The Sun. — London, England, 1844-04-22 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS FROM TAE EVENING PAPERS OF SATURDAY. STANDARD.—The approaching Exeter election claims, we think, from the public a degree of atten tion beyond what is generally due upon such occa sions. The character of such a man as Sir William Follett does not concern merely the place of his birth, the city that he has already represented, or even the distinguished profession of which he has long been, according to the acknowledgment of all men, the most brilliant ornament. The cha racter of such a man belongs t o the whole country ; it is not the least valuable of our possessions, and the country is both damaged and disgraced when such a possession is treated as of little worth. It is the boast of our free Constitution and of our social system, that a man may in England advance himself from the humblest rank of life to the very highest honours of the State, by his own unaided honourable exertions. We use the word honourable emphatically, be cause here, in truth, lies the grand distinction. In every country, even in countries governed by the tyrants of the East, men can advance by means less than honourable, and often advance themselves with a rapidity proportioned to their indifference in the use of means ; but it is the pride of England, that advancement is open to those most scrupulous and delicate in the steps of their ambition, and that an honourable ascent is the only secure one. Of this truth it is scarcely possible to find a more striking ex ample than in the person of Sir William. The son of a gentleman of respectable but of middle rank, he has, by the exercise of his rare talents and in domitable industry, in 20 years from his call to the bar, wrought his way to a position in his profes sion and in the country which would be very in adequately estimated by the official station that he has won, though that is the highest to which the ambition of a practising lawyer can aspire. If you would ascertain what is Sir William Follett's real rank as lawyer, statesman, and gentleman, ask in Westminster Hall, has so great a lawyer appeared there in the memory of any man living; has a greater ever appeared there ? Ask in the House of Commons, has any practising lawyer at all approaching to Sir William Follett's professional emi nence ever produced so powerful an impression in that assembly ? Ask either in Westminster Hall, or in Parliament, ask wherever the Attorney-General is known, and prosecute the inquiry indiscriminately among Conservatives, Whigs, Radicals, and Chartists, whether a man of honour more strict, morals more pure, or manners more amiable has ever defied and distanced envy by his talents We can truly say that SirW. Follett is nearly the only public man, of whom we never heard an unkind or disrespectful word spoken by any man of any party. Such is the gentleman who, in consequence of the favour conferred upon him by his Sovereign, solicits a re-election by the constituency that he has already served—receiving and reflecting honour—in two or three Parliaments. It is said that the state of the Learned Gentleman's wealth—which, though not alarming, is delicate—for bids his undertaking a personal canvass. Surely, the generous feeling of the citizens of Exeter must in such a case render a personal canvass superfluous. Sir William Follett is in principles and conduct" without shadow of change," the same Sir William Follett whom the citizens of Exeter returned to Parliament by a great majority in 1835, in 1837, and again in 1841. The only change in him is, that he has greatly extended his reputation, added to its lustre, and thus augmented the honours of his native county, which in another age will add his to the rich catalogue of illustrious names of which the men of Devon are naturally and justly proud. An opposition to Sir 'William Follett is, however, threatened—an opposition we must think insulting to the sense and honour of the electors of Exeter, and rendered especially disgusting by its utter hopeless ness, and by the supposed inability of the Attorney- General, from temporary indisposition, to fight his battle in person. The Opposition candidate is said to be General Briggs. Who is General Briggs ? We look in vain to the pages of Pole, Prince, Ris don, Dunsford, Carew, and Polwhele for evidence of any connection of the eminent house of Briggs with the county of Devon. Well, but the candidate is a General : his name, however, does not shine in any page of the annals of the Peninsular war, or in the glorious roll of the 'Waterloo heroes. He is an Indian general ; but the military history of India is apparently as negligent of his merits as the military annals of Europe, or as the chronicles of Devon are of his lineage. He is a General, and that most inconsi derable of all things—an unknown, undistinguished General. High military rank, associated with obscu rity, perfectly realises the figure of " the little statue upon the mighty pedestal" which grows less by its elevation. We can respect an old soldier, su baltern or captain, of whose name we never heard before; because, howerer important their services, however signal their gallantry, both may have passed unnoticed in the crowd; but we cannot extend the same charity to an unknown General, for all a General's exploits are sure to be trumpeted, and when we hear for the first time of a General, we are disposed to set him down with the class spoken of by Frederick the Great. " These fellows," said the sarcastic hero, "have not as much claim to favour as my baggage mule, which has seen more service than any of them, and has fully as much sense and spirit. Their sole plea of merit is that they have contrived to keep a long time out of the way of being knocked on the head—a caution for which the Sovereign that must feed and pay them has little reason to be grateful." Until we hear what are the services of General Briggs we shall without hesitation assign him to this class. Meanwhile let the electors of Exeter decide between their late accomplished, able, and faithful represen tative and this intruder. GLOBE.—The Times City article puts forth the following statement, as serving towards the expla nation of the fall of more than 1 per cent. within these few days, in Consols:—" As it appears that the greater part of the sales have originated with brokers who usually act for the Scotch banks, it has been conjectured that the very sagacious managers of those institutions have obtained some scent of the nature of Sir R. Peel's new measures relative to banking, which he is to communicate after the budget, on the 30th instant, which induces them to take up a defensive position, and by selling their stock to provide themselves with a large amount of dis posable funds to meet the emergency. The point on which they are most apprehensive is the circulation of their small notes ; and should these be withdrawn, in order to assimilate the Scotch currency with that of the rest of the United Kingdom, their place must be supplied with gold, which can only be ob tained by a sale of stock and Bank of England notes." It may in some degree appear to confirm the con jectured surmises of the Scotch bankers, that Sir Robert Peel has shown something like a small-note phobia on several occasions ; and has attributed to small notes a power, which (under the condition of convertibility, and free competition in banking) we cannot conceive as belonging to them, whether for good or evil. On the last day of the session of 1842, Sir Robert Peel, after remarking on the tendency of his tariff to mitigate the existing distress, concluded by saying—" I admit that there are modes by which a temporary prosperity might be created. I might create a temporary prosperity by the issue of 1/. notes, and by encouraging the Bank to make large issues of paper ; but such a prosperity would be wholly delusive. It is much wiser, in my opinion, to abstain from the application of the stimulus." This is quite the style of ~Eolus (or Sir Jabesh Windbag) with bladders full of that commolity which mankind were so anxious to raise. Mr. Tooke, in his recent pamphlEt entitled " An Inquiry into the Cur- ' rency Principle," remarks on this magnificent piece of flatulence of the Prime Minister, "At the time when Sir Robert Peel made this remark—namely,' in August, 1842—the rate of interest had fallen below what it had been for several years before, and most assuredly nothing like a return of pros perity, however s h ort -li ve d , h ad yet man if este d itself. He cannot, therefore, any longer have sup posed, whatever may have have been his impression when examining Mr. Page two years before, the rate of interest being then still comparatively high, that mere advances on securities, that is, loans or discounts by the Bank (al ways assuming that the securities are un exceptionable), could have the desired effect. How he would have proposed the extra issue to be made, with the view of creating temporary prosperity,does not ap pear." There is no reasoning with a fixed idea; and if Sir Robert Peel has a fixed idea about one-pound notes, he has probably given it, by this time, an apartment for life in the structure of his brain. In that case we take leave to consider him not a whit less mad about currency, in his way, than the Brummagem men in theirs. Time will soon show whether this is the case. Meanwhile, we will trouble the Minister to take along with him the fact that, while the number of banks in Scotland has in creased, the notes in circulation have diminished. The same thing might be' said of the country circula tion in England. If Sir Robert Peel is really going to take the field against Scotch and Joint-stock Banks, having for his banner the ragged pet ticoat of the Old Lady of Threadneedle-street (no embroidered garment of a Holy Virgin that), why, we can only i_gey we wish hi m j o y o f thi s new an d most gratuitous " difficulty" to his Government I VALI:IAMB DISCO VERIES.