The Sun. — London, England, 1844-04-15 00:00:00

• rtiftE,'WrlLLS FORGERIES. t on being examined, were found to exhibit in every respect a profossional appearance. Mr. Mil, the stock-broker, admitted that Mr. Barber was a member of the same literary Society as himself., That Society was composed of persons of known * , bility anal integrity. NVas character to have no influence upon their deci , non, or wcre literary men likely to be engaged in a transaction of this nature? if Mr. Barber had suspected that this was a f.l..:ery, would he have signed his own name at the Bank? Believing the person who call: . herself Miss Stewart to be Miss Stewart, he snapped his fingers at Messrs. Pickering, and acted upon her instructions. When 301. was all that he was to have for his services, if he were a guilty man he was certainly the maddest guilty man ever heard el. Would he have paraded his name before the public for such a paltry sum 2 In referring to Mr. Barber's writing to Mr. Strode, he observed, that Barber gave hie OW7I name, and that this ren dered it very improbable that he sl wild before have given the Parr:. of Peckham, as the inconsistency would probably have been discovered by Mr. Strode, and would have excited sus picion in his mind. In commenting on the letter of Mr. Barber, in reply to that of Messrs. Pickering and Co., he said that if that letter failed to convince the jury of his innocence, nothing which he could do would have that effect. If this do cument did not prove innocence, he (Mr. Wilkins) was no judge of human character. He made an application to Messrs. Pickering and Co. for the payment of a small balance of wages due to the brotherof Miss Stewart. The Bank had believed his identity, and he now made this claim in the firm belief of it himself. Was this the conduct of a man, who, in the meridian of existence, was exposing himself to the risk of ignominions punishment ? It appeared that the legacy duty had not been paid. It was very common for attorneys to leave the duty unpaid for eighteen months or two years, the Government not insisting on earlier pay ment. It not being paid in this instance showed that Barber was a needy man ; but had he been a guilty one, it would not have been left unpaid. This delay of payment would of neeessity provoke the inquiry which he must be anxious to shun. It appeared that Griffin who, there could be no doubt, was a guilty party, had received 51. from Mr. Fletcher and 5L from Mrs. Dorey. Mr. Jess—Mrs. Dorey's mother. Mx Wtmurts thanked his Mend for correcting him. No • thing would be further from his wish than to do anything to njure the case of that unfortunate woman, for whom, whether innocent or guilty, he felt sincere pity. He had now gone through the whole of the evidence. He would not trouble them with many more remarks. What, then, was the case against Mr. Barber? Supposing they had any doubt respecting the testimony of Hyatt, there was not a tittle of evidence to show that Barber appeared in the transaction until long after the bond was executed. Mr. Fletcher was the party who took lodgings for Miss Stewart, who gave all the directions, and who took the leading part in all the proceedings. If Mr. Barber did not visit Marlow till October all the difficulty vanished. He had explained the difficulty arising from the name " Peckham." He would call witnesses who would prove that Mr. Barber was no ordinary character. His literary pursuits were altogether inconsistent with his being guilty of this charge. With a vulgar mind these pursuits would have no weight ; but to those who knew how literary tastes rarified and ennobled the mind, that would appear worthy of great consideration. Mr. Barber appealed, however, to their sense of justice. He asked no pity—he asked them not to be guided either by clamour nor by sympathy ; but he appealed simply to their sense of justice. The noblest sacrifice which could be made was that of prejudice to truth. That sacri fice• he called upon them to make. _ln propor tion to the destitution and misery of the prisoner, he asked them to weigh well the considerations which he had ad vanced. In the meridian of life, th% prisoner was deserted by those from whom he had been accustomed to receive sym pathy and caresses. Mr. Barber looked to them alone for his character. There he stood, a withered man ; but at their hands he felt confident justice would be done to him, and this would be some compensation to him for being deserted by false friends. He trusted that the jury would, by their ver dict, rescue him from obloquy and disgrace. The Learned Counsel spoke for about three hours and a half. The prisoner Barber appeared to be deeply affected by his appeal to the jury, at the close of his address. Their Lordships and the jury then retired for a few mi nutes, and on their return, Mr. GREAVES applied to their Lordships for permission to defer his defence of the prisoner Fletcher: until Mr. 'Wilkins had gone through the evidence which he intended to bring in defence of Barber, on the ground that until that period it would be impossible for him to understand in what position he was really placed. Their Lordships declined to grant the application. Mr. GnitAVES then proceeded to address the jury in de fence of Fletcher. He commenced by adverting to the diffi culties with which the jury had to deal in a case of so complicated a nature as the pr es ent, and pointed out that the evidence wt s not to be considered in the same way as evi dence in ordinary cases, where it applied to only one person or to one state of circumstances. But here the evidence was of a most varied nature, part of which could not be consi dered as having any reference whatever to his client; and the parts which did apply he begged them to look upon in the light of evidence affecting a man who, up to the present time, bore an irreproachable character. The prosecution, he admitted, was most fairly and candidly opened, but he begged the jury not to allow themselves to be swayed too much by that opening, for men were really likely to suffer themselves to be carried away by that which appeared fair, open, and candid. He contended, notwithstanding the observa tions of the Learned Attorney-General, that the ends of justice would be best obtained by a separate trial. His Learned Friend, in opening the case, had said it was an indictment for forging a bond, but had abstained from stating why he thought it forgery. The Learned Gentleman then defined what he considered forgery, and proceeded to argue that his client was not liable to any charge of the nature of forgery. It was quite a fallacy to hold this in the light of a pro secution for forgery of a bond, when it was clearly a prosecution for obtaining money from the Funds under false pretences. The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to address himself to the evidence adduced for the prosecution, and contended that the evidence which had been brought to prove that John Stewart was a native of Scotland bad failed, and there was nothing adduced which should lead to the belief that John Stewart was not born in Marylebone. There had been no such direct and plain evi dence of his being a native of Scotland as was in the power of the prosecution to give by show ing that his accent was that of a Scotchman. With respect to the part of the evidence referring to the lady named Stewart, he submitted that there was no proof whatever of his client ever having known that lady, save by the name of Stewart. Letters came to her in that name, and his client had no other means than they furnished of ascertaining her name. The evidence of Emma Hartwell was conclusive in this respect, and he submitted that this was a most important considera tion in favour of his client. The Learned Gentleman dwelt at considerable length on this part of the subject, and con cluded that the evidence in this part of the case must be construed in a favourable light to his client. One of the charges which had chiefly been brought by the prosecution to fasten on his client was, his having incited and stimn lated the old lady to commit the forgery of the bond. It was a strange thing to charge a man with inciting another to forge a bond, when there was no proof whatever that he thought such a bond necessary at all. Why should he make the woman forge the bond, when he did not consider such a bond requisite? Besides, there was no proof, he submitted, that his client had incited the old lady to commit the alleged forgery ; at least there was not enough of evidence to warrant the jury in coming to the conclusion that Fletcher was an accessory before the fact of the forgery, for that was the charge brought against him, and not that he was a principal in that alleged crime. As to the question of transfer of Stock, he would not advert to it ; because there was no proof that his client had been to the Bank on such business. But with respect to the conversion of the notes into gold by Fletcher, his having openly put Mrs. Stewart's name upon them showed that he was not conscious of any guilt in the transaction. After dwelling at some further length on the minor points of the evidence, the Learned Gentleman concluded by request ing the jury, if they had any doubts whatever on the ques tion of the guilt. of his client, to give him the benefit of those doubts, and by assuring the Court and jury, that he left the Case in their hands, with the most unbounded confidence in their sense of justice, in whatever decision they might come to. General) should be able to vindicate that right, alter wit nesses had been called for the defence, in common with any other prosecuting counsel. If any one had a right to corn- , plain of his having a reply it was Mr. Graves and Mr. James, who had called no witnesses. His Learned Friend (Mr. Wilkins) had said his client had deserved a separate trial, and it seemed to him (the Attorney-General) as if he was challenged to show why all the three prisoners were tried together. It was because, if they had been tried separate, each counsel would have laid the blame on another prisoner, and would have much confused the jury. Accord ing to the speeches of his three Learned Friends, every prisoner was to be exonerated. Mr. James had said that. birs. Dorey was imposed upon by Fletcher. Mr. Graves stated that Fletcher was deceived and duped by Mrs. Richards, who was