The Sun. — London, England, 1845-07-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TITURSDAI MORNING, JULY l7, 184 5. THE SOUTH-EASTERN COIVIPA.NY AND THE BOARD OF ORDNANCE. EVIDENCE TAX EN BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. Members present—Lord Ashley, Sir Charles Douglas, Mr. Duncombe, Mr. Tattoo Egerton, Mr. Hawes, Mr. Hayter, Mr. Liddell, Mr. Faking,ton, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Tapered, Mr. Vernon, Lord Wortley. Benjamin Hawes. Esq., in the chair. Francis R. ainham, Fsq., called in and examined. ai:pli , ,:a.tion I .Ira al,,out to do to the Committee. I trust you will allow me to preface it with a very few observations. CHAIRMAN—WiII you allow me to precede what you are going to say, by stating what the Committee have entrusted me to enmmunicate to you? It is their wish that the whole of the e qui ace that is supposed to militate against you, in your pub! sapacity, should be in your hands, and that you should have the full cognisance of all that has been alleged against your pubic cenduct ; if that has rant been done, you are at perfect liberty to wait. till you have full cognisance of all that has been said before the Committee, before you make any statement, Witness—l am exceedingly obliged to you; I have had no papers. My object in appearing here may be considered an improper object. I am told that I have forgone an ad vantage, and I am quite willing to forego that in the anxiety that I have of setting myself right, or at least of making such explanation, whether it be satisfactory or not, as in my cross-examination or the evid.nce of ethers will bear the test of truth. The object of my coming here is to pray that. I may be immediately examined ; and o ne word I have to say upon that. It was late on Wednesday when I heard that a statement was made as to the cheque. I heard it indi ectly ; this Committee was sitting, and the immediate inn ulse upon my mind was to send in to beg to be examined at the moment ; but I felt that as you pro bably were upon the other question, that is, immediately upon the petition, it nouid be impertinent and improper for me to occupy your time at that moment. It was only last night. that I heard in a way that may readily ()emir hi a gentleman that was examined, that the question of the cheque Was gone into. I immediately deter mined iu my ewn m nd to appear before the Committtee; the advice of the only friend I consulted upon it was against it ; he said, " You forego an advantage; you should hear the whole first." lam ready, however, to forego that advan tage, and I am perfectly willing to state the case, sub jecting my statement to the test of cross-examination afi.eitwarde, aril the statement of oilier witnesses who may be examined. I am prepared to make a state ment of the precise facts. The Committee will re member that the transaction was nine years go. I have no paler of any kind or sort. I think, however, my statement will be so ccrrect as to defy eiedradiction ; at the same time, up to yesterday, when I saw Mr. Wray after hia examina tion, I was mistaken as to one point which I am extremely anxious to ex s lain ;he set me right yesterday as to th a t, My statement mu t be very short; In the early part of the seesion of Mr. Wrey, to whom I was under considerable obligations (it is not necessary to state them with any ex licitness), came to me and said, "I am very much interssted in the success of the South-Eastern Railway, and I wish you would eive us a lift ; and I want your advice upon some yesnts." I said, " %-y dear Wray, I owe very great obliea es to Sou, and I will do anything I can to serge you." He • , " I should be very much otillged to you if you would." A: d, upon that, I have not the least hesita tion i n s wi n e the , : 1 did all I cull individually to assist Mr. Wray in the object he had in view; that is. in plai n t erms, I did what I could to assist him in pa sing that Bel. both in and out. of Parliament Mr. Wray never held out to me oi.•• word. nor any c:inversation e,er take place, as to any advantage of any kind or sort that I was to derive from it. I considered it a great personal advantage; I mean personal, with e cute to the debt of gratitude that I owed him ; I consider , it it a great pieasure to m y se lf to d o w h at I could far him. Trier, were some vestions upon the French lines where I gave th• m sor e advice, I will not sae assistance: because thee w •re tacit eb eto assist them elves. I never had any communication in anyway with any members of the South • Eastern Railway Committee. I never had from them directly or indirectly, or from Ms. Wray di' ectly or indirectly, any offer of any personal advantage to my self to be derived from it After that Bill was passed, Mr liVrey came to me and stared that the South-Eastern Railway Company felt that. I had been of use to them. great use to them, I think he said, and that they had kept a quality of reserved shares, which had not been disposed of, aest that they had determmn d to appropriate 100 snares fanny benefit. Mr. Wray said, "I know it will not he cony n'ent for you to hold these snares." meaning, of course, what Ido not deny, that I :Ina not a rich man " I will hold them for you and I te ink I , an derive some advantage from them ;" and Mr. \Vr ty, I think, ab cut three weeks after wards (he will be able to tell you be'ter), cam• to me and said. .' I have been able to make 30 'I. of 'hose share: which I will wive, ton" brim beginning to end, so far as I know of the transaction, I have no hesitation in stating that that is the w transaction. It is nine years ago. and I had very much forgotten it ; m e impression was the other day, that I had not received the 30/.. but that, in point of fact. as I ow. d Mr. Wray money, Mr. Wray had received the 3001. for my benefi, liquidating the debt I hat was my im pression ; bur the day befere yesterday, when I stated this to Mr. Wray he said, " You are wrong, depend upon it ; I gave you the money, either in a cheque or money." Arid I said, 4 ' If you did I have not the least recollection ; but as I never meant to suppose for a moment that I had not had the benefit of it in some way, you are much more likely to know than I am, and therefore I take it for granted, under the circumstances. that I received the money." I have not the least recoll:ction of receiving it, but I take it for granted that so it is. I cannot have the slightest doubt of it, and I must take it for granted that he did give me the cheque. I can only stale again that, a to the transaction itselt, there was never, at the time I assisted him, the smallest expectation on my mind of deriving any advantage frem it ; and of course, when I state this, the Committee will most naturally and properly take care to ascertain that fact from other quarters. I think I can undertake to say, net knowing who the Directors of toe South-Eastern Railway were at that time, so much as this, that all those gentlemen will tell you the same. I should h.toe so. for, upon my honour, I do not know their names, nor all of them ; but I challenge them all, from beginning to end, to say that I had ever the slightest expectation of any kind or sort, and Mr. Wray also ; and the proposal as to these shares was never made to me till after the Bill had passed, and the shares I never received. inasmuch as it would not have been convenient ; but the shares' worth, afterwards, I did re ceive frosty Mr. array ; that is the transaction. Was that the only sum which you so received from the South-Eastern Company ?—Certainly, unequivocally the only sum. Have you read the petition which has been presented to the House from the South •Eastern Railway Company?—l have. And. of coo se, therefore, you have read the letter, signed 4; J. Hignett," dated " February 3, 1845 ?"—Yes. I w iLt read tw,, pass3ges in that letter :—" I spoke to Mr. Bonham on the same point," that is, the allocation of forth coming +hares. " i.ut he feels scone difficulty, as there is to be an oppo pion in Parli.onent to y••ur Ines. You can send some shares to him or not, as you please, and mark your letter, Pri vate,' and s , ate that no do so at my suggestion." Have you any explanation or observation to make u i .on that ? —Mr. Hignett never spoke to me on the subject in any way. I had never communicated wish hioi upon it. I never heard of the ex istence of any letzer written, as it appears, on the 3d February, up to the receipt of this 1.-tter from Mr Fearon. Upon my honour, as a g entleman, I was perfectly ignorant of the exist ence of such a letter till I received this letter from Mr. Fearon. The —to RS read the same as foll , ws g Sottel-E...stern Railway-office, 35 a, Great George- We-tmioster June 26, 15.1,5, st F ;ma fo i it Inv duty to inform you, that under the advice () f co, 6 • ter addr s-t 1 by Ilr, Hignett, the solicitor of the B • r to which you -ire attached, to the late Secretary of the Soot i-Eas frt. if ; du , y Company, will he produced this d.,y at he sittinz of the Cti;:omitte• on Group A ; y• ur name is mentioned in this letter, ,nti it w ll no doubt appear desirable to you that you o - oul Ibe present.--1 have, Sze. ( Sign. d) " JOhN •'. FEARON. " Solieito to the Soutt-Eastern Railway Company. " Francis R. 13 , nhain Fr i . Ordnance-office, Pall-mall." The ``6th of Joe w-s 'f• hors •ay ; lbursday is not a board day at the Ordnance. lam there every morning, but Iha i quitted the office, at d by a mere accident connected with other maters, I went there o ee someht d, at a quarter to three; and if it 'ha • not been for that. I sh uld not have f •und the le ter sill the t.. owl g day. It was of course too lave so go t o toe Committee that day. I im mrdiately sent for Mr. fliztiett, not having the least idea to what the letter could refer, to in quire whether he Was in the House; they said he was not ; soon afterwards Jr,A ilignett saw me. I was a god deal embarras ed and a-tooished, and felt in a difficulty to know w , .at to do. Neither of my colleagues, neither Colonel Ps•el nor C•pt •in Bolder°, wa to the Hcuse. Vt ry soon afterwards cairtain Bo deco Caine in. and brought a copy of the letter addressed to him, and two or three minutes afte:wards Hignett came in, in a sate of great agitatiO'n. • I -aid to him, • I am very anxious to know what this is but. I think ail explanation had better he in 'writing." He went out of the room, of course, imm idiately, and I went very soon to a club in the neighbourhood. I sail, •• I shall he at the Carlton for some •ime." In about an hour or two of erwaria I gut a letter from Mr. Hignett ; it was a coniu ed letter, certainly, tot the main point of the letter was-. I do not like to put in the letter, because you will have evidence eoough to show you that I could not have had anything to do with it. I will not put in that letter, but I may say that Mr. Hignett wrote me a letter, expressing his vexation, and so on, but saying that he was quite pre pared a d ready to admit that he had nerer had any communi cation with me on the subj. ct. The letter Came about an hour after I quitted the Ordnanc--office. It came to the club. I was in a private room in the club I dui nut choose to remain at the Ordnance, because I was afraid Mr. Hignett would come up. and I wished to he aw y. The Committee aai-h you to produce the letter which you received from :Mr H gnett. The letter was reacr:4s follow g :-- " Office of Ordnance, June 26, 1845. _ ,t si r —l have . p 'tilted a letter add re ssed to you by Mr. J. p.'Fearon, solicoor to the S' , outh-Eastern Company, dated this day, adverting to a letter stated to have been written by me to the late Secretary of that Company, in which your name is mentioned ; and in compliance wish your desire to be furni-hed with some explanation. I beg to state that I remeo.b , r Applying. tOr :orae new shares lour or five moths .ago, I navitits, previous! hrld some of the old shares in my own name for individuals of my family ; but I have no recollection of having ti,ed your name in my letter to the secretary. Most assuredly I had no authoriy ,om you to apply for shares in your name, or on your behalf, neither had lever c mmunicated , w;th you on the subject. If I did so. it must have been inad vertently, and improperis no doubt, and I deeply regret that the circutti , %ill occasion you much ann• yPor.e. have Sze., " J. HIG.NETT. " F. R. Bonham, Esq." Soot a•ter, Co , onel Peel came in from the House of Corn !fops, and sain its me ." NiTme u.,en i arth is this •tory ? There is a e'or, down at the House about you?" and I lin 12iediately put the le•ter into his hawk and said " 31v dear Peel, alt I can , ell •. on is, upon my hands, I said, c` heard one word upon th • c e t oat is t , e matter ? first let me know what ih.