The Sun. — London, England, 1845-05-16 00:00:00

Group V. THE NOTTINGHAM AND LINCOLN LINE- The Committee, consisting of the O'Conor Don (Chair man), Mr. Hope Johnston, Sir John R. Reid, Sir Denham Norreys, and Mr. J. A. S. Davies, met this morning in room No. 13, and proceeded to the consideration of clauses on the part of the objectors to the above railway. Mr. GREGORY, on the part of Lord Chesterfield, proposed certain clauses compelling the Company to deviate in the parish of Burton Joyce to an extent of eighty yards from their present line ; and in the event of such deviation causing in jury to the parsonage-house and church-yard, such damage to be compensated for, the amount of damage to be fixed by an arbitrator. Mr. MACAU r.AY said that the advantages to be derived from such a change would be altogether disproportioned to the injury inflicted on much valuable property. It was suggested by the CHAIRMAN that the line should be carried fifty feet north of that at present intended in the parish of Burton Joyce, and eighty yards in Gedling ; but as Mr. Gregory did not consider the first any great advantage, and as the promoters of the line would not consent to the second, the clauses were entirely thrown out. There being no more clauses in the Bill, The Committee proceeded to the next railway in the group, namely, THE NEWARK AND SHEFFIELD. Mr. BAINES, on the part of he promoters of the Bill, read extracts from the report of the Board of Trade recommend ing this line. He stated that it was intended to extend it to a distance of thirty-two miles, and that it would connect the producing districts of South .Nottingham and South Lin colnshire, with the markets of Yorkshire and Lancashire. By forming a junction with the Midland Railway at Chesterfield, they could communicate with Manchester, Leeds, and Barns ley ; and he would produce evidence before the Committee to prove that the traffic would be amply sufficient to maintain the line, and return a profit to the Company. The line would not interfere with any existing interest. The Learned Counsel, after giving returns of the export trade of Newark in the crticles of malt, flour, coals, lime, &c., pro ceeded to call witnesses in support of his position. John Thorpe, malster and coal merchant, proved that a very considerable export trade existed between Newark and the market of South Lancashire in the articles of malt and flour, and that coal was imported in great quantities from Derby shire and Nottingham. He was certain that if the line were made it would increase in a very great degree the value of property in Newark. The popular feeling was strongly in its favour. Mr. Bramston, Mayor of Newark, gave similar evidence. The Committee adjourned till to-morrow. Group E. NEWCASTLE AND BERWICK LINE. Mr. Hudson, the Chairman of the Company who promoted this projected locomotive line, occupied the attention of the Committee during the entire day, in showing the immense local advantages which would be derived from its adoption. His evidence chiefly tended to prove that the atmo- spheric system of railway would not work the same quantity of goods as that worked by the locomotive, and that the public would not be convenienced by having such fre quent trains as were advocated by the Northumberland At mospheric Company. RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE. REPORT OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE ON SCHEMES FOR EXTENDING RAILWAY COMMUNICA TION IN VARIOUS DISTRICTS. Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be printed, May 8, Railway Department, Board of Trade, Whitehall, May 8, 1845. The Board constituted by the minute of the Lords of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade, for the transaction of railway business, having had the fol lowing railway schemes, viz. : Porthdynllaen and Bangor; Chester and Holyhead ; Ditto—Mold Branch ; Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings—Rye and Ash ford Branch ; have decided on submitting the following report thei-eon, for the consideraticn of Parliament : The Porthdynllaen and Bangor (or North Wales Railway), commences at the port of Porthdynllaen, runs along the coast of the Irish Channel, by Clynog and Caernarvon, to Bangor; its length being 28 miles 56 chains. The earth-works on the whole will ex ceed an average, and a tunnel occurs of 704 yards in length. At the 6th mile is an embankment 118 feet high, and at the 11th mile a cutting 71 feet deep and several run from 40 to 50 feet. The promoters of the scheme state, that by bring ing into close connexion the city and port of Bangor and the town of Caernarvon, the line would confer important commercial advantages upon the interests of North Wales ; and that its further course through the mineral and agricultural districts will throw open additional supplies of copper, lead, slates, grain, and provisions, to new and extended markets. Es pecially they lay stress on the advantages to be de rived from opening out the extensive slate quarries in the district. With regard to passengers, they reckon upon a considerable number going along the proposed line, particularly in summer and autumn, and the traffic tables, which have been submitted with the statement of the promoters' case, seem to justify, so far as it is in our power to form an opinion from the data which they contain, their assumption that the line will be remunerative. We have stated that the earth-works on the whole will exceed an average, and that a tunnel occurs 704 yards in length; consequently the line will be of an expensive description. The promoters of the scheme, however, while they estimate the cost at 300,0001., state that arrangements have been made with responsible contractors to complete the Railway within the engi neer's estimate, both as to time and amount. The projectors are particular in their statement, that their scheme is not intended to rival the Chester and Holyhead Railway, nor to disturb any existing arrangements between that Company and the Govern ment; their line is for local purposes, and it appears to have received very general local support. No statement has been made to the Board of Trade in opposition to this scheme, and we are not aware of any circumstances tending to invalidate the case ' of the promoters. In these circumstances it becomes our duty to re port, in conformity with the Fifth Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, that " there are no public reasons which ought, in the opinion of this department, to be decisive against it. The object of the Chester and Holyhead Railway Bill is to complete the continuous communication from Chester to Holyhead by the passage of the Menai Strait=, by means of one of two alternative lines, the first of which, 4 miles 63 chains in length, passes over the town of Bangor by a viaduct bridge ; the other, 4 miles 26 chains in length, passes about half a mile south of Bangor, and effects a saving of 37 chains in distance. The gradients on both lines are good. The point selected for the passage of the Menai is at the Britannia Rock, in the centre of the Strait, which affords a convenient position for the central pier of a bridge of two arches; but as an objection was taken to the bridge proposed to be constructed, the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty directed a local examination to be made by Sir John Rennie and Mr. Rer:del, civil engineers, in company with Capt. Vida!, Royal Nary. We beg to refer the Committee on the Bill to the reports of Sir John Rennie and Mr. Rendel, in which the Inspector-General of Railways concurs. The Mold Branch of the Chester and Holyhead Railway has been formally withdrawn by the projec tors, with the intention of bringing it forward in an improved form at a future period. The Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings (Rye and Ashford Branch) is 29 miles 27 chains in length, with a subsidiary branch to Hastings, 1 mile 21 chains in length. The main branch commences at a point on the Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Railway, about two mils westward of the St. Leonard's terminus, and about thirty one miles from Brighton ; and, sweeping round to the north of Hastings, to which it throws off the subsidiary branch which we have mentioned, passes by Winchelsea and Rye to Ashford, where it terminates at the station of the South-Eastern Rail way. In the report from the Board of Trade on the Kentish and South-Eastern Railways, we stated, with regard to the South-Eastern Company's scheme (Ashford to Hastings), which is an important link in the coast line of communication, that we were aware of no public grounds why it should not receive the sanction of the Legislature; and we omitted to notice expressly the scheme which is now before us, in con sequence of the Directors of the Brighton, Lewes, red Hastings Rail wa y h av i ng , in a memorial re vved at th e B oar d o f T ra d e on the 7th of January, made the following statement : " The extension of the coast line to a point on the Dover Rail wa y w hi c h would complete the chain of communication along the coast, between Dover and Portsmouth, a t t h e eastern end of the chain, is an object which h as b een viewed byDirectors to be of great publi c importance, and the was much their interest anddesire to one which it o promote, and for such purpose th ey h ave caused surveys to be ma d e and the country i n that direction thoroughly explored ; but they feel bound to say, that any in terference with the p rospects of their' Railway, b ythe adoption of any line h av i ng f or its object theab straction of the Hastings and London traffic, will probably be fatal to such an undertaking, and that, pending a state of uncertainty and d ou bt as to the decision which may be arrived at, all efforts towards its accomplishment on their part must be suspended, although of course they could not object to its ac complishment by any other parties." Considering, therefore, that the Hastings and Ash ford project was withdrawn, we omitted all notice of it from the Report on the Kentish schemes ; but as the Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Company have since requested us to report specially upon the project, we beg to state, with reference to that scheme, that inasmuch as a line of railway from Hastings to Ashford will be an important link in tle chain of the south coast communication, we think it ought to be made; and that, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, as set forth in our report on the Kentish schemes, we are of opinion that the branch will be best constructed by the South-Eastern Railway Company. In conclusion, we beg to draw attention to the passage of the Fifth Report of the Select Committee of last year, in which it is stated, in recommending that reports should be made to Parliament by this depart ment upon railway schemes, " That no such report should be held to prejudice the claims of private persons, the examination of which should be alto gether reserved to the Houses of the Legislature." In submitting to Parliament, in conformity with the recommendation of that Committee, the results at which we have arrived, with a view to the information and assistance of Parliament in forming a judgment upon the schemes in question, in so far as our re port may be available for that purpose, we are anxious that it should be distinctly understood that we have ar rived at these results solely upon public grouads, and to the exclusion of all considerations how far such results might require to be modified by a due regard for private rights and interests. DALHOUSIE. C. W. PASLEY. G. R. PORTER. D. O'BRIEN. S. LAING. TTIE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, MAY 16 1845. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Guildhall, May 14. (Sittings at Nisi Prius before Lord DENMAN and a Common Jury.) MARY ANNE PHILLIPS V.:WORSELEY. Mr. Crowder,lMr. M. Chambers, and Mr. Char nock appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Cockburn, Mr. Warren, and Mr. Bovill were engaged for the defence. The action was brought to recover compensation in damages for tho injury which the plaintiff had sustained by reason of the defendant having broken a promise of marriage which he made to her. It appeared that the plaintiff is the daughter of a person who was once the treasurer of Covent-garden Theatre, but has more re cently been the landlord of some three or four public houses or taverns in and near the metropolis, of which the latest was the Swan, is llungarford-market. He became unsuccessful in this latter occupation, and was obliged to give it up, and as he had a large family, six daughters and one son, the plaintiff; who had become acquainted with the duties of a barmaid, procured em ployment in that situation at some two or three houses of which the latest was that of Mr. Doyle, in Chandos street, called the Marquis of Granby, where she became acquainted with the defendant, who is a saddler, and a person of some considerable property, residing in South Audley-street. Miss Phillips had entered into some previous engagement with a person of the name of Ponder, which, however, was broken off before her intimacy with the present defendant. An offer of marriage having been made and accepted, the parties continued to live upon the footing usual upon such occasions, until a person called Metcalfe communi cated to the defendant some facts concerning the lady, which statement the defendant conveyed to the plaintiff herself, declaring at the same time that he believed it to be true, and that he should put an end to the contract of marriage accordingly. The plaintiff demanded the name of her accuser and the particulars of the accusation, but no distinct answer appeared to have been given to her upon the subject. It seemed, however, that the indivi dual who was said to have been improperly intimate with her was a Mr. Honey, the husband of the actress of that name, who had died nine years before the circu lation of the report, and whose acquaintance with Miss Phillips and her family existed when she was only 14 years old. The efforts of the lady to procure an oppor tunity of justifying her conduct were very energetic, as were her protestations of her: own innocence. The de fendant, however, continued inexorable upon the subject of the marriage, and the present action was accordingly brought. The declaration was in the usual form. The defendant pleaded in justification, that after making the promise in question he discovered that the plaintiff was a person of loose, unchaste, and immodest character and conduct; that she had appeared upon the stage of seve ral theatres in male and indelicate attire, and that she had actually had illicit intercourse with a person of the name of Lowry upon several occasions which were spe cifically set forth, and had upon other occasions, and with other persons, been guilty of improper and indecent familiarity. Mr. CROWDER, having stated the case of the plaintiff, called the following witnesses:— Charles Jay said that he was a coalmerchant at Black wall, and a fishmonger at Hungerford.market. He had married an elder sister of the plaintiff, and he detailed some of the circumstances which we have already men tioned about the commencement of the acquaintance between the parties, and the footing upon which they lived before the breaking off of the engagement. With regard to the fact of the plaintiff having appeared upon the boards of some two or three theatres, the witness deposed that the defendant upon one occasion told him that the plaintiff had acknowledged to her lover that she had been upon the stage, and that he (the defendant) was perfectly satisfied with her statements and explana tions upon that subject, and that no change in his con duct or deportment was at all made in consequence of that information. The witaess himself was not aware of the fact that the young lady had appeared upon the stage at all. The witness stated, on cross-examination, that two sisters of the plaintiff and of witness's own wife were married, but he said that he did not know whether one of the husbands was a private in the Foot Guards, and the other a private in the Blues. It was no business of his to know who his sisters-in-law were married to. He did not know whether the proposed marriage of the plaintiff and defendant was known to the plaintiff's mother, or whether the plaintiff had the consent of her family for going on the stage. A person named Humphreys, and another named Phillips, the brother of the plaintiff, deposed to some of the facts already mentioned, and they both stated that they took all possible pains, but without effect, upon the part of the plaintiff, to procure from the defendant and his attorneys the fullest information upon the nature of the imputation and the source from which it proceeded. The plaintiff's brother deposed that he offered to release the defendant from all personal responsibility if he would only furnish the name of the party by whom the infor mation was given. Evidence was also given to prove that the defendant, besides his establishment, had received more than 5,0001. at his father's death, and had other property worth about 6001. a year. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. COCKBURN addressed the jury for the defence, and called George Metcalfe, who said—l am an engraver, living in Pall-mall. I know the plaintiff and defendant. Had known plaintiff seven or eight years. She is 27 years of age. I have frequented the Swan Tavern, kept by her father. I know Edward Lucas Lowry. He made a statement to me with regard to Miss Phillips. I men tioned it to the defendant. I had not made any com municaton to him before the 7th of February last. I know nothing of my own knowledge of any impropriety in the conduct of Mary Anne Phillips. I never saw any impropriety in the conduct of any person in the Swan, where she was barmaid, and which was kept by her father. Cross-examined—Had been at the house several times before Mr. Phillips gave it up. I had met Lowry there several times. I believe he was not a friend of Worseley's. I had been several times at Doyle's house whilst Miss Phillips was barmaid there, and whilst the defendant was paying his addresses to her ; and I had several opportu nities of observing her conduct. Edward Lowry was then called.—He said, I am the collector of the West Middlesex Waterworks Company. I know Corby. He told me that Mary Anne Phillips was going to be married, upon which I made an obser vation. Metcalfe afterwards called upon me upon the subject, and I afterwards saw Mr. Worseley. I after wards repeated to Mr. Barlow, the defendant's attorney, what I had stated to Metcalfe. I first knew Miss Phillips about eight years ago, when she was barmaid at the swan. Our acquaintance continued about a year and a half, and, terminated about six years ago. My inti macy with her was of a peculiar nature. It oc curred at the Greyhound, at Greenwich. I was in the habit of going into the upper bar of the Swan. I have had intercourse with her in the Swan. The first act of in tercourse occurred twelve months after the commence ment of our acquaintance, during the continuance of which the illicit intercourse continued afterwards. The first act of intercourse took place at the Greyhound, at Green wich. I did not ask permission of her father or mother to let her come out. I never knew them. It was be tween eleven and three o'clock. We were home before six o'clock. I was articled to an architect in Vincent square, and am now ready to act as such. I was not with her at Greenwich more than once. Once it oc curred in a room in the second floor of the Swan. I am not aware of any other occasion. I can't recollect if the second act was in the morning, or evening, or middle of the day. I can't recollect whether it was light or dark, or whether it was in summer or winter, or what month it was, from January to December. There was no bed in the room on the second floor of the Swan. I don't know if there was a carpet. There were chairs and a table. The occurrence took place upon the table. There might have been a glass of sherry and water of mine upon the table. To Lord DENMAN—When I first had intercourse with her I was of opinion that she was not a virgin. I have known Mr. Corby seven years. My acquaintance with Miss Phillips ceased about seven years ago. We had something to eat and drink at the Greyhound. Corby—l know the defendant, and Lowry, and Metcalfe. When I heard that the plaintiff and defendant were going to be married, I mentioned it to Lowry, who said he was very much surprised and very sorry. Metcalfe, re-called, stated that Lowry told him that he (Lowry) had had connexion with Mary Anne Phil lips. After another communication with Lowry, I then communicated the fact to the defendant. _ Young, an officer of Excise, near Banbury, knew 'the house whilst Miss Phillips was serving at the bar. Saw Lowry there, and a person called Bone. I saw no personal impropriety of behaviour upon her part, but her freedom of behaviour with the young men who at tended there was not correct. Hannah Hamlet lived with the Phillips family when they kept the Jew's Harp, near Albany Barracks. The house was frequented by soldiers, and two of the daugh ters married soldiers. The late Mr. Honey used to be with them a great deal. Mary Anne Phillips, the wit ness, and the whole of the family went into mourning when Honey was drowned. I never saw Honey's picture with Miss Phillips. Never saw Honey take her out. That I know. I never saw Mr. Lowry, and never had any conversation with Miss Phillips about Lowry. The witness proceeded to give