dead ; and Mr. Wilkins declared that his client had been made the scapegoat of both parties. The best mode, therefore, of inquiring into the case was by . trying all the prisoners together. It was essen tial to the ends of justice that it should be so. A jury would be a useless machine if they did not divest themselves of everything not connected with the case. It was his opinion that unless these three persons had been tried together it would have been impossible to have obtained substantial justice. Now, with respect to Mrs. Dorey, his Learned Friend, Mr. James, had claimed exemption, on the' ground that she was a tool in the hands of Fletcher, and because she did not understand the circumstances of the case. Was she so very young and inexperienced as not to under stand the meaning of forgery? She had admitted, how ever, in her confession, that there had been a former bond, which she had signed, and for which she had received 501. or 60/. Then, with respect to her visits to Camberwell, it was not alone the going there and asking for the " Old Lady," which he had urged as a proof of guilt. It was the going and asking for Mrs. Stewart, when her mother's name was Rich ards ; the calling her Miss Stewart, when she knew she was a married woman; and also her stating that she was her niece, when she was perfectly aware that she was her daughter Was that the conduct of an innocent person ? She had also admitted that her mother had got 4001. or 5001. from that transaction. With respect to Fletcher, he did not go into the evidence against him to any extent, as it was very voluminous, and ample justice would be done to it in the summing up by his Lordship. As to Barber, his clerk had volunteered that there were four cases of a suspicious nature against him—the one under trial, and three about to be tried. The jury couldj ridge for themselves whetherthe evidence to character was borne out by these admissions. There was one fact very strong against Mr. Barber. It was alleged that he went down to Great Marlow, on the 13th of October, 1840, to ascertain whether there was a sister to Mr. Stewart living there ; but how came it that a letter was found at his (Mr. Barber's) chambers dated the 9th of October, four days before, signed Fletcher, stating that he had discovered that there was a Miss Stewart living. What occasion, then, for Mr. Barber to go down to Great Marlow on the 13th, to find out a fact which, according to that letter, had already been ascertained ? He thought that a very suspicious circumstance. With these few observations the Learned Gentleman left the case in the hands of the jury, feeling assured that, after hearing the summing up of the Learned Judge, they would return a verdict according to their just sentiments. The Court adjourned at a quarter to seven until ten o'clock on Monday (this day). CENTJUL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. C( , ?-i - EINUATIOZ; OF THE TRIAL OF BARBER ILL - ETCHER, AND MRS. DOREY. The Judges—Baron Gurney, Justice Williams, and Justice Manleee-took their seats on the Bench precisely at ton o'clock, when the prisoners, -William Henry Barber, Joshua Fletcher, and aeoryiatia Dorey, were placed at the bar. The.Ar roaeray-Giescanae said before his Learned Friend (Mr. Wilkins) proceeded to open the defence of Barber, and in order to make the casefor the prosecution at once perfect, he wishedto put iniOtiedccuments which he had had occasion frequently to ailide.te . end the sigaaturea to each of which it rasa areestary, the j ury. should be satisfied were identical. These were three documents from Doctors' Commons, and four from the Bank, and they were all signed by Elizabeth Stewart. These instruments having been handed to and examined by the jury, Mr. Wxuwes rose and said, he had the honour to appear before them on that occasion, as counsel for Mr. Barber, and he did not use that word honour lightly, for despite all the denunciations of the press, and all the calumnies that had been heaped upon him, he thanked God he had the courage, knowing well his innocence, to state that he had the honour to appear there that day, as She advocate of William Henry Barber. And if them was any drawback to that feeling, it' there was any, depreising circumstance on his mind at that time, it arose from the consciousness which. he deeply felt,:. of his inability to do full justice to Mr. Barber's case and character. Never since he had the honour of belonging to the profession, did he enter upon a dutYwith so much fear and so little of self-_ complacency. He trembled, not on account of any demerits of hum whom he had to defend, but of the obstacles which the prosecutors had thought proper to throw in the way of Mr. Barber, in proving his innocence. He had to contend with the first forensic talent of the land, with such talent, that his heart sank within him, and this more especially when once or twice when answers were given by the wit nesses, he had heard expressions of applaaae. Baron GURNEY—SureIy not. I did not hear any such thing. Mr..Wrisutsts—Perhaps his Lordship did not hear them, but he (Mr. Wilkins) and his friend Mr. James heard them, and, with every respect to the Bench, he should say that ap plause was nicest discreditable to those who uttered it. But , had be nothing else to complain of ? He had asked at the beginning . of. the cute for a separate trial, and the Court would, not toncede it, except at the instance of the Attor ney-General. Withoutrunniaig the risk of being charged with adalation to one whom all the young members of the profession looked up to as a father, . he must say that there was no man whom he more honoured than that eminent man. But all his respect would not hinder him doing his duty independently, and stating that he had been reftised that request on groandsthe most inconsistent with reaSon, and the most uafounded in truth, he had ever heard. ?.arned Friend had asserted it was necessary to the ad ministration of justice they should be tried together, for they had all been working together. But that was the very reason why ho should hay. hail his request granted, for by those with whose guilt it was tried to mix him up, could his innocence have been best established. What was the first step taken by Mr. Barber when made a prisoner in his own office and taken to the Mansion House? Was it not to send for'Fletcher? • Did he not when asked by the Lord Mayor if he had counsel, immediately reply that he wanted no „counsel ; .he wanted nothing but evidence to clear himself, and to that end he sent for ,Fletcher. To that end he had sought a separate trial now, and that trial had been enost unfairly refused. Did not these things show the difficulties under which Me. Barber had laboured 2—he who commenced life as a poor boy, and had worked his way up fo a respectable station in life, as every industrious man was sure to do, and Who was now immured in a gaol, with the • only consolation left to him, which was that of his innocence. In order to complete the destruction of that man there Was arrayed against him not only all the legal talent he had spoken of, but evidence froM almost every part ofthe kingdom ; and all his papers and books, which were neces fiery to . him, withheld from him. He asked not the jury far their pity, under these circumstances, but for their sympathy. And, satisfied was he, that even with all these difficulties, he should clearly and absolutely prove his client's innocence. Firit, to call attention to the speech of his Learned Friend the Attorney-General. First, he besought them to give their verdict according to the evidence, and he (Mr. 'Wilkins) ebbed that prayer. He must, however, first of all say, that lie had observed lately, and that with dismay, a growing ten dency on the part of the bench to dictate to juries, which had produced consequences of the most injurious character to the best interests of justice. Me therefore besought them to give their verdict according to the evidence, and that alone. :Now all that the witnesses hid said was, that Stewart had no sister, to their knowledge. That was all they ventured to swear to. Then came the journey of Fletcher, in May, to Great Mar low ; and on the 25th of June he went to Mr. Strode, to say he had discovered that Stewart had a sister. Did Mr. Strode or Mr. Coxwell, or Mr. Hyatt, or any other of the witnesses write to contradict this ? Not one of them did so, The Attorney- General said about the same time Barber went to Marlow. He (Mr. Wilkins) put into the witness (Hyatt's) hands a bill which he admitted he had drawn out. He had sworn that Mr. Barber was at his house in May or June, and in his own handwriting the bill WAS dated the 18th of October. Noiv he (Mr. Wilkins) would prove that not for one day in May or June was Mr. Barber away from London ; and he would prove that on the 18th of October he was at Marlow. Ha would prove thit in May or June Mr. Barber had no oc casion to go down to Marlow, and that in October he had business which called him there ; and this journey was taken after he had written to Mr. Strode, after he had written to Mr. Coxwell, and after Messrs. Pickering, the lawyers, had expressed themselvei dissatisfied with what had been laid before them. But it was said he went down in the name of Clarence Peckham, FSsq. But he had given his right address in Nelson-sqiutre, and he had a clerk of the name Peckham, who, in his absence, might and would have opened any letters ; and, therefore, had Mr. Barber been a guilty man, he was taking about as direct a course to have himself found out as man well coulddo. What did the witness Myatt say to - Barber? Did he not say he was coming up to London in a week? To be sure he did, and Mr. Barber asked him to call and have a bit of dimmer with him. He did call ; and there, staring him in the face, was a large .brass plate, with the words spon it, Mr Barber, Solicitor." Did it stand to reason that a clever, acute man like Mr. Barber would have done co simple an. act as this? Why, it was well known that there were many men who made an honourable and legiti mate livelihood by tracing out properties and friends, and getting large rewards for their information from the, parties 'benefited by it. To this end secrecy, especially in the outset, was often not merely desirable, but absolutely ne cessary, If this seeress , was observed at first, was it foie lowed up ifterwarda ? Why, Mr. Barber had written to Mr. Streife. stating that there was a sister of Stewart, and not merely stating this, but demanding from him the arrears of wages due to her_ deceased brother. He wrote the same to Mr.. Coxwell--she deelsired the same to Messrs. Pickering.. Would he dared to have done this had he not himself believed the faa ? Would. he. have been stupid enough to have done this had he not himself been convinced of the fact? None of the evidence which detailed all Fletcher's proceedings Touched Mr. Barber in the slightest degree. No, nor did the statement of Griffitt EVery document prepared was pre paced Iv the order of Fletcher, and Barber was no party to it ; , and even when the. other security was required, that wee not'obtalned for, or by, 'or at the instance of Barber. Now, with 'ail the energy sihich had been shown in this Prosecu tion, he defied them to bring evidence to show any intimacy between Fletcher and Barber—that ever Fletcher broke breid - With Mr. Barber, - or - named the thre.shold of his house. Mr. Fletcher from 'lB3B - t0 . 