• . t ' j is." He to Mr. Lascehes t'o.i:•cl.'ti:.raisc.Lopy He said, " You had b•-ter write of the letter ;" anti I had half written a lev er that to write to Mr. 1-as . c Dawdles' when it occurred to me perfeetiy ah,urtl, inasmuch a, the Committee had refused tr 'a h 7to a'' receive the letter, and there fore I could not get Fearon had written to me m o. le tter a w c h . ;( l ;h ) . in of it ; but as Ali-. ihe hurry of the -moment, I had forzu l t ri r v er e t ~, ,, e a a n.wer, ve the answeri I g of Mr. Fcaron's letter wou d i GI-tool+ y for in quiring, for the letter ; I kept a burri r e b o g c;:i . i d y n o ' f ' the letter which wrotre"tnoN would i r p Eatonin I wrote to Mr Fearon • probahly Mr. orlginal; this was the letter whir.. I tit the same evening. The % itneis read the same a s follows " 35, Clar,:es—tr..et, June 2 7 ' s : a !845. " Sir,— On my return to the Ordnance office thi,. I found your letter, in which you state your invention noefrnoon pro clueing a letter from Illr. Hignett to :he secretary of the South :.Eastern Railway, in winch letter my name is mentioned, and I thank you for tine courtesy of your communication ; and I have >ince heard the substance of its contents, but I should be g'ad to have a coo of the letter, in which I am, of course, deepli , int,,sted lo the mean time, I can only give the most •-oli mn fk surance that neither directly nor in directly was Mr. Hienptt withori , ed to tive my name, or Trakf , an-.• apr!ic. , tion fin Try Ir 6 tif, for any Owes in any corn s,any, and that 1 had not the slightest notion that he had ever done so.—l have, &e. (S010.,1) 14 F. R. BONHAM. " J. P. Faxon, E49...' Perhaps the Committee would allow me to suggest that I should be very glad that the original letter, of which this is a copy, should be given in, and I will state precisely why. I have written thus far, but in the original letter to Mr. Fearon you will find this sentence—" I could not state the pre cise words; I did not think of copying it : but you will find a sentence to this effect—' I shall be glad if you will show this letter to any person to wham you may have shown Mr. Hig nett's letter ;' that was in order to make my denial as public and unequivocal as the charge. The following morning, I found, of course, the answer from Mr. Fearon, and he en closed me this letter, which then, for the first time, I saw. The witness read the same, as follows : ".South-Eastern Railway Office, 3.5 A, Great George street, Westminster, July 27, 1845. " Sir—l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday's date, and beg to forward you herewith a copy of Mr. Hignett's letter of the 2d of February last to the secretary of the South-Eastern Railway Company. " I have, &e., (Signed) "JOHN P. FEARON. " Francis R. Bonham, Esq." Have you ever held scrips or shares in the South-Eastern Railway "? No—never in my life. I use the expression sub ject to the explanation a',out the shares of Mr. Wray's—l never held a single share, or applied for a single share, nor ever thought of applying for a single share. Permit me to repeat the same question with regard to the North Kent shares never applied for a single share. I have held shares and hold shares. I bought the shares in the market, and I hold them at this moment. In what company ? —ln the North Kent Company. Will you inform the Committee the date of the purchase of those shares in the North Kent Company ?—I could easily get it, but I cannot speak from memory, but it was very long since. I should be perfectly prepared by to morrow to state the time. I bought the shares in the market at a premium, and paid a deposit. Was the purchase of those shares suggested to you by any one ?—No, it was suggested by my own opinion that it was a very good line, judging from what I had heard. Ido not pro fess to have much knowledge of engineering, but the company was a strong company, and fro' what I remembered and always thought of the advantage of having a direct coast line to Dover I thought that would be a good line. I considered myself as much entitled to buy shares in that as any other line in the market. Have you purchased shares in the market in many corn panies, not with a view to investment, but as a speculation ?—I have nut the !east objection to answer the question. I have. Have you ever had any joint transactions in the purchase of shares with Mr. Hignett, the solicit or to the Board of Ordnance? —Never in my life. Whatever shares you have purchased in railway companies have all been purchased in the railway market, entirely at the dictation of your own opinion of the merits of the company of which you have purchased shares ?—Every share I ever bought has been purchased upon my own opinion, in the open market; and certainly I have had no shares in any company. nor even any conversation which would lead to i•hares with Mr. Hignett, and I have had no shares with any member of the Board of Ordnance at all, or any person connected with the Board of Ordnance. Mr TANCRED—You have had no conversation with Mr. Hignett as to shares ?—No "conversation" is rather indefi nite. But I should say that I could have had no conversation with Mr. Hi 'nett.upon the subject; one is not in the way of seein him very much. I think I might safely say that I had never any conversation with him upon the subject. Mr. Ronsucx—You do not hold any shares in the North Kent Railway That you have not bought ?—I do not hold a single share in the N ,rth Kent Railway that I have net bought and paid for. Ali-. T. EGERTON—That purchase being a matter of invest ment, and not of speculation will endeavour to answer that question as nearly as possible. I wish to answer it cor rectly; it is a mixed question. I would rather answer that question. I have no hesitation in saying that I had more shares than I could pay ui, is full; and the advantage that I contemplated was, to hold a certain number of shares, as I think the speculation a good one, atid likely to be for my ad vantage, ano by selling some to pay for the otters. CHAIRMA N—Can you state to the Committee the lines of railway which pass in or near the Ordnance property, upon which the Board of Ordnance - have reported their assent or dissent ?—I really cannot ; and, extraordinary as it may appear to the Committee, I have never read one word of any of the papers connected with any one of the railways. I wish that answer to be put down. I have not read any of the papers connected with any one of the railways, not con sidering it any part of my duty. Then, whether you have bought or sold shares in any of the lines so affecting Ordnance property, you cannot inform the Committee?—Yes ; I meant to state distinctly to the Coin mittee that I had not bought shares in any other but the North Kent Railway. Mr. ROEBUCK—Nor held shares? Nor held shares. Mr. LIDDELL—May I ask you whether you ever attended any meetings of the Board of Ordnance, where you pro nounced an opinion as to the merits of any particular lines ? —Never, upon my honour ; nor have I been called upon to do so ; nor still, further, have I had an opportunity of doing so. Perhaps the Committee will allow me to say this; it will appear more distinctly if the Committee will do that which I think is due both to the public and to the mem bers of the Board of Ordnance, viz., examine the highest authorities in the department upon the subject ; I should be most happy that Sir George Murray, Colonel Peel, and Mr. Byham, who has been Secretary of the Ordnance for forty years, should all be examined ; and I am sure they will all state that I could have had no opportunity of giving an opinion, or furthering or promoting the interests of any one of the railways. I believe you have documents from the office, and you will see my name signed to them. Many of the documents contain this indorsement, " Refer it to the Inspector-General of For tifications for a report." When we have a report of the Inspector-General of Fortifications, it is submitted to the Master-General for approval. The papers will be before you ; and I state it, subject to the possibility of stating anything in accurately, with all the consequences before me. I have never had any opinion to give, and never been called upon to give one. In what capacity do you sign your name to these papers ? —As a Member of the Board ministerially. I may make myself understood in this way : when a railway company applies to the Board of Ordnance for permission to pass through their property, Mr. Byham, the secretary of the Ordnance, not waiting for any communication from the Board, makes the minute : " Refer it to the Inspector- General of Fortifications for a report," the Inspector-Goneral of Fortifications reports accordingly to the Board. In every case, and on all occasion., the next minute will be, " Submit it to the Master-General for his approbation." The Master- General, you will find, always enters somewhat at large into the question, and then he gives instructions to the Board to convey his approbation or disapprobation of the line. That is the re gular official mode of doing business. We never have an aye or nay upon the subject ; we have no opinion to offer; we can offer none. It is a military question ; and the 1 faster-General Mates that, upon all military questions, he reserves to himself the entire power of deciding. Then your signature, upon the occasions upon which it ap pears upon the pap e r s , is p ure ly i n an official capacity?— Purely official. No discretion whatever is exercised nn your part with re gard to the merits of any question which may come under the consideration of the Board in those papers?—No question whatever on my part—no power of altering it in the minutest degree ; of advancing the interests of one, and retarding the in terests of another. Mr. HA YTER—It ig merely ministerial?—Merely minis terial. SHICRIDA M—Are the papers read by the members of the Board?—With regard to the other members, you will have an opportunity of having both Colonel Peel and Captain Bol• dero before you ; but, fur myself, I have never read a single paper connected with one railway, for I have enough to do without. Ido nut understand engineering. Mr. ROEBUCK—Can you explain how it was that on one oc casion Mr. Hignett had to report ?—With regard to these three railways, there were three competing lines, the North Kent, the South-Eastern. and the Croydon, and the Master-General, you will find, has reported (tor there is great misconception on the subject ), his assent to each and all of them, subject to certain conditions ; that is. that a certain clause should he put. in, which he dictates. This clause, of course, must be put in by the solicitor, and the solicitor is ordered to put in a clause fur pro jeet so and so ; for example, with reference to the North Kent Railway, the Master• General reported his appro bation of ihe line. (I am speaking with regard to NS'ollwich ; I do not remember what it was as to k.;tiatham, but I remernier that with regard to Woo:•.vich from a discussion occurred since.) The Master-General reported his assent to the .forth Kent Railway passing through Wool wich .common by a tunnel; he required that the whole extent of our ground at Woolwich should be tunnelled; that was the first cond , tion; and I b lieve also that the stations on each side should he so fur from the Arsenal as not t r produce incon venience, by quantities of persons corning ; subject to those two conditions he assent .4. 