--A [issouri is exceedingly rich in all kinds of minerals. A valuable mine of Cobalt (black oxide) has been discovered in Meue La Motte, Madison county, said to be worth several dollars a pound. A small vein of Cobalt was once marked in Connectitut, and with that exceptio n , thi s i s t h e on l y vein discovered in America. Cobalt is used in colour ing porcelain. A valuable vein of cannel coa l h as a l so been discovered et 13t. Genevive, en the ro u t e t o t h e New Mountain. Eminent geologists have denied the existence of this coal in Missouri.—New York Sun. LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT April 20. THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY V. THE BIRMINGHAM AND GLOUCESTER RAILWAY. , His HoNouß gave judgment in this case, which was part heard during the vacation, and the argu ment in which was continued during the two first days of the present term. The circumstances were these : —That under a variety of railway Acts the plaintiffs were entitled, on or before the month of June, 1845, to repurchase a moiety of the shares in a certain tram-road between Gloucester and Cheltenham, for the sum of 17,5001., after deducting the dividends, which the defendants should in the meantime receive from the tram-road, and they were also, on or before the same time, entitled to purchase that half of the Gloucester and Cheltenham Railway which lay next Cheltenham. That if they should repurchase they and the defendants would become joint tenants of the tram-road, and each would become the owner of a half of the railway. The defendants, the Birming ham and Gloucester Railway Company, had con structed a portion of their railway on this tram-road, up to the terminus at the basin of the canal, and the, plaintiffs complained that they had thereby altered the character of the road, and had prejudiced the dividends, which would affect the interests of the plaintiffs in case they repurchased the road. The VICE-CHANCELLOR, in giving judgment, said the case of the rival railways stood in this manner : that the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Com pany were entitled to the tram-road in ques tion, subject to the right of repurchase, which might be exercised by the Great Western Railway, which right had been derived by means of having purchased the interest which the Gloucester and Cheltenham Union Railway had in it. The Great Western Railway had filed this bill for an injunction to restrain the defendants from laying down rails for the purpose mentioned; his Honour thought the plain tiffs, although their statement was short, had made that statement with much clearness and truth. He did not think the mode in which the case had been stated was unfair, but the question was, how far their case was established by the legal right they possessed? When it was first brought forward, his Honour thought the thing complained of went to the destruction of the tram-road itself, and he therefore granted the injunc tion ; but it appeared the point was, how far the de fendants were justified in doing what they had done under the terms of the original Act, by which the tram-road was to be made and maintained. If they were justified in doing this under the Tram-road Act, then they could not be prevented merely because difficulty might hereafter arise as to the reduction to be made in the dividends, in case the Great Western Railway Company thought fit to exercise their power of re purchasing. They certainly had a right to re-pur chase, but it was not certain yet that they would do so. In ascertaining what was the amount of reduc tion to be made, this Court would have power to take care the Great Western Railway should not suffer. There might, perhaps, be relief in the way of com pensation, but for that the time had not yet arrived, and it was useless to speculate upon the fact whether they would re-purchase or not. The question now was, whether there was evidence on the affidavits of an illegal dealing with the tram-road, either in the shape of waste or destruction, so as to induce this Court to interfere. It was stated, first, that the de fendants intended to break up the tram-road, and dig up the soil, and remove the rails, and also that parts of the stone upon which the rails are laid have been cut away, so as to endanger the safety of the tram-road ; but, on the other hand, there were affidavits contradicting ' this altogether, stating that the new rails were laid down quite independently of the old tram-road, and the stones had only been cut away at the top in order to leave a smooth surface for the new rails without endangering the safety of the old rails. On due con sideration of the affidavits respecting waste and de struction, his Honour's opinion had been removed, and he did not think anything had been done which would interfere with the proper existence of the tram way in its original state, and he therefore could not interfere. The Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Company were the absolute owners in equity of the tram-road, and great powers were given- by the Act to the owners of the tram-road. On the fullest con sideration, his Honour's opinion was, that the Court was not authorised to continue the injunction, and as it turned out, lie thought the injunction had been im properly granted. Ile must, therefore, dissolve it, with casts. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, April2o. THE QUEEN V. THE INHABITANTS OF LEEDS. There had been an appeal against an order of two justices, by which a mother and her children were removed from Leeds to another parish. The sessions discharged the order, subject to the opinion of this Court, as to whether the consent of the wife to a separation from her husband should have been stated in the examination. Mr. Buss and Mr. STAPLETON now submitted that the mother and children could not be separated from the husband and father without the consent of the wife and mother; for it had been decided that it was against public policy and good morals to separate a husband and his wife ; and it was further pressed that the husband and wife could not be separated, even with their consent; and there being nothing in the examination of the husband touching the wife and children, it was informal. Mr. PASIILEY and Mr. HALL admitted that it was , true the examination of the husband adverted only to his settlement; but it was the complaint which de termined the subject of inquiry. The question be- ' fore the justices would be shown by the complaint. The examination was a ministerial, and not a judicial, act. Where nothing else was shown the mother's maiden settlement must prevail. No doubt it had been supposed that the consent of the husband alone was sufficient to the separation. Here there was no proof that the wife had not consented. The order was good as to two of the children, because they were above the age of 19, though of tender years; there fore, if the - mother ought to continue her maternal care over them she must accompany them. In one case the overseers had intended to send the husband to Scotland, and the wife to-a parish in England, and it was one of those cases of hardship which sometimes drew lectures from the Bench, which might scarcely be correct in point of law; but there was no such hardship in the present case, and the wife having been examined immediately after the husband, and not dis senting from the separation, it must he presumed that L. wish was the same as her husband's. A party remaining silent under such circumstances must be assumed to consent. _ _ _ The CouRT took time for consideration. INNES V. BOUCHER AND OTHERS. The present action was brought for an assault and battery by the plaintiff, who was a member of the Caledonian Society, at Radley's Hotel, New Bridge street, Blackfriars, against the defendant, to recover compensation from him. It appeared that the plain tiff had claimed a right to sit at a particular part of the room at one of the meetings of the society, upon which a dispute arose, and one of the defendants al leged that the plaintiff had used threats of personal violence, and the matter being brought before the committee for regulating the affairs of the society, it was resolved that the plaintiff should no longer con tinue a member. It would then appear that on the 9th of November this resolution was submitted to a general meeting of the society, by which the reso lution was confirmed. Many objections were taken by the plaintiff to the competency of the meeting, that he baknot had notice of it, and that only one of the members present had paid up his subscription. The case was tried before Lord Denman, and a verdict for the plaintiff was returned with 40s. damages. Mr. ERLE was instructed to move for a rule to show cause why there should not be a new trial, on the ground that the plaintiff had no right to remain a member.