ad jutant-General of the Forces, &C. SOUTH RENEIINGTON MUSEUM.--Daring the week ending the 25th of April the visitors have been as follows :—On Monday, Tuesday, and Saturday, free days, open from 10 RM. to 10 p. m , 60,020 ;on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, students' days (admission to the public 6d.), open from 10 a.m. till 6 p.m., 23,785 ; total, 9 2 , 505. From the openi ng o f the Musetun, 3,900,219. I\luseum of Patents.—Number of visitors for the week end ing April 25, 4,277; total number since the opening of the museum free daily (May 12, 1858), 713,651. FATAL ACCIDENT ON THE MAIN DRAINAGE WORKS.—On Monday morning, between 7 and 8 o'clock, considerable alarm was occasioned among the resi dents of Church-street, Deptford, by a loud report proceed ing from the direction of the works now being carried out by Messrs. Aird and Co., for the low level drainage sewer of the metropolis, and which was found to have arisen from an extensive slip of earth, carrying away and splintering in pieces large balks of timber used in the shoring up the sides of the cutting, which, at this spot, extends to a depth of 55 feet. At the time named eight men were employed at the spot where the accident occurred, two of whom escaped, three being considerably though not seriously in jured, whilst the remaining three became embedded beneath the mass of timber and earth which weighed many tons. With as little delay as possible, the other men employed set to work to rescue their fellow workmen, and shortly succeeded in reaching a man named Daniels, about 60 years old, who was found breathing, but another slip occurring, the unfortunate man's body became again covered, and when taken out life was quite extinct. About two hours afterwards the body of a second man named Bray was per ceived, but the soil was so treacherous that it was not until nearly 5 o'clock in the afternoon that his body was reached, life then being extinct. The third person known to have shared , red a similar fate is a young man named King, but up clock last evening his body was not recovered, nor was it considered possible to reach it during the night. At the inquest held y f‘ Ao c i c i ell ug 44 , 44 „ TdaY, the jury returned a verdict of Reported Recruitment of British Subjects for the Federal Army. An important correspondence between Earl Rus sell and Mr. Adams on this subject wa3 published yesterday. The first letter, dated November 20, 1862, is from Earl Russell, and informs Mr. Adams " that her Majesty's Government are informed, by persons to whom they are disposed to give credit, that recruits are being raised in this country for serving in the army of the United States, and that bounty money of a considerable amount is offered by agents of the United States to encourage British subjects to enlist," and that the practice to which his attention is thus called is calculated seriously to increase the difficulties already incident to the observance of neutrality by her Majesty's Govern ment. On the following day Mr. Adams replies, stating that he " not only has no knowledge of any such proceeding, but that he has no belief that they can have been attempted by any persons really vested with authority as agents of the United States. Should it turn out that these are individuals as- snoring to act under such an authority, he will be obliged to Earl Russell for such information as he may possess that may enable him to ascertain who these persons may be, and to take the necessary measures to disavow their operations." On Dec. 16 Earl Russell writes to Mr. Adams stating that he has the satisfaction of informing him that " further inquiries which have been insti tuled respecting the alleged recruiting in London for the United States army seem to establish that the reports to that effect which had reached her Majesty's Government were without foundation_" On the 16th of April Earl Russell writes to Mr. Adams— Sir,—With reference to your letter of the 10th inst., in which you repeated the denial you had formerly made of the truth of the report that men were being recruited in this country for the United States' army, I think it is right to communicate to you the substance of a report which has just been made to her Majesty's Government with regard to the number of persons who are now being shipped as emigrants from Queenstown. to New York. It is stated that within the last fortnight 1,278 emigrants have sailed, the greater number being strong, active young men ; that it cannot be doubted that they are intended for the United States' army, and that many of them do not deny it. A certain number of those men were militiamen from Cork and its vicinity, and they informed the emigration officer that they would get from 250 to 300 dollars bounty. It also appears that the prospect of this large bounty has been held out to young men by general rumour throughout the country. It is further stated that the friends of these persons in Ame rica are paid so much for obtaining and bringing them over to New York. I do not think it necessary to encumber this letter with farther statements of a more or less trustworthy character which have reached her Majesty's Government, corroborative of this asserted recruiting of her Majesty's subjects for service in the United States army ; and I shall therefore merely add that I am informed that about 800 young men were booked to sail from Queenstown by the steamer of the 9th inst., it being freely spoken of that all the young men were going to join the Northern army, and that although the Inman Company have put on additional steamers, the number of applicants for passage is so great that they cannot all be accommodated, and that several hundreds are consequently left behind each week.—l am, &e, (Signed) RusszLL. Two days after Mr. Adams replies : Legation of the United States, London, April 18, 1863. My Lord,—l am very much obliged to you for the cent-- teay extended to me in the communication of the substance of a report which has been made to her Majesty's Govern ment with regard to the number of persons who are now being shipped as emigrants from Queenstown. The fact that a great many people, especially in Ireland, have been anxious for some time past to find their way to the United States has been made known to me by the frequent applications to this legation for free passage, A considerable proportion of these contain offers to enlist in the service of the govern ment. No doubt they are more or less influenced by the high bounties offered in America, accounts of which have been from time to time published in the newspapers here. To all such solicitations the answer given from here has been uni formly to the effect that no authority has been given by the Government to listen to any proposals of the kind or to make any engagements whatever. Instructions have like wise been sent to the respective consuls, who have re ported similar proposals to me, to make the same answer. I have no reason to believe that any American citizen in England, clothed with authority, has ventured to act in any other way. It is proper for me to add, in explanation of the emigration that is taking place, that a gentleman of in fluence in America, now in London, who is in a situation to know, has lately informed me that some of the great corpo rations for the extension of railways in the western part of the United States, having experienced inconvenience from the liability of the labourers in their employ to be drafted for the war, and apprehending more, are making efforts to procure large supplies from other countries of aliens, who are from that circumstance exempted from the risk of being called into service. It may be that some of those who desire to get across the ocean, for the purpose of enlisting, expect to take advantage of the opportunity thus placed before them. In addition to this, there is no doubt of the fact of a scarcity of labourers in the United States. I learn from private sources that the rate of wages this season is very