The Sun. — London, England, 1850-12-05 00:00:00

ri”ro Kbitto -1 .43 11 •cif THE POPISH AGGRESSION. MEETING AT FREEMASONS' TAVERN. (THIS DAY.) A large public meeting of the laity of the Established Church was held this afternoon, at the Freemasons' Tavern, for the purpose of addressing her Majesty on the subjecia the recent Popish aggression. The meet iag was convened for one o'clock, but long before that hour the large room of the tavern was densely thronged, while the galleries were filled with well-dressed ladies. The chair was taken shortly after oLe o'clock, by the Right Honourable Lord Ashley, M.P. The requisition and advertisement calling the meeting having been read, and the Divine blessing invoked upon the proceedings of the day, The CHAIRMAN addressed the meeting as his Pro testant brethren of the Church of England, declaring that the exigencies of the time rendered it imperatively necessary that he should use that distinctive epithet when he was speaking to the lay members of the Es tablisned Church. The meeting was convened to de nounce the aggressive proceedings of Rome. The laity was as much a part of the Church as the clergy and the bishops, and therefore it was their duty, as it was their priviteer, to protest against this flagrant violation of her rights and liberties.—(Cheers.) The Bishop of Me lipotamue had openly and publicly declared to the world The opposition redact up against the invasive influence of the Vatican originated in the interested motives on the part of the clergy of the Church of England, and it was for this meeting to tell him that he was not only mistaken, but that he had been guilty of an impudent and fla grantly untrue assertion.—(Cheers.) He for one was astounded at the impertinence of the feeble old man who was recognized and known as the Pope of Rome. The coercer of his own miserable people, supported on his throne by foreign bayonet:, and the oppres sor of man all over the world, had dared not only to invade the right of England's So vereign, but had gone the length of insulting her people by attempting t force an obnoxious hierarchy upon them.—(Cheers.) This misguided man would find, how ever, that the movements of himself and his agents would be resisted step by step and inch by inch, and though his bishops and cardinals might be allowed to remain in the land, they should never be recognised. It was urged against those who took up the defensive position, that there was nothing to fear in this aggres sion. What was there in a name? it was asked— "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." But there was more than a mere hollow-sounding title involved in this Popish movement. Give the emissaries of the Vatican the names, and they would not long be without the territories and powers of bishops and arch bishops; and not even the right of calling themselves nicknames ought to be conceded to them. Not that he wished to coerce any body or sect. He wished not to return to the days of bills of pains and penalties, or disabilities acts, but they were now arrayed against a power which extended toleration to no one. The Church of Rome was oppressive and intolerant, and it was be cause it was so that he was prepared to resist its inroads upon the civil and religious liberties of Englishmen. The very principles of the Romish Church were incompatable with anything even appeoaching civil or religious linerty, and he therefore hoped the country would not abate one jot or tittle of all that their forefathers won for them.— (Cheers.) The Pope held himself responsible to no earthly power—a doctrine which ought not to be tole rated, let alone recogyised, in this free and civilized nation, and the proceedings of his pretended bishops must be resisted to the lest.—(Cheers.) So _.much for the external evils that threatened Protes tantism from without. Now, let him glance for a mo ment to the dangerous enemies who were concealed within,—(Cheers.) No one could hold these personages in more abhortance than he did. It was to them that they were indebted for this aggressive movement of the Pope; but before the excitement subsided he hoped they would be driven from the posts they so unworthily occupied in tare Established Church.— (Cheers.) God forbid that the 'election should ever become necessary; bet, for his part, he should sooner worship with Lytle, on the banks of. the river than pray with a hundred surpliced priests in St. Barnabas Church.—(Cheers.) To avert such an evil as that they must petition her Majesty to put the con stitutional law of the land in force to cleanse the Church of her insidious enemies, and he trusted the meeting would be unanimous in attaining this end.—(Cheers.) Captain Sir EDWARD PARRY proposed the first resolu tion, and declared his conviction that if Protestantism had only to contend against Rome in the present struggle it would have nothing to fear.—(Cheers.) But there were sinister enemies eating the very bread of our Pro testant Church, and using her pulpits fur Popish pur poses, from whom they had mach to fear.—(Cheers.) Po pery itself was a ptantom, based upan a lie, which was originally concocted to enslave the minds and endanger the souls of men, and they need not be alarmed at its spreading in England if its advancement were left solely to the influence of Roman Catholic countries. But there were Tractarians engaged in promoting Popery. True, they denied the supremacy of the Pope, but like Archbishop Laud, they wanted to be Popes in their own dioceses.—(Cheers.) They had, therefore, been called together to tell the Pope that, whether at St. Peter's or Sr, Barnabaa, that they would net have Popery in England, but were determined to rid themselves of the foul pestilence which the Vatican had imprudently lended upon our shores.—(Che ere) The Gallant Cap Leh, concluded by moving the following resolution:— " that raise meeting has esitnessed, with the deepest indignation, the recent act of the Bishop of Rome, who, in detieeee of her itleteste'e prerogative, has presumed to parcel cut her Majesty's dominions into provinces and dioceses, filling them with his nominees, and invest ing the holders thereof with territorial tittes, assailing thus the icdeenuence achieved by our forefathers at the glorious Refer mattion, and aspiring at the establish ment o: a power not permitted even in the darkest pe riods of the middle ages." Mr. O'MALLEY, C.C., seconded the resolution, and reminded the meeting of the great responsibility which it had taken upon itself, It would not do to leave that hall under the impression that all the work had been done; nor ought they to feel that they were engaged in an exciting pry movement, so much as in a step which should serve to extend the glory of the Deity and our Saviour.—(Loud cheering.) Ho recognised no fine•drawn distinction between policital and spiritual supremay. The Queen, since she was the head of the laity was the only living head of the Church, and they were bound to resist all movements which had a ten dency to subvert that supremacy from her Majesty to the clergy of the Church.—(Cheers.) The resolietion was then put and carried unanimously. Aar. CHILDRRS, M.P., moved the second resolution, at followeh— " Thai this meeting i s , a l so compe ll e d to express its convieteon, confirmed by the recent testimony of several bishcep e of our Church, that the Court of Rome would never have attempted such an act of aggression, had not, encouragements been held out to that encroach lr.g power by many of the clergy of our own thurch, who have, for several years past, shown a desire to assimilate the doctrines and services of the Church of England to those of the Roman ;Communion. While we would cheerfully contend Tor the principles of the Reformation against all open enemies, we have to lament that our most dange rous toes are those of our own household; and hence we feel that it is to little purpose to repel the aggressions of the foreigner, unless those principles and practices, which htr', e tempted him to such aggressions, be publicly and universally repudiated." Le had always been a friend of toleration; but resisting oppression was not an act of intolerance. The Tracta rians had good cause to cry " heaven save me from my friends;" for the shining forth of the Roman sun had brought to light a crouching or hidden viper that lurked in the Established Church, and he, for one, hoped shortly to see cast out. The Tractarians were now beginning to be held in contempt by even those whom they looked upon as their friends, and nothing would more clearly prove this than a boa mot he heard the other-day. A Roman Catholic priest was asked if he had been to St. Barnabas', and his reply was very significant. He said ho did not like mock turtle.— (Cheers and laughter.) The Earl of CHICHESTER seconded the resolution, giving it as his opinion that the conduct of the Trac tatian clergy had not only been erroneous but culpable, and they had a right to demand of the heads of the Church if their practices were in accordance with the laws of the Church.—(Hear, hear.) If they were, it was their duty to endeavour to get those laws • altered, and the Church purified from such evils.