—Rule granted. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, April 20. EEDUCTION.-MARLAY V. DEWING. This was an action by the plaintiff to recover com pensation in damages for the injury he had sustained by means of the seduction of his daughter by the defendant. Mr. Martin, with whom was Mr. Bovill, conducted the case for the plaintiff; and Mr. Jervis, Mr. Cock burn, and Mr. Bramwell appeared for the defendant. Mr. Martin said this was one of these extremely painful cases wherein a father was compelled to appeal to a jury of his country for compensation—if, indeed, money could be considered a compensation—for the debauchment of his daughter. The plaintiff had been a Lieutenant-Colonel in her Majesty's Marines, but had retired from the service on a pension. He had been married twice, but from some circumstances, into which it was not hi s d uty upon th e presen t oc casiontHime,e,thsteeortetelfneedrteear,olvnat had separated from the second wife. aftergo c h hes igt h o u ß et wroxbiothurnheie daughter, forashort who was even now not he eighteen years of age, as his servant, because she hadn might say housekeeper. Indeed,that she was his other help than the occa sional assistance of a charw o oman to do the more dirty work of the house. Of course s e h of her duties was to go to market and to the various shops in d the village ni with this the for the domestic purposes, and it occupation that she first became acquai e nte i w defendant. The Learned Counsel then entered into a detail of the transaction, as stated in the following evidence : Mary Ann Marlay—l am the daughter of th e plaintiff, who was Lieutenant-Colonel in the Marines. I shall be eighteen next November. I live with my father at Cheshunt, to which place we went in Ja nuary, 1843. He had before lived at Broxbourne, only three months at that place ; but before that my father lived in Wilton-place, where he had been about twelve months. I was during that time at school at Grove House, Walthamstow. I left school in 1842, towards the end of the year. After that I went with my father to live at Cheshunt and Broxbourne. We were THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, APRIL 22, 1844. not able to keep a servant, and I acted as house keeper, having occasionally a female to do the work of the house. At that place I became acquainted with the defendant; I saw him at the house of his mother. The business carried on there is a grocer's. Ido not know whether he has anything to do as a - partner in the business. It is a general shop. I was in the habit of going there for articles, and in that way it was that I became acquainted with the defendant. The defendant paid me attentions almost immediately after we went to Cheshunt. I was not introduced to his family, although I was in the habit of seeing his mother and brother in the shop ; I have also seen his sisters there, and spoken to them there. He continued his attentions to me, and repeatedly expressed his attachment to me, and that it was his wish to marry me. This was in January and Febru ary in the last year. I replied that I was sure my father would never give his consent. He, however, continued to pay attentions to me, and also renewed his expressions of attachment. My father was not aware of the circumstance. The defendant has often asked me to take a drive with him, and I have done so perhaps three or four times. On the 6th of April last year I went to the defendant's shop to buy some articles of crockery, and told the defendant what it was that I wanted. He asked me to go up stairs to look at it. It was kept up stairs, and having pre viously purchased crockery I was aware it was kept up stairs. On the former occasions the mother of the defendant went up with me. On this occasion I went up to select the articles I required. The defendant, and no one else, accompanied me. When we were there he proposed marriage, but I said my father would not consent. The defendant then said that if I were to become a mother my father then would give his consent. A proceeding then took place which in the end led to my becoming a mother. Prior to that proceeding the defendant used much persuasion. I saw him about a week after that event, but not any impropriety then occurred. I have seen the defendant in my own bed-room. He gained access to the room by a ladder. It was at night. This occurred twice, and was in the May or June. I discovered my preg nancy in the summer. I told the defendant of the fact, when he said it should be all right, for he would marry me. About a week after I asked him when he would marry me, and he again said it should be all right ;he would marry me. This he said upon seve ral occasions. Some time afterwards, a week per haps, he told me I must put it off on the back of some one who could better afford to keep it than himself. At another time, a few days after, when I repeated my request, he said I might put it on the back of old Har rild. Between that gentleman and myself no impropriety had ever taken place. I refused to do so, observing that I knew nothing of Mr. Harrild. I again spoke to him about the matter a few days afterwards. I pressed him to marry me. I also asked him what he intended to do about me, but he made no reply. About a week after he asked me to take something to destroy the child. I refused at once to do so. During this time I often saw him, for he was calling for orders. The conversations about myself were either at his own house, or when I have accidentally met him out. I desisted from making any further applications to him about the month of July. At the last interview I asked him what I was to do ; he said, " Put it upon the back of the old man, and when he comes down here I'll swear it is like him." The old man he al luded to was my own father. He told me I might go and be d—d, for it was all lies. That was the last time we met. My father knew of my situation in September. A child was born the 7th of January last. My father sent me to lodge with Mrs. Farley, in Hornsey-road, in October. I remained at her house for a month subsequently to my confinement. I paid that person 16s. a-week, and a pound a-week after my confinement. My father gave me the money to pay her. A medical gentleman was employed ; his charge was two guineas. The defendant has told me he is between twenty-five and twenty-six years of age. He never told me what his means were. He ap peared to be living comfortably. Cross-examined by Mr. JERVIS—The defendant serves as a shopman in the shop. It is a general chandler's shop. My father was in the Marines. I never was with him at Portsmouth. He has had two wives. Ido not know where my mother-in-law lives now. I lived in the same house with her before I went to school. My mother-in-law lived in Queen's ' terrace, Chelsea, and I lived there with her when not at school. Although my father lived in Chelsea, my mother-in-law continued in Wilton-place. My father did not go and live, a short time after we left Brox bourne, with my mother-in-law. Ido not know the state of his affairs, or why he does not live with my mother-in-law. I do not know what her maiden name was, but he married her about seven years ago. I was at school at Mrs. Sorrell's, Waltharnstow. A boy was kept there to attend to the garden and other things. His name was Mills. I never walked out with him. Part of the time I was at school I slept at other houses in the village, at a shoemaker's (Mrs. Buffey's). I was at the school about three years or more. Soon after I quitted it we went to Broxbourne. The defendant paid atten tions to me very soon after I had been in the habit of going to the shop. The first thing that struck me as marked in his conduct towards me was in January or February. He asked me to walk out with him. I did not do so when he first asked me. The first time I went out with him was in his cart. Upon that occasion he went round the village and up to Burv-green, where he was going to. That was in in February or March. He frequently came to our house when it was absolutely necessary, and, I thought, paid me marked attention. lie did not put me down at my father's house, but at the end of the village. I know Woolley. I never got out of the cart to meet him. The reason I got out at the end of the lane was because the defendant was not going that way. I afterwards frequently met him by chance in the village. I did nut, before this time, walk about with him more than two or three times, but before the 6th of April - I may have walked with him more than twenty times. Before that day he had not taken any liberties with me that I remember. He first proposed to marry me in