much advanced. I am led to believe that these causes, in addition to the alleged distress of the popu lation of Ireland, may explain the phenomena of emigration to which your lordship has been pleased to draw my atten tion,—l pray, &c., (Signed) CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE, ' LISBURN ELECTION—BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. The Committee on Elections met at 12 o'clock yesterday, for the purpose of inquiring into the circumstances under which the petition against the return of Mr. Barbour for the borough of Lisburn was withdrawn. There were pre sent Mr. Herbert (chairman), Sir William Miles, Sir F. Baring, Mr. Bonham Carter, and Mr. Ker Seymer. Mr. Wyatt appeared as agent for the sitting member, and Mr. Baxter for the petitioners. The following evidence was given : Moses Bullock, examined by the committee—l am an elec.. tor for the borough of Lisburn. On the 9th March I signed a petition against the return of Mr. Barbour. On the fol lowing day Mr. M'Cann, who had obtained my signature and that of the petitioner Mr. Knox, to the petition, brought me two papers to sign, and I signed them. I did not read them, nor did Mr. M'Cann read them to me. I did not know they were withdrawals of the petition, nor did he tell me that they were, nor anything to that effect. The first thing that made me suspect the documents were a withdrawal of the petition was an observation made by Mr. Knox, to the effect that Weenie told him he could get Mr. Barbour four years in the Tower. (Laughter.) By Mr. M'Cann—You did not explain, nor state to me that you wanted me to sign a withdrawal of the petition. You never told me it was a withdrawal. You only called it a paper. You never told me what the nature of it was. You owned to me that I never read it. On the 24th of March we went to you to Belfast to get up the document, and you produced a paper which you offered to read, but I demanded to see it, and you would not let me. You got round the table from me, for my object was to take it from you by physical force. You had pistols. You read the paper, and it sounded like a withdrawal. You never either read th e paper t o me, or told me the meaning of it. I signed three documents for you in all, without knowing what they were. I deny utterly that I knew any cf them was or were a withdrawal of the petition. If the document came to me from any of the Barbour party I might have questioned it, or examined it , but coming from our own canvasser we thought that ' no thing was wrong. I knew what I was doing right well when I signed I signed the it notwit petition. I .thoughthstanding.it might inju re me i n b usiness, but Did you not go about Lisburn c r yi ng that night, saying I had ruined you by getting you to sign the petition ?—No, sir ; lam not a man of tears. (Laughter.) Did you not ne xt morning come to me a n d t ell me you were a ruined man because you signed the petition?--No, sir, I utterly renounce it. (Laughter.) Wm. Jno. Knox, the other petitioner, was examined, and gave confirmatory testimony. He stated that he sign e d the documents without knowing their nature,. having con fidence in M`Cann, who presented them to hit)]. He denied that he knew their nature or that they were ever read by him, or by M`C ann to hi m, prev i ous to h i s affixing his I sig nature. saiWd Inth.aSteognr"thee c 2 l 4 e t r h k teot.ll,7ttrWeharLneg,pseotliticieintoerr, s L a i s s ir buz,. Waring, and stat_t uru te him that M`Cann had obtained their u si e g t n k a u tn e rz to an ad d oc ument, hiseandt,vitcheethpeurypeollrtproefeewehdiecdhte Belfast yd s id t and saw M'Cann, who refused to give up the doc umen t. A u not rarded. "disclaimer" w as then drawn,o addressed to the Speaker o f themlir.oz,uls,ecoefuCuo—mDmeonysu, and k nowthat I will b e a h eavy ett loser by this affair ?—No ; nor I it. (Laughter.) don't believe a word of p were Mr. Moore, solicitor, examined— Drew the petition aga inst the return of Mr. Barbour. Th e appo i n ted at a meeting of Conservative electorstioners Lis burn. The day aft er the si g nin g of the petition, of witness o bt a ined through WCann a withdrawal of the petition in duplicate. The object of the document was that, in case Mr. Barbour resigned, or in case in the short space of time allowed by the rules of the house the chain of evidence could not be completed, the petition could be withdrawn without expense. These documents were not made use of, and he stated at a meeting of Mr. Vernon's committee that they could not be and would not be made use of, except a resolution was passed to that effect, Never authorised M'Cann to obtain the petitioners' signature to the docu ment of March 24, and did not know of its existence until the 25th. The witness was cross-examined by Mr. McCann with a view to show that he had been employed solely by him to present the petition. This the witness denied, stating that his clients were the committee who acted for the beaten candidate, Mr. Vernon, Letters from witness to Mr. McCann were offered in evidence, but not received by the committee, on the ground that the relative position of the witness and Mr. A.l`Cann was not within the scope of their inquiry. Mr. M'Cann stated that his case was that he employed Mr. Moore, and, considering himself liable for the expense of the proceedings, and that he had control over them, with thew the petition. Mr. IV. Barbour, father of the sitting member, was ex amined, and stated that on the 24th March Bullock, one of the petitioners, came to him and told him be was sorry ho had had anything to do with the petition, but that he had that day signed a withdrawal of the petition. He several times used the word '• withdrawal." Bullock added that his object in seeing witness was to warn him lest any im proper use should be made of the document to get him (wit. ness) or any of hie family into a trap. Thomas Wilson, who was present at the interview, gave confirmatory testimony. Mr. M Cann was eximined, and stated that the docu ment in question.—which he had forwarded to the Speaker of the House of Commons—withdrawing the petition, had been read by Bullock and Knox before they signed it. He had presented the petition, and considered he was justified in withdrawin3 it when he foresaw that he would be put to costs and inconvenience by its prosecution. On cross.examinatiou the witness denied having received an offer from Mr. Barbour of £5,000 to stay the proceed ings. He would not accept a bribe if it had been offered. He admitted having stated in a letter that he had received an O'er of £5,000. The committee adjourned at half.past five until Wednes. day next. RAILWAY EYE-SORES. The Secretary of the London, Chatham, and Dover Rail way—a railway whose measure of usefulness may be gathered from the fact that its shares are at more than 60 per cent, discount—has attempted to defend the proposed unsightly ext,nsion of this enterprise across Ludgate-hill on the ground that it was not opposed by the local residents in 1860. Three years ago, the public were not so well ac quainted with the working of metropolitan railways as they are now, and had come to no definite opinion as to the form these constructions ought to take. The experience gained by the sight of such structures as now dis figure the Waterloo and Blackfriars' Roads, and the dismal leaden-looking tank which is raised across the mouth of the Borough, have determined the public to tolerate none but strictly underground railways. The expense of a few thou sands, more or less, or the crotchets of a few interested engineers and contractors, are as nothing to weigh in the scale against the preservation of London from further dis figurement. Our City has too little beauty to spare, and is already too much the laughing-stock or critical foreigners, to be given up without a struggle to rail way vandalism. In tolerating a railway project of this kind, we shall not be really going forward in what is rather showily called the "path of progress," but returning