'f hat assent is reported to the so'icitor, and he is instru ted to prepare clauses ; accordingly, Mr. Hig nett had to prepare those clauses. What followed on the report being made by Mr. Hignett?— He is required to report to the Board, for the benefit of the Master-General, how he has executed that duty. That report, and you will find, it among the papers, is sent to the Board ; and you will find a minute referri: g it to the Mater-General for his approval ; but one word of it we are not called upon to read, because we have not the power to decide upon it. Mr. LIDDELL-With regard to the North Kent Railway, you have stated that you bought shares in the market, and paid for them a deposit, upon the impression that that was likely to be a successful line of railway?—Certainly. Has the North Kent Railway come under the consideration of the Board of Trade ?—The North Kent Railway came under the consideration of the Board of Trade, and the South- Eastern was preferred. In the report of the Board of Trade the South-Eastern was preferred ?—Yes. May I ask whether, from the transactions that had occurred at the Board of Ordnance, you had acquired any information respecting the line of the Noith Kent Railway which induced you to give it the preference?—Certainly not. Was it then the character that it bore in the market gene rally, and with the public at large, which induced you to prefer it when you bought those shares ?—I acted upon the advice of a friend of considerable engineering knowledge. You took that sort of advice which any person may legi timately take who goes into the market and buys shares?— Precisely. And that advice you consider to have been fairly given ? Yes. I pledge myself, knowing what the Committee cannot know, but what I am sure they will be sati.fied of before the inquiry is concluded—l am content to let the issue rest upon this, with reference to any improper advantage that I may have derived, that I was as fully justified in buying North Kent shares as I should have been in buying Yorkshire shares, where the Ordnance have no property at all. lam content to r •,t my whole case upon the Committee coming to that opinion whin they know how the bu•iuess of the Ordnance is transacted. DUNCOMBE—How many member. is the Board of Oronance comp sed of?—Three ; the Master-General is not a member of trle Board ; we never see the ;Ilaster-General. The surveyor-general, Colonel Peel ; the clerk, Cap , ain Bol der) ; and the storekeeper, myself, are the three members of the Board of Orch:ance. Have you any voice in anything which is proposed to the Board?—:Many things; everything but military questions. The 31aster-Genera; distinctly ryes, and states .0 the mili ta.'y authority that he does, in those cases, act for himself; I believe you will find a minute to that effect. All cases of c ntract, all commissariat cases, all store cases, m an y o f which must occur, and various tither thing., of course come before the Board, and each member of the Board has a voice.' If there is a difference of opinion in the Board, does the ma jority decde ? Yes ; I have been ;our years at the Board. and there never has bee. a difference of opinion coming to a point, coming to cella' m.y be called a division, or anything of that kind, since I have been there ; I have been in four years ; I never miss, and I have nut been out of town during those four years for four weeks, and I have never known a difference. Supposing it is proposed to carry a railway across the Ord nancetliei property, and a diff rence arises among the members of b ( ~ ro t a i r i ,d :t ih v ie n t a h ep r a a r tn i ey s ,c ; o nsent on the part of the Board shall given to that railway, whether they shall appear as consent ing_l answer t istinctly that l t t h o e w ca w se ill e. th n a n t o r a e c it e t u io n n be decided ? That is not a military question ?—lt is considered so; in a certain sense it is not, but r i i ti e s r t so t , occur, practically considered ; and it u , n s e t v i oenr areoul could f c e c r u r r , ci o it nev e r he iMast er -G eneral , o whi c o c h u w r, e. b n e i c t a h u r s o e ug a h ll those bj; C, DovgLA3—Any railway nance property would be under the military surveillance of the Master- General ?—Yes. And would not come before the Board ?—No. Mr. TANCRED-Mr. Hignett save, " On the 30th of May the Board ordered me to have a meeting of the military officers with the solicitor, myself, and then on the Monday following we met near the Committee-room, in an ante-room, and dis cussed the matter, and on the 3d of June I made my report re commending the stations ;" did you not take that report into your consideration?—Certainly not; we referred it to the Master- General. Then it passtd merely ministerially through your office ? Clearly. I hove endeavoured to exrlain that no one case of that sort ever came before the Beard for their consideration. We referred it to the Master-General. He says, " The minute submitting this to the Master-Gene ral is signed by Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero ?"—That is exactly bearing out my point; that minute is submitted to the Master-General. Does not that minute contain a general approbation or disap. probation ?—Certainly not. Mr. SHERIDAN—What is the nature of the report submitted to the Master-General where do you make alterations or amend ments or suggestions ?—There are various questions of course upon which we make communications to the Master-General ; i t is rather difficult to answer that question. In fact, upon many points of the general details of the Board the Master-General would rather require us to give an opinion : for example, as to the conduct of officers in various things. Very recently there was the case of a gentleman in one of the Arsenals whose conduct was complained of : we referred it to the Master-General ; we thought it wiser to refer it to him ; and the Master-General sent it back to us, and stated he would be glad to have our opinion upon it; but upon military questions we never (1 state that generally aid broadly) presume to give an opinion to the Master-General—and all rail way 'questions are considered under that category of military questions—and we never presume therefore to form an opinion; and I will venture to say that, having the documents before you, you will not find an opinion in any case offered by the Board to the Master-General upon military subjects; but at the same time this will be much more satisfactorily explained by others; and I do hope that you will have Mr. Byham, who has been in the office for half a century, or the Master-General; those gentlemen will tell you the routine of the office. Mr. PAKINGTON—Upon a railway question, after the Mas ter-General has given his opinion, is that opinion submitted to the Board, or is his opinion final ?—Final ; it is never submitted to the Board. Mr. T. EGERTON—Your duty is merely to transmit it to the parties ?—Exactly ; and the answers to those three com peting lines were sent to the solicitors of the different com panies; to Mr. Fearon, the solicitor of one ; to Mr. Stephens, the solicitor of the other ; and to the solicitor of the Croydon ; we never offered our opinion upon it. `Jr. ROEBUCK—So that if, in your opinion, one of the rail ways was a very mischievous one, and the other a very good one, that could make no difference ; you could express no poi nion 7—l , would be totally out of any power to express any of ficial opinion. I aright out of doors, if I was fool enough to critici,e what had been done, express an opinion. Mr. VERNON—Is the decision of the Master-General upon the point submitted to him known to other persons as soon as the members of the Board ?—Yes, because to other parties in terested it must be communicated. Mr. LIDDELL—In your official capacity, as a functionary of the Board of Ordnance, would it be possible fur you to pro mote the iuterests of this railway or that railway at the Board of Ordnance?—Clearly impossible. That anQwer I give win , it distinctly, and I abide by it, always supposing that you will take care care to have the parties connected with the Ordnance before you to examine them. Mr. TANCRED—The Master-Gener:.l does not act, except through reports ?—Not except through reports. with the single exception of the case I alluded to. of the officer, whose con duct was brought before us. I have not occasion to see the Master-General for seven or eight months ; the clerk of the Ordnance has occasion to see him on many points. I believe he has occasion to consult him upon the question of the har bours of refuge. That is a case on which I know nothing ; and h,s see'ng him is, I believe, rather with a view to questions coming before the House of Commons, that the clerk of the Ordnance •hould be prepared to answer any question that may at ise. But they are Master-General's questions entirely ; and unless it could be supposed that the Master •General was likely to take my opinion upon a military point, it is totally impossible that I could have the slightest influence, or indeed any member of the Board, in the case of any single railway. CHAreatAN—Will you turn your attention to a letter dated " Office of Ordnance, the 24th of June" (the letter being shown to the witness.) That letter, signed by Mr. Hignett, the solicitor of the Ordnance, states :—" I am directed to add, that the Company are not to vary the level of the railway by raising the same ; but that the Master-General and Board consent to any necessary deviation of the level of the railway by lowering the same." Had the consent of the Master-General been formally obtained at that time ?—I believe I can give infor mation upon that. The question was raised before the Par liamentary Committee whether the Master-General's consent had been really given. 1 think a letter was sent up to Mr. Byham, Secretary of the Board, to know whether the Master-General's consent had been given or not. Mr. Byham went down accordingly, and was examined before the Committee : and he stated that the papers had been sent to the Master-General, but his consent had not been formally received. It was the board day, otherwise I should not have known anything about it. Colonel Peel and myself were at the Board when Mr. Byham re turned from the Committee. The moment he came into the room, a paper was sent up by Mr. Elliott, the chief clerk in the Master-General's department, a different depart ment from the Board of Ordnance, containing the Master- General's report, and Mr. Byham said, " I am very sorry that this did not arrive before I went ; for being called upon, I stated, that the consent had not arrived, for we had sent to the clerk for it, and it had not arrived ; and it now appears that Mr. Elliott received it last night, and had not sent it up before I went." We told him that all he had to do was to forward it to the Committee that day. Indeed that was his own suggestion. He said, " The best thing I can do is to send this to the Committee." We said, " Certainly ;" and it was sent to the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Lascelles, upon that day. The Committee was up ; it had adjourned at two o'clock ; and the following morning, the first step that the Chairman of the Committee took was to read the report of the Master-General of the Ordnance. Could the solicitor of the Ordnance, without your know ledge, write a letter, stating that the Master-General had consented to a variation of the levels, without the formal consent of the Master-General ?