several other answers, which were in opposition to the anticipations of the Learned Counsel by whom she was called. Some dis cussion thereupon arose as to the degree in which the counsel for the defendant was at liberty to contradict the testimony of his own witness from the written account which the attorney had made of the witness's examina tion at his office. Lord Denman finally permitted a cross-examination to proceed upon this .f'ooting, and afterwards allowed the attorney himself to enter the box, and state from the paper all the information which the witness had originally given him. Part of the state ment given to the attorney was, that the witness never thought there was anything criminal in the conduct of Alio Phillips. Morris Levy swore that there was not a better family in the kingdom than the family of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff went upon the stage by the desire of her mother, the family being in bad circumstances at the time. Mr. Ennis, the under-prompter of the Haymarket Theatre, deposed to the plaintiff's having played the part of a page in the Fair One of the Golden Locks. Her salary was 9s. a-week. John Doyle, the landlord of the Marquis of Granby, in Chandos-street, said that whilst the plaintiff was re ceiving attentions from Mr. Ponder she was taken out once or twice by the defendant ; and that whilst she was engaged to the defendant himself she received presents from a Mr. Laing. The witness remonstrated with her about such impropriety, but she said that she should take presents from anybody; but she did not wish the de fendant to know of it. She also expressed a wish that Mr. Worseley should not be informed of her having been upon the stage. The witness when Miss Phillips left his house told her that he should let her know what it was to have an enemy. Rebecca Bristow was barmaid with Mary Anne Phil lips at the Marquis of Granby. Saw Ponder, Crotch, and Laing there. Cannot recollect if they paid any par ticular attention to her. This was the case for the defendant. Mr. CROWDER then replied, after which Lord DENMAN left the case to the jury, who, after a little consultation, found a verdict for the plaintiff— I)amages, 4001. . . . The case was not concluded until near ten o'clock al night. __ _ MAY 15. (Sittings in Banco.) HOWARD V. GOSSETT, KNT. This morning the Court sat in banco, and proceeded to give judgment in several cases, amongst which was the im portant one on the action, which a Mr. Howard had brought against the Sergeant-at-Arms of the House of Commons for false imprisonment ; to that action a demurrer was raised. Mr. Justice IVIGHTmor commenced by saying that in this case the plaintiff had brought an action for false imprisonment, to which the defendant had demurred : in his opinion, the plaintiff was entitled to judg ment on the demurrer, as the defendant had rested his defence on the power which the House of Commons pos sessed to issue a warrant, and on that to detain the plaintiff in custody ; that the warrant had been issued according to the usage and privilege of the House of Commons. Looking at the whole of the bearing of the present case, and considering the power claimed by the House of Commons to be dan gerous to the liberty of the subject, he of was opinion that the judgment must be entered for the plaintiff. Mr. Justice COLERIDGE said it was his opinion that the pro ceedings which had taken place under the Speaker's warrant were bad, and that the plaintiff was entitled to judgment. Mr. Justice WiLuAms differed from his Learned Brethren. A few words more in the warrant would have made it a valid document ; the plaintiff had been guilty of a contempt of Parliament, and unless they had the power to enforce the attendance of a person before them, the House of Commons would be in reality but a shadow of a high court of law; that the House alone was competent to decide that its perediction having been dis obeyed, the proceedings were legal, and, therefore, in his opinion, the judgment ought to be entered for the defendant. Lord DENMAN, after going through a very elaborate opinion, in which he referred to the powers possessed by the House of Commons, contended that the House was bound to set forth the offence in the warrant ; and as a principle of vital importance was involved, in which the security of the subject was affected, he considered that the judgment of the Court ought to be for the plaintiff. SHERIFFS' COURT, May 15. (Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCTIELL.) SCARFE v. SIR A. L. lIAY. This was an action to recover the sum of 1301. for one quarter's rent of a cottage at Fulham, and for damage done to furniture therein. The defendant had suffered judgment to go by default. Mr. OGLE stated the case—The cottage was let to the de fendant so far back as May, 1837, at the yearly rent of 250/. Defendant remained in possession twelve months, and one quarter's rent was still unpaid. On defendant leaving the furniture was inspected by a valuer, who estimated the dila pidations of the furniture at 681. Is. There was no defence to the action, but it was perhaps necessary to account for the delay in bringing the action, by stating that Sir Andrew had been out of England a considerable time, and they had been unable to serve him with process, besides which, he had been protected, being a Member of Parliament. Mr. Samuel Lahee, house-agent, of Bond-street, proved the terms on whick the cottage was let. Mr. Samuel Jones deposed that he was a valuer, and in spected the furniture after the defendant left. It had been beautiful, but was very much damaged. He estimated the damage at 681. Is. By the Jury—Did not see the furniture before defendant took possession. Could only estimate the damage on suppo sition of its previous state, and from description. The UNDER-SHERIFF-011, they always put down all the broken windows, and all kinds of dilapidation, as having been done during the tenancy. He then summed up, and said that the jury must take the amount of the damage as stated by the witness. The jury said it did not appear to them that there was any proof of the value of the furniture at the time the de fendant took possession, or what ought to be allowed for wear and tear. The UNDKR- SHERIFF said that it was the duty of the defendant to adduce evidence if he had been overcharged. The jury could only go upon the evidence, and as the witness had positively sworn to the amount, he did not see how they could avoid giving a veriict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. The jury thereupon gave a verdict for 1301. 10s. nuTsox V. WEBB. The plaintiff in this action is an attorney, and was brought to recover the sum of 11/. Ils 6d. for an attorney's bill in defending the defendant's son in an action brought against him by a person named Chidley. The defendant pleaded the general issue. Mr. THOMAS stated the case—When the action was brought against defendant's son, the latter put a plea of infancy on the record in person ; it was, however, discovered, that a de fendant could not plead infancy except by an attorney, and a person named Mayston introduced him to the plaintiff. It being, however, necessary for the proceedings that a guardian should sign a petition to the Court, defendant was sent for, and he accordingly did what was necessary by signing the petition, which the Learned Counsel contended was, in fact, the retainer. The plaintiff's clerk was called, and proved that the work was done and that the plea of infancy was supported. De fendant asked whether he would be liable to Chidley for costs, and was told he would not as the plea could be made out, but he did not say that he would not pay his son's costs. Mr. HORRY addressed the jury, and contended that the signing the petition was a matter of form, and no retainer, and that in fact the defendant's son had been the only person looked to by the parties, and had been first introduced to plaintiff. The defendant's son was then called, and he proved that he had become liable to Messrs. Chidley for goods supplied. He had kept a shop about twelve months, but failed. He owed Chidley about 201., but had previously paid them 1001. He had requested Mayston to offer 51. to settle. He had been anxious to pay if he could. His other debts were very small. When he went to plaintiff he paid 30s. on account of costs. His father had never paid anything, nor was he told he would be held responsible. Mr. THOMAS, in reply, said that all the dispute arose through, in the first instance, applying to one of those persons who called themselves agents, who from their ignorance generally involved all who depended on them in misery and consternation, and did great injury. If Mayston had been called he would have proved the exact agreement. The jury then gave a verdict for the defendant. The principal cases were postponed. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. C'LERKEIVIVELL. Edward Wilcox, of No. 3, Little Guildford• street, was charged with the following outrageous conduct. Julia Wright, the wife of a decent mechanic, a mo dest, quiet-looking young female, stated, that on the previous night, between eleven and twelve o'clock, she was returning home with her mother and husband, when the latter made a momentary stop, and they walked on. At the corner of Cromer-street, a boy was playing a barrel organ, and they stood awaiting the return of the hus band. The prisoner, with five or six others, was stand ing at the door of a beer-shop on the other side of the street, when Le suddenly ran over, and dragged her to the side upon which he was standing. He then asked her to dance—she being much terrified refused—her mother interfered, but the prisoner knocked witness down, and another man knocked her mother down. Witness rose three times, but was each time prostrated with a blow on the chest from the prisoner. The fourth time she got upon her legs as well as she was able, and screamed " Murder." Her husband came up, and the prisoner ran away. She pursued him, but the pri soner suddenly turned round, and with a blow again felled her. Witness had some bruises on her, and felt great pain in her chest from the bruises inflicted there. Herself, husband, and mother were perfectly sober. She considered the prisoner was sober. Mary O'Neill, the mother, gave exactly the same ac count of the transaction. Her daughter, the complainant, being in the family way, she feared she would be killed, and when the prisoner knocked her down, she threw herself between them, and said, " Oh, for God sake, preserve her life, she is in the family way." Witness had hardly uttered these words when one of the pri soner's comrades felled her with a blow on the chest. Police constable 216 G deposed that he saw the pri soner running away and strike the complainant, who was pursuing him, a violent blow, from which she fell on the pavement. Before he came up, he heard screams and cries of murder. Mrs. Williams, the housekeeper of the Court, deposed that there were bruises on the complainant's hips, recently inflicted. The husband gave confirmatory evidence. The prisoner said that when he asked the complainant to dance, she refused, and struck bim on the eye. Mrs. Wright positively denied this, and Waddington, the gaolor, said there was not the slightest trace of in jury on his face. Mr. GREEN WOOD said the complainant was a respect able woman, and had given no provocation. She was waiting quietly for her husband when attacked and treated in the manner described. He would fine the prisoner 2/. 