February or March, when he was driving me out. It was between nine and ten o'clock in the morning, when I went to buy the crockery. The defendant had not taken any liberties with me before we went up to see the crockery. I cannot say how long we were up stairs before this affair took place, but it might have been half an hour. I looked out the crockery. The defendant never mentioned such a proposition before to me as this transaction. Fie pressed me to become a mother, and then that my father would consent to our marriage. I did not consent at once, but resisted him, and said I would not agree. I did not let him into my bed-room ; I did not know that he was com ing until he was in the room. He opened the win dow himself, and got in without my assistance or knowledge. I had not made any arrangement with him to go when the proceeding was repeated. I did not tell my father of his behaviour to me. Ido not think I ever saw the defendant in the shop after he swore at me about Jnly. I went with my father to Father Mathew's meeting, and there we saw the de fendant. That. was before he told me I might go and be d—d. We were in the shop, I think, when he told me to put the child on Mr. Harrild. It was at our gate that he asked me to take something to destroy the child. This was upon my asking him what I was to do if he would not marry me, and when he was breaking off. I know the clergyman, the Rev. Mr. Morris, of Cheshunt. I have never walked about with his pupils, but they have tried to talk to me in the defendant's shop. Mr. Mor ris complained to my father that his pupils had been walking about with me, but they had not done so. It might have happened that they walked by me as I went home from the shop, but I have never walked with any of them. Ido not know that after this time I ever-saw Mr. Morris walking. The vicar complained to my father that he had heard that I was with Mr. Harrild ; but I never had been so. This was a month or two after the occurrence in the crockery room. Mr. Harrild never walked about with me. He has never talked to me from my bed-room window between ten and eleven at night. I have no recollection of doing such a thing. Ido not think that I ever spoke to any per son from my bed-room window at night, except the defendant. The fence in the garden is broken, but not large enough for a person to get through. I have seen Martinson, the butcher. I know him. I have waited at his shop for the d e f e ndant, and once while it was raining. I have never been up stairs in his house. I have seen a Mr. Aldersey, but have never walked with him. Ido not know that the vicar re monstrated with my father about my conduct with that gentleman, but I have mentioned to the de fendant that the vicar had spoken to my father about Mr. Harrild. I know Mr. Butts. I never rode with him in his cart. He never asked me to do so. I never rode in any cart but one driven by the de fendant. Ido not know a Mr. Lincoln. Re-examined by Mr. MARTIN-Mr. Butts never took any liberty with me. He never made love to me. I never walked about with Mr. Aldersey, nor did he ever take any liberty with me. The time at which the clergyman made complaint to my father that he had heard the report about Mr. Aldersey was subsequent to the transaction between the de fendant and myself on the 6th of April. No impro priety of any description has ever passed between Mr. Harrild and me, neither have I ever walked with that gentleman. He never either addressed me in the terms of love. I never had any more than the common passing civilities of the morning with him. Upon no occasion have I had a long conversation with him. I have not the slightest recollection of ever having spoken to any person from my window other than the defendant. The pupils of the vicar I have seen in the street, and at the shop of the defen dant. They bow e d t o me, an d o f course I returne d the civility. I have never wa lk e d a b out w i t h any o f them, but it may have occurred that some of them, as they have been going my way home, may have walked up the road by me, but not with me. I never took a private walk with any of them, nor did any one of them ever take the least liberty with me, or make proposals of any descrip tion to me. I informed the defendant of the fact of the complaint to my father by the clergyman sub sequently to the 6th of April. At that period the de fendant did not say- that he entertained any suspicion as to my rectitude of conduct. My father was en tirely ignorant of any intimacy between the defendant and myself, until the fact of my pregnancy was dis closed to him. Our acquaintance began about Jan uary, 1843. The defendant never took any improper liberties with me, nor made any improper proposals until the 6th of April. My father is separated from my stepmother I know, because they do not live to gether. It was in the month of October in which I left school. The reason why I slept out of the house when at school was, that occasionally there were so many scholars that the house would not contain them, and then it was that I ar3d others were se n t w ith one of the teachers to sleep in the rooms of the cottage, which was just across the road. The rooms were taken by the school-mistress. There was a lad of the name of Mills in the school to clean shoes and attend to the garden. There had never been any improper conduct between that lad and myself, and what is more, I never heard of such an imputation until this day. The defendant and his mother keep two shops, and appear to carry on an extensive business. Mrs. Sorrell, the lady who keeps the school at NS , al thamstow, to which the young lady had been sent, stated that she had been a pupil at her establishment from 1839 to 1842. Her conduct had been extremely good ; hut she was very dull and slow in learning. She had not heard of this transaction until Monday last. Cross-examined—The young lady had been placed at her school by her stepmother in 1839, and at the holidays she always returned to that lady, in Wilton place. The plaintiff at that time was at Malta, and in 1842, after his return to England, he took his daughter away from school. Part of the tim e Mi ss Marlay was with her, she did not always sleep in the house. She had deemed it requisite, from the increase in the number of her pupils, to take rooms in the cot tage opposite, where the children were under the care of one of the teachers. She had never had any occa sion to find fault with this young lady's moral con duct. She had never complained of the lad Mills being too intimate with Miss Marlay, because she had not had reason to do so. Mrs. Catherine Woolley was next examined. She lived opposite to the plaintiff, and had constant oppor tunities of watching the conduct of his daughter, and had never seen anything improper in it. Mr. Harrild was then put into the box. He denied in the most positive terms that there had ever been the slightest impropriety of conduct between Miss Marlay and himself. Cross-bxamined—He had heard that the clergyman had complained upon the subject to the plaintiff, but that complaint was without the least foundation. He had scarcely been even upon speaking term% with the young lady. He had never held a conversation with her from her bed-room window. Mr. JERVIS then addressed the jury at consider able length on behalf of the defendant, contending that his client was the seduced rather than the se ducer. It was not likely a young man in his station of life would look up to a young lady who was so much above him in rank unless he had received the first encouragement from her. After going through the evidence of the lady, he submitted that even, if they should be satisfied that he had been guilty of the act of which he was accused, that the conduct of the lady had been of such a nature as to render a very trifling sum an abundant compensation for the injury her character had sustained, or the loss her father had been put to by her absence. Mr. Baron RoLrE summed up, and The jury, after ten minutes' consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff —Damages, 1001. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (SATURDAY.) MANSION-HOUSE. _ A man of respectable appearance and good address, who at first refused to give his name, but afterwards said it was Edward Bathurst, was charged with having endeavoured to obtain 2,0001. Exchequer Bills under false pretences from Win. Davis, a stock broker. It was stated that the prisoner uad been in troduced to Wm. Davis by Mr. Moxhay, the pro prietor of the Hall of Commerce, who had agreed to accept the prisoner as a tenant, in the belief that he was a man of property. Two days after the intro duction he requested Mr. Davis to purchase 2,000/. Exchequer bills, stating that he had an account at the banking-house of Messrs. Dennison and Co. and Messrs. Coutts and Co. It was, however, ascertained that he had no account at either of those banks. Mr. Davis did not purchase the stock, suspecting that there was something wrong about the business, but gave the prisoner into the care of a policeman. Mr. Resaigh, a clerk in the banking-house of Messrs. Dennison, stated that he never saw the prisoner till that moment, and the house had no account in the name of Edward Bathurst, neither had they any ac count with Coutts' bank. Mr. Ellis, a clerk to Mr. Moxhay, stated that the prisoner had signed an agreement for a counting house in the City with Mr. Moxhay two days ago. Mr. Moxhay knew nothing of him until he called to take a counting-house as a yearly tenant, w h en h e represented himself as having recently returned from India, where he said he knew some eminent person, whom he named, and also a personal friend of Mr. Moxhay. He likewise represented himself as a man of property, and expressed a wish to be introduced to a London banker, stating, at the same time, that his bankers at the west-end were Coutts and Co., with whom he had lodged money amounting to about 2,0001. Mr. Moxhay, not supposing for a moment that there was any doubt as to the prisoner's possession of the cash, introduced him at Messrs. Dennison, in the belief that the moniv would be immediately lodged there. Sir P. LAURIE called upon the prisoner to ac count for so remarkable a transaction ? The prisoner said he could explain the whole matter in the most satisfactory manner. He had, he said, had a corres pondence with Coutts's house, while he was in India, since the year 1830, and down to 1842, an d h e h an d e d a letter to Sir Peter Laurie, with a request that the Alderman would read it. Sir P. LAURIE read the letter, and said, " Well, there is nothing explanatory in this." The prisoner proceeded—When he returned to England, he renewed the notice of th e accoun t w hi c h he wished to have with the house, and th e fi r m re quested that he would write to them the nature of the business he meant to transact with them. lie did as he was requested, and he had a copy of the letter he had sent to them.—(He here produced an other paper which Sir Peter Laurie read.) He also had the answer which he received from them, in which they stated they consented to let him draw bills, subject to their approbation. Afterwards he saw Mr. Moxhay, asked him about an office, and mentioned to that gentleman how he was situated with regard to Coutts and Co., and th a t h e was de sirous to open an account with a City ba n k e r. M r . Moxhay subsequently introduced him at Messrs. Dennison's house. He (the prisoner) also stated to Mr. Moxhay that he wished to empl o y a fi rs t- ra t e stock-broker, and Mr. Davis, the complainant, being at that moment at hand, Mr. Moxhay pointed out that gentleman as in every respect qu a lifi e d t o ac t. He afterwards saw Mr. Davis and questioned him upon the rate of exchange, and on the last interview commissioned him to buy 2,0001. Exchequer-bills ; and finally he was given into the custody of the police. Sir PETER LAURIE said he really believedthere must be something wrong in the head of the prisoner, who seemed to suppose that Mr. Davis would be fool enough to entrust him with 2,0001. The prisoner—l certainly meant to deposit the money; I had no intention to do any wrong. Sir PETER LAURIE—You talk of your property ; where is it ? You have shown that your application to Coutts's was rejected. Show us what ground you had for directing this purchase of stock to be made at all. The prisoner said he had been taken suddenly and unprepared. He had not said he would immediately pay for the Exchequer-bills. Sir PETER LAURIE—YOt have told falsehoods all through, and I think that a man who deliberately tells a falsehood is capable of any other bad conduct. He said this was a very serious case, and he should require the prisoner to produce two sureties in 2501. each, and enter into his own recognizances to the amount of 500/. to appear and answer the charge on another day .1 The prisoner was then removed, and Sir Peter Laurie directed that the surgeon of the Compter should be requested to examine the state of his mind. Two young fellows, named John Smith and Luke Marrion, were charged with having attempted to pick the pockets of a great number of persons on London-bridge. A policeman stated that he had distinctly seen the prisoners, who were well-known thieves, put their 1 hands into the pockets of several gentlemen and ladies. He followed them and they turned round and put their thumbs to their noses and twirled their fingers at him, at the same time making a very disrespectful noise with their mouths. They persevered in that way for some time. At length they turned a gentle man's pocket inside out, and witness collared them. The prisoners said nothing could equal the villa nous lies of the police, as their case proved; for they were walking quietly over the bridge when the po liceman who charged them made a most ferocious attack upon them. They were both hard-working lads, who never did injury to, or offended a human being. Policeman—They are every day working the bridge. A girl that was with them gave one of them a poke in the ribs with her elbow when she saw I was observing them. Sir P. Laulaz (to the gaoler)---Gooch, do you know anything of these prisoners ? Gooch—l know them well, they have been in Bridewcll and in New gate, as well as in the Compter with me. The prisoners—The " bloaty" tells a lie, your Lordship - ; he knows nothing of us—we never set eyes upon him before. Gooch—The last time they were here they were sent away for three months. One of the prisoners—You lie, " bloaty," it was only for one month.—(Laughter.) CITY POLICE COMMITTEE. Mr. Gardner, the landlord of the Barley Mow public-house, in Long-lane, 'West Smithfield, ap peared before the sitting magistrates, Sir John Pine, Mr. Alderman Gibbs, and Mr. Alderman Johnson, to answer a complaint laid by the police for serving during the hours of Divine service on Sunday morn ing last, whereby he endangered the license of his house, and incurred a heavy penalty.—Mr. Child, the solicitor, attended on behalf of the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. The informer was a constable of the name of Oliver Death, acting as a sergeant in the Smithfield division. To his vigilance, it is but right to state, he has brought more similar cases and had them dismissed than any other, officer in the whole of the City police force. His evidence went to show that at about a quarter before one o'clock on Sunday forenoon last, he saw a female come out of the back door of the house, with something concealed under her cloak. He asked her what she had got concealed, and, finding that she re fused to satisfy him, he pulled open her cloak, and found it to be a jug of beer. Mr. Child, in answer to the complaint, said it was a most frivolous case, as he was able to show. The female whom the officer saw leave the house by the back door, was Mrs. Gardner's washerwoman; she had taken home some linen, and Mrs. Gardner, out of compassion, gave her a pint of beer, which she was in the act of taking away when in pounced one of the constables. The washerwoman, Jane Woolman, residing at No. 2, Sun-court, was here called, and confirmed Mr. Child's observations. Sir Jomv PIXIE inquired of the officer if he sus pected any other person was in the house at the time? Death said when he found it was beer that the woman had, he took it from her, and went round to the front door, when Mrs. Gardner told him she had served no one else. He searched the house, but found no one in it except the domestics. _ _ Sir JoHN PIRIE—What character does the house bear ?—Mr. Child replied that Mr. Gardner had been landlord of it thirteen years, and had never had a complaint laid against him till then. Sir JoKN PIRIE—The case is dismissed. BOW-STREET. John Thompson, a young man having the appear ance of a stableman, was placed at the bar, charged with being concerned, with others not in custody, in robbing Mr. Finlaison, a clerk in the National Debt office, Old Jewry, of a valuable gold watch, and a purse, containing a sovereign and some silver, under the following circumstances : The prosecutor stated that, between ten and eleven o'clock on the night of Monday, the 15th inst., while on his way home, he was accosted by a female near Craig's-court, Charing-cross, who solicited him to go home with her, and while he was endeavouring to extricate himself from her, he was surrounded by several others of the same class, who commenced pull ing him about, and in an instant he found their object was to rifle his pockets, as he mised his gold watch and purse before the police could be found, although he had called lustily for their assistance. During the confusion he was also attacked by a number of men, among whom was the prisoner, who got behind him, and having pinioned his arms, held him in that posi tion until the woman ran away. Ile, however, suc ceeded, after some time, to get loose, and, turning round, he knocked down the prisoner, who received a severe wound in the head by falling against the kerb stone. The crowd by this time increased, and seeing the prisoner bleeding profusely, assisted witness to convey him to the station-house, 185 A division hav ing ran up Cockspur-street to overtake the females, but he returned in a short time without effecting his object. On examining in what manner the robbery had taken place, witness found his