— (Hear, hear.) But in his view no such alteration was heeded —(Hear.) He had always_ been favourable to ex.Oencling tolerati on i n matters a religious belief as far as lc could go consistently with the due safety of the Constitution, and it was because he still entertained that opinion that he was averse to Popery; for whenever - ,t'opery gained the ascendent toleration was at an end. Lord CHARLES EIISSELL supported the resolution. Rome had ala ays been insolent and insidious—insolent in her dr a y of power, insidious in her penury; but he W if defy all her insolence and all her insidiousness, they had not enemies to contend against within. With the °alines of those enemies before their eyes they must be Convinced that the time had arrived when the Popish aggression ought to be met by a great lay demons!ra tiwa..—(Cheers.) The resolution was then put and carried unanimously. Mr. BAXTER moved the t resolution, as follows: " That, while this meeting pcseious that 'the true and ffectual remedy ee for the dangers s humanw t ich beset our Protestant Church belongs t a o u power, but only to the Supreme altad of the Church, whose Almighty aid is to be sought by humble, per t, veriog prater, it is thankful that, by the British Constitution and the existing levy?, the re i 3 vested in her Mateety, tas the earthly head of our Church, a wholesome power of interposition—which power we ern,reat her itlejesly now to exercise. The records of the reigns of her lelejesty 's illustrious predecessors, both le.fore acrd duce the glorious Revolution, furnish Tetley examples of the manner in a hich the mischiefs and abuses which a; various times have sprung up in the Church, have bean dealt with, by the exercise of the Royal authority; and it appears to this meeting, that on no wittier occasion hue a more urgent need existed for seek as interposition," s ee e This aggreasion of the Pope would . not have been suf fered in Austria or other Roman Catholic dominions, .- where Roman CathafieiSm not only existed but was es ta.blished; and why, nlidutel they: sit quietly- .down and' ....,.....tcderatii these -proceedings?e-(Cheers.). Nothing short of a blind infatuation could have betrayed the THE SUN, Pope into attempting the invasion of Eng land ; but it was said the Roman Church could not exist without bishops. Well, the people of England had no objection to their having them, but they must be congregational and not territorial bishops. These demonstations must be followed by acts. The law had been broken and her Majesty's prerogative set at nought, and it was the duty of the Government to vindicate the one and protect the other.—(Cheers.) Mr. 'Wm. LOCKE seconded the resolution, and said if Parliament did not take up this matter vigorously and send the cardinal and his bishops back to Rome, it would be the duty of the Queen to dissolve it. The resolution having been supported by several speakers, was put and carried unanimously. A memorial to the Throne based upon the foregoing resolutions was adopted, and thanks having been voted to the Noble Chairman, the meeting broke up. QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before Lord CAMPBELL and a Spacial Jury.) THE QUEEN V. ANN LAVEY. This was an indictment for perjury against Ann Levey, a Jewish widow, she having, en the 9:h April last, sworn, when examined before Mr. Sergeant Manning, at the Whitechapel County Court, in a suit in which she was plaintiff and one Robert Hannah defendant, that she had never been tried at the Central Criminal Court fur forgery or any other offence; and, further, that she had never been in custody at the Thames police-station, or any other station, which was false. Mr. Prgndergast, Q C., and Mr. Macnamara, were counsel fir the prosecution; and the defendant was re presented by Mr. Ballantine and Mr. Huddlestone. Mr. John Hodgson, the attorney for the prosecution, produced certified copies of the proceedings in the W hitt chapel County Court, in the case of " Levey v. Hannah," and proved that Ann Levey was plaintiff in that action, and that it was heard on the 9th April last. Witness appeared for the defendant, and Ann Levey was called as a witness and duly sworn. She was examined by Mr. Felhare, her attorney, and swore that the debt, amounting to 161,165. 6d., was justly owing from Mr. Hannah, the:de fendant, to her. Witness cross-examined Ann Levey, and asked her when she was last at the bar of the Old Bailey ? She replied, " Never." Witness said, " What, never for uttering a forged endorsement to a seaman's advance-note ?" She answered, " Never, I am surfrised at your question and your insolence." Witness then asked her, if she had not been tried three years ago at the Old Bailey for some such offence? She replied, that she never was. Witness then asked if she had never been tried at the Old Bailey for any offence whatever? She said never, and she would swear that on the oath she had taken. She also stated she was never in custody at the Thames police-station, or any other police-station, and that witness knew it. Witness now produced an examined copy of the record of an indictment preferred against Ann Lavey, at the Old Bailey, for forgery. Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE—Wrote out the notes he had taken of Ann Lavey's evidence at the Whitechapel County Court the same evening. Had since endeavoured to have the case of Lavey v. Hannah tried again, but he had been unsuccessful. Mr. Thomas Vesey, as attorney, corroborated the preceding witness. James Ham, a police-sergeant (21 K) said on the Slst August, 1843, he arrested Ann Lavey at her own house, and she was locked up all night at the Thames police station. Took her into custody on a charge of forging a seaman's advance note for 255. The seaman who chargediber was named Yates, and was present on the occasion. She was taken to the Mansion-house before the Lord Mayor, and was then let out on bail. On the following Thursday she was brought up again and com mitted for trial. She was afterwards tried before Mr. Baron Rolfe at the Old Bailey. BfMr. B ALLINTINE—The judge stopped the case on the ground that as she was indicted for forgery, and as forgery could not be proved, she ought to have been indicted for obtaining the money by means of a forged order. , ' A copy of the record of the indictment of the defend ant at.the Old Bailey was then put in and read, and this closed the case for the prosecution. Mr. BALLANTINE addressed thejury for the defendant, complaining that the prosecution had not ventured to question her testimony at the Whitechapel County Court, so far as it respected any of the matters really in issue in the suit there, but had brought this charge against her on a thing wholly irrelevent and immaterial to that issue. He submitted that the extreme probability was, that her statement, alleged to be perjury, was meant to convey, not that she had never been tried at the Old Bailey, but that she had never been convicted there on any charge whatever, and had never been in a station house upon any charge whatever on which she was con victed. Lord CAMPBELL summed up the case. If the jury were of opinion that the defendant was questioned at the Whitechapel County Court upon a matter which there was reason to think she had forgotten, or even if they thought she was interrogated upon a thing wholly immaterial, it would be their duty to acquit her. ":The jury found a verdict of Guilty, with a recommen aation to mercy, and Lord CAMPBELL sentenced her to be confined for twelve calendar months. GERMANY. The Deutsche Reform, the official organ of the Prussian Ministry, has the following : " For the present we do not think that all differences have been removed and all difficulties overcome. Nor is it to be supposed that a few days will cause the disunion of years to merge into the desired satisfactory and last • ing understanding. But there is reason confidently to trust that the possibility to preserve the peace of Ger many fur the blessing and welfare of Prussia and Aus tria is now no longer a subject of hope, but that it ha s come to be a probability." Some further light is thrown on the subject by the letter of a correspondent of the Kolner Zeitung, who states that the Government has made important communications to the " Address Committee" of the Upper House, viz., that the Free Conferences should be held at Dresden, and that the Federal Diet (at least in its relations to the German Constitution and to pending questions) shall be suspended. Prussian and Austrian Commis sioners will proceed to Holstein to persuade the Stadtholders into a cessation of hostilities. If this peaceable intervention were to prove unsuccessful, it will be left to Austria to enforce her will by an armed intervention. In Electoral Hesse, the two powers will attempt to effect a reconciliation between the Elector and his Estates. The Constitutionel Zeitung adds to these news that the above agreement was condemned in the Cabinet Council of the Ist inst., but that it was accepted on the 2d, and that Baron Ladenberg had insisted on resigning his post. We learn from the same paper that the Cabinet have appointed General Brese to act as Prussian Commissioner in Holstein, and that M. Niebuhr has been sent to Cassel to threaten the Common Council with the occupation of their city by Bavarian troops, and in this manner to induce them to send a deputation to the Elector, and to submit to the payment of taxes. It is said that these propositions have excited the greatest disgust in Cassel. Messrs. Niebuhr and Delbruck have, however, received reinforcement in the shape of two officers, General Brese and Captain Boddieu, of whom the Cassel journals say : " We understand that these gentlemen likewise have entered into negotiations on the