to things which were practically got ' rid of by our forefathers. More than 100 years ago, the old lud-gate or arch, which spanned Ludgate-hill, was taken down in compliance with the wishes of the inhabi tants, and now it is proposed to erect a viaduct i n it s pl ace only 18 feet high, which is certainly going backwards with a vengeance. The secretary of the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway—the railway at 60 per cent, discount —may promise an ornamental obstruction, but there are several reasons why such a promise should not be accepted. In the first place, the obstruction is not necessary, as a dozen eminent engineers and contractors are ready to show; in the second place, no amount of high art plastering can make a real obstruction bearable; in the third place, the public has too ranch cause to distrust the taste 'of engineer-architects, when it looks at what they have done in South ensington and other quarters • in the fourth place, it o bj ec t s t o t h e destruction of houses, and the consequent rise in rents, which are inseparable from all metro politan railway operations above ground; and, in the fifth place, it objects to any structure which must inevitably im pede the traffic circulation of so crowded a thoroughfare as Ludgate-hill, which often has to afford a passage to more than 7,000 vehicles within an hour. A thoroughfare like this is too important to be given up, bound hand and foot, to the mercies of an unscrupulous tenth-rate railway. The proposal to facilitate the widening of the mouth of Lud gate-hill will be no recompense for the obstruction, as the chief pressure of the traffic is felt higher up, where the roadway is most narrow. _ If the House of Lords should grant this railway company all the powers which, by surreptitious clauses and all the pettifogging arts of Parliamentary warfare, it is striving to obtain, a most dangerous precedent will be established. When the principal thoroughfare in the City is handed over to the railway Goths, no other thoroughfare will long be safe, and London will soon become, like Birmingham or Manchester, a mere city of viaducts. The question whether this main thoroughfare of London, from east to west, is to be permanently disfigured by a hideous railway arch is not merely a local question. It is one that interests not only the millions who dwell in and about the City, but every visitor to the metropolis. The view of St. Paul's from the foot of Fleet-street is not the private property of a few dwellers upon Ludgate-hill, but of almost every men, woman, and child in the country. A LONDONER. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, APRIL 80, 180, THE PROPOSED RAILWAY VIADUCT ACROSS LUDGATE-HILL. The following letter, on the subject of the proposed rail way viaduct across Ludgate-hill, has been addressed to in dividual members of the House of Lords : As occupiers and proprietors of houses in Ludgate-hill and neighbourhood, in the city of London, we respectfully beg leave to call your lordship's attention to the inconvenience and danger of the new railwayviaduct proposed to be carried across that important thoroughfare, by a company now seeking for the sanction of Parliament ; and, in so doing, we beg to assure your lordship that we believe ourselves to be expressing, not only the views of ourselves and others whose interests are directly affected by the scheme in ques tion, but also those of the inhabitants of the metropolis ge nerally. Your lordship is aware that in 1360 the London, Chat ham, and Dover Railway Company obtained an act of Par liament, empowering them, amongst a number of other pro jects, to form euch a viaduct as is now proposed, at a height of 18 feet from the ground. Though these powers were not obtained without considerable opposition, the subject of the introduction of railways into crowded portions of the metro polis bad, at that time, received but little attention from the Legislature, and could scarcely be said to have drawn forth an expression of public opinion. It is, indeed, only within the last few months that the rapid extension of such schemes, coupled with the practical illustration of their consequences afforded by the inconvenient, dangerous, and unsightly via ducts recently built over important thoroughfares, has brought this subject prominently before the notice of Par liament, and has particularly elicited a powerful expression of opinion from some of the most distinguished members of your lordship's house. It has been perceived that these schemes have been laid down without any settled plan or approach to conjoint action, and rather with a view to the interests of particular companies, or for the carrying on of a wasteful competition with existing lines, than with that regard for the public i n t eres t s w hi c h i s th e on ly round of their applications to the Legislature for special powers and privileges. _ The London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company does not appear to have been free from these acknowledged evils attendant upon the development of railway enterprise. Nearly every portion of its extensive system of lines is en gaged in a disastrous rivalry with railways of earlier con struction, serving the seine, or nearly the same, districts; and so low is the publicfaith in its prospects that its shares, upon which £lOO have been paid, are at present sold in the markets at lees thin £IO, indicating a settled opinion among investors that more than three-fifths of the entire capital of the company have been expended unproductively. Under these circumstances the company appear to have, in reality,abandoned their scheme for carrying their line north ward of Earl-street, Blackfriars, including their proposed viaduct across Ludgate-hill. The time allowed for the com pulsory purchase of land for the construction of this portion of the line is limited by the company's act to August, 1863, and the time for the completion of the undertaking to August, 1865. But the company are now confessedly un able to proceed with such purchase, or with the construc tion of this portion of their project, a clause having been inserted by them in a bill (clause 17, No, 1 bill) now before Parliament, praying for the extension of these periods to August, 1865, and August, 1867, respectively; while by another bill also before Parliament it appears that the Lon don, Chatham, and Dover Company have privately con sented to relinquish their powers for the canstruction of all this portion of their original scheme to an entirely now com • pany, formed under the title of the Ludgate Station and Junction Railway Company, who aro now seeking powers for a similar, but, as we conceive, an even more objectionable project. The subject of the proposed railway and viaduct being thus brought entirely anew before the consideration of the Legis lature, and the Ludgate Station and Junction Company's scheme having been recently referred to a committee of your Lordship's House, an opportunity has arisen for the re-con sideratien of the subject by the light of the experience which has been gained during the three years which have elapsed since the London, Chatham, and Dover Company obtained their bill : and we therefore respectfully beg leave to sub mit to your lordship our reasons for objecting to the pro posed undertaking in its present form, The ancient Lud Gate, which originally spanned the thoroughfar e c a ll e d Lud gate-hill, was removed in 1760, at the solicitation of the in habitants of Farringdon Within or Farringdon Without, having been found a serious obstruction even to the compa ratively small traffic of those days. At the present time a viaduct crossing this crowded thoroughfare must be far more productive of injury to trade, inconvenience, annoyance, and datia-er, and will greatly disfigure this portion of the Cofity. St, I p t:w ul i , ll an sh a u w t i o ll u e t ff fr e o c m tua p l u ly bl p ic re v v ie e w nt the w no id b e le ni C n a g th e e f d t r h a e l street at