1840 had been'a client of Mr. Barber's, bringing to him business of such acharacter as made him a valuable•one, but a client only had he been. Only as his legal agent had Mr. Barber become mixed up in these matters, and it had all been carried on in the usual and ordinary course. The very evidence now brought forward wa g e all aken• from Mr. Barber's office. There all the docu ments and paperseleere—and there they were .found lying on his desk open - like to others, and with other papers, and the words " Stewart's• affairs" endorsed in large letters upon them. But nearly all these documents had been prepared and executed teibre ever Mr. Fletcher applied to Mr. Barber in the matter, and Mr. Barber on receiving the papers found they had all been correctly prepared. This clearly showed that Mr. Barber was the party imposed on, if imposition had been practised; ' But the Attornev-Gerieral had admitted that the certifleateseof baptism would have misled any one that WAS igmorantnf Stewart's family and history. These 'were the very - words of the Learned Attorney-General. Why, Mr. Barber was ignorant, wholly ignorant, of Stewert, his family, his history, or his affairs, and he had been - misled, - as any other man might have been. But did Mr. Barber - conceal these certificates or auv one of the papers ? Not one. What did the murderer do after he had committed his dreadful crime? Did he not conceal the instrument of his deadly work? To be sure he did. That was hie first thought, his first effort. Did :fir. Barber, the guilty Mr. Barber, conceal the evidence of his crime? He concealed nothing. The clever, the shrewd Mr. Barber, as the Attorney-General had truly called him, concealed nothing. There were the papers lying in his office, open to th e observe lion of his clerks, of his clients, of every one who entered hie office. Did this look like guilt or like innocence? Would not these papers have been destroyed the moment they had answered their purposes had Mr. Barber been the conscious partner to a fraud? The words "Stewart's administration" was endorsed in large letters upon them, and this fact itself was proof strong to the jury of Mr. Barber's innocence. Now, it Mr. Barber bad been a guilty party in the affair, would he have .gone with Miss Richards to the Bank to receive the stock? He was not required to do so ; there was no necessity that ke should do se, and the clever and inge nious Mr. Barber never would have done so had he been a party conscious of wrong. But the Attorney-General said this lady was not. Mies Rickards. He (Mr. Wilkins) said she was. There was assertion . against asser tion, and the one., was quite as good as the other: They would remember that a d ay or t wo a ft er t hi s occurre d Mr.'Hill, the broker, sent for M r . Barber, and on his coming told him that he hau l paid hi m 3/.. 2s. 9d. too much. Had he been engaged in a fraudulent transaction, what excuse would he have pursued under these circums tances? ' Would he not imm hu ed t ietely and aid the have put - his hand In - his pocket ead of t hat he mon ey :0 Undoubtedly he would, he world and told . gave him Miss Stewart's addr g e on ss e a h t d n ae t t ly he h h as a - d e him to go to her. If he- had diecovered, from the appearance of Miss Stewart , been imposed upon, and had unwittingly b een • to a fraud. Why did Mr. Hill identify 'Miss Stewart at party a • Bank? Because lie knew Mr. Barber t o b e a respe ctable tte mill. And' why' did Mr. Barber identify her? or the same reason. Eiery man was the creature of circumstan You would. say : that it would he a foolish' thing for any,man to sign a paper without knowing its contents? Yee t h e Judges themselves. froguently did so; depending on c l er k s and others, who they believed to be respectable and trust- Worthv men. So Mr. Barber identified Miss Stewart, be lieving her to be a•reepectable p erson—and Mr. Hill subse quently 'did the same thing. Both acted in the same manner, and their conduct was to be accounted for in the same way. He nnw came to a very important fact, which his Learned. Attarnet;General admitted, and which ought to weigh with the jury. A large sum of money was drawn from the Bank. Mr. Barber's property, even including his furniture, had been sold since this charge was first brought; and but forahe assistance of a few friends he would not have had money to defend himself on this occasion. The whole amount he had received on account of this transaction was Was it likely, he would ask, that Mr. Barber would t i r :i'learrred such risk for so small an amount ? He thought consideration; was entitled to great weight. Great stress 1a iii made to the clerk of session, in Scotland. to • hispotter flat plitatate Jane for Janet, it being stated in his part he did:':ket ire Scotland was Jane in England. FQr me n was 04 fact ! .1cn t ,"?.7 1 at that moment whether or not exri t e close of his address the Learned Attorney-Generil done in this case. ATfteerthsoatinwe wish that justice would.be he (Mr. Wilkins) heartily said, "Amen I" fu rt h erat remarks the Learned Counsel proceeded to comment len gth on the evidence brought in support ofthe pro o sec f wuthiointtin the order in which it 'KM - given. In speaking Place before the proctor and the - stirregate, he said that tkuthat which had ar . p i lr . , and he deceiaied them ~ had deceived stood in the same position as they Mr mph, Parkes stated that on going w ith Mr Birch' jee°e tci Mr. Barber's , three :days, a ft er the charge was ' made, h e tbund a number of *Os raulsed "Stmart'spapecopwitick., Mr. E. JAMES then proceeded to address the jury for Mrs. Dorey. He asked them, looking at the confession which his client had made, whether that document showed a guilty participation in the subject-matter of the present charge. The criminal law of the land was clear on the subject, and it was also compatible with common sense, and with natural justice. It was not only necessary to prove participa tion in the crime charged, but also participation in it, with felonious and guilty knowledge at the time that the crime charged was intended to be committed. That was the law of the land on the subject, and as such it was laid down in a recent case by Mr. Justice Patteson, in the clearest terms. He alluded to the case of the Queen v. Crews, 8 Carrington and Payne, 541, where the party ac cused was criminal ; but as it was not proved that ho had a guilty knowledge of the intention to commit the crime at the time, Mr. Justice Patteson decided that guilty participation was not proved. There was therefore the highest authority for his position, that guilty participation could not be proved unless guilty and felonious knowledge of the intended crime at the time was also proved It was necessary, therefore, to look at the precise part which his client had taken in the matter. The Learned Gentleman then referred severally to what he considered the main points of the charge against his client, viz., her getting the letters in the name of Jones—the visits to her mother—her asking Griffin to be a bondsman—and her payment of 101. to Griffin. and he contended that in not one of those acts had she any knowledge that she was participating in any crime of fraud or forgery. He did not appeal to any sympathy. The jury might feel for the position of his client. He relied on the justice of his case, and relying on that he now left the case in their hands. James Morris, a gardener and beadle, residing in Nelson square, was then called, and proved that Mr. Barber carried on business at the house No. 52, in that square. He had not noticed a plate with Barber's name on it till within a year or so ago. Robert Peckham examined—Was managing clerk to Mr. Brunnel, of 5, Belgrave-buildings, Gray's Inn. Had been In the employment of Mr. Barber for seven years up to the Ist ofJanuary last, three weeks after Mr. Barber's arrest. There was a diary kept in the office of the business trans acted. It lay on the table for the daily insertion of entries, A a n f t d e was tahsa open to o f t he u i gu n sp s e t t on o , f f l r t . h k Fletcher e cl ers in c a t i h l e e d o ffice. fre quently at the office, and often daily. Fletcher became a client of Barber's in the autumn of 1838 or 1839. Witness was on very intimate terms with Mr. Barber, and never saw anything like close intimacy between Mr. Barber and Flet cher. Mr. Barber always treated Mr. Fletcher with great coolness. In the year 1839 witness left the employment of Mr. Barber for another situation, but returned after a short period to his old employment. There were six cases within his knowledge in which unclaimed dividends had been re covered. One was a case in which unclaimed dividends to the amount of 1,5001., stand i ng in the name of Mr. George Robins, were recovered through the instrumentality of Air. Barber. Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GFNERA.f..—Heard from general report that Mr. Barber had two children, but r h i a ed d .n Witness lge a fa t t h h e a r t w i t as w as ch i s e o f . wa M re r h . o ßarbe tn r an wa..s n no h t e mar em ployment of the Apoth ecar i es ' Company, and was' in their employment thirty years. J. Macnamara, who had been a cle conse rk in ti M ue r n . ce ßa was rber' e a li n c ffi ite e d. e ' was next examined, but nothing of Several witnesses to character were then called for Mr. Barber. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (SATURDAY.) GUILDHALL. Mr. Thomas Holcroft, son of the dramatist, was charged by Captain Polhill with detaining some manuscripts containing his autobiography. Sir PETER LAURIE, the sitting magistrate, said he had no jurisdiction in the matter, and he hoped the parties would come to an amicable arrangement. Captain Polhill stated that his acquaintance with Mr. Holcroft commenced behind the scenes at Drury lane. Mr. Holcroft attending the theatre as a re porter, managers were desirous to propitiate the press, and a pleasant intimacy sprung up between them. About two years ago Mr. Holcroft called, found him engaged in writing, and inquired what he was about. He told Mr. Holcroft he had written his life, but it required editing. Mr. Holcroft looked at it, said it was very amusing, and kindly undertook to prepare it for the press. The manuscript was received by him, and he had kept it ever since. On the Ist of Fe bruary the captain, after repeated applications to know when the work was likely to make its appear ance to the world, and having waited two years, wrote to Mr. Holcroft, requesting that the manu script should be returne'l. Mr. Holcroft replied, that he had not bound himself to prepare the work by any specific time; that he had, had much business on his hands; that he had marked a number of passages for amendment and consideration, and that he was will ing to return the manuscript on payment of 501. for the labour he had bestowed on it. This sum Captain. , Polhill thought was not due, under the circumstances, and he claimed to have his property restored to him. Mr. Holcroft replied he had bestowed considerable; attention on the manuscript, and he considered him self entitled to 501., or he would engage to complete the redaction of the work in two months for 100/..' This surely ought to satisfy the captain, a ginal understanding was that they should share the amount the publisher might agree to give. Captain Polhill denied there was any contract. His. proposition was, to refer the value of Mr. Holcroft's literary labours to a third person. Mr. Holcroft declined to have his labour ancE talents subjected to 'valuation in this way. He was willing to finish the work, which he could do in sill weeks, provided he got 1001. for his trouble. Sir PETER, who had previously been informed, in. answer to a question by Captain Polhill, that tho book would contain an account of all the captain's: experience in the green room, on the hustings, and int the House of Commons—expressed his anxiety to. read the book. He thought the matter might be re-; ferred to the arbitration of Mr. Jerdan, of the Lite. rary Gazette. He recommended Mr. Holcroft t( finish his editorial task, adding that there could be Iv t doubt the captain and he would satisfactorily adjus their differences, and that he (Sir Peter) would, i necessary, act as a friend between them. This,cours was assented to by both parties, who thanked the worthy magistrate for his friendly offices, and theta withdrew. Mr. Choones examined—Had been a solicitor for the last 40 years. Mr. Barber had been a clerk in his office for sixtn years, during the latter part of which time he was. ear ticled clerk. His character for honesty and propriety was unquestionable, and it was in consequence of his good cha racter and services to witness that he became articled to him. Mr. C. Brady, surgeon, knew Mr. Barber between nine and ten years, during which time he bore a high character for honesty and propriety of conduct. Mr. 111‘ Namara, pleader in the Inner Temple ; Mr. G. Pil chard, surgeon ; Mr. Johnson, and a considerable number of other respectable gentlemen bore like testimony to the good character borne by Mr. Barber. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied, and said that much had been urged by Mr. Wilkins which had nothing what ever to do with the case. His observations on the right of the Crown prosecutor to reply, were quite beside any ques tion before the jilry. On every occasion ht (the Attorney- 'WV frolic Lowrom Ytottr-nAir StORNINCI; A.PAIL i!t_l4 fendants to the Vine-street station-house, where Mr. Lumley made his charge. The defendants were re lemed on ball. Mr. Robinson, the treasurer, said llanwell threw down some bills. When the defendantswere in the treasury they were asked what was their object in ad•pting this course ? lianwell replied the object was obvious ; it was to compel Mr. Lumley to engage M. Salvi. The defendants said they, had undertaken to distribute the bills at the request of Mr. Price, of No. 85, Jermyn-street. The defendants further admitted that they had left some bills on the seats of the gal lery stalls. They said it was by accident the printer's name had been left out of the bills. Witness knew nothing about M. Salvi, nor hadlhe ever heard any subscriber ask why he was not engaged. Mr. Chambers, at great length, contended for the right of the public to express in a theatre their appro bation or disapprobation of the performances or per formers, provided they did so in a peaceable way. He considered that the distribution of bills such as those given out in the theatre was not such an act as could by_ any possibility lead to a breach of the peace. It was in the recollection of the public that certain pro ceedings had takenplaee in the case of M. Tamburini. There the parties who interested themselves in the behalf of that eminent singer were, persons of high and illustrious rank ; but no steps had been taken on 1 that occasion to charge them with a breach of the peace, or to lodge them in the hands of the police for doing what he contended they had a perfect right to do, and what was far beyond the conduct of his clients. The defendants were desirous of having an opportunity of hearing an eminent man, such as they understood M. Salvi was, and they had a just right to make their wishes known, and to call upon the manager to say why the public was not to have the advantage of the talent of this individual. The Learned Counsel, after reprobating the continental system of introducing police •in places of public amusement, concluded by declaring that nothing had been offered in evidence to warrant the inference that a breach of the peace was meditated, and that there fore the lessee was not justified in giving the defend ants into the custody of the police. Mr. HARDWICK admitted the general right of the public to indulge in any spontaneous act of applause or disapprobation in a public theatre ; but could not agree in the doctrine that, because one or two, or ' half-a-dozen persons might choose to say that they would hear a particular singer or performer only, that therefore they were justified in clamouring so as to disturb the enjoyment of the mass of the audience. Mr. Lumley, the lessee of her Majesty's Theatre, pointed out the words " Memorable Tamburini de• monstration,u in the bill, and obsetived - that on the occasion referred to, not only great disturbance oc curred, but considerable destruction of property ensued. Mr. HARDWICK was of opinion, looking at the particular character of the bill, and concurring that the object of the parties in giving it publicity, was to force the lessee to do that which he might not think it to be either his interest or the interest of the public to do, that the case was one which ought to be submitied to a jury, He should, therefore, hold the defendants to bail in 1001. in their own sureties, and two sureties of 50/. each, to answer any indict ment for conspiracy which Mr. Lumley might choose to prefer against them at the sessions. plainaut was justified in the course he had adopfe I to suppress the nuisance, there could be no doubt that the defendant was entirely wrong in taking the law into his own hands, and he should therefore require him to pay the amount of the damage. The defendant, with manifest reluctance, produced the amount, and was discharged. CITY POLICE COMMITTEE. Yesterday, a dwarfish looking personage, of tin, name of Joseph Bellamy, described as "one of he/ Majesty's two-penny post boys" (though his age tol(l. that he was on the wrong side of thirty), and drivei • of the Barnet mail, was summoned at the instance o.'f the police, for furiously driving on the morning oif Good Friday last. From the Police-constable's state ment it appeared that at about 6 o'clock on the morn ing in question, he was on duty in Blackfriars-road, when he saw the defendant turn out of Earl-street itt the Barnet mail cart, and drive the horse at a moat furious rate over the bridge. Every person on the bridge appeared alarmed at the rate at which he was going, and declared that they had never before wit nessed such reckless conduct ; witness followed the cart over the bridge and into Stamford-street, where it stopped at Mr. Bolton's the post-office constractor's premises. He there obtained the defendant's name and told him he should summon him for his miscon duct. Sir CHAPMAN MARSHALL—Did he give you any explanation for his driving at such a fearful rate? Be sides, over Blackfriars-road, in the direction he was going, was not the road to Barnet. Witness replied the mail-cart had come that morning from Barnet, and the defendant was driving it over from the Ge neral Post-office to the stables. All the explanation he could get from him was, that he was not driving furiously, and then challenged him to fight. Sir CHAPMAN MARSHALL—What, challenged you to fight ! why, you would make three of him. The witness, who stood nearly six feet in height, assured the worthy magistrate that such was really the case, and further, he was very insolent. He (the defendant) however, was the worse for liquor. The defendant said his horse was a very hot-headed animal, and that it was entirely owing to its having become "rusty" just as he was turning the corner of Earl-street, and having commenced galloping over the bridge, he was unable to stop it until he reached Stamford-street. Sir CHAPMAN MARSHALL observed that excuse was of too flimsy a character to bear consideration. The case was a very bad one, ar.d he should fine him 103., and the costs of the information. Afterwards, however, the Alderman, having ascertained that the authorities of the Post -Office had discharged him from the situation, the fine was considerably reduced. He had been employed as the driver of the Barnet mail for eight years. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Mr. George Hanwell, of the Waterloo Hotel, and Mr. John Freire were called upon to answer the com plaint of Mr. Lumley, the lessee of the Italian Opera, for distributing bills about the theatre during the time of the perfOrmance on Thursday evening, with a view of either inciting or promoting a breach of the peace. - Mr. Chambers appeared for the defendants. The bill in question, which was without a printer's name, was to this effect : " Silva— the first tenor of the Italian Opera ; at Paris --why is he not engaged ? You are requested to demand the reason of the manager; and if everything else should fail, adopting, the words of the memorable Tarnburini demonstation in 1840, ask---" Will you engage Belli— yes or no." - Mr. Chambers wished to know who gave the t barge, and what the nature of the charge was, as the proceedings against his clients had been illegal, and steps would hereafter be taken to procure redress for the wrong they had sustained. Mr. HARDWICK said; no doubt the evidence would sufficiently explain the charge and identify the parties making it. Police-sergeant Mumford, A division, said he saw a gentleman throw some bills on the gallery stairs during the performance on Thursday night. He mentioned the circumstance in the treasury, and ac cordingly Mr. Robinson ' the treasurer, watched the stairs to see if he could find out the party. The de - - fendants, after the piece of Don Pasquale had con cluded, came down the gallery stairs, and Hanwell threw seven bills down and put others in his pocket. Witness went up and asked him why he did so ? The defendant at first denied he was the person who threw the bills, but afterwards he admitted it. The defend ants then went into the treasury, and ultimately Han well produced a further quantity of bills from his pocket, and Freire also produced three bills. In the presence of Mr. Lumley, the defendants said they had done this without any reward, and only to oblige a Mr. TJvedale Price. Witness went with the de- UNION-HALL. John Shields, jun., desc ribei as a wire-worker, carrying on business in the Westminster-road, was brought before Mr. Cottingham, charged with corn mit:ing forgeries on Aaron Smith, ship-owner and bill discounter, to the - amount of between 6001. and 7001. The prisoner underwent a short examination on Wednesday, and was remanded in order to give the complainant an opportunity of producing the ne cessary evidence to establish the alleged charges. The complainant stated that he had been acquainted with the prisoner's father for some years, when that person was connected with the (now defunct) West minster Loan Society, in the Ade*hi; that he (com plainant) employed that person, his ion (the prisoner), and Sarah Shields (his daughter), in collecting the money on bills when they became due. In the month of February last a bill of 151., which he (complainant) discounted for the prisoner, purporting to have been drawn by James Dubourk, and accepted by that per son's mother, was discovered to be a forgery, and information of the circumstance being given at the station-house, the prisoner had since kept out of the way. The bill in question was here produced . , when the witnesses, Dubourk, proved that their signatures as drawer and acceptor were forgeries. The complainant, on his cross-examination by Mr. Wolff, said that he was in the habit of discounting bills, and had discounted bills to the amount of be tween :30,000/. and 40,0001. for the Westminster Loan Society. Had brought actions against Tom Steele, and also against one of Mr. O'Connell's sons, for money advanced to them on bills. That he had frequently discounted- bills for the elder Shields, and received one shilling in the pound for the loan. Never charged him at the rate of 25/. or 301. per cent. Never employed Mr. Holmes, the solicitor, of Fen church-street, to negotiate with the prisoner on the subject of the bills now referred to. As soon as he discovered the bill in question was a forgery he gave information at the station-house. The bills were not what is termed accommodation bills. I endeavoured to find the prisoner's father and sister, but have ascer tained they have fled to the continent. Another bill for 101. was proved, purporting to have been drawn and accepted by the same person as in the former case, but upon examination of the sig natures, they were also proved to be forgeries. This bill was also given by the prisoner to the complainant to discount, the former saying at the time that he saw the drawer and acceptor sign their names to it. A third charge was also entered upon against the prisoner. A bill for 181. was discounted by the com plainant, purporting to have been accepted by Henry King. This bill, the complainant said, he hail no doubt was in the prisoner's handwriting, bat he would not undertake to swear whether it was given to him by the prisoner or his father. A fourth case was then selected, from which it ap peared that the complainant received a bill of 251. 155. of the prisoner, purporting to have been accepted by John Clarke, a hair-dresser, of Great Suffolk-street. This bill complainant discounted, and when it became due it was then ascertained to be a forgery. Clarke himself attended and proved the fact. The complainant here produced several other bills, which he had discounted for the prisoner, and which he said were also forgeries, but at present he was not prepared to enter into them, as the witnesses were not in attendance. He therefore requested that the prisoner might be further remanded. Mr. Wolff contended that the prisoner, being merely the agent of his father in those bill transac tions, could not, therefore, be brought within the scope of the Act relating to the alleged offence. On a future occasion it would be shown that the elder Shields and the complainant were connected together in the discounting of bills, and that the bills in ques tion were accommodation bills. The complainant, however,' contradicted the latter assertion, saying he discounted them as balm fide bills, not having the slightest suspicion they were for geries until recently. Mr. COTTINGIIAM said that he should remand the prisoner until Thursday, refusing, at the same time, to accept of bail for his appearance. HAMMERSMITH. Wm. Preston, a short, thick set 3 oung fellow, well known to the police as a notorious smasher, was brought before Mr. G. Clive for re-examination on the following charge : It appeared that on Thursday, the 4th inst., the prisoner went into the shop of Mr. Pummell, fish. monger, High-street, Kensington, and, in payment for half a pint of shrimps, gave a good half-sovereign, receiving 9s. 84d. in change. On the change being put into his hand he immediately said, " Oh, this is a bad half-crown," and Mrs. Pummell, being engaged with other customers, gave him 2s. 6d. for it. After he had left the shop, she, however, bethought her self that he must have " rung the changes," and she sent the foreman in pursuit of the prisoner, with di rections to gi , io him into custody. The foreman traced him to the Castle beer shop opposite Kensing ton Church, and he was instantly transferred to the station-house, where, while the charge was being entered, he quietly took up the bad half-crown, which, with the half sovereign, was lying on the charge room table, and said here it goes, and threw it as quick as thought into his mouth, and gulped it down before any of the officers could prevent him swallowing it. Mr. Powell, the Mint solicitor, for whose attend ance the prisoner was remanded, said he had before been convicted of smashing, and had performed a similar feat only six woeks ago, at Hammersmith. The case was, however, ineompiete, by reason of his having swallowed the half- crov% n, and he must be discharged.—The prisoner was discharged. WESTMINSTER ADJOURNED SESSIONS (Before Mr. WALESBY and a full Bench of Magistrates.) On Friday John Cowley surrendered to take his trial for an assault on Mrs. Mary Anne Peel, on the 20th of March. Mr. Prendergast appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Wilde conducted the defence. During the trial the defendant was allowed to sit be hind his counsel. The circumstances under which the assault was com mitted were as follow :—During the latter end of last year the husband of the prosecutrix was in trouble, and while in the Insolvent:Debtors' Prison the prosecutrix was desirous of entering into business, and having heard that a public-house, called the Grapes, in Old ('ompton street, Soho, was to be disposed of, she applied to Mr. Forewig, who had the letting of the house, and with whom she came to terms, on condition of giving him a bill of exchange for 3001. The defendant at that time was on friendly terms with the prosecutrix, and being anxious to forward her interests, env-red into security to Mr. Forewig for the prosecutrix, and the latter took possession of the house on the 4th of December last. Subsequently the defendant was in the habit of giving references to different tradesmen to the Grapes, and in those instances he generally- represented him self as a captain in the navy, and proprietor of the public-house in question, to which he. seemed to think he had a right, by frequently calling in (as the pro secutrix stated) in a friendly way to dine, and when short of money would call on Mrs. Peel to replenish his pockets. However, on the 20th of March the de fendant came to the Grapes, accampanied by a broker and eighteen men, took possession of the house, and commenced moving the furniture. The prosecutrix, with her husband, was at the time at breakfast upstairs, and hearing the noise, both came down to the bar, and found the defendant, with his men, taking everything moveable, and placing them in a van, which stood in the street. The prosecutrix ran to the station-house to get assistance, and on her return, she found her. husband had beets turned out of the house. She then went to the rear of the house, and succeeded in making an entrance through one of the back windows into the concert-room. The defendant, who was in the room at the time, seized a quart pot, and struck the prosecutrix a violent blow on the back of the head, from the effects of which she has not yet recovered, and on the next day the defendant took the prosecutrix before the presiding magistrate at Marlborough-street, charging her with keeping forcible possession, but the magistrate dismissed the case. Mr. Wil.nr., having addressed the jury, called several witnesses for the defence. The CHAIRMAN having summed up the evidence, The jury deliberated for a short time, and returned a verdict of Guilty against the defendant. Tho COURT ordered him to pay a fine of 51. to the Queen, and to be imprisoned until such fine be paid. Mr. PRENDERGAST suggested to the Court that the only wish of the prosecutrix was, that he should be bound over in his own recognizance to keep the peace ; to which the Court assented, in addition to the fine. SURREY QUARTER SESSIONS. MR. W. COULSTOCIE, APPELLANT, THE MAGISTRAT/S OF THE CROYDON DIVISION, RESPONDENTS. This was an appeal against a deei,ion of the bench of magistrates at Croydon, refusing the appellant a license to retail spirit.