—Certainly, without my knewledge ; he was instructed to prepare this; he would not come to the Board upon it, or have any communication with the Board. Mr. ROEBUCK—What is the meaning of the words, " The Master-General and Board consent ?"—Those words you will find always used ; in the same way as you have an official seal, so you have the terms, " the Master-General and Board consent," to everything. Then the Board really have nothing to do with it?—The Board really and truly have nothing to do with all these ques tions ; but I apprehend generally, in any formal consent to the conveyance of property, or anything else, they put " the Board" as part of the formal words ; but it is, in fact, the Master-General in military cases Do not you think that out of doors that is understood to mean the Board of Ordnance ?—No, I should think not; but if you consider that it is so. it is certainly desirable that you should have information upon that from a higher authority than I can pretend to be, or a more disinterested one ; that you should in that way obtain accurate information ; but the party to df•cide in que-tions of this kind is the Master-General; but the words must be used on all occasions in every lease, and so on, • The Master-General and the Board of Ordnance." Mr. TA NCRED—In the letter of 'he 10th of June there is the same expression. " The Master-General and Board of Ordnance being of opinion that the two stations for the Lon don, Chatham, and North Kent Railway," and so on; von have nothing to do with that ?—No. Mr. Dor:comas-1 he Board of Ordnance are only instru ments ?-I'ney are only instruments, but they are necessary in strument, Mr. RoEsucx—lf they were efficient, as they are supposed to be efficient out of doors, what would be the result of any one member of the Board being known to be a large share holder in any railway pas4ing through Ordnance property ? I hardly know how I can answer that question ; I understand what it is intended to convey, but I hardly know how to answer it. CHAIRMAN—Do you not think that any member of the Board of Ordnance holding shares in a railway where the con sent of the Master-General and Board of Ordnance would be necessary. would convey the impression that the consent of the Board would be obtained, and increase the chances of that line passing ? I must leave every gentleman to answer that ques tion ; all I ran say i-, that I, as a member of the Board, con sidered my-elf as much entitled to buy shares in the North Kent Railway as I should in any Oatord Railway. I may be wrong, but that is my impression. Mr". ROEBUCK—Y ou came to that conclusion from the Board beinp, not real]) efficient, but merely nominal?—Yes, illy. LIDDELL—NominaI so far as these points are con cerned ?—Exaetly. Upon military questions you are a nominal Board, but upon all other questions an effective Board ?—Yes. Mr. RA YT R—Would not the knowledge on the part of the public that any members of the Board of Ordnance were holders of shares in one of the lines passing through Ordnance property, create an undue prejudice against a rival line which had no such advantage ?—ln the first place, I do not know that when a person buys shares in any line it will be publicly known what shares he has. Do von think that it oozes out through the brokers 7 Pos , il;ly. Mr. DUNCOMBE—ShouId you think it right on the part of the Master-General to have shares in the North Kent Rail way ?—Certainly not. Mr. LlDDELL—Because the Master-General is the p e rson to pronuunee upon the adoptio n or re j ec ti on o f th e li ne —He has the absolute power in his own hands, and therefore, of course, he should not 1-old shares. Mr. DUNCOMBE—What is the great use of this Board under these circumstances ?—ln the first place, the Board transact all contracts and commissariat business of every sort, and business connected with landed property. We are, in a word, if I may use the expression which was used by our old secretary, gene ral dealers. The India Company receive through the Ord nance their supplies of arms, clothing, and various things. The contracts are all made by tender, and they are made through the Ordnance. Why should not your decisions equally extend to matters con nected with railways ?—Simply because they are military ques tions; and the Master-General, who is always a high military authority, decides them ; and the members of the Board of Ordnance are not supposed to be military men. With the exception of two, the other two are military men ? —Generally, they are. Mr. W. PATTEN—Two of the members at present are mili tary men ; but, on a late occasion, two out of the three were not military men ?—I should say that there is never more than one civilian at. the Board ; at least, so far as I am able to speak to that; there is a great deal of business for a civilian. Mr. LIDPELL—Durinz the time that Lord Mulgrave was Master-General of the Ordnance, Mr. Ward was Clerk to the Ordnance for many years ?—de was. Mr. SHERIDAN—Were Mr. Hignett's letters submitted to you before they were forwarded; for invance, this letter of the 10th of June ?—No, that would not be submitted to us ; Mr. Hignett receives instructions from the :Master-General; the Master-General approves of the proposition, and sends it to the Board " approved" so and so. I believe you have the original paper, which would show it better than I can. Then it is rather incorrect for Mr. Hignett to say, "the tunnell and other railway works at that spot are to be executed to the satisfaction of the Board ;" he does not there mention the Master-General?—But " the Board" means the Master- General. Mr. VERNON—I suppose that your attention was more directed to the merits of the North Kent Railway in consequence of the communications which have been made on the subject, and which had been brought under your knowledge in the pro gress of the applications to the Board ?—No, certainly not ; I should rather say that my opinions as to the North Kent Rail way were derived from one who is not a member of the Board, but who it a personal friend of mine. I again repeat what must sound very extraordinary, that I am persuaded, with re ference to this railway, I never read a single paper, for I was nor called upon to give an opinion ; and therefore it was no use for me to read any of the papers. I have plenty of occupation. Mr. LIDDELL-I' 2 S the Board of Ordnance always been per r s ? ; —Yes s er t e he w y od ra ul y not be more than composed of the same officers who now yompose it, a surveyor, be military men, I should think. o oa n re e nlea civ ka i l lian aninedn at t so h tro e re Sila eikveile e i time; CHAIRMAI , T—WiII you state the number of shares you had in the North Kent Railway ?—I had 100. You purchased 100 ?—Yes. You still hold them?—Yes ; that is to say, I had 125 ; those 125, it seems, were sold upon a profit of somewhere about half a-crown, or it may be ss. a share. Lord WORSLEY—You mean the whole 121 ?—Yes. CHAIRMAN—Then you purchased again 7—Yes, I purchased again very recently 100, and those I have. Did you buy them in the market? I bought them, at least ray friend who managed the transaction for me, bought them in the market at a high premium. They were not then bought in your name ?—They were not bought in my name. Your name does not appear ?—No, it does not. Then they are, in fact, held by him at this moment ?—They are, in fact, at this moment held by him. Are they held by him in trust for you ?—Yes. You having paid the deposit and the premium?—He must have paid the deposit and the premium ; they are held by him in his hands for me. In point of fact, up to this time, you have paid nothing?—l have paid nothing upon those—they were bought only a few days ago. Was that friend any person connected with the Board of Ord nance ?—Not in the remotest degree. Was it any person connected with the promoters of the North Kent Railway ?—Not in the remotest degree. Mr. VERNON—What was die date of the first purchase ?—I cannot state the date,' but it must have been long ago, because they were purchased at par ; it must have been vary early in deed, several months ago, and they were sold again at quarter premium. CHAIRMAN—Did you pay the deposit and premium upon those shares?—Certainly. Of those shares did you hold the scrip in your hands ?—I should say not—my friend held them in the same way. Mr. LIDDELL—Do you happen to know when Captain Boldero sold his North Kent Shares ?—I remember he came into my room (you remind me of that which perhaps, 1 ought to have stated), and said, " I think this question is likely to come unpleasantly before Parliament" (he did not mean before the Board of Ordnance) ; " a question has arisen about Woolwich-common, which is very likely to come before Parliament, in which I must take a part, and I shall therefore sell my shares." He said, " before Parliament," not " before the Board of Ordnance." I beg you to draw the distinction. That was early in June ; it was when the difficulty arose about the tunnel question. Was it the 9th of June?—Very early. It appears further, of which I was not aware at the time, that I told this to my friend, and he sold my shares also. The CHAiumax—The first one hundred and twenty-five shares were bought in the open market? All were equally bought, I apprehend, in the open market ; I can have no doubt about that, as they were bought at par. I shall be able to inform myself correctly upon that. The last I know were bought in the open market, and they were bought at a con siderable premium ; that I can speak with certainty to. Your name appeared in none of these transactions?—No, I should take for granted, in none. Each time they were bought on your account ?—Yes ; not on a joint account. My name, therefore, would not appear. If on the papers to morrow there should be any difference be tween them and what I have now stated, I trust I shall not have any disservice from it. To the accuracy of the papers I will pledge myself; the precise details I cannot vouch for, but I will pledge myself that those details shall be forthcoming. Was the person who was joined with you in the purchase of those shares in any way engaged in promoting the North Kent Railway ?—No, in no degree whatever. Do you feel any objection to mention the name of the party with whom you were joined in buying those shares ?--I do not know that I shall have the least objection to-morrow morning to mention his name. Captain Henry George Boldero, • Member of the House. examined. CITAIRMA N—You are the Clerk of the Ordnance ?—I am. Have you read the petition presented to Parliament by the South-Eastern Railway Company ?--I have. Has you attention been particularly drawn to the letter of Mr. Hignett of the 3d of February, 1845 ?—Deeidedly. Are there any observations or explanations which you wish to make in reference to that letter ?