any future tiiue, From the already crowded state of Ludgate-hill and the steepness of its descent accidents are of freq uent occurrence ;but the company proposing, as it does, to o bt a i n powers to permanently close all other streets, roads, and alleys running east and west for a consi increase the traffic in thi s th orough f are may be expect e d th at the railway will still iabfaler further largely it ely while the lowness of the vi a d uct will bring passing e trains and engines so close to the heads of the horses- augm entation of danger to life an d property may d r e e x a_ pected. On the other hand, it is the opinion of competent authorities, including Mr. Tite, that the proposed viaduct is wholly unnecessary, and that the railway may be con veyed with ease, and at an inconsiderable addition to the cost of the undertaking, under Ludgate-hill by means of a unnel. We have the honour to be, my Lord, Your Lordship's most humble and Most obedient servants, F. K. GLOVER, (Signed) JOHN GRAHAM, CHAS. SAMUELS, J. W. BENSON, HENRY GILBERTSON, GEORGE ROUTLEDGE, THOS. TRELOAR, Hon Sec., Committee for the Preservation of Ludgate-hill. C ommittee-room, 12, Ludgate-street, E.C., April 27, 1863. I _mporting. Tea without colour on the leaf pre. vents the Chinese passing off inferior leaves as in the usual kinds. Ilorniman's Tea is uncoloured, therefore, dicays good 414 Sold in packets by 2,280 agents, SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOIIRNALS. TIMES.—In a House of 560 members the Church rates Abolition Bill yesterday received its annual quietus by a majority of 10. Compared with the casting vote of the Speaker last year, this was a very great triumph to those who conceive the exist ence of the Church to be staked on the question. Unless Mr. Newdegate should succeed in carrying his specific for its settlement, it will survive to next year, and most probably many a year after. How little this pertinacity is for the interest of the Church we have often expressed our opinion. We wish to see the controversy settled, by compromise if possible, by abolition if it must be, but, if not, by any other method. Were it in our power by a mo derate amount of violence and injustice to stop the discussion of Church-rates by fixing them on the country for the next fifty years, we should be sorely tempted to do so. Our readers would be spared, at least, one annual wrangle, in which all that can be said has been said a hundred times. But, unfortu nately, in these days there are no meansof shutting up Sir John Trelawny and a dozen of his colleagues in the Lollards' Tower, and it has become next to impossible to extract a Church-rate from a reluc tant ratepayer with money or friends. There is not a hope of the question being thus set at rest. Other questions come and go, shake Governments for a season, and then are buried in old alma necks. he magicians who could once raise a tem - pot on Parliamentary Reform have Bunk their wands a thousand fathoms deep, and in the same abyss lie controversies the names of which will not even recur to the memory. But the Church rate question is cursed with a longevity which bids fair to carry it on beyond our time. So the question must remain open, and as long as it remains open the Cburch of England is placed in a thoroughly false position, and suffers undeserved odium, and, what is even worse, gratuitous injury. POST.—The House of Commons yesterday re jected Sir J. Trelawny's bill for the abolition of church rates, by a majority of ten. The House was unusually full—no less than five hundred and sixty members voting on the question. The number who attended showed how important the question was held to be on both sides of the House. Indeed, ever since the Dissenters openly avowed that their object in seeking the repeal of church rates was not the removal of an obnoxious impost, but the insertion of a wedge which, when driven home, would split up the Cherch, a great change has come over the mind of Parliament, It is only four years since the majo rity against church rates numbered seventy-three. The ground of that majority was a belief in the mind of many persons that the bill for abolition would bring about a settlement which would get rid of a vexatious annual motion in the House of Com mons. Many members who sincerely wished the prosperity of the Established Church supported the abolition of church rates merely to obtain a substi tute which should do well what had been badly done before. But when they came to see that abolition meant not the removal of a Dissenter's grievance— not the substitution of a good measure for a bad one—but the establishment of a principle which in its development was contrary to the very notion of an Established Church, and was meant to over throw it, they had no choice but to conclude that, whatever modification the present state of the law might admit of, abolition was certainly not the principle which ought to be supported. Looking at it altogether, in its history and antecedents, we accept this important majority against the aboli tionists as an incontrovertible token that the Church is gaining ground in popular estimation. We believe that, as long as it pursues its present active, useful course, it will strengthen its hold upon the people; and we can scarcely doubt that ere long even the most rigid Dissenters will feel that it is their own interest, as well as that of the whole community, to let the church alone. HERALD.—A majority of 10 in a house of 560 members has ratified the sentence passed last year by the bare majority of one against Sir J. Tre lawny's bill. The falling off is, we are happy to say, on the part of our opponents mainly. Last year they mustered 286 supporters, whilst only 275 were assembled on yesterday's division. Sir J. Tre lawny himself pointed out another fact of some sig nificance. Previous to this session, some alterna tive, some compromise or other, was always kept in view, as a sort of makeweight to the Abolition Bill. Need we add that every compromise was is turn scornfully rejected ? Under these circumstances, and with the confidence of past success, Mr. Hardy met his antagonists with more than their own in flexibility. He moved the strongest amendment known to the forms of the House of Commons, and he carried it by a majority of 10, in a house of 560 members, exclusive of tellers. Such a blow has not been dealt at the Liberation Society since the day it came into existence, some 20 years ago. It will reverberate through its whole frame, and the stag gering effects will be remembered if it survive twice the time it has already lived. ADVERTISER.—It will be seen from our Parlia mentary report, that the second reading of Sir John Trelawny's bill for the abolition of Church-rates was yesterday lost by a majority of 10, the numbers being, for the motion 275, against it 285. The an nouncement was received with uproarious applause by the Opposition. Nor need we wonder at this, because they had a double triumph in the rejection of the bill—tbe first victory being one over the Dissenters, and the second over the Ministry, they having voted in the minority. Every succeeding session thus sees the Church-rate Abolition party in the House of Commons " becoming small by degrees and beautifully less." The fact is easily accounted for. The extreme violence and vituperation of the Liberation Society and its weekly organ could not fail to do damage to any cause. And if this ultra virulence be persisted in much longer, the result will be to destroy Dissent altogether. If, indeed, the Liberation Society and its weekly mouthpiece were specially retained and liberally paid by the friends of the Church, for the purpose of upholding the Church and overthrowing the cause of Dissent, they could not more efficiently do their work. Well, indeed, may Dissent pray to be saved from its friends—at least from such friends as the Libera tion Society and their hebdomadal organ. LAW INTELLIGENCE-April 29. COURT OF DIVORCE. HARE V. HARE. Dr. Spilka and Mr. Searle appeared for the peti tioner ; Mr. T. Atkinson for the respondent. The respondent, Mr. John William Hare, the clerk to Mr. Vice-Chancellor Kindereley, married the petitioner, then Lydia Tester, a widow, on the 14th of October, 1852. They cohabit e d a t 10, Liver pool-terrace, at 489, Oxford-street, and in Malden road, till August, 1861 ; and they had issue three children. The petitioner sued for a judicial separa tion on the ground of cruelty. The respondent's plea was simply one of denial. Mrs. Hare said—l had a child named Alice, by my first husband. She is now 13. My children by the respondent are Herbert, aged 10; Selina, aged 7 ; and Percy, aged 5. My husband has treated me with great contempt and unkindness ever since 1854. His temper had been bad from the first. In 1855 we had some friends staying with us, and he was angry about their being at our house although he had asked them himself. He told me he was tired of me. The next thing I remember was find ing myself lying on the drawing-room floor at about four the next morning. I had evidently fainted, and I,e had gone up stairs to bed, leaving me in that state. 