- at the Ralk, ay Tavern, in the Addiscombe-road, near to the Brighton Railway Ter minus. The case occupied the Court from ten in the morning till eight at night, and from the circum stances connected with it created a great deal of in terest. _ Messrs Wellidger and Knapp were for the appel. lent; and Mr. Montague Chambers and Mr. Taylor appeared on behalf of the Croydon bench. The grounds on which the license was claimed were, that it would be a great accommodation to parties travelling by the railway, who had occasion to alight at Croydon, ;ld the Director; of the Brighton Railway expres,ed their opinion to that effect. A number of witne<ses were caned, who stated their opinion to the effect that the granting of a license would be really an accommodation to the public, and that the house was required. Evidence was given to show that the house was commodiously fitted up, and in every way calculated for the recep tion of visitors, and to give them the accommodation required. It should b stated that a great wally of the witnesses were railway clerks, and persons ac quainted with Mr Couistock. Upon the other hand it was contended, in support of the decision of the bench, that the house in question was not required ; and it was also urged that there was another licensed Ivaise, the William the Fourth, kept by Mr. Laing, within a very short distance, asi that two houses were not necessary. The petition of the other licensed victuailers of the town was also put in against the license, and it repi - e-ented that, owing to the decrease of traffic occasioned by the railway, they were at present only with difficulty able to get a living, and that it was impossible for another li censed house to be required for to be advantageous to the public. After a great many witnesses had been examined on both sides, The COURT decided up ,n allowing the appeal, and directed the license to be granted forthwith. CORONER'S INQUEST. On Saturday a lengthened inquiry was instituted before Mr. Baker, the coroner, at the Brown Bear, Leman-street, Whitechapel, respecting the death of a fine young woman, named Elizabeth Ilatchell, aged 23, who died in the Whitechapel workhouse. . . It having been repurted that the deceased had died front the effects of sumo• poison administered for the purpose of procuring abortion, more than usual in. terest was manifested during the proceedings, and which was incrett.ed from the circumst ince of there being some presumed neglect of the parochial autho rities. Sarah Higgs, one of the nurses in the above poor house, stated that the deceased .became an inmate of that establishment about a fortnight before her demise. She was a single woman, and an entry stated that she was enciente. She had been a servant at Mr. Bar. low's, the furnishing ironmonger, in King William street, and had been seduced by the foreman in. that gentleman's employ, who had. since that period ab sconded to Liverpool. On the morning of the .30th ult. she was suddenly taken ill with .the pains of la bour, she remained so for - twelve hours, and her ac-. couchement then took place, the .infant being still alive. She was properly attended throughout the de livery by the parish doctors, Messrs. Forster and Ricketts. On the following day she expressed a strong desire to see her mother, but, owing to some mistake or other, she did not see her till the fourth day of her confinement. On last Sunday her counte nance underwent a most remarkable change, having turned quite yellow, and the medical ger3t:emet .were irameliately called in, who acinfolisterA powders to her and had mustard poultices applied, but she gra , dually got worse, apparently as if in a stupor, . and died on Wednesday last. - The Coroner inquired of this witness if. she had heard that the deceased had.in any way taken. drugs for the purpose of abortion ? She replied in the ne gative, but stated that the deceased had attempted to take poison, for what purpose she did not know, but was prevented by the father .of the child, who ob tained possession of the poison, and threw it down a sinkhole. . The Coroner wi lied to know what gave rise to the idea that she had taken poison ? Mr. Forster, the surgeon, remarked that the deceased had taken some thing; and the master of . the workhouse being in formed by the mother of the deceased that her daugh ter had been in the habit of taking drugs, in order to, produce abortion, that official thought it prudent that . the Coroner should be made acquainted with the fact. The Coroner observed that it was a most extraordi nary case: He did not think that the deceased had in any way taken poison, from.the fact of the child being born a fortnight ago, and still living in a healthy state. Mr. Forster was then examined, and deposed that he was called to the deceased last Sunday, when she was seized violently ill. lie found her labouring under diarrhm and inflammation of the bowels, and which ultimately caused her dea'h. He had been in formed that she had attempzed to take poison to destroy herself, and other drugs so as to produce abortion. If she had taken the latter, it would have no effect upon the child, presuming it was born s , )on afterwards. The Coroner here put it to Mr. Forster, whether, if the body was opened, he could discover proof of poison, now that the child had been born more than a fortnight. He answered that, if such was the fact, he should find ulceration in the inte,tines. The Coroner was of a different opinion, and he should wish to know the feeling of the jury on the subject, whether an adjournment was required, so as to allow a post- mortem examination to be made. The jury replied th it they did not think it neces sary, as so long a period had elapsed, and they con sidered that it would be impossible for the medical man to trace any marks of poison.—A verdict of " Natural Death" was ultimately recorded. FIRE in the WESTMINSTER-ROAD Shortly before four o'clock on Sunday morning a fire broke out upon the premises belonging to Mr. Pardon, hosier and linendraper, 'carrying on business at No. 81, Westminster-road, Lambeth. Police-constable Fenn, of the L division, was the first to make the discovery. It appears that the officer, in passing along his beat, had his attention directed to the premises by perceiving a dense suffocating body of smoke issuing through the apertures in the window shutters. With all possible expedition an alarm was raised, and the inmates aroused from their slumberi, but by the time they were all awake, the whole of the shop had become one vivid sheet of fire, and which was making rapid progress up the staircase, to the different apartments in the butldng, thereby cutting off all escape by the usual means. The constable, seeing the great danger to which gr. Pardon and his family were exposiql, ran and brought a ladder, which he placed in front of the l.lazing premise's, hoping to take the resi • dents out with its aid, but so strong a hold had the fire obtained of the whole of the upper portion of the house, that the constable was obliged to immediately retreat. Mr. Pardon, with several brinches of his family, were to be seen in the kitchen area, confined there by means of an iron grating, begging arid praying to the officer to reletise them. At first, their destruction appeared inevitable, but several other 'offi cers came up and happily succeeded in forcing up the grating, when the affrighted persons were, one after another, released. By this time the Waterloo-road brigade engine had arrived with a strong body of the brigade, followed by the West of England en gine, with Mr. Connorton and the Company's fire men. There being an abundant supply of water flowing from the firemains in the neighbourhood, these two engines were set to work, but the fury of the flames were such that they de fied for some minutes the exertions of the firemen. Mr. Braidwood, superintendent of the brigade, with an engine from Watling-street, and Mr. Carter with the County firemen and engine, were also at the scene of conflagration. The firemen continued to work with little intermission until half-past five o'clock, when it bdcame evident that they had obtained the complete mastery of the fire, and no further destruc tion of property occurred. Mr. Pardon, whose loss is very heavy, we understand is insured in the County Fire- office. THAMES POLICE. The Court was occupied from the opening until nearly the close, in hearing two cases of assault pre ferred by Mr. W. Major, M.D., who acted as surgeon of the barque Dublin, on her homeward bound voy age from Australia, the one against Captain Dunihan, master of the vessel, and the other against the first mate, named Cooper. It appeared from the evidence that the commence ment of the voyage was very harmonious, and the passengers did all in their power to while away the tedium of a long confinement on shipboard. Some of the gentlemen having a literary taste, got up, but without the adjuncts of types or presses, a sort of newspaper, in the style of a shipboard gazette, to which each, as inclination prompted, furnished his quoturn. Fora time all went on " merry as a mar riage bell," until some random shot in the journal, which was never aimed with intent, touched the captain on the raw, and led to some little unpleasant ness. It appeared, too, that one of the pas sengers knelt, on one occasion, in a mock heroic vein to the captain's lady, " a new affianced bride," soliciting her to play some favourite air, but the jest was taken so seriously that the breach between the captain and the passengers was widened. They had not been many weeks at sea when the crew and the passengers were put on short allOwance both of food, water, and wine, though the master at starting had assured several of the passengers that he had laid in a sufficiency for one 'hundred days. The passen gers naturally became discontented, and from that time all was discord. On one . occasion Dr. Major wrote an order for wine for one of his patients, which the captain did not think sufficiently respectful in its wording, and challenged more courtesy. The doctor denied that he intended any disrespect, words ensued, and the captain struck , him two blows upon the head, and so far from offering an apology or expressing any regret, he said he was only sorry that instead of striking he had not ropes-ended the doctor. The case was fully proved, and Ma.