watch-guard had been cut with some sharp instrument. The prisoner denied all knowledge of the females, but said. that, having incautiously jostled the prose cutor, he was instantly knocked down by him, and stunned by the blow. He was ordered to be re manded for a week. A man, who gave the name of Jonathan Swift, was also charged with being concerned, with others not in custody, in robbing a young gentleman, named Charles Robinson, of four 51. notes, and 251. in gold, while he was passing along the Strand. The prosecutor was proceeding home, on Thursday night, and at the corner of Surrey-street was spoken to by a nymph of the pave, who requested he would treat her with some drink, and, before he could make a reply, being afflicted ~with great hesitation in his speech, she succeeded in pulling him down Surrey street, notwithstanding his repeated efforts to get away. He then found that his right-hand trowsers pocket had been emptied of the case in which the money was deposited, and while he was accusing her, in the best manner he could, of having robbed him, which she denied, the prisoner and another man passed by, and, addressing witness, asked why he did not go elsewhere, instead of stopping with her in the street, upon which the female instantly ran off. The prisoner then offered his services to assist in going in pursuit of her, at the same time inquiring if the numbers of the notes were known, and if they were, he would accompany him in the morning to that Court, for the purpose of giving: the necessary in formation upon the subject. Witness, being very much confused, gave him to understand that he had received the money only a short time back from a friend in the City, and the prisoner imme diately offered to accompany him to tell what he saw. The prisoner and the other man, who went away, seemed to be very intimate. Mr. Richard Brinsley Porter, residing at 2, Idol-lane, City, said that about half-past 9 o'clock the prosecutor came to his house bringing a note for the money in question from his father, which he gave him and he went away, Between 11 and 12 o'clock hearing a knock, he put his head out of the window, and saw the prisoner and Robinson outside. On letting them in, the prosecutor stammered to such a degree that he was unable to make himself understood, and having provided himself with pen and ink, he wrote that he suspected the prisoner was concerned in robbing him with a female, who made her escape. Witness imme diately communicated the suspicion against him to the prisoner, and having. asked him his address, that he might be found if further inquiries were neceseary, he said he was a tailor, and lodged at 17, Red Lion street, Holborn, which was a private house. They then went to the station-house, where the prisoner gave the same address, and upon sending to make in quiries it was found to be a greengrocer's shop, and no such person as the prisoner was known there. The prisoner being reminded of the false address he had given, admitted the fact, as he had every objection his friends should know the situation he was placed in. He had previously said he had lately come from Ports mouth, where he intended to return in a short time, and he would prefer being brought before a magis trate to giving his address even privately. The prisoner persisted in refusing to give any ac count of himself,_and he was remanded till Tuesday. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. The Court was crowded with hotel keepers and licensed victuallers, anxious to hear the examination of Win. Kelly alias Win. Young, charged with com mitting a robbery at the Waterloo Hotel, Hay market, and respecting whom there is little doubt thit he is the individual who has within the last twelve months plundered. a_ vast number of hotels and public-houses. The police have for a considerable time been in possession of a description of the pri soner's person and a list of his robberies, but owing to the adroit manner in which the offences were com mitted they have, up to Saturday last, been totally unable to capture the delinquent. The prisoner is an Irishman, about 30 years of age, rather tall, light hair, and of flashy appearance. His clothes had ap parently been contrived with the view of carrying on his robberies so as to elude detection ; they were very large and loose, and calculated to hold any plun der he might get possession of, without drawing sus picion on him from any appearance of unusual bulki ness. The first charge was the following : Mr. Richard Bradshaw, a gentleman of fortune, said he had occupied apartments at the Waterloo Hotel for about four years. On Saturday week last, about one o'clock a.m., he went into his sleeping apartment, and discovered that a chest of drawers had been forced open and a case containing a silver knife, fork, and spoon, with some other articles, taken away. The prisoner had engaged a bed at the hotel for that night, and his sleeping-room was opposite to the bed room of prosecutor. Suspicion having been excited, prosecutor knocked at the door of the prisoner, and after some time prosecutor was admitted by the pri • soner, who apparently had just been roused from his bed. Prosecutor immediately searched the prisoner's clothes, and, having found sufficient evidence to con firm him in his opinion that the prisoner was the thief, he went out of the room and caused a policeman to be sent for. When the constable came the bed-room was thoroughly searched, and on the top of the bed the case of plate was found. There were other articles also discovered which had been stolen from the room of a gentleman who also occupied apartments in the hotel, but who was then at Ramsgate. Police•constable Wells, C 185, said when he took the prisoner into custody he found a chisel in his pocket. This chisel exactly fitted the marks on the drawers, and no doubt was the instrument employed by the prisoner to effect the robbery. On this charge the prisoner was full committed. The next charge was preferred by - 'lllr. E. Tomp kins, who stated that, on being informed while at Ramsgate that a robbery had been committed he cum to town, and arcertlxineti that a patniantimu in his apartments had been forced open, and several shirts,' a card-case, and other articles stolen. The missing property was found in the prisoner's room. On this charge the prisoner was also committed. Mr. Hardwick was informed that since the pri soner had been in custo ly the police had ascertained that he had committed an immense number of similar robberies in all parts of London, and also that the prisoner had been committed in May last for a rob bery at the Ship Hotel, Charing-cross, and had been sentenced to six months' imprisonment. The system adopted by the prisoner was this :—He fixed upon a house, and engaged a bed for the night. In the morning, when the family were engaged at their business, he took the opportunity of going from room to room, and breaking open boxes and drawers, and carrying off as much booty as he could-get clear with. From the bulk of some of the articles it is suspected the prisoner had a confederate, and the police are consequently on the look out. Among those who have been pillaged, the following have been traced out by City-policeman Horton, 532 :—Mr. Curling, Sugar-loaf, Great Queen-street, Cheapside, a quantity of clothes and jewellery, worth about 201. ; Mr. White, the Cock, Leadenhall street, of clothes worth about 10/. ; the George and Vulture Tavern, George-yard, Lombard-street, a quantity of linen and wearing apparal from the carpet-bag of a gentleman staying at the tavern; the Sceptre Hotel, Fleet-street, a suit of clothes belonging to the waiter; the Rainbow Tavern, Fleet-street, a silk-dress, the pro perty of the housekeeper; the Mitre Tavern, Fish street-hill, a quantity of clothes and other wearing apparel; the Catherine Wheel, Bishopsgate-street, a quantity of wearing apparel, the property of a gen tleman from Cambridge. The potboy at a public-house in London also complained to the magistrate that he had lost a new Taglioni and other articles of Sunday clothing, in consequence of the prisoner having been accom modated with a bed in his master's house. The Crown Tavern, at Pentonville, had also been visited by the prisoner, among other houses. Mr. HARDWICK said, as there was reason to believe that many other complete cases would be brought forward against the prisoner, he would remand him until Thursday .week, May 2, in order to grant time to the police to arrange the charges. QUEEN -SQUARE. John Crosby, a strange-looking, middle-aged man, described as a pensioner from the 4th Regiment of Foot, was brought before Mr. Bond, charged with haring endeavoured to force his way into the Royal Mews, and with having made use of threatening lan guage towards her Majesty. On the first witness being called, prisoner, who looked wildly round him, made some incoherent ob servations, and on being requested to keep quiet, exclaimed, " I shall not hold my tongue ; I should not if her Majesty herself was present; am I striking anybody ?" Police-constable George Bartlett said, that at about one that day he saw the defendant engaged with the soldier