1 had a business in Oxford-street. We had s.,t up in opposition to Mr. Charles Burton, the dealer in perambulators. Burton's men often in sulted me, hut when I asked my husband for pro tection he would run out of the shop. At Christmas, 1859, my little girl had accidentally hurt her brother's eye while at play. Mr. Hare's mother insulted me in my husband's presence. She told me that I was a " nasty long legged hussy ;" that I had no business to " sculk" on her son, and that I ought to get my own living. My husband patted her on the check, and said th a t th a t was the way to talk to me. She left two o r th ree days after. My hus band constantly called m e "b e ast" and "serpent." At that time we had a servant named Ellen Muchmore. The respondent frequently told her not to mind me, and said that my friends were not half so respectable as hers. He has asked her in my hearing if " the sav age," meaning me, was at home. He has told her that I was nothing but a poor needlewoman when he married me, and that he had made me a lady. He has told me to go on the stage, and said that they would engage such as me at the Britannia. He would have his dinner removed to the kitchen that he might have it with the servant. I was only allowed 255. a week to keep house for the whole family—four child r en an d a s ervant. He said that if I wanted m ore money I m ight go and earn it. His income was £250 a year . He has several times caught me round th e th roa t, a nd has frequently put his fi s t i n my f ace. One day he brought an Italian home with him, end said 6 , There's the beast ; you not would thi n k she w as so bad to look at her." In the spring of 1861 some negotiations took place for a separation, but they came to nothing. In t Yl he ay y . t l:3 ok 6l, the resp on d ent b urs t into my room with a man, named Champn e y s , w hile I was in bed, and my boy Percy from me. I resisted, and my night dress was torn. My wrists were dread fully bruised. The next morning two brickmakers with immense s ti c k s i n the i r h an d s were brought into my room. I was giving day they attempt e d t o come my youngest child his bath. My h us b and insu l te d me before these , men. They took my children f rom me. The next :: in again, but I had bolts put on the d oor . M r. H are sent, however, for a man with a crowbar. Clompneya remained in d the hoUse• and had some of his meals with Mr. Hare. Once the respondent got my hand in the door. I told him he was hurting me, but I think he pushed the harder. My hand was very much swollen. He has told me I was no more in the house than a dead dog. In August, 1861, we were in apartments at .Anerley ; and he told me that my mother, who had been staying with us, should not remain in the house any longer. I tried to go to her, but he seized me round the throat. I have not lived with my husband since then. Cross-examined—l was a widow between three and four years before I was married to the respon dent. I do not remember calling Mr. Hare " crawling reptile." I never used abusive language to him for taking his sister to a lecture, or at an) time. I never abused his mother. In January, 1860, my father wrote a letter to my husband. 1 requested him to interfere, and it is very likely that I requested him to write that letter. I very pos sibly saw it before it was sent. (The letter was put in. It was a notice to the effect that the writer in tended on the following Monday to lay a statement of the respondent's "cruel. unmanly, and co war6l 3 conduct before Sir R. Kinthrsley unless a satisfac tory arrangement was previously made.) Sir C. Crebswell thought it was rather a pity that Sir R. Kinderslcy had not been invited to interfere. Mr. Atkinson said that Sir R. Kindersley had been applied to by the petitioner. Witness--Did not hear my father call my hus band a -- sneak. My friends did not on ont occasion hunt him from room to room; but he did leave the room in which my friends were. My mother and I went to him and asked him to see her. I cut the leaves out of my husband's account-book containing the items of my housekeeping expendi ture. They are safe in the possession of my solicitor, I can write, but did not think fit to take a copy. He did not allow me two guineas a week. I did tell him that I would not have any more children by him, I never threatened to get him dismissed from his situation. Once he gave the servant a shilling for what be had eaten at home. I said I would not have it, and told him to take it back. As he would not do so I threw it into the fire. I took lessons in singing and on the piano, but my father paid for them. My father is clerk to Mr. Plowman thel attorney. In August, 1860, I broke open a drawer and two boxes. I did that to try and find my account books, which were aljvays taken away from me. I took away letters of my own which I fouled in the boxes, and a bundle of other papers. I took a chopper and destroyed my husband's portrait which was hanging on the wall. The Judge—That was cutting him up in effigy. (Laughter.) Witness—l also chopped up some chairs, but not seven—not more than five. (Laughter.) Mr. Atkinson (producing the debris of a music stool)—Did you chop up this ? Witness—l did not leave it in that state. I hope you will spare me as much as you can on that sub ject, for I was so irritated that 1 was worked up to a state of madness. The Judge—But you cannot be spared ; for the jury want to know what was the amount of irrita tionon both sides. Witness—l took away some plated forks and other articles, but I did it after my husband had removed some things of mine. The Judge—lt is a pity they did not settle the whole matter in the same way—namely, by set-off. (A laugh.) Mr. Atkinson—Where are the things now? Witness—l don't know that lam obliged to say ; but I can tell you, if I must. Mr. Atkinson—l won't press you, but a learned friend suggests that you perhaps took them to your uncle's. Witness—Oh dear, no. My uncle would not re ceive them. (Laughter.) I burnt the fragments of the portrait, but I did not say " many a better man has been served so." I left his bed in October, 1860; but do you know why I did it ? He had told me that I might lie there all day if I would go out all night. After that I had a separate room ; but Mr. Hare made no objection to it. Once I did box Mr. Hare's ears; I ju , t tapped him, but he had been daring me to strike him. I never sent my girl to buy a cane to beat him with. (Lsught, r.) No, sir, certainly not. It is dreadful to have such ques tions put to me. I was summoned before the ma gistrates for assaulting him, and fined. He had told my Herbert not to mind such a worthless fag g►ot as me, and that my father was an imbecile old fool. I told him if he used such language to my child I would pot him out, and I tried to do so, but I tailed. I was fined 6i. (Laughter.) After this I withdrew from his table. During one of the al tercations that occurred I asked a person named Hopkins to protect me, but I did not say to him, " That's right, hit him again." (Laughter.) I never addressed the mob, and the crowd did not pelt the house with mud and stones—at least I was in such a state of mind that I cannot say what took place out of doors. I summoned my husband for neglecting to maintain me, but the charge was dis missed. Re-examined—l did not summon him myself— it was the parish that did so. A servant was called to corroborate the peti. tioner's evidence, and the case was then adjourned - - POLICE INTELLIGENCE-April 29. LAMBETH.