—The first intimation I had about that letter was a letter I received from %Ir. Fearon. I received this letter from Mr. Fearon, dated the 26th of June, 1845 I docketed the time at which I received it ; it was half past three, but it might have arrived at the office sooner. The witness read the same, as follows : " South-Eastern Railway-office, 35 A, Great- George street, Westminster, June 26, 1845. " Sir—l feel it my duty to inform you that under the ad vice of counsel a letter addressed by Mr. Hignett, the Solicitor of the Board to which you are attached, to the late Secretary of the South• Eastern Railway Company will be produced this day at the sitting of the Committee on Group A. Your name is mentioned in this letter, and it will no doubt appear desirable to you that you should be present. (Signed) " JOHN P. I'EARON, " Solicitor to the South-Eastern-Railway " Company. " Captain Boldero." Having received that letter, as I have stated, at half-pat. three, I immediately sent down stairs for Mr. Hignett to come up. He was not in the office, and I left word that he was to come up immediately he came in. About half-past four I went into Mr. Bonham's room, and there I found Mr. Hignett. I had the letter in my hand, and I said to Mr. Bonham, " Here is a curious letter ;" or something of that kind. I alluded to the lett er f rom Mr. Fearon. Mr. Bonham told me he had received a similar one. I then said to Mr. Hignett, What does this letter mean ?" because it was an ambiguous letter. I could not make anything of it. He said, " Sir, I do not know ; I have no copy of that letter." I said, " Very well, sir, you will take thi s ,' I gave hint the original letter), " and give me an explanation immediately." I mentioned also, (this was at half-past four), that I hoped to dine at the Carlton Club, where he was to send his letter. At seven o'clock the following letter was delivered to me. The witness read the same as follows : " Office of Ordnance, June 26, 1845. " Sir—l have perused a letter addressed to you by Mr. J. P. Fearon, solicitor to the South-Eastern Railway Com pany, dated this day, adverting to a letter stated to have been written by me to the late secretary of that Company in which your name is mentioned; and in compliance with your de sire to be furnished with some explanation, I beg to state that I recollect having had some communication with the gentleman alluded to, but it was a confidential one, and he has just in formed me that he so considered it, and so indeed did Mr. Fearon so understand it from him. I remember applying to the Se cretary far some of the new shares four or five months ago, I having previously held some of the old shares in my own name, for individuals of my family ; but I have no recollection of hav ing used your name in my letter to the secretary. Most assur edly I had no authority from you to apply for shares in your name, or in your behalf, neither had I communicated with you on the subject. If I did so it must have been inad vertently, and very improperly no doubt, in a letter which was strictly private and confidential. I have, on the present oc• casion, strictly conformed to the orders of the Master General and Board, and am exceedingly sorry for the annoyance which this most unwarrantable breach of confidence on the part - of Mr. Fearon will occasion you.—l have, &c., (Signed) " J. HIGNETT. " Captain Boldero, M.P., &c., &e." I had previously made an arrangement with Mr. Bonham to meet him after dinner. I met him after dinner : I should think at half-past nine, and I said, " Steps must be imme diately taken to get a copy of this letter." We discussed the question, and we mutually agreed that a letter should be written to the Honourable William Lascelles, the Chair man of the Committee, requesting a copy ; but when writing the letter (each was engaged writing his own letter), we received an intimation that the Chairman of that Committee ( Group A) had refused to receive the letter ; therefore, I naturally said, " It is useless to write, still something must be done." We discussed the question, and we thought that the only mode open to us was to write to Mr. Fearon. I drew a draft of the letter I intended to send : Mr. Bonham, of course, wrote his own. I came down to the House of Commons, and it was intimated to me that a petition was going to be pre sented that night from the South-Eastern Company. I went into the library and I altered the terms in which I originally addressed the letter to him. I meant to have asked for a copy of the letter of the 3d of February, but when I found that a petition was going to be presented to the House, I had no doubt that a copy would be produced, and, therefore, I did not ask for a copy. This is the letter which I wrote. The witness read the same, as follows : " Ordnance, June 26, 1845. " Sir—l hare received your letter dated this day, wherein you state your intention to produce before the Committee now sitting on Group A ( Railways) a letter addressed by Mr. Hig nett to the late Secretary of the South:Eastern Railwa), in which my name is mentioned. I thank von for the information ; I am ignorant of the contents of Mr. Hignett's letter, except as far as he has since communicated them to me, and 1 have to as sure you that he had no authority from me, direct or indirect, to make such an application. But, whatever correspondence has taken place between the contending parties, and sanctioned by the Master-General and Board, I, as a Member of this Board, am content to share the responsibility.—l remain, &e. ( Signed) " H. ts. BOLDERO." I think you caine to me and stated that you wished to speak to me, and you then said, " Here is the petition." That pe tition you offered to me, and you said that the petition you would not have presented, unless you had the original letter. You offered me the petition; I declinpd it, arid asked for the original letter. That was my first knowledge of that letter. Will you now allow me to call your attention to a paragraph in a letter of the 3d of February, whirl is to this effect ;—" I think you should not overlook Captain Boldero (a member of this Board) in your allocation of the forthcominc , shares ; you can address them to him at this office, and mark it private." The Committee understand, therefore, from the letter that you have put in, that Mr. Hignett had no authority whatever to use your name ?—Not a shadow of authority. Are you a holder of shares in the North Kent Railway ?—I am not now ; I was. Did you buy them yourself in the market?—l did not buy them myself in the market. Will You state the particulars of that transaction to the Com mittee ?—Decidedly. The date when you became a shareholder in the North Kent Railway, and the date when you got rid of those shares?— Until the beginning o f t hi s year 1 never h e ld a r ailway share of a n y description ; my first transaction in speculating a little in rail ways commenced th us : A f r i en d o f m ine asked me if I would buy some shares in the Chester and Holyhead. I said " Yes, provided they are moderate in priee. It was finally agreed between him and me that I should buy twenty shares of him, and h e wou ld d e li ver t h em i n th e co urse of fou r or five day s , if I would give him a c h eque f or 1401. I sen t for the ne ws p aper, and I found the shares quoted in the market at He said, 4. W e ll, if you w ill give me a cheque for 140/., that w ill i nclude b rokerage an d ever ythi ng ; an d I bought the shares. On the 10th of March I asked Mr. Hignett to buy me ninety shares more in the Chester and Holyhead. I knew no broker; I was never on the Stock Exchange, and I therefore asked him to buy them for me. Mr. PAKINGTON—And you got those shares ?—Yes ; he bought them for me at my desire. On the 7th of March Mr. Hignett was at my room, and we spoke about the North Kent Railway ; he said he thought it was a vod speculation; . the premium was very low, and I requested him to buy me one hundred shares. He bought one hundred shares, a-d of course paid the premium and paid the brokerage, and I paid him for them; I kept them for a short time, and sold them. When did you sell them ?—ln a fortnight, I think. Mr. W. PATTEN—Do you recollect what the premium was ? ' —No ; it was not a very profitable one. CHAIRMAN —You gained by the sale of them ?—I think I did ; yes. I may say that I did. Mr. ROEBUCK—Were the whole 100 sold ?—The whole 100 were sold ; it was a heavier stake than 1 liked. _ CHA IRNIA N Can you state what the premium was ?—I will endeavour to ascert,in by to-morrow at what the market price was; I forget what it was at thi- moment. What was the date of the sale ?—Ttiat I will make good to morrow. Had you a broker to sell those shares?—Yes. Do you remember the broker's name ?—No, I do not. Mr. HoEsuck—Have you got the note ?—1 do not know whether I have, for I had closed my transactions upon that point; but I will look ir.to all my papers for the Committee. CHAIRMAN—Were they sold in your name?—No, I believe not. Mr. PAKINGTON—The whole bu,iness was transacted by Mr. Hignett ? —lt was ; he bought and !old them for me. The next transaction was, I think, in April. I took up a paper, and I said, " Mr. Hignett, I have selecb.d three lines, and I should like for you to buy me twenty shares in each:" (I am stating things as they occurred:) " twenty in the Man chester and Leeds, twenty in the North British, and twenty in the Glasgow and Edinburgh," all six teenths. I think the Manchester and Leeds I hold now, and these are the papers. ( The witness produced the same.) There was a premium paid in the market. And these are the North British. (The witness produced the same.) The Glasgow and Edinburgh I have not got ; I sold them in the market. CHAIRMAN—Did you at any time subsequently purchase any shares in the North Kent ?—I did. What was the date of that purchase, and the number of shares ?—That was in April; the next and only other trans action that I had in the North Kent, something occurred in getting the Bill through the Committee; some objections were got over, and a friend advised me to re-invest in the North Kent. On the 25th of April I asked Mr. Hignett to buy me fifty or sixty shares. In the afternoon he came and said that he had bought one hundred and twenty North Kent shares. 1 said, " That is more than I want," and I took seventy. There was 21. premium paid. I asked him also to buy twenty five shares in the North Kent for a connexion of mine, which he did, at 21. premium. Sir C. DOUGLAS—Were those twenty-five over and above the seventy ?—Certainly. Mr. T. EGERTON—Did you pay a deposit with the pre mium ?—They were sold in the market at 21. premium on the deposit ; the shares were, I think, at l/. los. each, and 21. was the premium added to the deposit. I sold thirty of those shares in April, and I kept the remainder until the 9th of June. On the 9th of June I sent for Mr. Hignett, and de sired him to sell the whole sixty-fire. Mr. PAK' wcrow—Your remaining forty, and your friend's twenty-five ?—Exactly. There were thirty sold first, and on the 9►h of June I sold sixty-five. Here is the paper— " Sixty.five North Kent shares, 9th of June." I sold them at 23 premium. CstantatAx—You have ceased to be a shareholder in the North Kent Company ?—I have. You have not had any shares since ?—No. Your purchases and sales were made in the name of Mr. Hignett ?—They were. Under your direction ?—Certainly. Your name not appearing in the transaction at all T— I sup pose not. I told him to buy and sell, just as I felt a disposi tion to speculate. The reason why I sold on the 9th of June I will explain. Finding that evidence was being received by the Committee contrary to the spirit and wishes of the Master- General, it struck me that possibly some question might arise in which I should be called upon to offer some explanation, and that induced me to sell. Mr. Dulscomse—Where did you expect that explanation would be called for ? In the House ; there might be some petition or discussion about it. I saw that as the matter was going on I had better be out of it. But previously to this, the Master-General having given his consent to the three competing lines, unqualified to one, and conditional to the other, which conditions had been accepted, I did not think it possible that any question could arise in the depart ment affecting the merits of either line. The Master-General having left it to Parliament which of the lines was the best, his assent being given to all three. CHAIRMAN—You have stated that a friend advised you to re-invest in the North Kent shares in April, you having sold those shares that you previously had in March ; was that friend any Member of the Board of Ordnance, or anybody connected with the Board ?—Certainly not. Was he in any way connected with the promoters of the Bill ?—Not in the slightest degree. He was a man specu lating in them a little like myselt ; a connexion of mine. Neither connected with the office nor the Railway Company ? —No. Have you ever had joint-share transactions with any per sons, with the exception of Mr. Hignett, connected with the Board of Ordnance ?