who was on duty at the Royal Mews, and heard him say that he wanted to see her Majesty, and declare, with an oath, that he would see her. Defendant (with much vehemence)—" And I will too." Witness continued his statement—Defendant then said that he had come there on purpose to see the Queen, and nobody should prevent him. A gentle man then came up and desired witness to take the man into custody, and assisted him in doing so. De fendant frequently exclaimed on his way to the sta tion-house, " I will see the Queen, and I'll Queen her when I do see her." Mr. BOND—Judging from his conduct and expres sions, is it your opinion that he is of sound mind ? Witness—l should say that he had the appearance of being of unsound mind. G. Rudder, a private of the Ist battalion of Cold. stream Guards, said he was on duty at the Royal Mews at one o'clock that day. Defendant came up, and asked him which was the entrance to the Palace, and witness, thinking by his excited manner and ap•• pearance that there was something wrong, directed him down towards Chelsea. Defendant said that was not the way, and made an attempt to open the gate. Witness pulled him away by the collar, and put him into the road, but he returned again, and said he wanted to see her Majesty, and would have admittance to the Palace. A gentleman who was passing imme diately requested witness to keep tight hold of the prislner while he fetched a police•constable, and the gentleman then assisted the officer in conveying the defendant to the station. Rees Davis, a tradesman residing next door to the Royal Mews, stated that he sent a boy for the police on observing defendant's determined manner. De fendant inquired whether the Queen came out that way, alluding to the side entrance to the Palace. Wm. Cornish, a police-constable of the B division, stated that he was on duty at the station when defend ant was brought in. Defendant said he wanted to see the Queen, and she should not be Queen long after he got a sight of her. He added that he had as much right to be King as she had to be Queen. Mr. BOND asked what had been found upon the defendant ? Cornish produced his papers, which showed that he had a pension of sixpence per day, and the following certificate : " John Crosby has been for some time confined in the lunatic ward in the workhouse for deranged intel lect.—N. MTherson, Captain, Staff Officer. Man chester, April 6th." The police-constable, Bartlett, informed the magis trate that the prisoner had been very violent that morning at Chelsea Hospital, and had broken Leveral windows. Mr. BOND asked the accused what he had to say ? Defendant gave a wild look around him, and said, " What have I done ? I only went to see the Queen." Mr. BOND said there could be no doubt of the de fendant's insanity, and directed that he should be taken to the workhouse and placed under restraint. Mr. Barefoot, an inspector of the B division, sub mitted that it would be better to remand the de fendant until Monday, and give the parish officers notice to attend, when they could receive charge of the man at the hands of the Magistrate. He (the in spector) was apprehensive that if the accused got a little quiter by the morning he might insist upon being discharged from the workhouse, and might thus, in his dangerous state, be at large. Mr. BOND said, that the authorities at the work house must be desired to detain him, and he would then be passed in due form to Ilanwell Lunatic Asylum. REPORTING FOtt THE LONDON PAPERS. We have often been struck with the amount of un scrupulous exaggeration, assertion, and perversion of the truth, displayed in the reports which appear in some of the London papers of meetings held in this town and neighbourhood, when we have had the means, from personal observation, or otherwise, of detecting this species of dishonesty. Though we have now seen so many instances of this sort of reporting that we have ceased to be astonished at it, we think it right occa sionally to expose it, that at all events the public both here and elsewhere may be on their guard as to this species of deception. We had the curiosity to look at the reports of the fr‘ Ten Hours' Bill" meeting on 'Wednesday evening, given in the Morning Post and the Times of yesterday, and we will give a few spe cimens from each, of that sort of misrepresentation which, we fear, is becoming habitual to the reporters or correspondents of these journals. The Post com mences thus : " Last night one of the largest, and decidedly the most important meeting ever held in this town, was convened at the Corn Exchange, &c. * * * The room, which is the largest in the town, was filled al most to suffocation, and the principal doors had to be closed ; many thousands went away who could not obtain admission. By this time there could not have been fewer than 4,000 persons present. On this occa sion the platform had been enlarged, and made capable of holding upwards of 300 people, and it, like the body of the room, was densely crowded. * * * Amongst the gentlemen on the platform we noticed several mer chants and manufacturers, many clergymen of the Church of England, axtd_ some of the Roman Catholic priests, as well as several Dissenting preachers. This may be said to have been one of the largest and most re spectable meetings ever held in Manchester. * * * The following letter from the Dean of Manchester to the Chairman of the Short Time Committee was read." And then comes the Dean's letter at lengtClThe ther the meeting was one of the largest ever held in Manchester, is decided by the simple fact that it was held in a room. We have seen meetings of at least 20,000 persons, and the courage of the reporter is only screwed up to 4,000 in this instance. But is the room the largest in Manchester ? Its area is, according to th 3 statement of its proprietors, "nearly 600 square yards ;" that of the Car penters' Hall is 665, the Wellington room 700, and the Free Trade Hall 1,750 square yards. As we have seen all these rooms "crammed," of course the Corn Exchange is neither " the largest room," nor could any assemblage in it be "one of the largest meetings ever held"—in a room—in Man chester. But were there 4,000 persons present ? Where could they be stowed in something short of 600 square yards of floor ? We doubt if ever this room held 3,000 persons ; we should estimate the numbers present on Thursday night at between 2,000 and 2,500. The plat form certainly could not hold 200 people, and not more than 150 were upon it. We deny that there were "many clergymen of the Church of England" on the platform ; we deny that there were " several Dissent ing preachers." As to the Dean's letter paraded at full length in the Post as read, every one at the meeting knows that Mr Wray said he would not read it, as it was so long; and it was not read. Here we might stop; but we may just add, that the same misrepre sentation runs through the whole report. Certainly, , if there bad be en " a k no t o f some h a lf-d ozen L eaguers " in the room, they would not have marked their presence by "clamouring for Mr. Oastler." Here we must leave the Post and its reporter. The Times is a little more modest in its istinutte of the numbers present, which 446.0 it g states at " between 3,000 and 4,000 ;" bein 0„, 9 1 1,000 to 2,000 more than re ally were present. Vice-Dean having handed. his written speech to the, reporter for the Times, it has been duly interspersed with ." cheers," some, of course, in the wrong pla c i . e l ' and others existing only in the imagination of liberal distributor of these marks of popular ape for The same remarks will apply with still raore for.ce to . the speech of Mr. Walter, the proprietor of.tn, e Times, which is interlarded with cheers which certai.My. never were given, but instead of them such unequivo cal marks of disapprobation, as to draw from be Oastler the strongest expressions of regret, and t a t most earnest appeals to hear Mr. Walter. No ne this app inter' ears in the Times, but in ti,ve or three . stances we are told there were " cheers . and ruption." We need not pursue our examination fur ther, than to add, that Mr. Mitchell's charge of fa y ' hood on the part of Mr. Ferr an d, in reference to mode John Brooks, and Mr. Ferrand's characteristic wee ' of dealing with it, are suppresSed.—Manc hester Guardian. - - FLANDERS AND DUTCH MAIL S ' BRUSSELS, APRIL 17.