--FURTHER EXAMINATION OF THE REV. THOMAS WYCHERLEY.—Ttie Rev. Thomas Wycherley, late Baptist minister of the Baptist Chapel, Clapham-rise, was placed at the bar for the fourth time, before Mr. Elliott, on a charge of being concerned, with Mary Ann Newton, in steal ing £6O in bank notes and other property. Mr. Chipperfield, as before, attended for the pro secution, and Mr. Neale for the defence, and the court was much crowded. The first witness called was Mr. Alfred Cooper Woodward, a clerk in the International Telegraph Office. who attended with the documents relating to the telegrams ; but before producing them ho said that there was a rule of the company which bound it to secrecy in its communications, excepting in such cases as the ends of justice required their production on compulsion, and he had, therefore, to request an expressed desire on the part of the magistrate before producing them. Mr. Elliott made the request as desired, and the witness produced the usual printed form filled up on Tuesday, the 24th of February, and signed " Thomas E. Wycherley," and containing the following tele gram addressed to Mrs. Mary Ann Newton, 143, Great Gaol-street, Yarmouth•—" Have you arrived safe ; are you well ; when do you return ; send a reply to the Shoreditch Station." That message reached Yarmouth as appeared byanother document acknow ledging its receipt, and signed " Mary Ann New ton;" and by a third document signed "Mary Ann Newton," an answer was for warded on the same day saying, " Arrived safe; I am quite well, and will leave by the 2 o'clock train." By a fourth document it appeared that the message was received at the Shoreditch Station, and the acknowledgment of its receipt was signed "Thomas E. Wycherley." The young woman, Mary Ann Newton, was here brought into court in charge of one of the warders of Wandsworth House of Correction, and when s worn admitted that her name to the telegram pro clued, and which she had received from the prisoner, was in her handwriting, and that the signature " Thomas E. Wycherley" to the other documents was in the handwriting of the prisoner. Mr. Chipperfield— O a your leaving town on the 21st February, had any arrangement been made between the prisoner and yourself about his follow ing you ? Witness—Yes ; he said he should come down on the following day (Sunday) after his sermon, and if he did not I was to return on the next day (Mon day). He also said that if he did not come, and that I did not return on the Monday, he should send me a telegraphic message on the Tuesday; so that on that day I expected one. Mr. Oh ipperfield—Now,respecting the bank notes belonging to your mistress. I wish to ask you whe ther you had any conversation with the prisoner before you took them from your mistress's bedroom drawer ? Witness—Yes, we had a conversation respecting the notes, with a view of our going to Egypt. He said that if I could get a sufficient sum of money to take myself, the owners of the ship woald take him, but they would not take me unless I was married to him. Mr. Chipperfield—l want you to state whether you had any conversation with the prisoner respect ing the bank notes before you took them from the drawer. Witness—Yes ; I told him there were notes in one of my mistress's drawers, and we agreed with each other that I should take them. He wished me to take the notes for my passage out to Egypt, but I was not to tell him the time I was to take them, but that he should be in the kitchen when I brought them down, and he asked me to give him a note as he owed £3 for lodging. He told me to put my name to it, and I did so and gave it to him, qnd put the others in the kitchen drawer. On the Thursday before I left my mistress to go to Yarmouth I put my name to four or five notes, and Mr. Wycherley had the rest ; and we agreed to change them between us. The prisoner did not say how much he had, but the .notes he had he must have taken from the kitchen .dresser-drawer where I put them. When I started 'for Yarmouth I had £l5 and the prisoner had all !the rest. When the prisoner came to me to Tun bridge I had 11 sovereigns and a half, and 13s. in my purse, and out of that I gave him 10 sove reigns; he then asked me for my purse containing the sovereign an d a half and the 13s. in silver, and I gave it to him. The prisoner then told me that Mrs. Levy had discovered what I had taken, and isked me if I wished to know what she charged me with. I said I knew what I had taken ; that I had aken three rings, two chains, and the notes; and he then said that Mrs. Levy charged me with steal. g four rings besides, and £2 10s. in gold that was in the purse with the notes. I told him that when I took the notes from the purse I left the gold, and he then said that he took the purse himself, with the £2 10s. and the four rings also ; that he pledged them in the Borough, and destroyed the duplicates. [ doubted whether he had done so, when, in proof, he pulled out mistress's purse from his pocket and burnt it, and then said to me, "You must swear you took them ; for you are sure to go to prison." said, " I don't care if they hang me, for my mind is in a miserable state." Mr. Chipperfield—What was it that induced you , o give the prisoner the £lO at Tunbridge? Witness—He asked me what money I had, and said they ,vould take it all from me at the station, Ind I then took out my purse and gave him the 10 sovereigns. Mr. Chipperfield—Did ho say anything about what he wtt►s about to do with the £lO. Witness—Yes, he said he should take care of it hi I came out of prison. Out of the sovereign and t half and 13. in my parse, the prisoner took the calf sovereign and 13i. in silver while we were in the cab going to the station-house to give myself up, Ind the sovereign and the purse he gave up to me. I begged of him that I should have a solicitor to de tend me, and he said he should take care I had one. Mr. Chipperfiold—Had the prisoner said anything to you about the key of the dressing-room P Witness—Yes; he said the key of the dressing room would open Mrs. Levy's bedroom ; and on my saying I was not aware of it, he said, " What, surely you are not going to look me straight in the face and tell me, after living four years and a half in the house, you do not know that the dressing-room key will open your mistress's bedroom P and I said I did not know it. Mr. Elliott—What you have been swearing to day the truth ? Witness—lt is, sir. In reply to further questions by Mr. Chipperfield, The witness said that the first day she had been brought to this court to give evidence against the prisoner, she had ben locked up in one of the cells, and while there had a conversation with the pri soner and his friends. The first person who came to her was a young woman, who called herself the pri soner's daughter, and she requested that she would not say anything unfavourable of the prisoner, and that she was to state that she had borrowed money from the prisoner, though she never borrowed a farthing from him in her life. The gaoler to the court denied that the witness could have had any conversation with the prisoner, but the witness reasserted the fact, and the prisoner on the occasion called her his dear Annie. Mr. Chipperfield here said he required further time to complete the case, and the prisoner was again remanded. GREENWICH.