- BALLANTINE, after commenting with some severity on the conduct of the captain, who, though holding the highest position as commander of the ship, was still in real rank and intellectual position, far inferior to the gentleman whom he had treated with such indignity, fined him th e f u ll est pena l ty o f 51., or two months imprisonment. The next charge against the first mate was then proceeded with. It appeared that the defendant had written some letters to the plaintiff, which the latter seemed to think offensive, and requested him to write no more such. This led to replies and remonstrances, and the defendant (Cooper) called the, doctor an old woman, a fool, a madman, and ultimately i, b— b—. The plaintiff admitted that, being irritated by the lan guage of the defendant, he said thank God, though I have not personal strength, lam • not a mutton headed' fellow. Thereupon the defendant seized him by the throat, which he Compressed until the plaintiff was black in the face, and struck him on the fitce and on the temple. This case was also fully proved, and Mr. BALLAN TINE seeing nothing in it to distinguish it from the previous one, passed the same sentence. 11r. Fearnley, who appeared for the defence, said his client could not pay the fine, but he, Mr. Fearn ley, wished to put in an acceptance for 251. to let him go at large, until another case of assault, in which the two latter defendants are included, and which is to be taken on Thursday next, comes on for hearing. Mr. Pelham, who conducted the prosecution, ob jected to this, and the owner of the vessel, who said he had lost three thousand pounds by the voyage, owing to the misconduct of the master (Dunihan). He was satisfied that the acceptance tendered was for some passage money due to his vessel. Mr. BALLANTINE said, that . under the circumstances he would be no party to any of their arrangements. The captain then paid the fine, and the mate was locked up in default. WORSHIP-STREET. Mr. John Lyon, a country gentleman, residing at Lee, in Kern, was charged before Mr. Broughton with having wilfully broken a pane of glass at the dwelling-house of 111 r. Yule, a manufacturer of preserved provisions, in Wilson-street, Finsbury- square. The complainant stated that he was sitting in his drawing-room about ten o'clock that morning when a pane of glass in the window was suddenly demolished by some one outside, and on going to the door he observed the defendant, who instantly avowed himself to be the author of the mischief, and he ac cordingly sent for a policeman, and gave him into custody. In reply to the charge, the defendant, who was in a state of v►olent excitement, said that he had just arjved from the country, and was passing the pro secutor's house when he was compelled by an urgent requirement to turn towards the side of a gate lead ing to the warehouse, and which bore every appearance of having been publicly used for a similar purpose, but the moment he had done so a torrent of water descended upon him from an iron pipe communicating with the premises, and he was instantly deluged from head to foot. As soon as he recovered the shock produced by the suddenness of the ablution, he went round to the front door, where he saw the complainant, who at once admitted having erected the . apparatus for the purpose of administering a sound ducking to every one who made a temporary stoppage under such cir cumstances, and that he had given general orders to his servants to turn on the water whenever they saw any one so engaged. On hearing such an avowal, he (defendant) immediately repaired to this Court, with a view of obtaining redress, but finding the bench unoccupied he returned back, and in the irritation of the mon lent broke the window, in order to bring the matter in a tangible shape under the notice of the Magistrate. In answer to questions from Mr. BROUGHTON, the complainant said that the nuisance which existed be fore he erected the water-spout was the subject of in cessant complaints from the opposite inhabitants, and was rendered more intolerable from the peculiar na• ture of the business which he carried on ; but that no one might be taken by surprise, the words " Beware of the pipe," were legibly inscribed immediately over the spot. The defendant said that he conceived he had been most injuriously treated, and the thorough drenching he had re ceived would probably be the death of him, as he had been long suffering from a severe rheumatic affection. Mr. 1311.0liGEITON said that the want of proper places of convenience in this crowded metropolis was a most crying evil, and necessarily gave rise to innu merable offences against public decency. Without deciding. on the question as to whether the coca- w~ '. T STATE OF TRADE. FOREIGN WOOL TRADE, LEEDS, APRIL 12.—We have no change to report in the Foreign Wool trade since our last. There continues to be a moderate amount of business transacted, and without any per ceptible variation in prices. ENGLISH WOOL MARKET, LEEDS, APRIL 12.—We have not any alteration to report in this branch of trade during the present week. Sales of combing wools are small.; but as the consumption continues quite as large as for rimy months past, it is evident that manufacturers must shortly come into the market again more freely as purchaser.; of wool. Clothing wools are in steady demand; and prices are without any variation of moment. LEEDS.—The markets at our Cloth Halls have been much slacker during the last two weeks than for the two months previous; this does not appear to arise so much from the • want of demand, as from the circumstance of the goods which are now coming to market being made from wools upon which a con siderable advance has taken place. They appear dear in comparison with the prices of goods at the com mencement of the season, and rainy of the buyers are holding off purchasing except for present demand. This applies to low and middle qualities of goods, but fine goods remain without any alteration in prices. There continues to be a very good demand for goods calculated for the season, such as fancy light trouserings and summer tweeds, and there has also been a little improvement in the de mand for cloth. ; on the whole there is a fair average amount of business doing in the warehouses. riI,;CKAIONDWIKE BLANKET MARKET, A.PRI I. There was only a thin atten&nce of buyers on Monday, and only a limited business dune. To day's market was better,- and a quantity of orders put out. BRADFORD MARKET, THURSDAY.—In the piece market there is not quite ao much doing as a few weeks back, and as the Germans are awaiting the re sult of Leipsic Fair (which is now on), we do not expect any improvement till they ascertain what is likely to he most in demand, after n hich a full ac tive bu,iness is generally anticipated, unlez. , s the price of the raw material should command prices beyond what the trade can afford. Yarns are moved off in a fair way, and the general state of the trade is healthy. Prices stationary. The wool trade has not shown any improved symptom, -.11411 may be accounted fur hy the spinoers buying so freelrkome months buck, and now using their former purchases rather than buy at pres, , nt prices. TRADE OF MANCHESTER, THURSDAY EVENING. — We have a little more doing in cloth this week, and this has been decidedly the case since Tuesday, and prices are very firm for all descriptions. The demand for China continues. The calico printers are again rather busier, but printing:cloth, from the great pro ductiou of that artia.., is very dull. The twist Is market is better in demand only; b' prices there no real change.—Leeds Mercury. MARKET NE WS.-(SATURDAY4 COVENT-GA.EDEAT. Although our market was heavily supplied with n 10 5; articles in season, the general demand was active and .goou clearances were effected on the following • terms :—rot,at", from 2s 9d to 5s per cwt ; young Onions, Se to 3s 6d; Cole worts or Greens, 2s to 4s ; Turnips, Is 6d ,"to 2. 3di e," Leeks, 8d to is 2d per dozen bunches ; Spinach, Od to 10 4 i Apples, is to 4s ; and Brocoli Sprouts, *ls to is Od peg I s sieve; Asparagus, 3s to Ss; French -Beatith, Is 6d to'' Oranges, 8s to 15s ; and Lemons, Es to • lEs per 100; il fir POtatoes, 4d to 10d ; Pine Apples, 6s to 9s per lb; SPout Onions, Is 6d to ss; Beetroot; 6d to is, and Parsnips•_, to Is per-dozen ' • Horse-radish, 2s to ss; Celety, 8d to to Da; Rhubarb, Od to Is 6d ; and Brocoli, 2s to 3s per bundle. NDWOAT3I AND LDADMAOLAI , Z. We bad a good supply of fish, yet the deniond was sow what active, as follows :—Fowls, is 6d to. 4s 3d; Chickeolo ls to 2s ; Ducks, Is to 2s 3d; Geese, 4s . to . Cs; Fige °l l l4 . 4d to 10d ; Turkeys, 5s to 8s ; Rabbits, 3d to 46, " ` and flares, Is 6d to 2s 6d each. Each kind of pr iPl. : meat was in steady request, at very full' prices ; but other' wise the dematid was inactive.