—I do not call those joint-share transac tions with him. He bought when I asked him, and sold when I asked him. Have you had any similar transactions to those with any other person connected with the Ordnance ?—No; and ex cept that he bought and sold for me in those two cases, with those two exceptions, I have never touched any shares in the North Kent Company. Mr. T. EGERTON—The reason that you employed Mr. Hignett was, that you had never had any dealing in shares?-- Exactly. You said that you bought those shares after the assent of the Master-General had been given to one line, and the conditional assent of the Master-General had been given to the other; will you be kind enough to state when that assent had been given ? —The answer to that ought to have been, that I bought the shares after the assent of the Master-General had been given to all those three lines ; the assent to them was Riven, and they were all before the House of Commons with the assent of the Master- General. Mr. W. PATTEN—Before you bought any shares ?—Yes. Mr. T. EGRATON-Will you be good enough to give the date of the assent of the Master-General 7—The assent of the Master- General to the London and Croydon was given on February the 7th, to the South-Eastern on the 29th of January, and to the North Kent on the 20th of January ; a conditional assent was given, and then went to Parliament. Mr. Liddell—The sixty-five remaining shares that were in your possession after the purchase, you directed to be sold on the 9th of June ?—I did. I understand you to say, that the reasons why you directed that the sale should take place were, that certain proceedings were going on before the Committee, in consequence of which you thought that the propriety of your holding those shares might be questioned ?—vecidedly. I had previously enter• tained the opinion that no possible question could come before us. I thought that the present conditions of the Master-Ge neral, would, in this case, as in every case which we had had before, be insisted upon by the Committee to which the Bill went: I had never known any instance to the contrary. Mr. TANC KED—Have you had frequent instances of Bills in which the consent of the Master-General was necessary ? —Yes, we have frequent instances of Bills that affect Ordnance property, and the Master-General makes one rule in such cases ; he will never throw any unnecessary impediment in the way of a public improvement, whether it is by a railway Bill, or a dock Bill, or any other; he decides all those questions; they are military questions. Mr. DuricomßE—The Board have not the slightest influence in those cases ?—Not the slightest. TUESDAY Nlcill'rS GAZETTE. DIVIDENDS DECLARED. C. Murcott—first div. of I Id. in the pound, any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Christie, Birmingham. G. Harvey, spirit merchant, Handsacre, Staffordshire— final div. of 3s. 3 3 %d. in the pound, any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Valpy, Birmingham. J. Kirkpatrick, banker, Newport, Isle of Wight—third div. of 2;. 6d. in the pound, any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Basinghall-street, or the Town-hall, Newport. W. Chandler, chemist, Minories—first div. of Is. 4d. in the pound. July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at the office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry. T. K. Gorbell, bookseller, Bedford-place, Commercial-road, Stepney—first div. of 6s. 6d. in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at the office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry. F. E. Blyth, porter merchant, Colchester—first div. of Is. 2d. in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at the office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry. J. F. Figge, merchant, Dunster-court, Mincing-lane—first div. of 84. in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednes days, at the office of Mr. 1 urquand, Old Jewry. R. M. Herbert, tea dealer, Reading—first die. or 3s. 4d. in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at the office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry. J. Burge, jun., tailor, Weston super Mare, Somersetshire —final div. of W t d. in the pound, July 16, or any subsequent Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston, Bristol. W. Carpenter, innkeeper, Chippenham, Wiltshire—final div. of 3 1 / 0. in the pound, July 16, or any subsequent Wed nesday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston, Bristol. T. Robinson, lime burner, Eccleston, Lancash re—first div. of 7s. in the pound, July 17, or any subsequeuThursday, at the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool. H. Lewis, cabinet maker, Haverfordwest—finsTdiv. of 11,4 d. in the pound, July 16, or any subsequent Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston Bristol. J. Kewley, tailor, Liverpool —first diva of 2s. 6d. in the pound, July 17, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. W. S. Goodeve, banker's clerk, Chichester, Aug. 5, at one—J. Phillips and T. Peason, silk dressers, South-place, Finsbury, Aug. 11, at eleven—R. Kipling and W. Atkin.on, warehousemen, Wood-street, Cheapside, Aug 5, at eleven— It Kipling, warehouseman, Wood-street, Cheapside, Aug. 5, at eleven. In the Country. T. Lakin, builder, Nottingham, Aug. 7, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court—T. B. Golborne and A. A. Dobbs, wine merchants, Liverpool, Aug 7, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court—A. A. Dobbs, wine merchant, Liverpool, Aug. 6, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court —T. Parr, plumber, Liverpool, Aug. 8, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court—C. Mottram, wool broker, Liver pool, Aug. 7, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court—B. Berrill, merchant. Liverpool, Aug. 8, at eleven, at the Liver pool District Court—D. Rowlands, wine dealer, Pwllheli, Car narvonshire, Aug. 8, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court—R. Shepherd, boot maker, Liverpool. Aug. 7, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Ceurt—J. Taylor, miller, Willowholme, Cumberland, Aug. 6, at half-past one, at the Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court—E. Heron, shipowner, South Blyth, Northumberland, Aug. 6, at twelve, at the Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court—J. B. Pigott, linen ma nufacturer, Darlington, Aug. 6, at two, at the Newcastle upon-Tyne District Court—S. Rogers, earthenware manufac turer, Dale-hall, Staffordshire, Aug. 5. at twelve. at the Bir mingham District Court—B. Robinson, draper, Burton-upon- Trent, Aug. 7, at half-past eleven, at the Birmingham Dis trict Court—H. J. Dixon, carpet manufacturer, Kiddermin ster, Aug. 7, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court— T. Izon, merchant, Handsworth, Staffordshire, Aug. 8, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the contrary, on the day herein-mentioned. R. Kimble, boot maker, Great Marylebone-street, Aug. 7 G. Sheraton, corn merchant, Hartlepool, Durham, Aug. 5 C. Martyn, linen draper, Durham, Aug. 5—H. Nichols, auctioneer, Coleford, Gloucestershire, Aug. 14—H. J. E. Saffran, cloth merchant, Huddersfield, Aug. 7—W. H. Robin son, wine merchant, Leicester, Aug. 7—T. Jones and H. M. Crosskiil, booksellers, Rochdale, Aug. 6—Joseph Hill, hatter, Stroud, Gloucestershire, Aug. 5.—J. Winscombe, boot maker, Bristol, Aug. 5—J. Wood. linen manufacturer, Barnsley, Aug. 5—S. P. Bidder, slate dealer, Fleetwood-on- Wyr*, Lancashire, Aug. 5—G. J. Carter, carpenter, Hornsey-road, Aug. 5—W. Granger, paper manufacturer, Relly-mill, Dur ham, Aug. N : Fraley, linen draper, Bristol, Aug. 5. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. C. Taylor and J. Helliwell, brewers, Kirkburton, Yorkshire —J. Davies, W. Davies, T. Stephens, G. Waters, jun., J. Morris, J. Baker, T. W. Smith, J. Russell, J. J. Nicholas, J. Nattriss, H. C. Quinton, J. Gardiner, J. C. Smith, J. Tayler, R. Phillpotts, and W. Davies, jun., wine merchants, Chepstow, Monmouthshire (so far as regards J. Gardiner, J. Baker, and J. Morris)—E. Jones and J. Ripley, wholesale druggists, Huddersfield—J. Rouse and S. Hodgson, carpenters, Cleckheaton, Yorkshire—J. Cook and E. Cook, soap makers, Goodman's-yard, Minories—J. Playford and G. Playford, pawnbrokers, Great Yarmouth—N. Haly and P. Roberts, schoolmasters, Saltash, Cornwall—E. Williams and W. Haydon, merchants, Queen-street, Cheapside—J. Barker and W. Hen shaw, merchants, Manchester—W. Margetson and P. Mar getson, leather dressers, New Weston-street, Bermondsey— M. A. Moore and T. Baily, millers, Darweston-mills, Dorset shire—V. C. G. Load and J. Mair, warehousemep, Watling street—D. Davies, W. Reed, R. Roskilly, and T. J. Pile, linen drapers, Blackfriars-road—A. C. O'Dwyer and W. L. Robin son, sharebrokers, Wakefield—l. Hicks and S. Skuse, farmers, Buttermere, Wiltshire—C. W. Radcliffe and T. Evans, estate agents, Liverpool—R. Kitson, J. Garthwaite, and B . Firth, flax spinners, Brighouse—E. J. Hughes and J. Whelan, engravers, Manchester—G. Purdy and B. S. Feadt, violin makers, Finch. lane, Cornhill—D. Midgley, J. Midgley, and A. Midgley, Leeds —J. Hughes, sen., and W. Hughes, maltsters, Birmingham— H. Jennins, J. Shepard, and R. Hargrave, stuff merchants, Leeds (so far as regards J. Shepard)—B. Silva, J. J. Silva, F. de 0. Chamico, J. J. da Silva, and F. de 0. Charnico, mer chants, Crutched-friars—E. Grundy and W. Grundy, lacemen, Birmingham—C. F. Bennett and G. Bennett, bonded ship store builders, Hull —J. M. Foster and W. K. Bird, vinegar manufacturers, Cambridgeshire —G. Long and J. Peirce, iron mongers, Richmond. The foundation-stone of a new pier at Peuzame Was laid on Moeda, lait,with much coraonz, LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, July 15. (Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD. ) IN RE ABRAHAM HENRY CHAMBERS. The bankrupt in this case, the well-known banker, whose ease has been i n progress of litigation for a number of years, and who has only Just been liberated from prison, came up to day for the purpose of obtaining his certificate. The Learned COMMISIONER asked if any creditor was in attendance for the purpose of opposing the application for cer tificate now asked for by Abraham Henry Chambers ? The Solicitor for the assignees—No, your Honour. We (the assignees) do not intend to oppose the application; and I am not aware that any of the creditors of the bankrupt intend to oppose. The bankrupt was then declared to have obtained his certificate. SECONDARIES' COURT, July 16. (Before Mr. Secondary Parr En.) CROSS V. REDMAN. This was an action to recover the sum of 51. 9s. Id., for rent of stables in North-place, Portman-market. The case was de void of general interest, but was another instance of the neglect so continually occurring in the Courts. The first case, Hunter v. Knight, was withdrawn, the parties not being prepared, arid in the present, defendant had pleaded that he never was in debted, but was not in attendance. He had alleged that he had a set-off for repairs to nearly the amount, and a witness was present to prove a tender of the balance. The SECONDARY said it was a great pity defendant did not attend in time. If the defence, however, was a set-off, it ought to have been pleaded. It was evident he intended to defend the case, but the jury, as the case stood, could not do otherwise than give a verdict against him.—Verdict for the plaintiff. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. July 15. (Before Mr. Commissioner HARRIS.) " BOATSWAIN SMITH" IN DIFFICULTY. The insolvent, known as " Boatswain Smith," applied on his petition to be discharged. He was liberated on bail a fort night back, and there was now no opposition made to him. The debts on the schedule were 4411., of which no consi deration had been received for 275/. ; the bona fide debts were only 162/. The insolvency was attributed to the law expenses (the non-consideration debt) incurred in being ejected from the Danish church in Wellclose-square, which he had rented at 501. a year from 1825, and his debt for rent was 34/. 