—Mr. Charles Edward Butler. of 31, Farringdon-street, and Sutton, Surrey, ap peared to three different summonses, at the instance of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Rail way Company, charging him with travelling on their line of railway without first obtaining his ticket, and with intent to defraud the company. Mr. Sleigh, barrister, appeared for the defendant, the railway company being represented by Mr. Inspector Carpenter, the chief of the company's police. John Wright said—l am a servant in the employ of the company, and on the 13th of the present month I was a passenger by the 9.30 a.m. tram from Epsom. On the arrival of the train at the Sutton Station at 9.45 I observed the defendant enter a first class carriage. I entered the same com partment, and sat with him and a lady Ns ho was a plssenger. At New-cross the collector came to the carriage and asked for the tickets, The lady gave up her ticket, but the collector knowing me did not ask for my ticket. The collector then asked defendant, who sat at the further end of the carriage, for his ticket, and the defendant replied, "I am an annual." The collector remarked that he must see the ticket, and the defendant put his hand into his pocket and took out a pocket book, which he exhibited to the collector, The col lsctor then observed, " That w ill not do ; I must see your ticket, sir, if you please;" and defendant replied, "I have left it in my other book." The collector asked defendant the station from which he came, and he said Sutton. The fare from Leather head, the station whence the train originally started, was then demanded, which the defendant paid with out any demur. I was at the London bridge Station on the afternoon of the same day, and saw defen dant approach the booking-office, pass through on to the platform without taking a ticket, and enter a first-class carriage by the 510 train. I entered a second class carriage adjoining, and on the train ar riving at Sutton I saw the defendant get out of the carriage. The ticket collector was standing at the gate through which th e p assengers passed, but the defendant passed through the goods yard into a lane. On the afternoon of the 17th inst. I was again at the London-bridge Station, and saw de fendant get into a first-class carriage by the 4 15 train. I travelled in a second-class carriage, and at Sutton I saw the defendant again pass through the goods-yard into the lane, which annual ticket holders are in the habit of doing, instead of passing through the gate at which the tickets of ordinary passengers are collected. After the defendant had got over the stile into the lane I went up to him and said; "I beg your pardon, sir, but did you give up your ticket on getting out of the train ?" He said " Yes." I asked him to whom he gave the ticket, and he replied " The boxing clerk." I told him he had not done so, and he then said, "Did I not ?" He searched his pockets, and accompanied me back to the collector, when he asked him if he hid not given up his ticket ? The collector said he had not, but that he had seen him take a single ticket in the morning. The defendant, without any further words, then took 18. 6d. f rom hi s poc k et and paid the fare. John Marsh, ticket collector at the New cross station, was called to prove demanding defendant's ticket on the morning of the 13th, and said that, on defendant showing him his pocketbook, he told him he must see his annual ticket, when defendant said he must have left it in his other book. Inspector Carpenter said the defendant had been an annual ticketholder for a period of ten years, but not since the 22d of October last. Mr. Sleigh said, for the defence, that the defen dant had been an anuuel ticketholder of the com pany, but beirg about to dispose of his property at Sutton he had not renewed the ticket, and having a large business under his management, and heavy Gifitction among his family at home, he had forgot ten that his annual ticket had lapsed, and had paid his fare when demanded of him. He (Mr. Sleigh) thought there was some discrepancy in the evi dence of the ticket collector and the witness Wright as to the defendant having first said he was an annual ticketholder. It had been ad mitted that the defendant had taken a single ticket on the morning of the 17th, the difference between which and a return ticket was only 9d. If a charge of endeaeouring to save such a sum had been made against a person to whom 9d. was an object there might be supposed to be a motive, but to defendant the money was no object. It was well known that if the wife of a peer took a sixpenny packet of needles for which she could have no possible use, it would not be called stealing, buy it would be said she was mad, although a person to whom the needles might be of value would be held guilty of stealing. 'rho learned counsel, in conclusion, made a strong appeal on behalf of the defendant. The defendant also addressed the magistrate, ob serving that on the very next day after being stopped by the witness Wright he went and paid £l7 for an annual ticket, in order that a mistake should not again occur, and that in exhibiting his pocketbook he had-done so, thinking he had his re turn ticket, and that nothing was said either by him or the coltector as to the annual ticket. Mr. Maude said he was sorry that he could come to no other conclusion than that the defendant had knowingly con_mitted the offences with which he was charged. He saw no discrepancy between the statement of the , a itnesses and the statement mad • by the defendant himself, that in showing his pocket book he thought it contained his return ticket ; but this could not have been so, or he would not, when unable to produce the ticket, have said he had left it in his other book. A great deal had been said about the respectability of the defendant, but ho knew no distinction of persons while sitting us a magistrate in that court. His worship then imposed a penalty of 40s. and costs in each of the three cases. Mr. Sleigh —I suppose the defendant has a right to appeal ? gr . . Maude—He has that right, and if my judg ment is wrong I shall only be too glad that it should be set right. An awkward incident occurred the other day in reference to the writ for a new election for Halifax, It seems that by some inadvertence the writ was directed to Halifax in Nova Scotia, instead of Halifax in Yorkshire I The accident was discovered before the despatch of the colonial mail, and the letter was delivered up by the Post office authorities. [AnvElsTlSEMENT.]—Holloway's Ointment and Pills.— Bad breasts, ulcers, abscesses, wounds, and sores of all kinds may be thoroughly healed by the application of this ointment to the parts affected after they have been duly fomented with warm water. The discharges should not be checked at once, but rather encouraged, for such sudden check must of course be always dangerous. Nature is the noblest of physicians, and must not be opposed, but seconded. All sores are for a time the safety-valves of the constitution, and should not be closed or healed until they assume a healthier character. Under the action of this powerful oint ment, together with the pills, the depraved humours of the body will be quickly romoYed, Mysterious Attempted Suicide by a French Officer in the City. The police are at present engaged in investigative the circumstances of a most determined attempt at suicide by a French gentleman named Hippolita Linde, who had been for a month past residing at Fiveash's Hotel, Aldersgate-street. It appears that on Monday evening the commissioners of the City and of the Metropolitan Police received simulta' neously letters stating, that by the time the letters came to hand the corpse of the writer would be lying in a room in the above hotel, as he would have shot himself dead with bullets from a revolver. He con cluded by saying that the police would be rewarded for any trouble they might be, put to in conse quence of his act. The singular circumstance of the letters being directed both to Scotland-yard and Old Jewry by a foreigner, who