—Beef, from 2s 2d to 3 5 Mutton, .2s 4d to 3s 8d; Lamb, 58 to 6s 6d; Veal,'-' 3l to 4s 8d ; and Pork, 2s 4d to 4s 2d per Sibs, by the c oca*, szwurpoß.T. . • , Prime Beef, Mutton, and Lamb sold freely, other kinds meat slowly at but little variation in prices. Beef from 2 1 to 3s 4d; Mutton, 2s 8d to 3s 8d ; Lamb, 5s 4d to 618 d ; Veal, 3s 4d to 4s 8d ; and Pork 2s 6d to 4s 4d per Blbs. EIZZIANGSGATZ. There was a steady demand fo r: most kinds of lull quotations. Turbots, 8s to 173 ; Cod-fish, Is ri 8s ; Brill, 6d to 2s ; Hallibut, 4s to 85 ; Haddocks , 1744 to 6d; Lobsters, 104 to 3s 3d; Wlutings, id to Scl ; bra 8d to 3s; Scates, 10d to 3s; Gurnets,_6d to Is ' • Plaice, 10 - d each ; Soles, 6d to 3s 6d per pair; Eels,4d to lOd lb; Flounders, Is to is 4d per dozen; Oysters, 13s to per bushel; Red Herrings, 405 to 41s per barrel; Mar-k 41 7" 44 to 8d each. WHXTECHAPEM. Most kinds of Meat were taken off steadily at fall pt-ii Beef, from 2s 4d to 3s 6d ; Mutton, 25 6d to 3s 841; 117 0 5s Id to 65 6d ; Veal, 3s 4d to 4s 8d ; and Pork, 29 " 4s 2d per Sibs. ITUNSIMPORII. • This market was but moderately supplied with all descr i P;i tions of produce, yet the general demand was beat;'' • prices about equal to those ruling in the other markets. TREAD. • 011 The ricer of Wheaten Bread in ths .nietropolis at* 8d to d; of Household ditto, bid to 71d per 411) loaf. HMI WI.AMILEIT; . rif Raw ilides, at per stone of 141bs—Best steers and u•;,,„. 5s 6d to 55'10d; middling hides, 4s ed to 5s 4d ; inferior 4s to 49 .6d. Sheep and Calf Skins, at per skin—D l4r ;,4 calf, 6 t;d to 6s ; long woolled sheep, 4s 6d to 5s 6d; s h ditto, 3s 4d to 4s 4d; lamb skins is to 2s; and sheSX , Pr: 4d to Sd each. . HAT - ' SMITIIFIELD.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 2/ 15s to ••••, ful ditto, 31 3s to 31 8s ; fine Upland' ditto, 31 I, dt ; 31 16s; Clover Hay, 3/ 5s to 5/; Oat Straw , 11 61 to 1g 3 7 - , Wheat Straw, 11 8s to 1/ 10 $ per 'load. Both Hal Straw met a dull sale at barely the above quotations. CUMBERIAND.--COltne Meadow Hay, 2118 e to 31- •5s • u"7 , . ditto, 3/ 63 to 3/ 13s ; fine Upland ditto, 31 15s to t o Clover-Hay, 3158 to 41159 ; Oat Straw, 1/ 73 to 119 s ; , ;es Straw, 1/ 8s to 11 12s per load. Supply but 11 1044. and trade dull. IT 07 31 59 WIIITECILLTEL.--COMO Meadow —ay, ... tO. t o useful ditto, 3/ 6s to 3/ 10s; fi ne Upland ditto, 3 1 1. ` 3 31 16 3 ; Clover Hay, 3/ 5s to 51 5s ; Oat Straw, 1/ 69 t " „ 1/14 8s ; Wheat Straw, 1183 to I/ 103 per load.: A good 6 and a heavy demand. WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET.—FIttrat%O. We have fair arrivals of grain to this. day's no l e ; 1 0 The Wheat trade has . been steady, - at fully last . '",- c a prices. Barley is taken off to a moderate ext'" , ,.,',, t i r much the same terms as we last noted, as also are , _ "- • Shelling; and Beans. 1. ; .... 4 ,...•• Per gr. of 801 b. to the In h .s , 'll2:Crik ota Wneat. SuINA. Essex. and Kent...". 0 ed......' —to N ,56 ". 0 Ditto ditto ..... White... '.... 0 .,„ •51 '.O N0rf01k............. ' . Red ".... .w.,,. :il • • Ditto ditto White". a', ,s.j' y .. Lincolnshire and Cambridge Red. ....."-i- 55 44 a Ditto . ditto . Yorkshire..." ..... .. . . ... ......- Red....... -- • 4.$ ,„ A s: Ditto ditto ..... ... A„ Forgigh Mc."... 'l4 :8 , -• Ditto -ditto Per, quar• cf 1 0 • Isticy, Noifolk ane Stifliilk v:i Yorkshis- a d I.inciiiiiire — 32 ,0 qg . - Griiiding Forces - .32 ' tlr. 00 - Per qr. . t63lb. ,•-, ~‘ p g , Cleans. Smal ' a -....... ..... .... ................... Tic I! .31 34 - ..., • r . • Foreign...... ~ .. ..--.........•................" —• .' ... 1; , 'fiats, l'uLe.. a d Pala d - --, 'rt , i gr' ' 0.e.i1in;......... 10 :.• to 11. i.. Fcr•ign -:-d to -4: i . e' 1,40 S•'-i 111 6",.........,............ .............. ...., -- .4":14 25' .'C r 1 ,i , K `t - i, R •••**,,,,—....... . ... 2.5 , ..i5, • 7i, M. -.../. ,s. . . o.*. THE PRINT T . ING ELEGRArV Au engine having this title was exhibited On"Ldi . for private inspection, at the South • Wetter's' } In the present instance it is made applicable to the s kt, poses of railway communications, but it May be! _l e :o'9 l , general utility. There have been many, ContrlYor lir this kind, but the complexity of the machinery D. 6 05 p.' therto interfered with their success. The inventi ve ip question has the advantlge of comparative Pu t P ti Or both as regards its principle, and . also as respl e . , 6o,, mechanism by which its utility is carried: out. . •0 6 , gine is worked by the electric currents of the W'' pant these currents are produced by means of a plate 9 0 1 0 being imbedded in the earth at one extremity, from a wire communicates with a plate of copper, tr:;, to the earth at the•opposite point. Th e e ff ect o f t `ol d convert the earth between the two poi n t into $ battery, and the value of this contrivance is tba S b i l. currents are constant, for, upon investigation, ithi t,he found that during the space of eighteen month! .7, 00 has been, under such circumstances, no . variation ib lio currents. In all former telegraphs it was istirs._ oi , tell if the message intended to be conveyed frk"Vo point to the other were properly cominunicatedc y t i' effect of the invention under consideration ii, to,trif intimation forwarded from one . extremity is ace' ,, re - , told at the other, or should. a mistake occur,, the lo si instant means of remedying th,. def,et. A notho f . l , titi a , tage arising from the improv e d p r i nc ipl e ; ipplii•d l i G e case is, that the engine may be worked by nOl lO 4 O O , repulsion, by setidingtlle eleetrie curre!.t at right Sarre the permanent magnt-t. This is th e pri nc ipl e o f the ito,nl in question. Its mechanism appears to be ( - if a Vell . l - 0. ti i .• order. The engines, for there are two to work . 66$ principle involved in this invention, and they eri . , at either extreme of the points to be-cominunics „At, may be supposed to be powerful chrononieters el' i l, " 0 together. This power, is produced by. the Weit l t PI tached to them, which are of 1001 b . -; and all Wi s e, electricity has to do is to stop them at the figure, and prints same . operation takes into action sPa ratus that printi the same letter at both 'ends. ,o 2 B Blii is produced on a revolving cylinder,• which by t:. 0• 0 0 ! is gradually elevated by a screw, s.)-that thesinte" l a r 7 is printed in it continuous spiral line until the PI ro l : d full. To illustrate the value of this invention - WI , necessary to say that if a party at one portion of 4 : c on way is . desirous of having post-horses at a -'. fl i t bl position on the line, h e can h ave his d es i re Citly i OF. with the greatest celerity through the medium of communication. Indeed such is the perft.ctino; .4 invention, that it may . be locked up i n a r;)?_T;01," when ' the person having ,the.control of 'the ePal'igi returns, he will find any mes,atTe that has beel . ' . **lifted to him .in the meantime recorded on Ito( g attached to the never failing -cylinder.. It till ": 4 11 mentioned that the wire from the engines canls" pv, laid in-the common earth as in ground used for W , W 1 poses of a railway ; but the most seizure wa y of it 1 : i ing the wire from one'point to another is by IslY il lie m a bed of usphalte, which prevents it from` being ll ,4 er, by dampness, which would draw the e le c tricity 1 0 ;(1), earth to the wire, and thus destroy the usetulneo 0 11 1 invention. Upon the wh o l e , . we look nli (4/ 0 44 Printing Telegraph" which is i n o p e r a tion 1.0 4 Nine Elms and Wimbl e d on , t o be a mostW to ti" valuable discovery, and we ll d eser vi ng th e supr r " , . public. off , to THE COIDEMNED MURDERElL—YeSterdal,ived ing, a special messenger from the Home-o ffi ce a r for 1 York by the mail-t ra i n , bringing with him a rellos 1 0 week for George L ow th er , w h o was convicted at to : # 4 assizes of the murder of John Moffitt, garnekeep er oe Marquis of Norinanby, and who was to have been e this day.— York Herald, of Saturday. v.., ll BS. of o#40 #4 On the 11th inst., at Din IRTH om der, Serset, the lady 4, Lovell, Esq., of a daughter. , v ., ber r ' On the 7th inst., at Croydon, the lady of J. is- —ill 4 Esq., of a son. E tli On the 7th inst., in Brunswi c k- square, B r i g htou, i f, of E. N. Hall, Esq.; of a daughter. gr .. On the 9th inst., at Ca non b ury - p l ace, I s lingtoth e Oldershaw, of a daughter. i e or On the 10th inst., M rs . John Greg ory v Crs,co l( ~ : i ,", treet, Cavendish-sq uare , o f a 50n. 14- 0 On the 11th inst., at th e G rove , Camberwell, i'''" orS George Dawes, Esq., of a son. On the 10th inst., Windsor- terrace, 1 C . tr iii :. • ils4' 11 Winder, of a son. tier, On the 10th inst., at Kemp s hott p ar k, Hants', lf-eill the Rev. John Lawrell, R ec t or o f H ampres t on , Dome [ , ~,f On the 11th inst., at Wellington-road, Si. J ohn _; tO the wife of T. Henry Plasket, jun., Esq., of a 9 00 %,,0r, On the 11th inst., at Ch urc h-p assage , Spital-P4 wife of the Rev. John Garwood, of a daughter. • • - ..te MARRIED. Ch li. sri • On the 9th inst., at St. Helier' s , J erse y, the g 6f. o l oe ' her Heath, to , Elle na G ra ti ana , secon d daughter : . li e, Campbell White, Esq. ' ' 'vereljoi i i o On the 10th Inst., at St. Luke's, Chelsea, Thomas tte , / / Esq., of Mount -street, Grosvenor-square, to Charl ° ' °. daughter of CaPtain lord, of Cllelna College. Sorewl On the 10th inst., at Cheltenham, George De j o sUr 1,/ the Middle Temple, Esq., barrister-at-law,' I°CW third daughter of Rear-Admiral Sir Josiah Coghill " 8 0) Belvedere House, Dublin, Bart. • ' J T a r t On the 11th inst., at St. Luke's, Chelsea, the R e f,' "ill: - • White, of Nottingham, to Ann Cadogan, eldest 0- i' the late W. Martin, Esq., of Hornsey, On the 19th of June Ias DIED China, Aresßus , "° 1 ,01/ late Right Hon. Sir Arthur Paget, aged 22. • , ze i w - On the 20th of October last, at Wellington , o ' e " - a Henry, the second son of the late Thomas Ma rt - of Norwich. ,eat;ik On the 31st ult., at I,ille, Mr. W. D. Sefestre, ;' se- On the 2d inst., at Old Broad-street, City, M r ' 1 3 00 ttO On the sth inst., Thomas Barber, Esq., ofTotte ° v oetigroi On the 7th inst., at Cromer, Mary AlecandsLo i v es,' daughter of the late William, eldest brother 0f ed. O P Earl of Caledou. On the Bth at Revel's Hall, near Hertf ° ' - ' '0! Pol O mer, aged 83. , n the Bth i t t., at Eiyiug-place, Epping* 1. ' 55-' e , f ' Stokes aged 91 • On t he llth lust , Jo h n-street, Bedford-A ll/I.' (I) June:;, aged 79. On the9th inst., at Bath, Charlotte, the Went dapL Major Battenshaw. London: Printed and Published by IICRE O c So t7 ', No. 112, Strand, P r inter, at The Sun (O e do Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, .itxtba blitlillesex, lkitaclsy, April 15, 3844' t of LON Sir( tYa J. a No, N•, Rai, Ea' The sto, Tu., Ili,' I, I. Ch a do„ Cs. lift