10s., or three weeks' imprisonment. The money was paid soon after, anti the prisoner was liberated. Henry Bunting was charged with stealing 17s. 6d. The prisoner, a lad about twelve, is well known to the police. lie lodges with a poor woman named Bunting, in Stephen street, Maiden-lane, whose little savings lay in a box in an upper room of the house. The prisoner is supposed to have pilfered the money, fora bag full of buttons, which lay in the same box, was found on the prisoner's person. The prosecutrix, a miserable looking poor woman, iden • tilled the buttons found on the prisoner as ber property. The prisoner, who would give no account of the matter, was remanded. DEATH OP THIS CENTENARIAN COUPLE.—It is but three or four weeks since that we gave an account of the ex traordinary age of Mr. and Mrs. Plaisance, then living in Redmoor Fen, in the Isle of Ely, the husband of the age of 107, the wife 105 I—a case without parallel perhaps in Eng land or in the world. On Wednesday, strange to relate, after a short affliction, both expired on the same day; their united ages 212 I The greater part of their lives were passed when agues were so prevalent in the Fens that very few escaped the disorder, yet their lives were prolonged to this extraor dinary period; and Providence seems to have ordained that dasivtihdeeyd.haTdhleivytasovelolettng O t n o t e d t a h u e g r, ht i e n r, d w e to u tht y h e e d y w w ith er t e he n m ot , 9f the age 91 14, B . Pot. THE LATE MURDER IN ST. GILES'S. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. TRIAL OF JOSEPH CONNOR. On Mr. Commissioner Bullock taking his seat on the bench, a number of prisoners were placed in the dock, and having been arraigned, were called upon to plead to the several offences laid to their charge, or to challenge any of the jury by whom they were to be tried. Joseph Connor was among the number, but he was not called upon to plead, having gone through that formula during the last session. He looked much cleaner and neater than whilst under exami nation at Bow-street, or when we last saw him in the chapel of Newgate, on the Sunday preceding the execution of Hocken He was very pale, and much of that moroseness which distinguished him on the occasions to which we have alluded had departed. He was dressed in a black frock coat, black waistcoat, black silk neckerchief, and corduroy trowsers. Ile paid great attention to the calling over the names of the jury, and appeared perfectly sensible of the awful position in which he was placed. Neither the body of the Court nor the gallery were in conveniently crowded. No females were admitted. At a few minutes after ten o'clock, Mr. Baron Alderson and Mr. Justice Coltman entered and took their seats. Immediately afterwards Josepli6n;;;;;T:gain placed in the dock. The indictment, which contained two counts, each varying the offence, charging him with the wilful murder of Mary Brothers, was then read. Mr. Bodkin, Mr. Montague Chambers, and Mr. Huddle stone appeared for the prosecution. Mr. Ballantine and Mr. Doane for the prisoner. Mr. B013E1:I then proceeded to state the case against the prisoners The deceased was one of those unhappy females who, like many others, prostituted her body for a wretched subsistence—that whilst engaged in the unhappy traffic she presented herself at a house of ill-fame in Little George street, St. Giles's, accompanied by a ma❑ and entered a room with him ; that shortly after a woman named Palmer heard the cry of " Murder," and on entering the room found the man in what she thought the act of striking the woman ; that the man hurried from the house, and that the woman staggered into an adjoining room with a knife sticking in her neck—(this statement caused much sensation in the Court) —and immediately expired. A man dressed in; a velveteen coat, whom he should be able to prove was the prisoner at the bar, was observed by a policeman on duty in the street to leave the house in a hurried manner. Threats had been held out by the prisoner against the deceased for communicating a loathsome disease to him, which, from the examination of the body, proved to be a false assumption. The knife found in the body of the deceased, he should prove, was purchased by the prisoner at the bar at the shop of Mr. Oldham, cutier, of High.street, St. Giles's ; that between the time he pur chased it and the time he went to the house in question, he had changed his dress to a velveteen coat and a sealskin cap. At the place where he was taken into custody a velveteen coat was found, the sleeves of which were smeared with blood. A person who had been on intimate terms with the prisoner, named Cochrane, who had not come forward at the examinations, would give important testimony on behalf of the prosecution with respect to the prisoner about eleven o'clock on the night of the murder. After entering at length into a statement of the facts of the case, which he said he should subsequently substantiate by the evidence which he should call before them, he concluded by calling upon them dispassionately to consider th• evidence he should call before them, and not to arrive at a conclusion which affected the life of the prisoner without the most mature consideration. The following witnesses were then called : Mary Palmer, charwoman at the house No. 11, Little George-street, said a man and woman came there at a quarter Wore eleven o'clock on the night of Monday, the 31st of March. I never saw either of them before. The man was dressed in a velveteen coat and a cap. I gave the woman a light, and she went into the back parlour. I sat down on the stairs. A few minutes after, a little better than five minutes, I heard the woman cry " Murder !" three times. I rose and knocked at the door of the room. I knocked twice without receiving any answer. Not receiving any answer, I put my back to the door and forced it open. I saw the woman sitting on the bedstead, and the man standing over her. He had his band at her neck. I thought he was beating her. I said, " For God's sake, don't beat the woman." Ile turned round and faced me. There was a glimmering light in the room. He then left the room, and I caught hold of his coat. Cross-examined by Mr. M. CHAMBERSI—He pushed - me away by taking hold of my shawl, on which I afterwards found the marks of a bloody hand. The woman got off the bed and walked to the fire-place ; she , had her hand to her eyes. She never spoke. She staggered and fell. The man had left the house before I got into the passage. The land lady of the house and I went into the room again and found a knife sticking in the woman's neck. She was dead. I gave information to the police- constable Allen, who pulled the knife out. I can't swear that . the prisoner is the man ;he resembles him. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTLNE—No one has been talking to we about the time when the man and woman came to the house. I stated at the police-office, and at my other examinations, that it was a quarter before eleven when they came. I never said the time was a quarter past eleven. The first time I saw the prisoner after the murder was at Bow street. I had not then heard anything about Connor, nor of any threats he had made towards the deceased. The deceased was a stout, tall woman. There was no blood on the bed, but there was some on the floor and wall. Mary Hall said I was landlady of .the house, 11, George street. I heard the woman Palmer cry out, and I went into the passage. I met a man there going as fast as he could run. He pushed me aside, and tried to knock me down. He was coming from the room. I said, " Oh, my God ! what have you been doing to the poor woman ?" He made no reply, and ran out. I could not see his dress. I caught hold of his coat, which, by the feel, I should say was vel veteen. I did not notice what he had on his head. I never saw the man before. John James Allen, Police-constable E 159—1 was on duty in George-street on the night of Monday, the 31st of March. About 11 o'clock I was standing at the corner of Clarke's .court. I was 52 feet from the house where the woman was murdered. A little before 11 o'clock I observed a man come from No. 11 towards me. He passed me and crossed the way between 19 to 20 feet from me. He had on a dark coat, which I think was velveteen, and a cap which I believe had a peak to it. Five or six minutes after I was fetched to the house. By Mr. Baron ALDERSON—I did not observe any one leave the house, the door of which creaked, from the time the man left until Mrs. Palmer came to me, and then I went into the house and found the deceased lying on her side, with a knife sticking in her neck. The handle was pointing upwards. She moved her eyes a little and smiled. She did not speak. I pulled the knife out and ran for the surgeon. She was dead when I came back. (The witness produced the knife.) A person, named Brothers, identified the body as that of his wife. I have no doubt, but I will not swear positively, that the prisoner is the man. Mr. Baron ALDERSON — If you have no doubt, you ought to swear positively. Witness—l have a strong belief, but I will not swear positively. Examination continued—l knew the prisoner for three or four years before. I did not know where he lived. I never spoke to him. I always took hint to be a porter. I had been off and on that beat for four or five years. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTLNE—The width of the street is about 26 feet. The man was running very fast. Several were apprehended on suspicion of having committed the murder. I gave a description of the man to Inspector Moore. A person about 40 years of age was taken up, but when I saw him I at once said he was not the man. Ellen Napier—l am a woman of the town. I have gone by the name of Scott. About a month before the murder I saw the prisoner and had some conversation with him about Mrs. Tape. He asked me if I had seen a stout woman, about 40. He said she had given him a loathsome disease. I asked if he could mention the name. He said he could not. About three days after he asked me the same question, and again about a week after. I mentioned the names of all the women that walked in the neighbourhood. I mentioned the name of Mrs. Tape, and he said " That must be her." He said he should never get rid of the disease, and used a dis gusting threat. I saw the prisoner on the night of the mur der by the chapel in Charlotte-street, Bloomsbury, a little before nine o'clock. He had on a short Jacket and a hat. The jacket was not velveteen. I was walking up and down, and be spoke to me. I said, "If you wish to see Mrs. Tape, whom you have asked about so many times, in a few minutes you'll see her." Mrs. Tape and a woman named Caroline Graham came up. The prisoner said, "There you are; that's the person I 'wish to see; you have given me the She said, "I do not know you." He said, she did. She repeated, " that she did not know him, and had never seen him in her life." He said, " You ought to know me ; if I put on my velveteen coat you would know me better." A policeman came up, and we walked on. We left the prisoner and Mrs. Tape (the name by which the de ceased was known to the wretched creatures with whom she associated) walking away together and talking. She soon after left him, and came towards me. He said he would not hurt Mrs. Tape. I went away, leaving him talking to " Biddy." In ten minutes I returned—about half-past 10. I saw a man speaking to Mrs. Tape. Soon after I saw the man and Mrs. Tape go into No. 11, George-street. I did not see the man's face. He had on a velvetteen coat and a cap. His height was about the prisoner's. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE—I was not examined at the police-office or by the coroner. I was examined by the grand jury. I heard , of the murder the same night. I first communicated what I have stated to the superintendent. Re-examined by Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERS—I saw Con nor at Newgate, and pointed him out among a number of persons. Caroline Graham—On the night of the murder I was in Charlotte-street, Bloomsbury, with the last witness. I saw Connor there, Mrs. Tape was with me. He came up to Mrs. Tape and said, " I have been looking for you for the last seven weeks. Don't you recollect me?' She said she did not know him. He told her when he saw her last, and what was the result. He said, "I had a velveteen coat on and a cap." She still denied all knowledge of him, and I said he must be mistaken. Soon after a policeman came up, and I went away. The last time I saw the prisoner was about half-past eight. I saw the deceased go into the house with a man about half-past ten. He had on a velveteen coat and a cap. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE—Was not examined before the magistrate or the coroner. Bridget Ronan (known as Biddy)—l get my living by walking the streets in the neighbourhood of St. Giles's. I saw the prisoner o n th e Saturday before the murder. He spoke about a disease he was labouring under, and said it had. been communicated to him by Mrs. Tape. I saw Lim on Monday n i g ht, a b ou t h a lf- past n i ne o'clock, near the chapel. He was alone. I asked him how he was? He said, " Much the same ;" and added, " I have just been blowing the old b— up. She denies all. If I comes up to her in these clothes she'll know me." (He had on a fustian jacket and a hat.) He said, " I shall go home and change my clothes, and put on my black coat and cap, and then she won't know me." He then left me. I saw him again about ten minutes after. He had on a black velveteen coat and a cap with a peak. He came close to me, and said "Do y o u think she'll know me now?" I sa id, " yes; why shouldn't the woman know you ?" He said before he went to change his clothes, 4, I have something at home that will pepper her." He had frequently said before that he would serve her out. He then went away. I was gone about three-quarters of an hour, and when I came back there was a crowd about the house. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE—I told the police what the prisoner said. I did - not know his name nor where he worked. I had known him for about a twelve month. _ . Elizabeth Hill said— I saw the prisoner a little after nine o'clock the night of the murder in Charlotte-street, near the chapel. I saw him speak to Mrs. Tape. I did not hear what he said ; but 1 heard her say, " I didn't." About a quarter of an hour afterwards I saw him at the corner of Vine-street. He asked me how I was ; and on my asking him how he was, he said, " That old woman has given me the He said he had been home to put his coat on. He gave me 2d. to get some beer, and a fourpenny piece to take him to my place and see what was the matter with him. I had an opportunity of noticing his dress, and he wore a velveteen coat and a cap. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE—That was after ten. I live near the house where the murder was committed— about five minutes' walk from Oldham's (the cutler's where the knife was bought). To the best of my belief he was not affected with a loathsome disease. Henry Oldham, a cutler, carrying on business in High street, St. Giles, said—The distance from my shop to the house in George-street is about 300 yards. Endell-street is about the same distance. On the night of the 31st of March I was in my shop. I sold this knife to a person. That is the man. He came into my shop at ten minutes to ten. He said, " What's the cheapest small carving -knife you have ?" I said, " I will show you some directly. I believe I have some second-hand ones." After I had done what I was about, I went to the counter, and I took three knives from a drawer, and placed them on the counter before him. By Mr. Baron ALDERSON—I was on the opposite side of the counter to that on which he was. There are three gas dights in the shop. Witness—l said they were a shilling each. He took them all into his hand and examined each. lie made no observation. He put down a shilling, kept one knife, and put the other two on the counter, and was going away. I did not like the idea of his taking the bare knife out in his hand, and I offered to wrap it up in paper. He came back. I set the edge on a stone, wrapped it up, and he then left the shop. I did not notice his dress particularly. He had a hat and a dark coat on. He was quite a stranger to me. 1 saw him on the following Friday. Cross-examined by Mr. BALIANTINF.--He wore a coat with tails to it. When I wasexamined before the magistrate I had a staong belief he was the man, bat I was not quite sure. He asked ma a question, and my belief was strength ened by his voice. I gave information to one of the inspectors of the E division. I did not say I should know him by a blotch on the side of his nose. I said nothing about it at that time. I told the police that my daughter said she thought the man had a blotch on the side of his nose. I had not heard until the prisoner was taken into custody and not until I had seen him that a young man had used threats to wards the deceased. I saw Inspector Pearce before I saw the prisoner. When I saw Connor I did not know that he was the man that had used the threats. By Mr. Baron ALDERSON—The prisoner was in my shop two or three minutes He bad his hat on all the time. The only time he spoke was in stating what he wanted. The second time I heard him speak was at Bow-street. His voice was not set like that of a youth verging into manhood. I also knew him by his age. One of the lights was over his head, and threw the shade of his hat over his face. The other light was in the window, about two yards from him, and gave an excellent light. Emily Elizabeth Oldham, daughter of the last witness, an intelligent little girl, was then sworn, and having been placed on the bench, was questioned by Mr. Baron Alderson as to the nature and responsibility of an oath, of which she was fully cognizant. She said, I was standing by my father's side when the man came in. When the man was looking at the carving -knives I stood at my father's side, and saw his face. That is the man, said the witness, looking steadfastly, and pointing at the prisoner. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLAIVTINE—I noticed a small blotch on the side of his nose. It was rather red, and was like a large pimple. It was on the left side of the nose. I was in the shop about a minute. I saw the prisoner at the sta tion-house on the Friday evening. He had then no blotch on his nose. William Pocock, 81 F—ln consequence of information which I received I went to 15, Endell-street, on the evening of Friday following the murder. I found this coat there. It was banging on a peg behind the door, with two coats hang ing over it. I examined it next morning. I found some blood on the right-hand cuff, and a little on the left. The marks are as visible now as then. There is some blood on the inside of the right-hand pocket. I also produce a cap and and a hat. I also found six hospital tickets. (The coat was here shown to the Learned Judges, and was minutely exa mined by them.) Nicholas Pearce, Superintendent of Police—On the after noon of Friday, the 4th of April, I went to No. 4, Ston cutters-alley, Gate-street, Lincoln's Inn-fields. I went to the door of the first-floor room. It was fastened inside. I knocked at the door, and it was opened by a female. I found the prisoner sitting on a chair. I asked him his name, and he said it was Joseph Connor. I told him I was an fficer of police. I was not in uniform. He made no answer. I called on a policeman from the street. and when he came I took the prisoner into the back-yard, where I told him why I took him into custody. He said " Yes, Sir ; oh, yes !" Adolphus Lonsdale, 110 F—l was in the cell with the pri soner late on the night he was taken into custody. About 4 o'clock in the morning he said, " I am sure to be tucked up if these two women come and give evidence against me. They saw me on Monday between 8 and 9 o'clock. I know them both to be prostitutes." Mr. Pearce was recalled, and cross• examined by Mr. BAL LANTINE—He said the prisoner was employed to turn a wheel at a silversmith's in Panton-street (Messrs. Garrard and Co.) Charles Waugh—l worked at Messrs. Garrard's in March last. The prisoner worked there with me. He told me about six weeks before the murder that he had got an in fectious disease from a woman, and that he would serve her out. I said, " You had better not interfere with the woman at all. If you strike her she will very likely take out a war rant against you." He said she was a young woman, fresh coloured, and fat. He said he should have got married to his cousin at Easter but for this illness; and he then said he should be married at Whitsuntide. He said her family knew what was the matter with him. I recollect the morn ing after the murder. He came a little after six to work as usual, and breakfasted with me. He went away at half-past 11 o'clock. He never came to work again. I did not know where he lived or lodged. He used to come to work in a hat and velveteen shooting-jacket, and changed the coat for a jacket. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE—He had worked at Messrs. Garrard's for about eight months. He was a very nice young man, well conducted and civil, good-humoured and kind to his comrades in every respect, and honest, as far as I know. I never saw him work in his velveteen jacket. No rouge is used in the place where he worked. He did not polish. I have not been there all the time he was. I have not given evidence before. It was reported by one of the men that a woman had been murdered in St. Giles's. He had a velveteen coat, a velveteen waistcoat, and a hat on the morning in question. John - Coclirane, a young man, said he was a tailor. I have known Connor for some years. I recollect the night of Monday, the 31st of March. I saw Connor about seven o'clock in the Crown, in the Seven-dials. He said he was suffering under a certain disease. He went away at eleven o'clock the same night. I was outside the door of the Crown. Connor came up. I think he came up Queen street, which leads close to George-street. A person might have run from George -street in five minutes. He looked flurried, as if he had been quarrelling. I went towards him. Prisoner—Perhaps you will allow me to ask the witness a question ? Mr. Baron ALDERSON said he would have an opportunity of asking the witness any question after the witness had given his testimony, but he had better leave himself in the hands of his Counsel. Witness—l said, "Halloo, what's the matter with you?" He said, " I have given her something." I did not know of whom he spoke, and asked him who he meant. He said, "The b— old that gave me the —." I said, jokingly, " I dare say you have not killed her?" He said. T don't know, but I have been home and taken off my things, so that they should not know me." There was a row in the Seven Dials, and I went to see it, and lost sight of the prisoner. He had on a velveteen coat and a cap. I heard of the murder the following morning. I heard that a person was taken into custody on Friday. I should not have mentioned this at all, but his father asked me to go before the Coroner; that is a fortnight ago. I first told this to police-constable Allen on the day the inquest terminated. I was not examined.—[Mr. Bal lantine having conferred with the prisoner continued his examination.]--I had not known Allen before. I was summoned to prove an alibi. I had not in formed the prisoner's father what I knew respecting the prisoner. I should not have gone if I had not been sum moned, and if Connor's father and Connor's sister had not come to me on the morning of the inquest, and asked me to come. I have been charged with robbing my master three years ago. I was tried, and sentenced to three months' imprisonment. I have been fined 7s. for an assault since. These are the only times I have been charged with anything. I did nut know where the prisoner lived or where he worked. Mr. Superintendent Pearce wrote down my statement at the station-house directly after the termination of the inquest. Mr. Richard Partridge, one of the surgeons at King's College Hospital—These tickets were given to the prisoner, and he was treated for a certain disease. He was not then convalescent. James Brothers, the husband of the murdered woman, said he had seen her body; that she was his wife, and that her name was Mary Brothers. - Michael Connor, the prisoner's father, was next examined —He said, my son was living at 15, Endell-street, Long acre, at the time of this occurrence. That coat is my son's. The hat was never worn by him. I suppose the cloth cap was my son's. Cross examined by Mr. BALIANTINE —The prisoner came home at 11 o'clock, to a minute, on the night of the murder. I noticed nothing extraordinary in his demeanour. He slept with me. My wife slept with my daughter in another bed in the same room. He undressed in my presence, and laid his clothes on a chair. I got up and left him in bed at half past 6in the morning. Nothing occurred during the night to attract my attention. He was not disturbed. I have worked for Mr. Garrard for 19 years as assistant stamper. I went to Cochrane first by my son's desire, to obtain him as a witness. I had never had the slightest communication with Cochrane. My son is the best that was ever reared to a poor man—he was kind, industrious, and civil. Re-examined by Mr. BODKIN.—I did not go out after seven o'clock. My son came in at half-past nine, and remained for 20 minutes. My son told me that Cochrane had seen him late on the night of the murder, and he desired me to tell him that I was to request him to come and prove it. By Mr. Baron ALDERSON.—My son slept with me on Mon day night. lie came home late on Wednesday morning, and slept till nine o'clock, when he went out. Mr. Fitzgerald, surgeon, skid I was called to the house on the night of the murder, about 11 o'clock. The woman was dead. I made a post mortem examination by order of the Coroner. There were sixteen wounds altogether, and one mortal, pas sing through the chest, entering the first and second ribs, and penetrating the pulmonary artery. Mr. BODKIN said that was the case for the prosecution. The jury then retired to take some refreshments. On the return of the jury the prisoner, who had been re moved during their adjournment, was again placed at the bar. Mr. BALLANT NE then proceeded to address the jury on behalf of the prisoner. Ile said—When he was first called upon to defend the prisoner he had felt that he should have been able to offer a fair defence in his behalf, but he was wholly unprepared for the fresh evidence that had been adduced, and he almost felt the weight of the responsibility thus thrown upon him— almost too great for his abilities. He called upon them to dismiss from their minds all that they had heard out of doors, or from the public newspapers, in reference to the prisoner, and, as unprejudiced men, :to arrive only at a conclusion warranted by the evidence they had heard. He held that the motives which had been as signed for the commission of the crime by the prisoner were not of a character to entitle them t ) come to an adverse de cision respecting him. The prisoner was hurried to Newgate with only half of the case heard against him, and complained that he had not been supplied with the depositions of the witnesses who were to be examined on his trial. Thus he had to answer evidence which he had no idea would be brought against him. Was it possible that the prisoner, a young man of two or three and twenty, could have had intercourse with a woman of the age of the deceased—a woman leading the most loathsome of all occupations, in the most wretched and lowest district of the metropolis—a district where, of all others, the lowest class of indi viduals and the lowest kind of vice was to be found? The threats were not such as were used by persons in the same class of life as the prisoner, and it could not reasonably be inferred from them that he intended to destroy the woman's life. It was unlikely that the prisoner, who was about to be married, and whose betrothed had in no way dis appointed his affections, would commit so horrible a crime as this. Then, as to the identity of the prisoner. There was a belief that he was the individual— a belief which might be excited by many causes, and by the similarity of the prisoner to some other person. Belief showed a defect of some nature—that the person using the term was uncertain of matters in his testimony. Let them look at what opportunities the various witnesses had of specifying that the prisoner was the man who committed the murder. Mary Palmer and Mrs. Hall, who had oppor • tunity of seeing him—the one, at the very time he was committing the murder, if he was the man—yet they could not swear positively that the prisoner was the person. Might they not have associated their belief with certain descriptions which were given of the person by whom the murder was really committed. So much doubt was there, that men as old as 'forty or fifty were taken up on suspicion. When Allen saw the prisoner, whom he said was the companion et reputed thieves, run out of the house hastily, was it not extraordinary that he did not arrest him—why did he stand still at the corner of the street ? The aspersion cast upon the prisoner by the police. man was refuted by the evidence of the witness from Messrs. Garrard's, and from the evidence of the prisoner's father, by whom it was shown that he was both hard-working and honest, and consequently obtaining his livelihood in a respectable manner. Then with respect to the evidence of Mr. Oldham. Persons were, no doubt, continually calling at his shop to purchase knives, and it was singular that an ordinary indi vidual, making such a purchase at an ordinary time, should have been so strongly impressed on his mind. His daughter said that the person who purchased the knife had a blotch on the side of his nose, yet none of the eight witnesses who saw the prisoner on the night of the murder were asked the question by the Counsel for the Crown. When Mr. Oldham said "That is the man," that inference was no doubt drawn from reasoning on the proba bilities that the prisoner was the individual. The voice was most fallacious, and changed more than any other oagan by deep emotion. Was it not likely that the prisoner's voice, speaking as he did, under deep emotion, and under painful and trying circumstances, might have been husky, and like the voice of a person merging from youth to manhood. He was not positive that the prisoner was the man who bought the knife until he heard him speak some half-dozen words. He held that this was not a reasonable test, and could not be entertained by the jury. The object of the prisoner in pointing out Mrs. Tape in the street as the person who had communicated a certain disease to him, was for the purpose of holding her up to shame amongst her com panions, and not as a prelude to a dreadful and revolting murder. Secrecy was no part of his conduct. He made no secret of his aversion to the woman, and of the injury he supposed he had received from her. The coat which the policeman stated was stained with blood ought to have been sent to some scientific person to ascertain if the marks on it were blood or not, for surely iu the advanced state of science there was some means of arriving at such a result. There was nothing to show that it was not rouge, or that it was not the result of some slight wound. If the prisoner committed the murder, was it not likely that in stead of there being spots cf blood on the coat, it would have been deluged in blood ? It was proved that the woman was tall and stout, and it was unlikely that the pri soner, who was not a powerful man, could have committed the murder without meeting with great resistance, and of having the knife wrested from his hand by her. It was shown that the prisoner came home as usual and went to bed with his father, and that his parent, whose testimony was not biased, as, from the position in which he stood towards the prisoner, might be supposed, saw nothing differ ent from his ordinary conduct. Was it not likely that, if he had committed the murder, that he would have been dis turbed with the consciousness that he had destroyed the life of another? Such, however, was not the case, and this was an additional reason why he was not the man. If, as it was stated, that he went home a short time before the murder, why could he not have obtained a knife there, instead of exposing himself in the cut ler's shop? He conceived that Cochrane had committed per jury. His evidence, and the assertions contained in it, were inconsistent with truth, and could be little more than in vention, in which he had been assisted by the police, who, lie believed, had basely tampered with him. The name of Connor had been associated with that of " the murderer," and many, Cochrane among the rest, no doubt considered him guilty; his name had been mixed up as " Connor the murderer" in litigation between public officers, and in the newspapers—who could help con , sidering him guilty ?