same subject, but there can be no doubt as to their having failed in inducing the authorities of Cassel to certain steps, which some people at Berlin may think desirable, but which are at variance with the just claims of the country— which cannot be reconciled to the honour and to the attitude of a people which has never for a single moment neglected its duties to its Sovereign, and which bas, in no manner whatever, given an occasion for his departure from Cassel. If the Elector returns we will give him a hearty welcome; if he will reform his government be shall have our blessing; but our enmity against Hassenpflug and his associates will never cease, and death is preferable to infamy." The same views are expressed in the last number of the Deutsche Zeitung, which protests that if the Elector were but to dismiss Hassenpflug, and if by this means he were to become reconciled to his people, the occupation of Hesse by Austrian and Prussian troops must cease, and one pretext fur dis cord at least would be removed. On the part of the Elect(); it is generally stated that he is very eager to return to Cassel, but that shame and the fear of M. Hassenpflug combine to hold him back. He regrets that he has gone to such extremi ties, and in short he is in a fit condition to accept almost any compromise which secures to him the en joyment of his private fortune and a legal authority in the Electorate. Such, at least, are the statements of the Frankfort Journal. It is said That neither Prussia nor Austria will di minish their military force until the free conferences shall have been concluded. The presence of the Russian Minister at the Olmutz conference has given great offence to the national pride of the Germans. ITALY. The Paris Ordre has the following on the affairs of Rome : "Much has lately been said of a note which the Apostolic Nuncio at Vienna delivered to Prin ce de Schwartzenberg on the 20th ult., demanding that the number of the Austrian troops in the States of the Church should be decreased. This corps d'armee is composed of an effective force of 20,000 men, and is entirely at the charge of the Roman Government, on which it entails an annual expense of six millions of francs. This enormous charge weighs heavily on the Roman treasury, and paralyses the efforts made by that Government to bring about an equilibrium in its budget. The Court of Rome thinks that the pre sent state of things admits of this auxiliary force fur nished by Austria being reduced to 12,000, and that this measure would procure a saving which is pensably necessary. The note, which is couched in very moderate terms, was preceded by a step taken some m3nths since at Vienna by an Envoy Extraordinary sent froi n the Roly See. The Austrian Cabinet at that time rep liedthat tranquillity was not yet sufficiently se cured f o render such „a measu t e safe. Now the Doman Governoafii4 insists. oz it; it says that the state of tho coui l t ayi i s eve ry. day improving, and that it i s better. ..a.ble.,„to —Judge on this matter than other - p-rtyr.-It iy affirmed that it i s so deeply , impressed, with the necess i ty . of bringing the quistion to a solution, That i t in tends to address itself to France to demand its friendly raediatit )11 in the event of Austria giving an evasive answer. The voice of France would have the more weight, as sho gives the example cf a generosity which is appreciated by all Europe, by keeping up at heir own expense a force of 10.000 men, who constantly obssrve the most admirable discipline." SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. DEPTFORD INN COURSING MEETING. WEDNESDAY. The Derby. First Ties—Lobster bt Factotum, Merryman bt Imp 'The Oaks. First Ties—Cigarette bt Sally Grey, Indiana bt Cash mere, Whiff bt Gipsy. The Cup. First Ties—Staymaker bt Liazy, Mildred bt Eddy, Red Republican bt Fairtoes, Lady of Locbleven bt Racer. Fish erton Stakes Deciding Course—Mr. James's Fame bt Mr. Law. rance's Leading Article, and won the stakes. Deptford stakes. First Ties—Myrra bt Fundholder. Syntax ags Bandit, undecided. The Stonehenge Stakes. Capt. Windham's Victory IA Mr. Bowles's Charmeau Mr. Lawrence's Leghorn bt Mr. Miller's Magdalen. The Amesbury Stakes. _ _ _ Mr. Lawronce's Lucifer bt Mr. Morant's Manimus. Mr. Esdaile's Gadabout agst Mr. Bowles's Jack's-the , Lad, not run. TATTERSALL'S-THIS EVENING SIX O'CLOCK. CHESTER CUP. 50 t) 1 agst Montague 50 to 1 agst Wallflower 50 to 1 sgst Clarissa 50 to 1 agst Brother to Dough 66 to 1 agst Musician 66 to 1 agst Miss Ann 66 to 1 agst Glauca All t►ae above bets taken. DERBY. 5 to 1 agst Grecian 40 to 1 agst Ipsus 50 to 1 sgst Confessor—taken SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. DAILY NEWS.—The Church of England was never framed or fitted for a state of religious war. It is one of those vessels that ride powerfully and majes ' tically in a calm, but the very bulk of which renders it the sport and victim of rough seas of controversy. The Church of England, like the constitution, is a compromise; and the nature and condition of a com• promise is, that extreme parties shall submit to it, not as the exact solution that each should desire, but as the best and most pacified result they can hope to ob tain. It has, however, been now for some years evi dent that a Church which is a compromise does not satisfy the ardent aspirations and devout zeal of many of its sons. The idea began to prevail, that religious faith without enthusiasm was of little worth, and that it was scarcely deserving of the name, unless it per vaded and controlled the thoughts and feelings of the whole community and of each individual in it; nay, unless it was the universal motive not only of man's serious resolves and actions, but even of the minutest circumstance and observance of his life. It is the striving after this, which has rent the Church in twain, and that it will succeed in corn pletely destroying it, is at least one of the eventuali ties towards which reflecting men should look. The present moment, and the circumstances of the time, 'fully reveal the importance of the crisis ; and we must confess we can perceive no power that has as yet been brought to bear upon these opposite tendencies and dissensions that is either capable of combating or likely to appease them. Whenever by chance one of the impartial public contemplates the anarchy of the Church, his first burst of resentment is directed against the bishops. But after all do we not heap too much blame upon them individually? Are they not, like drivers of mingled and heterogeneous flocks, un able to keep and tend together the sheep that wish to wander into fat pastures, and the goats that would climb the barren rocks ? The episcopal crook cannot reach both, and the pastor infallibly abandons either one-half of the flock or the other, or else in despair of controlling either, flings himself at full length to slum ber. If the authority of the bishops has failed, and if the bishop's office itself has become more a stumbling block and a derision than an active, efficient, and use ful authority, shall we look to the State for help ? But the State is even more ignored than the prelacy by both the extreme parties. Its interference has given rise to serious resentment. The aim of the State has been no doubt to trim the vessel of the episcopacy and the Church as to keep the balance even, nor allow it to vary so much on one side, or to let water in. But at every movement of the kind, the unruly and mistrustful crew fling themselves alternately, from one side to the other, so that it is in truth a miracle that the Church is yet above water. What happy Church and State pilots were Pitt and Lord Liverpool ! They had no need of balancing or trimming. All went straight in those right Tory days. But now it is far different. The Church his passed the power of Bishops to control, or of a Prime Minister, with his official authority alone, to manage. There is, in truth, but one remedy. Call i❑ the laity. Let not the Church be carried away and divided by purely ecclesiastical schisms, and merely sacerdotal views. Correct the idiosyncracy of the clergy by the good and plain sense of the laity. It h the latter that pay for the Church ; let them have a voice in it. Aid then, when there is a public, a lay opinion, clearly and constitutionally expressed, or Church matters, the minister can lean upon that, in stead of being compelled to go out of his way, and make an extraordinary appeal to the public sentiment, which, however powerful and decisive in the answer that it provokes, is still derogatory to the dignity and calm of high office,as well as offensive to those who deem themselves the objects, not of legal repression, but of individual and irregular persecution. ,The time is one which demands a large measure of Church reform ; and if the present outburst of religious zeal lead to such a result as that, it will be one of the most salu tary movements that ever stirred the British mind. We see, indeed, that this movement is scouted, and we read that Mr. Roebuck, amongst others, has come forward to decounce it as intolerant. In what is it intolerant? What penalties does it seek to in flict, what persecution does it demand ? It has stirred up certainly orators and writers to utter their opinions of the dangers of Roman Catholic progress and ascendancy. But who provoked them ? And if the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church at Rome and in this country have provoked