12s. He had been connected with the British and Foreign Seamen and Soldiers' Friend Society. The insolvent, in answer to the questions of Mr. Commis sioner H&aais, stated that he had made an application to the Thatched House Society, but obtained no assistance, because he was in custody for law costs in an action of ejectment. The building which had been used as the Mariners' Church in Well close-square had lately fallen down, and the property therein buried. Mr. Commissioner HARRIS said he perceived the insolvent was in custody for the costs of an action of ejectment, and re quired an explanation on the subject. The insolvent stated that there was a mariners' Danish church in Wellclose-square, of which he was the minister. The place was taken about twenty years ago to afford religious in struction, and he had the superintendence of the place. The rent had been paid, and an action was brought in ejectment to obtain possession, and he was now in prison for the costs of the same. Mr. Commissioner HARRIS remarked that one of the places in Wellclose-square had been obtained by an action, and the other had fallen down. The Court ordered the insolvent, who appeared to be labour• ing under indisposition, to be discharged. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME ClRCUlT.—Chelmsford, July 15. The commission for the county of Essex was opened on Mon day. The business is rather heavier than usual, there being 28 prisoners for trial, sof whom are charged with arson. On the civil side 23 causes are entered, three of them being special jury Causes. Chief Justice Tindal sat in the Crown court, and Mr. Justice Coleridge presided at Nisi Prius. (Before Chief Justice TINDAL.) INCENDIARISM. Samuel Read, 45, was indicted for set ting fire to a stack of beans and a stark of straw, the property of William Ridle}, at High Ungar. When the prisoner came into the dock he gazed wildly round him, and looking up to the gallery, where a number of ladies were sitting, he exclaimed, " Ah, there they are, I see them, the angels—l do love them." He then made a low bow to his Lordship, and burst into a lout laugh. His conduct altogether betokened insanity. Chief Justice TINDAL inquired whether the prisoner was in a sane state of mind. or whether his conduct was assumed? Mr. Neale, the governor of Springfield gaol, said the pri soner had been under his charge since March, and he had op portunities of observing his conduct since that period, and in his opinion he was really insane. The jury were then sworn to decide whether the prisoner was in a fit state of mind to plead, and upon hearing the evi dence of the surgeon they found that he was not ; and he was accordingly remanded until the next assizes. NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Bedford, July 14. The commission for this county was opened this afternoon by the Learned Judges of Assize, who also afterwards attended Divine service in St. Paul's Church. It is rumoured that this had well nigh proved a " maiden assize," as far as the " criminal prisoners" are concerned ; as it is, report has it that late on Saturday night a watchful con stable laid hold of an offender. He, however, is not of import ance sufficient to give employment to the " calendar.mengers," whose voices are silent, and disturb not the quietude of this town with their accustomed clamour. The cause list contains one special and two common jury causes, but its exact entry cannot at present be ascertained. MIDLAND ClRCUlT—Northampton, July 10. The commission for Northampton, the first place of busi ness on this circuit, was opened at half-past six yesterday evening by Sir Frederick Pollock, and this morning, at an early hour, the Learned Chief Baron proceeded to the church of All Saints, where Divine service was performed. At eleven o'clock the two Courts were opened, Mr.. Justice Maule taking his seat on the Nisi Prius side, and the Lord Chief Baron pre siding in the Criminal Court. On both sides the business is light. The calendar has the names of twelve prisoners, several of them being for rape, and two for cutting with intent, &c. There are eight causes only, and we believe they are altogether of a trivial nature.' Geo'ge Martin Keatley, aged twenty-one, James Cunning ham aged thirty-nine, and John Geldar, aged sixteen, were charged with assaulting and robbing, near Stamford, one Wil ham Wright Water&ld. Mr. Hildyard prosecuted. Mr. Macaulay conducted the defence. The prosecutor is a butcher at Stamford, and on the let of June was coming by Burley Park from Kettering. At the distance of a mile and three-quarters from Stamford there is a drift way leading to the great north road. The prosecutor saw three men there. He continued his way, passing the men, who followed him. About twenty minutes past ten he saw a man he knew named Richardson, and bade him " Good night." A short distance further on, having looked behind him, he saw a man, with whom he walked conversing. Sud denly he passed in front, and stood before him with a stick. This was Keatley. The other men then ran up to the pro secutor, who was knocked down by Keatley. Saw Cunning ham by a side view. He was then dragged to the side of the road and robbed of 4s. 6d. in money, and a variety of small articles. Prosecutor called out. One man seized hold of his throat, but said if he would hold his noise they would not hurt him. Having robbed him they went away, and prosecutor went on to Stamford. The prosecutor returned to where he had first seen the prisoners, and found Keatley and Cunning ham asleep, to whom he swore positively. • Thomas Sanders, a police-officer at Stamford, accompanied prosecutor to the gipl , camp, and apprehended the prisoners. A woman present sa►d there had been a robbery, and she sup posed that was what they were wanted for. Cunningham said " hush." The prisoners were travelling with china orna ments. In the camp, in a bag, were found 145/. 108., 841. 10s. being in gold. There were other witnesses, but the only evidence as to iden►ity was that of the prosecutor. Two persons gave Cunningham a good character, and re presented his business to be of that description as to make it not unlikely he would have a large sum of money by him. The Learned Judge having summed up, the jury retired. Ultimately they acquitted the whole of the prisoners. POLICE INTELLIGENCE . (YESTERDAY.) MARLBOROUGH-STREE 7 '. Christian Benninghaus, a Pole, was charged with ennO ti bi l i Lord Dudley Stua r t. • The prisoner had been relieved bYpj, Lordship with thi r ty shillings out of his private purse 0 0 ..te j day last, to take him t o M anc h es t er , w here he bad repreTers, he could obtain employment. He did not, however, P en ivg but subsequently appli e d f or f ur th er ass i s tance, and last e: 9 O he went to the o ffi ce of the P o li s h Literary Association, 'too. Chambers, No. 10, Duke-street, St. James's, in a verY;l4o, rated state, and insi s ted o n an i n t er view with his I.o.°_'';if which, being refused, he created a great disturbance To, street, and caused a crowd to assemble, continuing h i ' ol ; c e, orderly conduct until h e was t a k en i n t o custody by the P His Lordship, however, declined to press the charge. ~,t ok , The prisoner was in consequence fined 55. for being LLOYD'S SHIPPING. LONDON, JULY 16.—Wind W.S.W., light breeze, and fin e ' 0. to DEAL, JULY 15.—Wind A.M., N. to N.N.W.; r. M " frail ° N.N.E. ; 8 P.M., N.N.W.—Arrd. Eliz.,beth, Quebec, arrive d oo 4 river, and sailed for Strutford ; —, Mauritius. Sid. Gen r `"isi a Distant, South Seas; Ystroom Detering, Batavia; H., Roquette, ditto. 30. 14 PORTSMOUTH, JULY 15.—Wind N. to E.N.E.—SId. her Cs , ship St. Vincent, Queen, Trafalgar, R o d ne y, Albion, Vang nw . nopus, Superb, and her Majesty's st eame r R a ttler, On a cruise' 1014 court, Nesbit, Cape and Calcutta. Arrd• be; FALMOUTH, JULY 15.—Wind N., fresh breezes. — pep" Sisters, Wilkinson Leak. Off port, Elizabeth, Kouing Watson: •••• Helena, Asunder, New Bedford ; and Mary Clair, Say/ ,ll l o odd - HULL, JULY 15.—Wind N.N.W., moderate.—A-rr d • SO . ' Thompson, St. Andrew's, N. 8.; Queen, Watson, St. Joh ns ' sto ol. and Elizabeth, Willis, Greenland, with 4,400 seals, 3 l isp ' Que*rt FLEETWOOD, JULY 14.—The Derwent, Crewen, fret% -AO' aground in the River Wye, but expected off this tide " damage. ..Biabridge DUBLIN, JULY 14.—Wind N.W.—A rr d. 13th, Six, Transit, Ferguson ; and Silkworm, Smith, Quebec. • Pi , KINGSTON, JULY 14.—Arrd. James Fagan, Casey, Quebec, a-Ballagh, Quebec, a schooner from St. John's. ' WEXFORD.—Wind N.W.—Arrd. Rifleman, Hall, Quebe c Coax, JULY 13.—Wind N.W.—Arrd. Ann, Cooper, Sa idilw. Sid. Andromache, Skelton, Bombay. pryd. SHIELDS, JULY 14.—Wind N.E.—Arrd. 13th, Bes s i Wheatley, Miramichi. Orr DUNGENESS, JULY 14.—Arrd. Margaret, Porto Came o ' t t • • Orr SAI,CosmE, JULY 11.—Janet, North America for press, Africa. naebe e .i..4 ABERDEEN, JULY 12.—Arrd. Sir W. Wallace, Husband, NEWPORT, JULY JULY 14.—Arrd. Emma Searle, Quebec. o' n. Wright, Grenada ; Lady Prudhoe, Charleson, Grenada. ~,,r o alet,' SWANSEA, JULY 14.—Arrd. William and Joseph Crisp, o f Ow OFF CORK, JULY 13.—Homer, Dale, Birds' Island, P , thrown overboard, having sprung a leak 10th April. BELFAST, JULY 12.—Sid. Tom Bowline, Robson, QUe" -- Heyne, Price, Quebec. Cr r , LIVERPOOL, JULY 13.—Wind N.N.W.—Arrd. Jessie ther, Calcutta ; Seadrift, Wetherall, St. John's, New Std. Royal Saxon, Ingleby, Bombay; Prompt,: Irving, Denmark, Frost, Virginia; Harkaway, Nicholson, Virgini a ; Itfal," id :;4 Hawes, Baltimore; St. Lawrence, Ch ase , N ew York Alexander, St. John's, New Brunswick; Brothers, St. Pl' sBds Brunswick ; Yucatan, Humphreys, Miramichi ; Ayrsbi t "leir Quebec ; Mahaica, Jump, Montreal ; Lady Rowley, MOO T, chi ; Weir% Pater, Miramichi. • OFF 11ARYPORT, Juts 15.--William Hill, M.Farran. 0 0 ' BRISTOL, JULY 15.—Wind N.W., moderate.—Arrd. Randal, •.t, GLOUCESTER, JULY 15.—Arrd. Perseverance, Robson, „„ KINGSROAD, JULY 14.—Arid. Solway, Quebec; son, Licata. COWES, JULY 15.—An - 41. Virginia, Jantzen, Porte Rico ,OO REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS UPON VE' ENTERING PORTO ALEGRE. Ogr e ' British Vice-Consul's Office, Porto 26th April, 1845. °ol Sir,--I beg leave to acquaint you, for the inforinstlig°o parties interested, that the restrictions imposed on al l , pia', coming from foreign count r ies en t er i ng this Per; bo t h their inward cargoes, are now removed ; and, in futt, r ;§sc l foreign and B ra zilia n v esse l s arr i v i ng f rom f o reign r' o pot4 admitted to entry at this Cust o m-h o u se .—l have the b to remain, Sir, your most obedient servant, rnnstil' BENJAMIN AVELINE, British Vice- ~v To W. Dobson, Esq., Secretary, Lloyd's, London. MARKET NE WS-(YESTEItv `- "o r CORN EXCH ANGE The supply of English Wheat being very limited , th e Vie' mand for that article was somewhat active, at fai r t frel l provement noticed in the quotations on Monday 13st ' bo ode d Foreign Wheat was held for advanced currencies, but . te 0 parcels were much neglected. Grinding Barley was 10 0 ' dear, but all other kinds v, ere a slow inquiry. Oats/ Peas, and Flour ruled about stationary. ARRIVALS. Barley. - qrs Wheat. 1,970 qrs. P -I °S Oats. 2,590 10,320 . 0 ' 13,160 English • • Irish Foreign 2,020 1 1,570 Malt, 2,150 qrs. WECITE t Each kind of prime Meat C was in HAI'EL steady deman'' , sf3ee prices ; otherwise the trade was somewhat inactive. 5s to from 2s 8d to 3s 8d ; Mutton, 3s 4d to 4s 10d ; Lam b ' 6s; Veal, 3s 8d to 4s 8d ; and Pork, 2s 8d to 43 per 8110. COAL IVIAILICET. 001 Prices per ton at the close of the market :—Adair 's 13s 4d ; Bates Hartley, 14s ; Chester Main, 14s ; 9 , 11 49 1 °: West Hartley, 15s; East Tanfield, 13s 6d ; Holywei," 19! 