- The assertion that if the women came forward he would be sure to be tucked up, merely denoted a morbid state of mind, and that he was labouring under great ' 1 apprehension as to the threats he had used towards the un fortunate woman. After referring to other matters in rela tion to the case, he concluded by a powerful appeal on behalf of the prisoner. The Learned Counsel then called the following witnesses on behalf of the prisoner : Mr. John Webster, gold and silver chaser, Soho, said the prisoner was in his employment when a boy, and that he was peaceable and well-conducted. Mr. George Robinson, carpenter and builder, had known the prisoner for three years, and he had borne the character of a quiet, inoffensive young man. Mr. John Barnett, confectioner, 10, Great Suffolk-street, had known the prisoner six or seven years. He was quiet and well conducted. He was in his employ for eight months about two years ago. Mr. Baron ALDERSON then proceeded to sum up the evi dence. He called upon them to dismiss from their minds all prejudices, and to confine their attention to the evidenee they had heard, as if they were in the presence of Almighty God, who would have to judge them. With respect to the depo sitions of some of the witnesses not having been delivered to the prisoner, he would remind them that on the second day of the trial of Courvoisier, some important evidence was ob tained. It would not have been right to have dispensed with this evidence, because it was not obtained until a late period of the investigation. His Lordship then read over the evidence of the witnesses, and commented as he proceeded on the most important parts. He did not think they could rely on the evidence of the cutler as to the prisoner's voice strengthening his opinion that lie was the man who bought the knife from him on the night of the murder. Considering the position in which he was placed, it was probable that his voice was hoarse. He would not advise them to place too strong reliance on the evidence of his daughter, who was not in the shop more than a minute. After referring to other portions of the evidence, more particularly to that of Waugh, his Lordship concluded by leaving the case in the hands of the jury. The jury retired at twenty minutes past six o'clock, and did not return into Court until a quarter to ten. Their names were then called over, and the foreman gave their verdict of Guilty. The moment tha verdict was pronounced the prisoner turgid deadly pale, and appeared quite overcome. Proclamation for silence having been made, the Learned Judges put on their black caps, and Mr. Baron Alderson pro ceeded to pass sentence upon the prisoner in the following terms :—Joseph Connor, after a very patient and careful investigation of your case, the jury have felt themselves compelled to pronounce that fatal verdict of guilty, which must remove you f-om this world, and leave only before you the world that is to come. A more barbarous murder than that by which the unhappy victim of your brutality lost her life, I think, can hardly be conceived, but it at the same time shows that when a man offends against one of God's laws, he very speedily trans gresses against the whole. You were at first guilty only of an offence which you no doubt considered a very light one, and that which you thought a very venial sin ended in the commission of murder. No one could tell, when once he stepped aside from God's commands, where he should stop. I beseech you, said the Learned Judge, to think of your present state. Your time in this world is very short, and you must look upon it as of some • thing passing away from you, and place all your reliance and hope in that which is to come, and sincere repentance and contrition may yet avail you. I have nothing now to do, but as the minister of the law, to perform that which I have always considered one of the most painful and fearful duties of a judge, to pass upon you that sentence of death which the law has affixed to the crime of which you have been convicted. The Learned Judge then passed sen tence of death in the usual form. The prisoner appeared to listen attentively to the obser vations of the Learned Judge, and when he had concluded he made one or two efforts to address the Court, but seemed unable to do so from his emotion. He at length bowed re spectfully, and then walked away from the bar. The trial was not concluded until near ten o'clock. DUTCH MAIL. NIMEGUEN, MAY 9.—By a decision of his Excel lency the Minister of the Interior, the Rhenish rail way from Arnhem is to be inaugurated on the 14th of this month. The train of carriages is to leave the; station out of the Westerpool at Amsterdam, at ten o'clock on that day. His Majesty the King has sig nified his intention of being present on the occasion. Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Orange and Princes Frederick, and Alexander, and henry are invited to honour the ceremony with their presence. A great number of invitations to persons of distinction have been issued. The King, the Princes, and the public functionaries are to be at the station at Amsterdam on the 14th, and half-past nine is the hour. We hear that some capitalists of Amsterdam have obtained a licence from the Government for the con struction of an iron railway from the Hague to Scheveningen, and with the intention of connecting t'-,e new branch with the Dutch and with the station near this city. FRANKFORT, MAY 17.—Count Murich Belling hausen, President of the Diet, returned yesterday from Venice to resume his important functions. We hear from Vienna that Prince Metternich in tending first to visit his estate at Konigswart, in Bo hemia, will not come to the Rhine till the end of the summer, about which time the King and Queen of Prussia are expected. Letters from Berlin say that the negotiations be tween the Courts of Prussia and Wurtemburgh for a marriage of the Crown Prince of Wurtemburgh to a Princess of the Royal Family of Prussia are al ready so far advanced that it may be expected that the result will shortly be published. The Morning Herald and the Standard have re cently betaken themselves to lecturing upon the character of the newspaper press. They denounce the Times with great indignation, for maliciously suppressing Sergeant Talfourd's name in its law reports. We have already expressed our opinion—somewhat unreservedly perhaps—upon this con duct of the Times, and in the absence of any explanation, we must adlier;; to our opinion of its unjustifiableness. But we must protest against the assumption that we participate in the views or sympathise with the feelings of the Herald and the Standard. Respect for the character of the newspaper press is not the motive which induces these journals to assail the Times. They do it as a speculation—upon the same principle, and pretty much in the same spirit, that a mounte bank abuses a successful rival. It is not by conduct such a s is adopted by the H era ld a n d th e St an d ar d that the character of the press can ever be raised in public estimation. Take, for example, one fact of very recent occurrence. Mazzini, the Italian exile, was accused by Sir James Graham of having instigated the assassination of two men at Rodez. The Herald and the Standard repeated the charge, and one of them grossly misrepresented an article in the Chronicle, to prove that it was well founded. Sir James Graham subse quently discovered that there was no f oun d a ti on f or his abominable accusation. He did what became him as a gen tleman : he retracted and apologised. But what did the two journals, which, in repeating the calumny, took care to in fuse into it some of their own venom? They held their tongue. They neither apologised, retracted, nor explained. Yet they who coolly sit down to perpetrate a piece of villainy like this, have the face to talk about the respectability of the press and the unprincipledness of the Times. —Morning Chron. FATAL ACCIDENT ON THE RIVER.-01 1 Wednesday afternoon, between six and seven o'clock, a f a t a l acc id ent occurred near Southwark -bridge to a young man, named Edward Lee, an apprentice to a weaver. in company with several others, he had hired a boat for the afternoon's amuse ment, and in attempting to step from one seat to the other, he overbalanced himself and fell overboard. Being unable to swim, and somewhat inebriated, h e was d rowned, i n ' despite of the exertions 4;4'144 cmpanion2. LLOYD'S SHIPPING. LONDON, MAY 15.—Wind at neon, northerly, moderate breeze ari cloud. DOVER, d y MAY 14.—Arrd. Scotia, Sunderlan d, for Lisbon, slight damage, having been in contact with a schooner, none unknown. COWES, MAY 14.—Wind N. E.—Arrd. 'Michael, Christopher, St. mi Dono, for Hambuh. OFF DARTMOUTH, MAY 13.--Hermann, Week, Baltimor4 for Amsterdam. . from RAMSGATE, MAY 14.—The steam -tug , Mes on ' laSt London to Liverpool, was run ashore On Broadstairs ~ night to pt event her sinking, and now lies und er water, ", expected to become a wreck; crew saved. .AllflaAiveslt.y4.,s steamerl in d NiTNe Vesuvius, u t o s, wes N.E. , v, Sldl).lhAeLr'Van- PLYMOUTH, MAY 14.—Wind N.E.—Arrd. Moffatt, ‘. derwood, London, for Aden leaky, having been in contn with a foreign brig, name unknown, off this on the eig4' 5 • the 12th. Sid. Q. E. D., Montreal. FALMOUTH, MAT 14.—WInd N.E.—Off, Camillus, Per: ram; Red Rover, Charleston for Hull. Sld. Sancho Paw Aden ; Win. Kerry, Montreal ; Daedalus, Quebec. nobitt OFF BRIGHTON, MAY 14.