it, what great reason have they to complain that Protestants express their fears, state their convictions, and frankly avow their aversion to the principles, the forms, and ten dencies of a religion, the most illiberal and intolerant on record. Mr. Roebuck tells us that Protestant fears are groundless, that the Catholic Ppropagandists who come amongst us use but the weapons of per suasion, and appeal merely to reason. But of what value is the reasoning of an uneducated multitude ? We have millions in our very streets of the utterly ignorant, the hopelessly destitute; we have a popula tion of children in intellect, just the population that would fall down and worship the large hat and red stockings and the gilded couch of a Cardinal. And we have a half-educated upper class, many of whose members have disinherited their offspring, in order to endow a Church, one ele ment of whose greatness is successful mendacity and extortion. Mr. Roebuck will say, why not educate ? "Why not, indeed ? Wby not raise the Irish helot, the hewers of wocd, and.drawers of water in our great metropolis, to that rank amongst rational and edu cated beings, which would enable them to distinguish between an astutely trading religion, and an honestly philanthropic one ? But this cannot be done in a day, even if we knew how to set about it, and until this has been done, Mr. Roebuck must permit us to take precautions—precautions, not savouring of persecu tion ; and he must permit us to express fears—sensi ble, rational, well-grounded fears—of the partial successess of a retrogade religion amongst us, whilst we contain those most legitimate fears, both with re spect to sentiment and to language, within the fairest bounds of tolerance. THE RIVER PLATE.—Accounts from Monte Video of October Ist state that nothing of importance has occurred since previous advices, either in the city or the country. From Buenos Ayres we learn that General Rosas had given orders to the captain of the port to engage foreign sailors, and purchase three merchant vessels. It is also stated that General Urquiza, having received instructions to march upon Paraguay, replied that he could not move for want of horses. ------- THE BIRKENHEAD RIOT.-011 Saturday the ma gistrates assembled at the Town Hall, for the purpose of in vestigating the circumstances relating to the late riot. The meeting was strictly private, but Nye understand very impor tant information respecting the origin of the late riot was re ported to the meeting by Mr. G. Palmer, the special high constable of the hundred, and Mr. M'Haig, superintendent of Birkenhead police, and which was derived from vario us sources, all tending to show that the riot was the result of a deep-laid conspiracy. LocomoTwEs IN NEW Youx.—At the Board of Aldermen, last night, after a long discussion, permission was granted to the Hudson River Railroad Company to propel their cars from Chambers to 31st-street by the " dumb" locomotive, which resembles a baggage car externally, makes no perceptible smoke, and but little more noise than an ordinary car. It has been tried for two weeks, has not been found to alarm horses attached to other vehicles, and is favourably regarded by the carmen whose business carries them through that part of West street in which the rails are laid. ror the safety of the public its speed is limited to six miles an hour, and a proper person, mounted on horse back, is to be employed to precede it, to give warning of its approach.—New York .'ournal y . Commerce, Nov. 15. THE MOTJSE AND CANARY.—For some time past, in Mr. Timmon's shop, Cavan, a mouse has been in the habit of entering the cage of a can ary; an d f ee di ng t h ere qu ite unconcerned. Several engagements took ,place between them, before a friendly reconciliation could be, accomplished,' A few days since, however, the mouse was observed to carry: something in its mouth from another part of the shop and deposit. it in the cage, Which on examination proved to be manna. The bird partook of th e p resen t, an d f ro m that time there seemed to exist an increased friendship bet Ween them.-111euth Herald. PROPOSAL to CROSS the ATLANTIC WITH A BALLOON. Early in the year 1843 Mr. John Wise, the American acrona,ut, issued a proclamation annourcinc' his intention cf cro,,Fina , t the Atlantic Clfean with a balloon, in the summer of 1844; but as Lir. Wise himself was n ot p os . f recuniary means to attempt the voyage, he petitioned Corgress for assistance, but which up to the present time be has not been able to obtain. Several scientific gentlemen, convinced of the prac ticability of the scheme . , have lately urged Mr. Wise to renew his petition to Congress for aid in the matter, which he has determined to do by their assistance. If he is still unsuccessful, Mr. Wise will endeavour to carry it through with his own resources. From an cx - perience of a number of years in the prac tice of aeronautics by Mr. Wise, it has been fully de monstrated that there exists in the atmosphere a constant current of wind, moving from west t. east, with a velocity of from 20 to 60 miles an hour, according to its height from the earth. From the advantages continually at hand from the local currents of Lir, it is quite feasible (he observes) to travel eastward with a velocity that will circumnavigate the globe in 30 or 40 days. with an ability to vary from a straight course 30 or 40 degrees from the latitude of departure, which would enable to leavt , dispatches in Europe and China, and return by way of Oregon territory to Washington city. This has been demonstrated by experiments made by Mr. Wise, in reaching points 60 and 90 miles distant from the place of departure, with a precision not surpassed by ship sailing, aided by the local currents in varying from the groat eastward current. Mr. Wise observs, ‘• What if I du get a few degrees north or south of latitude of departure; it will at least be a beginning which will not end there." Tcn or fifteen thousand dollars is the sum required by Mr. Wise for this experimental outfit, and so confi dent is he that the thing will be effected, that he asserts that it will be done just as certain a.; steam followed horse power. LONDON', THURSDAY EVENING. STEAM MOTIVE POWER IN 1700. The discoveries which are from time to time made in the Ecyptian tombs authorise the belief that many of the inventions and machines of the present day were known to the ancients, and used by them. A gentle. men who is curious in such things. says the Baltim)re Patriot, sends us the subjoined extract from the History of China, by Peri du Heide, which was published is 1741 (folio edition). It is certainly nothing less than a miniature locomotive and steamboat which was here noticed. The extract is taken from a description given by du Halde of the various inventions made by the Jesuit missionaries in Chine, fer the instruction and amusement of the Emperor Kanghi, who died in 1722. The inventions there described were made about tee b+. ginning of the 18th century:—" The pneumatic engines did no less excite his Majesty's curiosity. They caused a waggon to be made of light wood, about two , 'ePt long, in the middle whereof they placed a brazen vessel full of live coals, and upon them an eolipile, the wind of which issued through a little pipe upon a sort of wheel, made like the sail of a windmill. This little wheel turned another with an axletree, and by that means the waggon was set a running for two hours tegether; but, for fear there should not be room enough for it to pro ceed constantly forwards, it was contrived to move cir cularly in the following manner:—to the exit-tree of the two hind wheels was fixed a small beam, and at the end of this beam another axletree passed througt the stock of another wheel, somewhat larger than the rest; and accordingly as this wheel was nearer or further from the waggon it described a greater or a lesser circle. The same contrivance was likewise applied to a lit le ship with four wheels: the eolipile wain hidden in the middle the ship, and the wind issuing out of two small pipes filled the little sail's and made them turn around a long time. The artifice being concealed, there was nothing heard but a noise like wind, or that which water makes about a vessel."—Boston (American) Journal, Oct. 24. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dec 4. DRYDEN V. FRYER. • (Continued from our Third Edition of last night.) After 11.1". M. CHAMBERS had replied, Lord CAMPBELL then proceeded to sum up. He commenced by reading two cases of disputed wills from Williams's book on Executors, by which it would appear that if at the time the testator made his will he was of competent understanding—if he knew the contents of it, and was in such a frame of mind as to enable him to understand the act, then the act was a valid one, and the will could not be set aside, even though it was proved that he was of insane mind before and after the execution of the will. Having recapitulated the evidence, commenting upon it as he proceeded, he loft it to the jury to say, from the evidence which they had heard, whether toey thought he was in a competent state of mind in June, 1841, when he made the will the validity of which was now called in question. His Lordship did not conclude his charge until twenty minutes after nine o'clock, having occupied three hours and a half in the delivery of it. The jury, without quitting the box, returned a ver dict for the plaintiff, thereby declaring in favour of the validity of the will. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 4. (Sittings at Nisi Prius, in Middlesex, before Chief Justice JERVIS and a Special Jury.) HARGRAVE V. HARGRAVE. _ This was an issue directed by the Master of the Rolls, to try whether the plaintiff, John Robert Hargrave, is the son of John Hargrave, deceased, and Mary, his wire, and the legitimacy was affirmed by the plaintiff and denied by the defendant. Mr. Butt. Q.C., Mr. Sergeent Wilkins, Mr. Welsby, Mr. Hugh Hiln and Mr. PhipsOn, appeared on the part of the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Chancel], Mr. Ser g eant Byles, Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., M r . Ad o l p h us , an d Mr. Willes, were couusel for the defenrient. Mr. BUTT opened the plaintiff'. case, and stated that the jury were already aware that the question was whe ther John Robert Hargrave wes the son of John ape Mary Hargrave, two persons who we. a married, hut also separated under circumstances to which he would their attention, and tin- mutter ark*, out of s..eue proceedings in the Court of Chancery. founded upon the will of Thomas Hargrave, the father of Jot's, Hargrave, This testator wee at one time an inn keeper in Old Cullum -street, but subs,- qusnfly he lived t Ley ton, in Essex, and he was a man of some pro p erey,Head, in possessing among Aid g a other n things the February fre, 8 e h l ol dl;,f hee Saracen's made his will, and devised his property to Messrs. Jos hing and Smith, in trust, for his son John for life, with remainder to his children in tail, as tenants in common,' and if John Robert were the son of John, he would be entitled jointly with William Gosling, the other son, to the property of Thomas Hargrave. The value of the testator's estate was about 5,0001., but he regretted to ray that litigation bad been going on respecting it since the year 1840, when John Hargrave met his death by drowning, up to the present time. In the course of the proceedings this issue had been twice tried; on the first occasion before the Lord Chief Justice Tindal, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff; but an application was made by the defendant for a new trial. Unfortu nately, Chief Justice Tindal died before the Master of the Rolls could confer with him, in order to remove sane doubt from his mind, and therefore he directed a new trial. Upon the second trial the verdict was given for the defendant, and the Master of the Rolls not being satisfied with that decision, the case was sent down for a third trial. Under these circumstances, they might easily imagine that after all this litigation, there would be but little of the property left for either of the claimants. Shortly after his father's death in 1840 the defendant became very dissipated, and in consideration of certain advances, he assigned his interest under the will to Mr. Simmons, who had died since the last trial, and whose widow was now the real defendant. On the:l4th of December, 1816, John Hargrave was married to Mary Snow at St. Bride's, Fleet-street, and they lived together until 1824, when they separated. Of this marriage several children were born, but the only surviving ones were the plaintiff and defendant, the date of the plaintiff's birth being the 18th November, 1836, and the defendant baying been born in 1819. The father of these children, John Har grave, was a man of very dissipated habits and loose morals, One of his principal failings being his connexion with the softer sex. During the early part of his mar ried life ho occupied part of the Ipswich Arms, in Cullum-street, as a feather-merchant, and at this time Mary- Rogers, a relation of his wife, assisted in the household work. Early in that year, it would be proved, that John Hargrave seduced Mary Rogere, and that under the pretence of being ill he had, in the spring, left his wife, and taken her (Mary Rogers) to Hastings and Brighton, it being subsequently ascertained that she was at this time in the family way by him. In June he returned to his wife, and she having become ac quainted with his conduct, separated from him in the Sep tember following. Upon this her husband took lodgings for her at Woodford, and made her a small allowance, and occasionally visited her. As regarded Mary Rogers, he lived with her until her death, in 1835, and alter that time he cohabited with a person named Tune. Whilst Mrs. Hargrave lived at Woodford she bad a daughter born, who was named Emily, but during this time no complaint was made against her by her husband. In 1829 dissipation produced its natural result, and he be came involved in his circumstances. Upon this ho re duced, and ultimately altogether withdrew his allowance to his wife, and quitted the country and lived at Box logne. He, however, was in the habit of coining fre quently to England, and it would be seen that he per sonally collected his rents, which were paid half-yearly. At this time he owed Mrs. Tresler 6631 ss. upon a pro.. missory not-, and he used to call aid pay the interest e f the debt to her daughter, Mrs. Pope. In the 3 ear 1830 he called upon Mrs. Pope and asked where his wi.e rived, and she gave him her address in the G!obe-road, Mile end. She also accempenied him on a visit to his wife, whom he addressed ii, his usual manner, and said, Well, mother, how tire you ? " and they appeared very friendly together, and the husband nursed Emily, who bed lived at Woodford, and treated her as his own child. Subsequently, Mrs. Hargrave lived in New Swan-street, Bermondsey, and worked at stay-stitching; but she removed, in 1835, loßaalzephon-street, in the 130- rough, arid occupied one room in a house belonging to Mr. Sturmy, two other rooms being occupied by E!iza bath Haltyer. The important question to be decided waa whether early in 1836 the husband was in com munication with his wife, under such circurastancee that the jury might fairly infer that he was the fah: r of the plaintiff. They were probably aware, that seine Lime ago a doctrine obtained in England, that if the husband and wife were Within what was called " the four seas," and a child were born, it should be taken that the husband was the father of that child. This rule was no doubt esialAished, but' in of the die.- fictiltY of proving the. ; contrary ; but in latter timers-it' Was held that it was not ehough to show that the hus band and wife :wete in the same country, if it should be shown satisfactorily that there was no communication between them. In this case it would be proved that the husband and wife were in communication, and, therefore, in accordance with law, the jury would infer Vasa he was the father of the plaintiff; for if it could he shown that they were in the habit of meeting the legitimacy must be presumed. The deceased, when he came to England. was in the habit of going to the Sup Tavern and Hotel, in Water-lane, where his wife visited him eeveral tines, and it would be shown that he was there in the early part of 1836. It would also be shown that Mr. Smith, one of his father's trustees, met him in Aidgate iu January, or February, 1835, and that on the 10th May in that year, he went with him to the Hope Insurance-office, and transferred ten shares in that company, which were part of the property of his father. This latter circumstance would be proved by the best evidence—the books of the Hope-office, which contained the signatures both of the deceased and Mr. Smith. In the waiter's book at the Ship was an entry, stating that an account was received on the 30th March, 1836, from the deceased, and thus it would be proved that he was in London in January or February, in March, and in May, 1836, the plaintiff being born in November of that year. The deceased also culled upon Mrs. Pope in the early part of 1836, and gave a new note in the place of the 01 , 1 one which her mother had formerly held, and the executor of Mr. Godfrey, the late tenant of the Sara cen's Head would produce many receipts for rent in the handwriting of John Hargrave. one of them dated on Jan. 10, and aucther in April, 1836, the receipt stamp having been purchased by the deceased personally at a shop in Aldgaie. Another witne as would be Mr. Veug hate who for many years kept the Burton Coffee-house, in Cheapeide, but who got into difficulties, and in 1836 was in the Fleet prison; and he would state that the deceased called on him there, in February of that year, he having ascertained from his son where he was. A piece of evidence connected with this part of the case was. that the deceased was in the habit of meeting his wife at the Burton Coffee-house, as would be stated by Mr. Vaughan, and also by his son. In the house in Baalze phon-street, in which Mrs. Hargrave lodged, there also lodged a Mrs. Elizabeth Hallyer, and she would be called before the jury in the course of the cause. Her e.vineece was that in February, 1836, a man answering the description of the deceased called at the house, and inquired for Mrs. Hargrave, whom witness called down stairs, and when she saw him, she exclaimed Hollow, Jack! what in the name of fortune brought yen here?" and he replied, "My legs." They then went up stairs together into Mrs. Hargrave's only room, and remained there alone for an hour and a half. When he left they shook hands, and in re ply to the question when he would be there again, he said he would be back in about six weeks. Part of this statement would be corroborated by Mrs. Payne,a green grocer