15s ; North Percy Hartley, 13s 9d ; Ord's Redhet% 6 4 ! Ravensworth's West Hartley, 14s • South Pontop , ' Ks 9' Taylor's West Hartley, 14 s 9d Tanfield Moor, i1:109; Townley, 14s ; West Hartl e y, 14s ; West Wylam , 1 55 6' Wylam, 14s 3d ; Wall's-end, Bewicke and Co., i k rfo eo Brown's unscreened, 13s 3d • Killingworth, 14s 6d;,,`" 1 " e rn 14s 6d ; Wharncliffe, 155 3d; Eden Main, 153 6d ; r:f."00 , 16s ; Braddyll's Hetton, 17s 3d ; East Hetton 15s ; 6 4 ' lis 3d ; Hetton, 17s ; Lambton, 16s 9d ; 11 ' 1 . 1 11 0' , Q . }, til t Russell's Hetton, 16s 3d; Richmond, 15s 6d ;„, 16s 9d ; Scarborough, 16s 9d ; Stewart's 17s 3d ; 111%'; 're,,, 17s 3d ; Heugh Hall, 15s 6d ; Kelloe, 16s 3d ; Adelo ,u :Aso o I6s 6d; Barrett, 15s; Brown's Deanery, 15s 3d; Rich i "jof Tees, 14s 6d ; Seymour Tees, 15s 6d ; South t ' 0pe., 11 153 6d ; Tees, 1696 d ; West Tees, 14s 6d ; Altos, 13s; l O ' Hartley, 159; Hartley, 14s ; West Hartley Netherton, —Ships arrived, 92. gee d [ADVERTISEMENT.] —The Gentleman's rte tl 'i o se • of Hair, or Invisible Ventilating Peruke, is so a e n d t° resemblance to nature as to defy detection ; enable any gentleman to see the effect, a larkt°,, ° e c b, ment is always kept for in s p ec ti on , any one of `e tr - üble' approved of, saves the purchaspr both time an aPe° These splendid speci mens o f th e perruquetto art g i t red i l : rior to anythin g t o b e o b ta i ne d e l sew h er e, el Paris or London, have only to be seen to be al i d and are the sole i n v en ti on o f R oss an d Sons, 1 !"boir 120, Bishopsgate-street, London. N.B. Splendid olte cutting apartments on the ground floor, the whole Pl y walls being lined with looking-glass, Ala mode de te [ADVERTISEMENT.] —THE ORIGINAL l‘W r il i 011 4 TABLET STROP, WITH FOUR SIDES.--MT. `' e j,/ Saunders, inventor and manufacturer, No. 25, Stra,llol This article has been in extensive use for the last 0 ° years by the first cutlers, who pronounce it to W I . , fo, equal in producing a fine smooth edge to a ral ° necessary to shave with comfort. They may . /1 1,00 A the following cutlers :—Lowcock, 38, Cornhll d er 24, Fleet-itreet ; Davis, 69. and Looker, 42, k e- sril hall-street ; Verinder, 79," St. Paul's Churl,' Millikin, 161, Strand ; Coleman, Haymarket ; Fb l u r ille; Whicker, 67, St. James's-street ; Warner, 25, Sac ; s ° street ; Paget, 195, Pi c c a dilly ; Kingsbury, „„1:11-.%0'4' Durham, 201, Regent-stre e t ; Ei ns li e , 46, St. lane ; Robinson, 53, Bishopsgate-street ; Carter..., t he Lamprey, Dublin. The fact of their Lein sold 13 /,,e0 above makes it superfluous for the inve g ntor to srss, further' in their favour.—George Saunders, 140. Strand. t [ADVERTISEMENT.]—D EAFNESS .—N o . 39, marle-street, Pi cca dill y .—I nvis ibl e V o i ce Conuu Al -001; when fixed i n th e cav i ty o f t h e ears; are not mo re uP ec ," fortable nor perceptibl e th an having a small P i n wool in n its place. They enable individuals at ,"fer vanced age, and of forty or fifty ye a r s ' s tanding "60 0 : treme deafness, instantly to join in ' general conve, 0 ' and to catch th e soun d o f a di s t ant , l ow speak iaW church, theatre, &c. They pour the, conversati ° 'o o . the ears to such an ex t en t, th a t i n most sevcre,, - ca ° deafness cannot be observ e d. Al so or i g inal Pl' 0 0 nets, French, German, and Spanish Artificial ,ElO4 11 improved Hearing Trumpets of every d es cription.. p 0! of those instruments,h ave rece i ve d th e a ppeobati ° o' the Royal Society a nd R o y a l I ns tit ut i on o f Gre%teli tain. The Newly I nvente d Sp ec t ac l es , inatoe u . l ,o, o they are placed before extremely imperfect 1 4 , 61 ; 0 0 :s brought to its youthful, nat u ral, an d origin° l „/Wo" Also Achromatic Teles c ope s , Ope ra - g l a sses, " 3 0 0 scopes, &c.—Caution : Messrs. S. and B. Soloinoid; ipticialis and Aurists, are not in any way conneete d Aglr, person of the same name i n th e i r i m mediate 11 70' 3ourhood, ROC in any part of the country. To Pred of nistakes, be cautious, and observe—Only to 10,.. h 0 g ° tel' 39. Albemarl e - s t ree t, Pi cca dilly, o pp os it e t h e Yors"' [ADVERTISEMENT.] —A CERTAIN CURE FOS Or PULA, OR KING'S EVIL, BY HOLLOWAY'S Pla s 0 0; OINTMENT.—Many of the hospitals, fi n di n g that o - 0 00 bar of their patients, afflicted with ulcers, abscesses'beeo sores, but more particularly from Scrofula, who ho d - 0 01 , discharged as incurable from various medical instit otl o ol were afterwards soundly healed by H o ll o way's P il : ig g O ointment—this fact has induc e d sev e ral infirmor .e V o purchase by weight from the proprietor, Holioerthii ointment for hospital use, for the purpose of curingA to class of patients. All such would, therefore, do ev s ,„4 have recourse to those famed remedies when s°' - '";0 from similar ailments. These medicines may be obts l loo of all chemists and druggists throughout the Cir. 14 4 . world; and at Professor Hollow a y' s Establishn3e" Strand. WESTERN CIRCUIT.— Winchester, July 14. John Derwudy was indicted for having maliciously cut and wounded John Beacham, at Fareham, with intent to murder him or to do him some grievous bodily harm. Mr. Edwards wa4 counsel for the prosecution, and Mr. Mis sing defended the prisoner. It appeared that the prisoner was servant to an officer, and had several times been at the Railway Tavern at Fareham, where the prosecutor was hostler. On the 24th March the prisoner went to the stables with some horses, and some words took place between the two parties relative to the hostler's fees, which the prisoner had not paid. The prosecutor threatened to inform the prisoner's master that he did not pay him, when the prisoner took up a prong and struck at Beacham's head, but missed him. He then stabbed at him with the prong, but Beacham defended himself and avoided injury. They parted ; in about twenty minutes afterwards they met again, and the prisoner asked ileacham if he would give it him then. Beacham said he would if he would stay. The prisoner struck at Beacham with a hor , ewhip, but did not touch him. Beacham then knocked the prisoner down, he got up again, and they " snuggled" a bit. They both fell down, and then the prisoner with a knife cut the prosecutor in the neck and over the eye. They get up again, and the prisoner went away. The prosecutor afterwards fainted away, from the loss of blood, at the Railway Tavern. Search was subsequently made on the spot where the affray had taken place, and the blade of a knife was found covered with blood and hair. The prisoner was taken into custody, and the handle of a knife was found upon him which corresponded with the blade found on the ground. A surgeon was called in to see Beacham ; he was then covered with blood, and fainting. There was an in cised wound on the face seven inches in length to the bone. There was also a wound of considerable depth in the throat. The wounds must have been inflicted by , a sharp instrument. Mr. MissiNG addressed the jury in mitigation of punishment, for he admitted that the facts were beyond dispute. Mr. Baron PLATT having summed up ; the jury returned a verdict of Guilty with intent to do grievous bodily harm. The Learned JUDGE then addressed the prisoner. The jury, in their compaction, had found a verdict on the second count of the indictment, thinking, perhaps, there was some doubt about his intent to murder this unfortunate person. It was fit he should tell him that if the verdict had been pronounced on the first count, he should have left him for execution, and he would have expiated his offence on the gallows. As it was the jury had saved him from that, but it behoved the Court in a case of this kind, which belonged so little to the feelings of Englishmen—the use of the knife—it behoved the Court to vindicate the justice of the country. He was invited to fight this man, but instead of acting as he ought in a manly way, he took from his pocket a knife, and held it in concealment, with a view of inflicting a wound in a cowardly manner—certain it was, he meant to do him some grievous bodily harm. His conduct was most savage and atrocious, unworthy of a man. The Court saw nothing in the case that could palliate it, and therefore sentenced the prisoner to 15 years' transportation. Robert Spencer and Henry Bedford, two boys aged 16 and 17, were indicted for the manslaughter of Jacob Light on the 20th of May. Mr. Missing conducted the case for the prosecution. This was a very distressing case, so much so that the Learned Judge was in tears during the whole of the trial. The facts are simple and easily told. On the day in question, a donkey was grazing on Netby-common, with its fore legs tied together by a cord. The deceased, who was a little boy, untied the cord and got on the donkey. He rode towards the prisoners. When he got up to them they took the cord from the boy, tied him round the body, and then tied the other end of the cord round the donkey's neck, and started the donkey. The bey being frightened, got off the donkey, which immediately went off at full speed, dragging the boy after it, and kicking him in a frightful manner. The two prisoners then ran after the donkey, endeavouring to atop it, which at last they succeeded in doing, but the boy died in a few minutes from the injuries he had received. The prisoners ran for assistance, and were exceedingly distressed. The jtiry - found the prisoners Guilty, and they were sen tenced to be imprisoned for a fortnight, but without hard labour. ill W D /E/). " On the 9th i ns t., at Kelston Knoll, near Bath/ . , Tudor, Esq., aged 77. , i OO On the Bth inst., at Ramsgate, Sarah, relict of Peter x• 4 Esq , aged 64. IP reil On the 11th i ns t., M r . Th omas H arvey, l a te of the Eagle, War,(isworth. tc, Chile.On tb e 12th inst., at Lower Tooting, Surrey, .•-" 0 • Chapman the 12, jun., surgeon of Merton. ._ 0 . ,1 th inst., at ' Ashurst -wood, East Grins 4. v- ,.- A , , a s ward Wardroper, Esq. ,i e fO rri On the 13th inst., at King-street, Cheaps. ; - - ', ho f Maria, the eldest daughter of the late Rev. C. Atre°`,l o lPP On the 13th inst., at Stamford-hill, Ernest 12 * _ Schwabe, youngest son of the late Rev. Dr. Schwabe•tb, grr On the 12th inst., at Brunswick-terrace, Walw" Elizabeth Morris, aged 84. YOV I 9 o London: Printad and Published by MURDO - 50, 1 0 9 f No. 112, ".trane, Printer. at The Sus OfSc e ' o lOW Strand. in the Precinct of the Savoy, in t- 116 Middlesex, Thursday, July 17, 1845. Jon 4 110 C"' Ne -aA Ho r briet • llg. Plen \V tc• • :lot 'fikr o y IIobl: G. k 8 „ 4. 1 . Pi, 11 Str '448 SI 444att Ed vva I r t d 411 04 , 4 1 R E , ' j E 0 Z : s'uni • --- BIB7'H S. , a nbill . , e l ' On the Bth inst., at Prestonfield House, near r , " -- ,.0. the lady of David L. Burn, Esq., of a daughter, still -b° d 9 0' On the 10th inst.. at Avening, near Stroud, the ist f. Alexander Rooke, Esq., of a so n . ° wi - Ilie On the 12th inst., at Upper Home r t on , Mrs. , , d Street, a a daughter, which lived only a few hours. , A. , - T" On the 13th inst., at Woburn-square, the wife 0' Gadesden, Esq., of a daughter. _., 1 010 4 On the 13th inst., Mrs. William Lane, of Bed ..., Russell-square, of a son. rrbotP" On the 14th inst., in Tavistock- square, the lady of • _,, F. Barclay, Esq., of the Middle Tem i d e , o f a s on. ~...."'" • RRIE D. t On the 9th inst., Mr. H enr y J or d an , t o E ve , Odes t...A ter of Lewis Jordan, Esq., of I3erners-street, Oxford-snO7A On the 12th inst., at St. Pancras New Church, Mr Id - Cox, of High Holborn, law-stationer, to Nancy' , / of daughter of William Matts, Esq., of Belgrave-stre et ' road. O °F Oa the 12th inst., at St. Mary's, Islington, Mathew 4 son, Esq., to Mrs. Casson. , Jo tp On the 12th in s t., a t St. M ary ' s , S to k e Newhipfi t or,- • Castle Gant, o f Nicholas-lane, Lombard-street, 50 1 piP Cecilia Ann, e ld er d aug h ter o f G . S . H ea l es, Esq., ° Newington. ~:< ?; Coi rt