might be supposed ignorant of the respective headquarters of the dif ferent police forces, deserves remark. When the letter was received at the Old Jewry, Inspector Hamilton, Sergeant Packman, of the detective force, and five constables were met by a similar body of the Metropolitan force, who had been despatched by the authorities at Ssotiand-yard, and who, find ing their services were not required, withdrew. The City police proceeded upstairs to the second floor front room, and found the door fastened, and it required their united exertions to force it open few inches. They then found that all the furni ture had been piled against the door, and that the room was perfectly dark, the blinds having been drown and the shutters closed. The writer of the letter was not dead, and, from the tone of his remarks Inspector Hamilton judged it necessary to be very cir cumspect in order to prevent casualties. TheFreech man said that he was a ruined man, and that he had been disappointed in the object of his life. Sergeant Packman said, " We are Englishmen; we do not wish to injure you," and he offered to shake hands in proof of friendship. He put in his hand, and found that the unfortunate man's body was wet with blood. The Frenchman shook hands, when Packtnan said, " Let us shake hands in the English manner, with both hands." The proposal threw the man off his guard, and while he was held fast the door was burst in. Upon the light being let in a shocking scene presented itself. A tall young man, of aris tocratic and military bearing, and of dark corn' plexion, was clothed merely in his coat and trousers, and was covered with blood, which was pouring from three dreadful ballet-wounds in the breast and side. The room was in complete disorder, and the bed and floor were saturated with blood. Upon the floor lay a revolver of French manufac ture, and near were some military orders and decorations, one of which appeared to be of great value. Three of the six barrels of the revol ver were found to have been recently discharged and completely reloaded, doubtless in readiness for a renewal of the attempt. The shirt, waistcoat, and two flannel shirts were picked up on the floor, and were each found to contain three bullet holes, and to be completely saturated with blood. had, no doubt, divested himself of the garments to allow himself the more freely to bleed to death. The bullets used were conical balls, of a patent con' struction, which rendered the injuries inflicted of very aggravated character, A surgeon was seat for, who temporarily bandaged the wounds, and ordered the sufferer to be forthwith carried to St' Bartholomew's Hospital, where he now lies under the care of Mr. Lawrence. The police, in searching the room, dis covered a number of documents and letters in the French language, the contents of which have not bees allowed to transpire, but which it is understood contain detailed statements as to the reason of the suicide. M. Linde is understood to be a member of a family of wealth and position, and to have been an officer in the French service, in which it is believed he ob. tained the decorations already mentioned, which were found in the blood upon the floor of his roots• Upon•inquiry at the hospital yesterday, it Was ascertained that, though the unfortunate gentleman ° lungs have been penetrated and fearfully injured' he still survives, but without hope of recovery. COUNTRY MARKETS. ... 4.), LYNN-TUESDAY. A good attendance at market to-day, with an average show of wheat, in excellent condition. The demand w B° good, at an advance of fully 2s per quarter Lion late rates' New spring corn unaltered. White 50s to 52s I Barley. 37s to 40$ EA.. 44s to 47s 1 Grinding ...... ..30s to 3 , 2 . Beans .—s to —s 1 Oats.. New 36s to 38s I Peas —s to --4 NEWARK— White wheat new, 45s to 54s Red do. 44e to 48s Old white --s to —s Red do. --s to —8 Barley, malting 37s to 43s Peas,.... 1 V Barley, E D x s g p r i A n Y th . g Oats, old, 305 to New do 23s to 260 Beans. 43s to 450 W Beans, new 35$ 33s to 38s. 2Bs to 31g HULL—TUESDAY. • a The wheat trade in the early part of the we e k reraan i e „, dull; but, owing to the advices from Am er i ca , a brisk '-`, mend sprang up. A small supply of E ng li s h wheat A; ) , day, for which farmers asked extravagant prices, but in "' cl i, business passing is to 2s per qr was generally reali o _ l Foreign was also from is to 2s d earer . S pr i ng cor n of ,‘, descriptions met with more genera l i nqu i ry at extreme ctir, rencies. Wheat.... Old white.... pe r qr .. 48 s Od t o 503 o O d I ~ Old red New white .. , 47s Od to 500 ,'A New red ... ~ Barley.... English malting 32s Od to 3 8 s o d Grinding 27s 6d to 29 oa Saal and Oderbruck Holstein and Danish 2 Bs Od to 29 3 v, a Grinding Oats English, o ld Archangel and Riga, per st.. 22 0 86 s ssl°°2(d to i l to dto ls 5 ., 1 1 Friesland and D u t c h o sl3d to 03 1 ; 5 1, Swedish and Danish oBl2ld to 001 Beans ....English, old, p er qr 4 ss Od to 463 ( ,',4 New pigeon 42 s Od to 41s ~a New tick. 4os Od to 42 3 ( 4 Egyptian .. 33s Od to 34s `, i i Peas Foreign boilers .. : : 5 336 2 3: 5 : °l-I° o ° c idddd to -t o( o : 5333- -684100: pa , d acl33 ' Grinding Tares .... Spring. 0 Indian Corn Linseed, feeding crushing . 4os Od to 525 0 Linseed cakes (Hull) £9 15 0 to £lO 0 0 Foreign 0 8 5 oto 9 in Rap 1 e ca k es 6 5 oto 6 .; 1 " 0 , Bones COAL ili Prices of Coal per Ton a' ARKET. the elose of the motet. Walls End. s. Hartlepool.. ......... 16 South Hartlepool.... • 1 6 1 Kelloe .... .16. 16 0 South Kelloe.. ....... • _ Rid dell ........ . 1 4 Wharncliffe .......... 14 p, Framwellgate ........ v f , Haswell .. . ...... •11 " 0 Hetton 1/ 6 South Hetton ...... • ' Tunstall . 1 5 Hough Hail ......... 1 5 v Camp ... Ships at market, 92; sold, 46. s. . Buddle'sWest H ar tl ey 15 d 3 Bates'sWest Hartley, .13 9 Byass's Bebside West Hartley .. 15 3 Wylam 15 0 Lambert's West llart- ley l5 0 Carway and Duffryn Malting l9 6 Hastings Hartley l5 3 anfield Moor 12 6 Tantield Moor Butes l2 3 Eden Main...... l4 6 nrile . A DEATH BED.—It i s goo d to h ave one's iweci tical sense of the wor ld' s no thi ngness refreshe d an d ot" up anew by the sight of a delitli bed, Bths. EURTON.—On the 28th inst ir ~ at Walmer-beach, the W ife of Colonel Fowler Buxton, of a son. coo . PAKENIIAM.—On the 28th inst i at-St. Leonard's -ow the Hon. Mrs. Pakenharcr,•of it,..danghter. the VINCENT,--On the 28th inst. 'tt Hemingford Abbots, wife of Captain Vincent, M.T., of a son. Marriages. Chr i ß t BOWRING—TOULMIN. On the 2Sth inst., 8-t f Church, Bayswater, John C. .Bowring, Esq. , ° ,.,"-og, beare, South Devon, eldest son of Si r John Bo%sc, of Isabella, younger daughter of Calvert Touluali, Inverness-terrace, Kensington-gardens. jolV i COLES—LERMITTE.—On the 28th inst., a t Bright° ll Aoo 9 Coles, Esq., of Notting-hill, and the Stock B... s .;ff ra ittoy London, to Amelia, thftedaughter of Fredk. Pe' Esq., Montpelier Yalu, Brighton. Deaths. F r a nci s BONHAM.— On the 26th inst , at Knightsbridg e, It. Bonham, Esq. . ga ll E L E w h E v e s s . --, Esq.,On o i f n ~s i t 1, e a h t a S m t .. p J a o r h k n: n s e - John's-wood,, r e .s e a b ' i r , -- c o- (.1 0 1 : Berke, aged 38. . On the 26th inst., at Melbourne, Derbyshire' Fox. On phire, l ielirj W. Fox, Esq,, aged t 4. TRIP Th am es LAMBART—Onithe 28th inst., a t Ditton. til h e /a te Corn. Oliver WM. Lambert, r e td. C o R.N., son °f the Earl of Cavan. ir• I lr ' POWELL.—On the 26th i ns t. a t a t Ch e ltenham, the Ii - v i c ar Powell, B.D , Can on o f Landaff, and for s ixt y Years of Abergavenny, aged 91. •,- ~, s O' for Buckinghamshire, aged 74. SlisAhuarrpEe.:—Eong,t,honthiniista.,d,nwWinimdipesehlea-nist,reet, .' a—e l.r , ---------- NDROVS. London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM A . / . /0 . li 2 l. of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at 'rum Surf Ofacceouoiol Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy', IA t /le Middlesex.—ThurecUth April 30, 1* 33. Surrey,