in the same street, at whose shop the man in question called, and inquired where Mrs. Hargrave lived. The plaintiff was born on the 18. h Nov.. 1836. in Pau line-street, Bermovdsey, and Mr. Tovy, a surgeon, at tend, d his mother in her confiuement. The circum eta, ees attendant upen the birth, he submitted, were conciusive as showing the legitimacy of the child. The mother need no concealment, but gave her proper name, and stated the tact that her husband was abroad, and further, the child was baptised at the church where his mother had been married, and was described in the re gister as the son "of John and Mary Hargrave." Ano ther most important piece of evidence was, that the de cc ised acknowledged the plaintiff to be his son. It ap peared that W. J. Hargrave went to sea, and that the sleceased, shortly before he was drowned in March, 1840, called upon Mrs. Pope, and entered into conversation with her in reference to this son. He said he had seen a letter from him, in which he cursed his father, and he appeared much hurt at the circumstance. Mrs. Pope endeavoured to con sole him, and said that the curse would fall not upon him, but upon the writer. The deceased, upon this oc casion, said, "If his mother would let me have John Robert, I would send him to school, and have him edu cated; for if anything should happen to Bill, he will be my heir." At this conversation a Mrs. Heald was pre sent, and this lady was examined on a former occasion, but as she was now eighty-three years of age, and in fiem,:her evidence would be read from the judge's notes. He understood that the defence to be set up was that the deceased was in Boulogne all the first half-year of 1836, his wife being in England, and, therefore, that he could not be the father of the plaintiff. Another matter to be raised was, that Mrs. Hargrave had so misconducted herself that it was probable that a person named Mortle main was the father of the plaintiff; but even if this were so, the husband being in a position also to have connexion with her, they would learn from his Lordship taut the law would presume the legitimacy of the child, and the immorality of the wife would not at all affect the ease. These being the facts, he would now proceed to prove them, and he had no doubt that at the end of the case, they would be of opinion, in the terms of the issue, that his client Jcbn Robert Hargrave was the son of John Hargrave, deceased, and Mary his wife. The Learned ounsel proceeded to call witnesses to prove the statements contained in his speech, and, in ad dition thereto, evidence was given as to the various places at which Mrs. Hargrave had resided after the birth of the child in question down to a recent period, and it was sworn that she had always been a woman of good moral character, and had not, to the knowledge of the witnesses, been in the habit of receiving any male visitor whatever. Mr. Sergeant CHaNNELL then addressed the jury for the defence, and stated that his case was not merely that John Robert was not the son of John Hargrave, but he would show, beyond all reasonable doubt, that he was the son of the man Mortlemain. He admitted that the deceased sometimes visited this country, and he did not deny that he was here in May, 1836. He did not deny either that he had gone to the Ship Hotel, and had bad there in his company a person passing as Mrs. Har grave, but he did deny that this was the mother of , ,the plaintiff; and he should endeavour to show that it was the woman Tune. He also did not dispute that the deceased separated from his wife in 1824, but he did not agree with his Learned Friends as to the cause of that separation, and he should show that it was eat in consequence of the intimacy of the de ceased with Many Rogers, tor that in fact did not exist wail atter the separation. The fact was, that the sepa rations was in consequence of the deceased suspecting his wife of an improper intimacy with a Frenchman named M. D'Arerue. There were two questions for the jury; first, whether John Hat grave was in England at all in February, 1836, and if they thought he was, they would then have to ask themselves whether there was sufficient evidence of what the law called " genetatinsr access " to warrant them in the conclusion that the plaintiff was toe son of Johu Hargrave. It was true that he had made his wife au allowance of a guinea a week, but after the birth of Emily it was reduced to such an amount as (if he could not distinctly prove adultery) the parish would enforce, namely, Bs. a week. At a subsequent period Mrs. Simmons, the sister-in-law of John Har grave, was living with a man named Mortlemain, and the allowance was then altogether stopped. It would also be proved by positive evidence that John Hargrave was at Boulogne all the first part of the year 1836, and there fore could not have been in England in February of that year. The Learned Sergeant went through the cir cumstances which he intended to adduce, and then called witnesses, who gave evidence, of which the following is a digest:— Martha Ann Hill (the first cousin of Mrs. Hargrave), stated that, about six weeks before the separation, in 1824, she gave witness some letters and a portrait of M. D'Arbrue, requesting her to take care of them, and not let her husband see them. On one occasion witness found Mrs. Hargrave and a Mr. Josling sitting on a sofa together, in a room in the Ipswich Arms. On Mr. Hargrave's return from Hastings he demanded of wit ness the letters and the portrait, and two days after that he and his wife separated. A short time before she went out to walk with Mrs. Hargrave, and they met M. D'Arbrue on Southwark-bridge, and witness left them together. - Ann Mary Taylor heard Mr. and Mrs. Hargrave quarrelling about a foreign gentleman. Mrs. Hargrave wasin a great passion, and would not bear the accusation. Mary Ann Porter recollected the birth of the child Emily, and that a day or two after the birth it disap peared, and was not brought back for six weeks. Elizabeth Shakes was called to show that the child was sent to the vestry clerk of Ail-Hallows, in a small fish-basket, and that the mother was subsequently traced by the parish authorities; and taken back. In the bas ket was a note, which it was sought to prove was in the handwriti❑g of Mrs. Hargrave, but the document was not given in evidence. Other witnesses were called, who stated that Mrs. Hargrave had been seen with a Mr. George Beteson walking near the forest at Woodford, as late as nine o'clock in the evening. That during 1836 Mr. Mortle main visited her three or four times a week. He had been with her as late as one or two o'clock in the morn ing, and on one occasion had been seen going away early in the morning, as if he bad been staying all night. After the birth of tqe plaintiff, a person, whom the witness had since ascertained to be Mortlemain, fre quently visited her. He frequently slept there, and on one occasion had been seen in Mrs. Hargrave's bed. It was also sworn that these visits continued at various places until a recent period, and that he treated the plaintiff as his child. Mrs. Ja❑e Simmons was examined by direction of the Court of Chancery, and she said, that her husband, John Simmons, had died since the last trial. She was the cousin and sister-in-law of John Hargrave. He and his wife separated shortly after his return from Brighton in 1824. He would have left her without mak ing her any allowance had not witness per suaded him to give her a guinea a week. He went abroad in 1828 or 1829, and witness saw him at her house in Cullum-street, the Ipswich Arms, in 1832, and again in 1835, and also about the 22d of April, 1836. On tat• last occasion he spent the night at witness's, and the following day went to Colney, where bis son Wil liam was at school, and brought him to her house on Tuesday, the 26th of April. The son William remained with her until February ; 1640. The father stayed until the following Thursday or Friday, when the boat went. She saw him again in May, and he then stayed atssut a month. She went to Pauline-street, Bermondsey, to see Mrs. Hargrave, in 1837, and witness's sister went with her. They saw Mrs. Hargrave, a❑d witness ob served that see was nursing. It was arranged that wit ness should pay her Bs. a week on account of her hus band. Witness afterwards- saw her in Crosby-street, and observed something belonging to a child. Wit n-ss asked what she did with such things, and Mrs. Hargrave said she often nursed the child of a woman is low. Witness made some inquiries, and saw her again at witnets'a house in the following November, rind accused her of having had another child Since Emi ly,, and said she should not have any more money. She said how:, dared witness accuse of doing wrong again because she had done so once. , Witness then showcd,her a piece of paper which cor;' taitied UO"tienaain's name and 'address. Witness thought' she' would have fainted. She went down on her knees,. and begged witness to conceal it from her husband, an& witness promised she would, if she would leave Mortle'-' main, and go and live on the other aide of the water. Witness also promised to continue the payments, and DECEMBER' 5, 185& afterwards guaranteed the payment of the ren - . or her lodgings in Pearson-street, litegsiand-road. Witness subsequently visited her in Dagger's-court, Moorfields, and see taro cups and saucers. Mrs. Hargrave said the extra cup saucer were for the child, but witness re plieddltat a