—Leander, Millman , -- satrrdo.ng breeze. TOWII, sail DU e Kin cardine d Dec. 11. OFF NGARVON, MAY 13 —Malcolm, of Pernambuco, out forty days. OFF LEITH, MAY 13.—Anne, Ichaboe. h boo. S'rocKroN, MAY 12.—Arrd. Hampth.n, Gibson, ic-a HULL, MAY I3.—Arrd. Edwin, Gibson, Ichaboe. ,_ „b, OFF DOVER, MAY 13.—Swan, New York, for Had Ifttinuilal. LIN-Et:poor. MAY 14.—Wind N , moderate.—'i ~,.;c0; lace, Mobile ;, Margaret, St. Andrew's. Sid. Faloonalo, Swallow, Trinidad ; Grasshopper, Porto Rico ; iuS Thomas Sarawak, Philadelphia ; K i lamaz oo and 11°9 : 0 's New York ; Glenview, Slaten Isand ; Glasgow , S t ' j g e lent New Brunswick ; Naitch, Restigouche ; Act' Lady Sale, and Lot d Seaton, Quebec. and HULL, MAY 14.—An outward-bound schoone r is 1 44rehit. , on the Holm Sand. The schooner Aquatic, hence to stable is ashore on Spurn Point. Liver LIMERICK, MAY 12.—The Ballina Lass, bound to ch arg l, pool, with wheat, has returned to the Quays t o dig having sprung a leak. EAST INDIA SHIPPING. Be g il t Arrivals.—Owen Glendower, Robertson. from - in the Downs, sailed Jan. 15, Madras Jan. 28 . 4 "ir March 23 ; Sea Gull, Lant4ley, from Mauritius, offen der, FL'l mouth, sailed Feb. 13, St. Helena March 29 ; k c Millman, Van Dietnen's Land, off Brighton , , s ,. e ll - e f rea s • Hobart Town Dec. 21, Cape March 9, °`" March 21. 0. oh , ' Arrivals in Table Bay —Ca eof Good ifop l , ‘" ° • hob° March 15, from Simon's Bay • P Shepherd, from boos, XL, 16th, from Ichaboe ; • L(•;(1 Glenelg, from f t oo and sailed 20th to Zanzebar ; last, 1 / 14 'r i sle, Mauritius Gloriana, 19.,h, from Calcutt a ; Robertson, 23d, from Newport ; Prince .Albe rt ' from ; Fortitude, Adelaide ; Garland, Ichaboe ' 2lst, London to Ceylon. ,4,161 Departures from Table Bay.—Chanticleer,.Ma'"osi ; Jane, January 17 ; Phrenix, 18th, to Heroine, 16th ; Parland, 16th ; Lady fluntlefi 1 , 0 1 Julia, 19th ; Ambassador, Margaret Hates c° r Wright, and Fairy Queen, 20th, all to Saldanuallotils Eclipse, Hay, 19th to Cork; Louisa, 19th to f i v r Cottlefr Margaret and London, 20th to London ; British wv , 20th to Mossell Ba. c hr bitoPi le6. Arrival at Mau y ritius.—John Hullett , Feb. 14, from London. Int dine i Amsterdam, May 13.—The Jane Smith , from London to Hamburgh, is aground between ',O • Ferachelling and full of water, crew and Pa -rt 4:4 saved. New York, April 30.—The Maid of the Mist, Johns, New Brunswick, to Jamaica, put into 138 r 17th inst., leaky. r PPP Shields, May 13.—The Alfred and Martbs ~4 ° 0 1, 5 to seilles, which was on shore on the Insand p re the 7th inst., has got off and proceeded. 11,4:0 ,• _..- MARKET NEWS. (YESTERJ- ~ ~,,, fp-, HAY la.asucincs. SMITTIFIELD.--Coarse Meadow Hay, 31 lOs to 4 /.: - 0107, ful do., 4/ I2s to 5/ 3s ; fine Upland do. 514 s to . . n. : 5 / '..1 5t15.,"; Hay, 41 lOs to 6135; Oat Straw, I/ 18s to 21; v" -- 8 sib ° ' • 2/ ls t© 2/ 3s per load. Trade 1 / quotations. 4 ,, 41 ~,• CUMBERLAND. Coarse Meadow Hay, 31 12s, "; 0 51 11 1 useful ditto, 4/ 17s to 5/ 3s ; fine Upland ditto, Sit to r t; Clover Hay, 41 lOs to 6/ ; Oat Straw, 11 a te le ft - Wheat Straw, 2l Is to 21 3load. A moiler 6 s per til 1 0/ and a sluggish demand. „ to 41, 11 WMTECHAPEL.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 31 lOs c - j 40 ` 4/ gi; useful ditto, 4/ 12s to 5/ 3s; fine Upland ditto , ; so to& 8s ; Clover Hay, 4/ lOs to 61 4s ; Oat St w ll - gv— ra , 1 011 Wheat Straw, 2/ to 2/ 2s per load. Supply to ex and trade dull. t o seP l4l MEAT MARKETS. v m odert ner si dt SOUTHALL, MAY 14.—We had onl a of each kind of stock on offer to-day, - while the gioeffr ° " :: mand was steady, at about last week's quotations g' --' d tO 59 241; Ss to 4s 2d ; Mutton, 4s to 5s ; Lamb, 45_ ,- __ 4 6lb! Veal, 3s 8d to 4s 6d; and Pork, 2s 10d to 3s We r.,, 50 (k" - : sink the offal. Nearly the whole of the stock " posed of. la std at the ItomFonp, MAY 14.—Prime Beasts and SheeP ;n B° A SI 0 at full prices ; but, otherwise, the demand Was ". 35 a state :—Beef, from 2s 10d to 4s 2d • mutton , 0 ; se 4s 10d; Lamb, 4s 8d to 5s 8d ; Veal, 35 8d to 4 1. 0 29 . 3 ti; Pork, 2s 10d to 3s 8d per Sibs. Suckling Calves , ~,,, iv* ill • Quarter-old Store Pigs 16s to 20s , and Mild' Li' ' ' 4 of their small Calf, t 0 ,191 each. HAft,sHANI, MAY 6 14.—We had only a moderate suP litek each kind of stock here this morning. GenerallYAtorttOlea the trade ruled steady :—Beef, from 3ssto 4s 2 d; - 6d ; ." 6d to 5s ; Lamb, 4s to 4s 8d ; Veal, 3s 10d 045 Pork, 3s to 3s 6d per 81bs. ~,i; t° Oil ARUNDEL, MAY 13.—Beef, from 3s 2d to 4 s o n •-.i 35 3s 4(1 to 5s ; Lamb, 4s to 4s 8d; and Pork, 3 5 "- iler sl per 81bs. Supply limited and trade firm. WV '' te '4'4 CMCU was a ESTER, MAY 14.—There very s - 3 , t ° trade here to-day, at our quotations :—Beef, fr0e ) ,...1 31 2d ; Mutton, 3s 10d to 5s ; Lamb, 4s 8d to 58 6d; ' 7 es, , 11 ,,t7 to 4s 6d ; and Pork. 35 to 3s 6d per Blbs. Stick"L le 'd Div" . 18s to 295; Quarter-old Store Pigs, ltis to 18s; "" Cows, with their small Calves, 16/to 19/ each. • CORN AVERAGES. , 0 5 / 00 GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISHOI 'tionif„.o;lo, For the Week ended May 10, 1N45, made up from thl,l 11- Inspectors in the different Cities and Town) il l E lle° 1 41 per Imperial Quarter. Wheat .. •• •• 45s 10d Oats ......I " 218 6d Bea ....•• '— Barley :NOs 5d I Rye.. AVERAGES OF TIIE LIST SIX WEEKS'-- 130°' Weeks ending April 5.... 12.... 19. 26.... May 3.... Wheat. Barley. Oats. 45 5 32 3 21 4 45 3 32 5 20 9 46 11 31 11 21 4 45 11 31 6 20 11 45 0 31 2 21 4 46 10 30 5 21 6 Rye. 29 6 30 6 32 1 30 2 29 9 31 4 ,1 . -. 34 9 3 6 1 35 6 3 6 33 3 6 io 35 3 36 37 . IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF T" — ••'. 36 Wheat ...... 463 Id Oats •• • • .... 21 2d Beans Barley •••• •• 31s 7d I Rye 30 7d I Pease •• 6J DUTIES ON FOREIGN CO RIC•• 61 64 Whea •• •• •• 20s Od I Oats . 6s Od I 13 " 1:1 ' ••• ••'' Barley .... • • 78 Od Rye ..•..... lOs 6d rease•• • 110 „„, • ~..1V;5Y,,,j14 GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY --IRIS A—; ..,„ i ,,,iti for upwards of two months run a "'quick train; Y -- Vi f irsis the journey from London to Exeter in five 10 213 :. stoP at the last few days it has announced its intertion,„ in f; e r express train, to perform the journey, 19 3 r i naile 4 ,ol hours and a half, being at the rate of 'fortP. PY ,, 0- 15 ' oa hoar, including stoppages ; but to enable It ";„, trOtail carry any number of passengers (which the eXP re „„'” Di e lbws do not do), it discontinued the tc- vie P. d stoppage for refreshments at the Swindon r o 9 lll ,, s ia IL itsej eed prietor of these rooms sought to prevent this,', 4 ' c oat', 4 ooo without stopping, inasmuch as the Company a pt a, ~r ten with him, as he alleged, to stop all trains, e' „.4,5, ' l7 .,e;' or and special trains, at his station, for refreshinr.d.to ~,"0 , 4 0 minutes, anal he on Tuesday and'yFsterday aP t irsteP.;b9 Chancellor Wigram for a special injunction 4 . 0 01. to rt express trains at his rooms. After two &Ws', I D r0P 116 )lr; Mr. Bail, (with Mr. Nelson as solicitor), for tu_, es and ,i 1;, and plaintiffs, Messrs. Rigby and Mr. Stwia",,' S s iia. Thanes Stevens (with Messria vain an 3 S W A Do rn th e citons) for the railway Company his Horour 8 w iiivf il 3 injunction, for the plaintiffs Utz ,fit heir remedy lit usual manner, if they should!) e advise& or R e o r, T uß AL Fo o o 7 . lrDic HOSPITAL, r, ° ,,, 11 soni ve 7 o /vs c rl ijigli We observe that the ntl.m. t bis u,ioo dthinenie,ronodfoltihTisaevxercne,llßenisthlonpsstgitautteifsntreetates,:wihol ec cfr.; p o lo l o s; his Royal Highness the Duke of Camb ridge at op°, we sonf.tothoziteshs,lo.637, t T h h e is c i u s, re iN o -e f b t c h li e ev d e ii , t t r h ess e oinnglydienfsotrmituittiyonor c t l b u t /7 - onti;ci ske t d o have no doubt but that its friends v, ill rallY r,° - o f Wipe make the fifth anniversary an occasion not ewi tag it° enjoyment to themselves, l 3at •f permanent advstu 210' harity. ..,00 1 ~,,, i Or ,dOP [ADVERTISEMENT.] — BRUSHES. --NE,' - 14 • IS ' ,8 1,4, to —The the e Triple o f H o a n i r e Brush, penetr at i n O g n . One fivestroke si and one even-cut brush ;to be had in four 9 1 ' 0, 11 y. Doc ss. Gd, ; No. 8,7 s. 6il. ; No. 9,9 s. 6d. _,' lt;:b doe ° P re' The Double Anti Pressure Nail Brush, vii"' beillg - it) divide the quick from the nail ,no pressur% os iJs jo quired, and thoroughly cleans and polishes be pric e 4, a tenth part of the time of any other me 6d. 6(1.; I le' bone, No. 1, 25.; No. 2,2 s. 6d.; No. 3 , ''-' The .he Th e n o ve'. 4 011 Gs.; and of all sizes and prices in ivory. Tooth-pick Brush, which entirely en in te a r r s ks, in fiV i l ipt interstices of the closest teeth ; brushes, No. 1, hard;'No. 2, lsss hard; IC° . 3 ' j• 14.. r bar , No. 4, soft. The na:rrow rushes, No. 5, ,s, eitc ° ' eo less hard; No. 7. middling; No. 8 soft, at ' da l I 1 Per 0$ 10s. per dozen in bone; and 2s. e acli to or co 2 4' ho it g . er ,bs o ir r in ivory, the hair warranted) never Medium Shaving Brush, between the usual badger ' iti and bristle brush, being a selection of the str ° ; b0t1!„,4 only from the badger skin, in a variety of si ge - s v entn the i t, gtre e ,' bone and ivory. The above articles aro sg a,w' the , of Ross and Sons, 119 and 120, 1 3 i 51 : . „ ° K, ta ting London, and, being protected, any one ' I-- _.......... will be proceeded against. (It - 11 1 BIRTHS- che iseit t ile „ t o On the 1l th inst., in Markham-square, Mr. Charles Aspre, of a son. Vi car e ' the lad/ 6 ' On the 1 lth inst. y , a t Farnborough 1 Fri" Rev. ( Hlbech, of a so. On of a el-tthodainusgt.h,taert.West-n gree v, Tottenhion, Warren,) .„, 1 of t iA er ► MARRI On the 12th inst., Christoph ED Cookso' 1„.to, P."'" late Colonel Cookson, of Neasham Hall, Mir — Cu% Charlotte, second e t ond d aug hter of Charles Heaton or * H At Sydney, Robert Shadforth , Esq to .' - third daughter of Captain Hollinworth, dad of AlteepsreiMajor - G e ne ral Malta, loo.4'l' E e ;sq l q. o . t , h of March, DIED. West oti es the On the 3d just., at Dresden, Charles FIVICI9 P t 0111°titi C:au:1110 totne.yireser'efoley‘td 4 On the Bth inst., Raikee, r elictx. of the ls- e of St. Frances b a °°. tra O m n , of Hunsdon Herts the Bth inst., ershlise, the infant daugb. Ar les got - On the 10th inst., in ibury-sirset, Pimlico, Cher Rev. G. Moultrie, Vicar of Cleobury g 00C1' the _On the 12th inst., at Alpha-place, St. J°1113.-.04.1013ire' CRodßfaaaeusasOliavkguznneehni rs ,tethtthshe,:er, r :02. f2s, Mortimer, Shr o y012:0 lot London: Printed and Published by AEOR-n0,850, c 1 ; 101 °. ty No. 112, Strand, Printer, at T)IS au ° ate Strand, in the Precinct of t he Sal o.r, Middlesex, Friday, itlay 16, 1845., /C. ' Col o W. l i t rill . w i lt ,' A•ben 11.,,.. / 4 1 Zoot 1 11 ,, al li t " anth, %, I k , k I N tw t I, t 1, ,A , ( }`~