—The average price of wne last week was 17f. 39c., and that of Rye la 71 c . .per hectolitre. The import and export duties, the re '. fore, remained as they have be e n for several w eek past. The A letter from Antwerp, of the 15th, says „ o . numerous ships that arrived ye s t e rday, from long voyages, gave our port a very animated appear ° e Among them were three from the Havannah, from Monte Video, one from Buenos Ayres, one freu! Rio de Janeiro, one from New Orleans, two from New Orleans, and one from Savannah. In consequence of the ordinance of the Prassi e° Government against speculation in railways, the Pr e ject of a railway, in competition with the Rho's" railway, has been abandoned. " The Provincial Board of the iron railway P r i , ° ; jected between Cologne and Creveld, informs t„" public, through the medium of the Cologne Gael‘ e i that, in consequence of the notice of the Minister e_ Finance, dated the 11th of this month, the conditions on which it has received subscriptions to this railway have become ineffectual, and it has, therefore, reso lve to declare those subscriptions null and void, an d to release the subscribers from their engagements. But," adds the Committee, " We do not renounce the hope of seeing the importance of an undertak in gf recognised, and we leave subscribers the option taking part till the 10th of May in the expenses of t" preliminary works by the payment of sums, the r e ; eeipts from which will entitle them to take part in tu , deliberations and the resolutions which will be ne ee l; sary when the authorisation shall have been obtained_ It seems that their Majesties will not return Lacken so soon as was expected, and that they tri not leave England till the 23d of this month. The Duchess of Kent and the Prince of Leiningl her son, will come to Ostend in the s a me steamer the. brings their Majesties. The fine weather which we have had for some time past has quite effaced the traces of the inundations 131 which the country suffered so severely, and the IT O counts from all quarters speak in the most favour abl e manner of the forward state of the labours of t" farmers. the AMSTERDAM, APRIL 18.—Their Majesties an d „ Royal Family are still here. The King give ss ,), - ; dience every day, and the Princess, as well as up " t Prince of Orange, take advantage of the fine N've at ': to visit different institutions, and make excursions t ° the environs. Yesterday between twelve and one o'clock, ter, rible fire suddenly broke out in the E n glish mag ezl ;a of Kerckhoff and Co., near the palace. There seer h , reason to fear that the fire would extend to the ne'Ap r bouring buildings; however, it was most fortune % confined to the magazine, whi c h i s wholly d e stroye The magistrates of Amsterdam have ordered a g i f : neral collection to be made for the re lief of the 5 ;4 ferers by the fire at Alstneer. From an ofne n l a statement of the loss occasioned by this fire we , that the whole amounts to 167,701 florins, in bao le ings, furnit ure , merc h an di se , & c ., w hi c h w ere °n insured to the amount of 56,140 florins. The statement of the amount subscribed to ti l t e voluntary loan by the se vera l p rov i nces i s n ow P. lished. The province of North H o ll an d s ubscri ms a about 54,000,000, South Holland 27,000,000, Allf the other provinces the remainder of the sum 117,000,000, which, with the 10,000,000 added the King to his first subscription, made up the t o ' al of 127,000,000 florins that was required. THE HAGUE, APRIL 18.—The Handelsblad ; be "We learn that measures are preparing in ; e a offices of the Department of Finance to be ee i a Ind into execution, by way of refusal, if Belgium s h°ll % adopt the proposal to lay on colonial produce co ra .% from the Netherlands a heavier duty than is l evee , on the same articles imported directly from the co ati' tries which produce them." This article has induced the following notice ft ° t the Journal de Bruxelle s :—" Thi s threat is n° o serious. We have already sa id, an d we shall ha l o occasion to prove, that Belgium is pe r f ec tly at lib er n 4 to introduce a commercial sy s te m a d o pt e d by al - all nations, and that Holland will in no case user,' prisals. May the Chambers and the Belgian _ . vernment be fully sensible of these truths." - The Journal de Bruxelles seems to consider If article to the Handelsblad as a threat on the par t + the Government. This is an error. We know P :i f i a tively that it did not ema n ate f rom any. Minist eri a s dep h artment. The Governme n t of th e Netherla n o never threatens, but it is wa t c hf u l, an d w hatever t to Journal de Bruxelles may say, it will not hesitateed. act in case the interest of Hovland sh ou ld be affec t „ 0 Is it necessary to add, that with re s p ec t to 13el fi g' vo we have abundant means of maki ng re p r i sa ls? 1-13. ,1 our neighbours forgotten how large a proporti ol ke Belgian produce e x p or t e d comes t o H o lland ? u ' t need quote only one arti c l e , name ly, that of eig'r six per cent. on all the calicoes. . r BO' THE LAYS OF THE LAST GREAT SCOTTISH MINS— 0 . —We understand that Mr. Templeton gives his nev!,,c. tertainmeat " The Lays of the last Great Scottish 0-11 r, strel, Sir Walt,r Scott," on Friday next, at the HaanT e b , square rooms, under the patronage of his Royal ~0 ness Prince Albert. The proceeds of the evenings • tertainments are to be handed over to the Scott Nin"ro., ment Committee, Mr. Templeton adopting this niffot priate mode of testifying his admiration and respe c t is the memory of Sir Walter Scott. We fear that this 0 the last opportunity which the admirers of TeLoP let° o o will have of hearing hint during the present seasn ri ; n ts we understand his numerous provincial engag eri t t ler will completely engross his time during the rernaLl3o of the spring and summer. He has just returned fr A ( ' iso very successful professional visit to Liverpool a n neighbourhood. nfriv iSS. FREDERICK THE GREAT ; HIS COURT ANDI' - r - EDITED BY THOMAS CA.IMPEELL, E6Q.—To many ° " l , ° o -00 readers, and especially to such of them as rail . 0 11 9 been disappointed of procuring the highly work, lately ushered before the public by the cli ; s „.ag guished author of " The Pleasures of Hope," con t ,- I tt e l att memoirs of the Life and Times of Frederick the u r ,., 0 0 it will be, we doubt not, a welcome piece of inforT l ',: t ied that a new and much cheaper edition has just: s ' o es. from the press, comprised in a couple of small vc °l ',., This is certainly a work which rivals almost any Tato, language in the deep and varied interest of its o , n ,i ts of and especially in the rich picture which it exh'ithe the mind and person, of the opinions and actions, ' bits splendid splendid achievements and pacific labours, of the ,I t iest and manners, not excepting the foibles and eccentri c i ,.." pie of the most renowned Sovereign, and most remar ks man of the age in which he lived. meritoritio, BIRTHS. ..e A' On the 17th inst., in Essex-street, the lady of L r e llii Simon, Esq., barrister-at-law, of a son. ILy J. ll' On the 18th inst., at Bristol, the lady of the B. . Woodward, of a son. On the 19th inst., at Clapham, the lady of Richard C' i?Ali dall, Esq., of Cornhill, of a daughter. _______..- On the sth inst., at MARRIED Gretna, L. Stanhope F. nue"nt -"s , ' Esq., to Caroline Sarah, fourth daughter of the late vh • Frerick White, of her Majesty's Packet Service. Lo On the 17th inst., at Long Crendon, Bucks, li fer °' Lovegrove, of Blackwall, to Arabella, youngest &tug the late J. Reynolds, Esq., of Nottley Abbey, Buckswillis° On the 18th inst., at Plumstead Church, the Rev . Suss' Hornby, of St. Michael's-on-Wyre, Lancashire, 10 coy' third daughter of Captain Phipps Hornby, R.N., C' u. ' troller-General of the Coast Guard. re 'or On the 18th inst., at St. George's Hanover-squ i 'dot (i f f A. M. Tulloch, of the War-office, General Superinten liter Military Pensioners, to - Emma Louisa, youngest c blug Sir W. H. Pearson, of Hanover-Lquare. trot On the 19th inst., at St. George's, Hanover-sclu„,, e . - F ,544 Collier, Esq., to Isabella, eldest daughter of W. ' Eaton-place. --"-------_ DIED. Georg e On the 16th inst., at Kingston -hill, the wife ' l3 ' Staveley Smith, Esq. vat , Mi ll ' On the 16th inst., at Arkesden Vicarage, Essex, -- -a f yo Ongn uest son of the R. T. S. Griffenhoofe u ter 0. the 17th inst., at ev Cambridge, Agnes, s econd da ti g' P the Rev. Dr. Ainslie. ~,f e, g ... , On the 17th inst., at Elizabeth-street, Eaton's Benjamin Benjamin Allen, the oldest member of her Majestys ' of the Guard, aged 75. ;,I Is° On the 17th inst., at Boulogne-sur-Mer, CaP t3— f tile Taylor, of Lloyd's Coffee House, aged 77. On the 17th inst., Mrs. Sarah Wills Wells, widoigsors. late Samuel Wells, Esq ,Paymaster of thelOth'Boril L'Arriot4 On the 17th inst., at King's Langley, Hert3, Thozal° Esq., aged 90. , ex l 7 1 %, On the 10th inst., at Boulogne, R. Lowe, Esq. , Tip u ten" -4 On the 14th inst., at Albion-grove, Islington, '-'-- W. Eldridge, R.N., aged 68. Durb aw. On the 13th inst., H.Lamb, Bs of Rvton House , - f o u llirl On the 16th inst., Henry Richard - Wood, E -gc l'' a- i d Hall, York. flare , On the 16th inst., at Carburton-street, Fitzroy-sq--- James Murray, aged 45. to nsb ire ' __ ~....e,n Jo O hn n B tte sw l e 6 i t 4 h E i sq ns . t ; , at Arthingworth, Is ortnaws shire, aged 92. toil On the 16th inst., at Preston Deanery, /CorthanlP d 10. Robert, youngest son of Langham Christie, Esq. , a„g e Legg e ' On the 19th inst., at Bla c kheath, the lion. ti., Ab ic ralm9q. On the 19th inst., i n Ne w gate-street, Mr. MID n 1 , On the 19th inst., in Sloane-street, Benjamin •-•3l' Your il~ London : Printed and Published by Ml: No. 11Z Strand, Printer, at The Sun 0 OA c ust y 01 Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, is th e we jitiddlestx, lattuday, April gi s 1844. 9 ~~ ~HF I. ,~ ~T,