child of such tender age could not ape a cup. There was ahio a pair of man's trousers there, hich said had haen oivca to her to menu. Witness under .stood that 2dr. Mortiemain was under the bed all the time. She refused to pay her any money, and told her husband of what she had seen. He was so afraid of her, that he begged witness to continue the payments until he left the country. Witness saw her subsequently, and accused her of being still connected with Murtlemain, and she replied—" How could you expect that a father would keep from his child." Witness was present about three weeks before Jehn Hargrave's death, when he and his wife were to gether. She said the boy (the plaintiff) would he his heir; and he said, "Do you mean to say that I am to educate it?" She said," Yes, certainly." She acknow ledged that Mortlemain was the father of the child, and she held up her finger and said, " I love his little finger better than ever I did you." Cross-examined—She had not seen defendant since May or June last, and did not know where he was. She had lent him 2911., and had got a decd authorising her to receive the rent of the Saracen's !lead. The rent was 3201. a year. She was to allow him 31. a week, and after discharging tome debts to appropriate the r e st in pat.ment cf be: claim. Part of the time she had received only half the rent, the other half being paid into the Court cf Chancery. She had lent defendant Money be fore he was of age, but that she h:.d never claimed. She certainly had not persuaded Mrs. Hargrave, three months before her husband's death, to put him in a lu natic asylum. She had been examined twice before; but would not swear that she had there said all that she had stated on the present occasion. The witness's evidence on the two former trials was read, and it was found that she had then spoken of the two cups and,: saucers, the man's trousers, and of Mrs. Hargrave falling on her knees, Sc., but that she had omitted some of other matters now spoken to. Elizabeth Hargrave, the sister of the last witness, cor roborated her testimony as to the interview in Pauline street, and upon some other matters. John Hargrave Rogers, the son of the deceased by Mary Rogers, was examined, and stated that he recol lected his father living with his mother, and afterwards with Miss Tune. Ho remembered the Carnival Ball at Boulogne in 1836. It was in the middle of February. and witness's lather was there with Miss Tune. His father went to England in April, 1836, but not before in that year. He was away about ten days. He went a second time in May, and then Miss Tune went with him. Cross-examined--He had entered the army in 1840. but be could not swear in what month. He could not tell the month in which he left Calais, nor could he tell the month in which he first went to school, nor thw in which he entered his first service. He bad gone to India with his regiment, but he would nut swear whether it was in the year 1845, or nut. Several other witnesses were called to show that John Hargrave did not leave Boulogne at all during February, 1836. and it was particularly sworn that he had attended the Carnival Ball there with Miss Tune in that month at the time when he was stated to have called upon his wife in Baalzephon-street. In reply to this part of the case, Mr. and Mrs. Blunt stated that they knew John Hargrave, that they attended the Carnival Bull, and that he was not there. Mr. Sergeant WILKINS, upon the conclusion cf the evidence, addressed to jury upon the whole ca.;e in a powerful and eloquent speech, which occupied three hourt4nd a half to deliver. He analysed the evidence with'great minuteness and ability, and especially urged upon the jury that most of the witnesses ou the part of the defendant were interested in the result of the cause, but the plaintiff and his mother were poor and unfriended, and not likely to be able to influence the testimony of any witness. In addition to this the plaintiff's case was supported in the most important particulars by written documents, which could not lie, but the defendant's case was wholly deficient in any such certain proof. Under these circumstances the Learned Counsel submitted to the jury, is fall confidence that they would have no diffi culty in coming to the conclusion that his client was en titled to their verdict. The CHIEF JUSTICE summed up at considerable length, and directed the jury that the law presumed legi timacy, and that the onus of proving the contrary was upon the defendant. The presumption of law was strong upon the subject, so strong that it had been said by a learned predecessor of his, that to upset it the evidence must be clear, strong, conclusive, and satisfactory. lie perfectly agreed with this ruling, and his opinion was that it was of the utmost importance that no child should be bastardised except upon the strongest proof. The whole question was one entirely for the jury. They bad heard the witnesses, they had seen their demeanour, and he had no doubt they would come to a sound conclusion upon the subject. The jury were absent from the court for half-an-hour, and then came into court and stated that they were of opinion that John Robert Hargrave was the son of John Hargrave, and thereupon a verdict was entered for the plaintiff. The case commenced on Monday morning, and did not finish until half-past six this evening. COMMISSARY COURT OF SURREY, Doctors' Commons, Dec. 4. (Before Dr. HAGGARD.) BATLEY :1. BATLEY. In this case Mr. Richard Batley, jun., promotes a sui for divorce, on the ground of adultery, against his wife. Dr. CURTEIS, for Mr. Batley,' was opening the pro. ceedings, when Dr. DEANE, for the wife, said he must abandon that portion of the case which related to the cotnmis:;ion of adultery ; but upon the evidence he should pray the Court to dismiss Mrs. Batley on the ground that her husband had connived at her guilt, and therefore was not ( n'ideil to a sentence. Ife (Dr. Deane) contended it was clearly estabdshed by the testimony in the case that the parties had cohabited together for se veral months precious to the marriage, and that six days aft er such marriage Mr. Batley, through the persuasion of his father, separated from her, leaving his wife in a destitute state; and that he afterwards drove her to the commission of adultery with a person who was employed for tne purpose by himself or Mr. Batley, sen., or by acme other p; rson on their behalf. Ile submitteal it was a case of malicious desertion, aed that the husband had been guilty of active and corrupt connivance to entrap his wife into the paths of dishonour. Dr. WADDILOVE was heard on the same side. Des. CURTEIS and BAYFORD, on the part of Mr. Bat ley, contended the wife had never been left destitute, or that her guilt had been connived at in the remotest de gree. They submitted that the case on the other side failed entirely. The COURT considered that there was no foundation for the charge of malicious desertion, or of the husband having been guilty of connivance. On the ground that the wife had been guilty of adultery, the husband was entitled to a separation. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. (Before Mr. Sergeant ADAMS, Assistant-Judge.) Sarah Burhe, 19, Sophia Dilbury, 22, Jane Finnerty, 18, and Eliza Jones, 23, were indicted for robbing Mary Ann Foster Si mmons of a mantle, and a purse contain ing . 133. 2d. The circumstances of this case were of an extraordi nary nature. The prosecutrix, a young woman appa rently about twenty years of age, deposed that she was a single woman, and the daughter of a person holding a situation on the Midland Counties Railway, at Derby. She arrived in London last week on business, and was staying at a boarding-house near the Euston-square station. At about one o'clock on Satnrday morning last she was proceeding along Tottenham-court-road, when she was accosted by the prisoner Finnerty, who asked her for a penny. She told her that she had no change, upon which she asked for some supper. They walked together a short distance, and they were joined by Jones, and at the request of Finnerty they went and procured some ham and bread. She then said that she was very late, and one of the prisoners suggested that as she was a stranger in the town, they would show her a respectable boarding-house, and not knowing her way, she said she would be glad if they would do so. They then took her to a house in Church-lane, St. Giles's, and conducted her to a room upstairs. All was in darkness, but she was aware that other women were pre sent. One of them immediately seized her and threw her upon the bed. She screamed, and one of them knelt upon her head and chest, holding her band over her nese and mouth until she was nearly suffocated, whilst the others proceeded to strip her of her clothes, and rifle her pockets. She struggled with them, and made all the noise she possibly could, but she speedily became insensible; the last circumstance she could recollect being, that the women threatened to murder her if she continued to resist. On coming to herself, she saw women still in the room, and some of them bega❑ to express pity for her. Sho was going down stairs when the prisoner Dilbury laid hold of her, in order to pr'vent ber following the other prisoners, who had just before left the room, but she broke away from her, and ran after them. She raised the cry of `• Stop thief," and they were captured by the police-officers, on duty in the neighbourhood" Evidence having been given, The prisoners Burke, Dilbury, and Jones, declared their innocence. The jury found all the prisoners Guilty. The sentence was, that they be each imprisoned and kept to hard labour fur the space of one year. Isaac Ballard, 15. and George Sainsbury, 18, were in dicted for stealing seven books from the residence of Sir J. Rotnilly, the Attorney. General. Ballard was found Guilty; Sainsbury, Acquitted. The former was sentenced to three months' hard labour. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. NIARLBOROUGH , N7'REET. Mrs. Eleanor Hirschfeld, the widow of the late Mr. Herman Hirschfeld, backer and merchant of Paris, came before Mr. Hardwick, to beg some temporary assistance for herself and four infant children from thzi poor-box. Mrs. Hirschfeld presented several highly respmetable recommendations authenticating her melancholy history, and her statement of destitution. ider husband was a Jew, but after rilarriage he emlor.:cd Christianity. This act drew open him the resentment of his family and his former friends, and having become reduced, by severe losses, to insolvency and starvation, he died at Berlin a short time ago broken-hearted. The applicant applied to his relatives for some trifling assistance, but they denied it because their relative hai htn.me a Christian. Th6estfen went so far as to Place obftacles irCher Way 'recOvering some paperi to ,shOw that, her httsband was iscfceemason, and had ..claim on that. compassionate fra tern i t y. She said her children had jallo sick, and she r,4 'ow n• iyeakeilVd fratie 4ould no Longer - seive to, i iod.t-Oan,support. She had thus'been compelled to make t h e present application. -r - Mr. lIARDwIcK, having looked over some documents which Mrs. Hirschfeld prezented, immediately or her a sovereign from the p,or•box. SHIP IN.: WS. LivEnroa., DEC, 4.—Wind N.W.—The Sarah Jane, from Liverpool to Dungarvon, is on shore ne a Wex ford. The Williain, from Liverpool to Londonderry, 101 l i ver pool been wrecked near Belfast. The Lyra, from L to Galway, has put into Belfast with loss of mainmast, The MOO &c., having been in collision with a bri g .a zinnia, from Bristol for New Orleans, iis put Wm this port with rudder damaged, cargo shifted , and leaky. V: Therese, Myostois, Prince Albert, Erin, Elizabeth, all Elvine, for Nantes. ANTWERP, DEC. 3.—The Jenne Armandet, Bordesta to Nantes, is stranded on Point de Grave, and in a dap' serous position. The Rossia, which was on shore near Calais, SI 23, is discharging, and it is expected will be go; off, $ ll into Calais in a few days. VESSELS SPOKEN WITH. Sphynx, Liverpool to Batavia, Nov. 4. lat. 33 N., log' 17 . Briton's Pride, Jaffa to London, Nov. 9, off C 4 P e de Gatt. The Duchess of Northumberland, Plymout h to oret of' Bay, Nov. 2, lat. 5 N., long. 21. Isa l3, b s,l e ,g l N la . 2. b 2l, a i n r g q .. ue 3 , 3 Glasgow to Bombay, Nov. 6, I s t ' 6S. I t. Molly Ban barque, Islay to Liverpool, Nor. 91 ' ii Livingstone, Calcutta to Liverpool, Nov 23, "a t ' 40 long. "29 W. Prima Donut; schooner, Nov. 29, let. 47 N.. long. 9 ' I,,,ii3 ' iLvap a ,uri:g n uce d ),rl:siv,t t s,e.tt a N,(h) r fo q .:Ao u vfn i l :i mre , tr,lo S :oo e sbl p etner t in,i . igi 2 : 7 ss ,. o l l a , t t.. 2 0 2 2, N r ., 0 1 i 0 n n t gd.e3olo bor. Sir Harry Smith barque, Nov. 21, lat. 49 N., long 9 Vi r *; e L d at 3 ; a . do r to Naples , lavi; 47 5" 10.. g. 25 W. ' i (ship), London to China, No. N0v.292,0,1,a5t... 49 14 " Mooltan E al l o p n e g r 0 . r l7 o Arjaobl'iga.nB, W. 22, to New York, Nov. 22, lilt' 4 9 ild Bengal Slier G chan ti t n ( o u p ar e q . ue), fur Bombay, ( - )ct " 6 ' f li C V. hina (ship), Sept. 4. Ist. 15 S., long:fat Ja C ne ap ( e ba o r f que), of and for London, from Mad ras '' ° Ist. 33 3 5 , .. u , look.ar nii r 1 g 7 ll E t . .o I I h ct. 7, San Gine • SirlBlt7ib.iet.rt47C,almunp,be4ll,l.Ha'r f)lin 9. w i t. , 36 14 " long. 32 W. avalina ' - of Waterford, for „d Nov. Juliet, nas St. u John's, to la e w R. 12, hit. 46 N., long. 35 W., w iih 's lo N s e s w o f f ° f ll o nfilell:3llsdt'.llt):-: Pe,terson, Zante to Boston, Oct 24, lat. 3 4 9 itivg i4 i f. , ia ia ( t. sc 4 h l o , o l L o e n r g ) . , l o 2 f . and from Bre.me, for Datil!), Sophie Thetis (brig), of and from Liv Hopewell (barque), of long. 9. cod , • Nov. 21, lat. 38, long. 6. Leripveoropl,oo:,:;dlabb, 50, SEABORNE MAILS , When made up in 'Frosty/Pi" ~„,. 'From di S" c " PLACES. General Yost-office pposicttebeid.' du, Loudon. , _____------" •••• ---. Africa (West coast ).. l9. America (via N. York A b z y ne ß ri r c i a tish (v p ia ac by British packet) ..*N December 6 .. LiverPcl" lam' i 1 Boston by N December 20 America (by United LiverPo o ' 1 5 t. States packet) .. • • N } December 13 , [ Southautp.. woo Belgium .. .. .. N Daily • . •• • • !Dover 0.. De c. 0 Br a z il • • • • .. Ni4th of the month Tal r•c u tti . Dee' 6 California( via Chagres) M 17th of month Buenos Ayres .. .. N Ith of the month Falra cc t, Dec' Cape of Good Hope.. N December 14 11) 11°1 „„ til t ,i . . De c ' S SP frti• Central America .. 31 2d & 17th of month Southa . "r t. v. - 2 0 Channel Isles • • .. N Mon., Wed., &Fri.:SoutltaroP,.. Dee , d olf Chili .. .. .. . M 17th of the month ISouthauW:. Dficesat. France .. .. 31 & N Twice daily .. ..iDarec .. 0000 .. Liverpool .•:Irevee' , 44 Ilamburgh .. .. N Tuesday & Friday ' i L S O u n th d o : l9 . got" Holland .. • • .. 31 Wednes. & Satur.iLondon _,.. pee. ';',o Honduras .. .. . N 17th of the month Southary Twle7- Ireland .. .. 3f & N Twice daily .. • • Holyhead t. Dec' 0 India (via, Southamp.) 31 20th of the month, Southall'. .. pee. • India (via - Marseilles) N 7 th& 24th ofmontht Dover •"- Madeira .. .. .. N -- 0 8 Mediterranean (via l i t. ee. Southampton) •• M 20th of the month Soathaa Mediterranean (via 1 .. Dec' 0 Marseilles) . - .. N 7th& 24th ofmontlfD o Y er Mediterranean (by •••• French packet via Marseilles) .. .. -- t• p ec. 1 Mexico .. .. .. 31 2d of the month.. ISoutharOP . per• 2o Peninsular.. .. .. 31 7th,l7th,27thSouthalt, De c ' /0 Pem • • • • • • • • 21 17th of the month southain . ec. West Indies .. .. N 17th of the month 'Southall:lP'. D West Havanna Indies& I t• l AW O ftlC. Nassau) 31 2d of th e mo nth .. Southg a P ~o s toe _...ea ° s outhow pt !Deoo 0 0 the Genera l itch. * N signifies that the by the night— and M by !2d of the month mails are sent frors the morning—disp: -------- sTS• to THE COUNTRY Il' R 1 „ton°, cainaNrnEheWeductASTLE, DEC. 3.—We had little cha la Eciess , r ; sale, and Barley continued a very , (4 , 0 1tY, unaltered.tthoe d r a a y te ; s t o h f e sat demand d was dull, u I l . , th b:: ‘ ,,i is t g i g i: lli f, tained; in some instances ur l u e y ss wer n e e3r i b ad behe:l) J. Fleur was the turn dearer. Oth m er u ar - ticl es illie ' -- 3."" g T r' NEWCASTLE CATTLE MARKET, 13°C ; 'corq quality. supply l o f Thebeasts trade to-day somewhat was wh a2. m ot9a o stbin d eo e et r dtae s .: t es e ;litch b :i f eiri . ° ao . l.:; t e e : se w ril i s : : ;1:0: good clParanee. Sheep trade active at l '"` 13 034 i a ttmho n e d 6insei a 6al l idl l m; sold. Beasts, 600 ; sheep, o°6l. so re i n a m rk u e t t to to n :d 4 ay d o to sa s s EDINBURGH MEAL MARKET , 3.---111gehing2t86b76 pe i r a , wh u i r e , h w so h l i ci ch thu so s l i d — a 3 t at 1 18 s, 10 st ' IS '? b a '' .191116. Dec. w2 and hsearceko tl/6s 6d ; average price of the vi - hol e . 1 . 1 :1:11 V t-blir.ej' sacks flour , 6 flo scAd thus:-2 at 25s Od and 4at 21' bd. De' u. .; EDINBURGH HAY AND STRAW ' M 11°11 ' "'" tr° ` l.-. Oat straw, from 7s ed to 9s 641 iierkeni - pl A e °f b l , 6 o s d i.- t ; 611 u— wheat ditto, 6s ad to 7s Od ; barley ditto, Hay, from 10d to is per stone. 1 49 ,ere Icer ! thi° DALKEITA MEAL bags oatmeal, 11 of barleymeal, and 4 . of pot -m "" ( it; fr. ball day's market ; sales ready. Oatmeal up 6d per bi d per and ;id per hag on the second price ; barleyruest,he t o? ' rd dearer on the top; pot-barley up is 6d per bag on d ' 1 111. 01 oa . tmeal, per sack, of 280 lbs. First S ec° ,, ° ,4 — 264 sa imperial .. 27s Od 2 63 „7 4 17 3 Barley meal, per ditto 17 91 175 ""' pd Peasemeal ": Od Flour °d s Od od Pot barley ... 22s Od --s Od COAL MARK ET. —YESTYRDAT• 145 pd Buddle's W. Hartley 15s Od Riddell ..... •.• ''''''''' 1 9 34 Carr's Hartley ..... 153 Od ; Eden Main ....... • • ...... lbo 0 Coxon's West Hartley 14s Odi Belmont. ................. 16s d East Adairs Main 124 fad Braddyll .......... .•••• 169 n .1 Hedley's Hartley l4s Od'Eletton .................. , 60 7.; Sd ElOl3 well " North Percy Hartley l4s 6d :11,ambton ............. • 16; .1 Ord's Maiii Panfield Moor Butes... 13 s Od I Whitworth . ........... 0 a 5 !'', West Wylam , W y l am 1 0 03 Wall's End, &a. !Hartley._ Gosforth • O r i g inal Gibson RAILWAY SHARE MARKET °. fr BRISTOL, DEC. 4. to•c ls '. STOCK EXCHANCE.—The market was more actifts,atioll and prices had an upward tendency. The tr7o' reported were—Bristol and Exeter, 73—Great WesterOo i lf 1,1 V.F.; KPO() 1., Dice,. 4. ~ bee 19 STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market °pane", Ow this morning, but afterwards rallied, and closed 704' The transactions were as follow : B r i s t o l and Exete r ' O W Caledonian, 10 3 / 4 —Chester and Holyhead, Preferenoe'Ditl°' ranteed 5 1 , 2 per cent., 13—E as t L ancas hire, I ° 4-- 1 3 4_,..: Preference, fifths, p ar —K en d a l an d WinWindermere'ol Lancashire and Yorkshi re , C onso lid ate d , 7 3 / 4 dis.—Ditto, 201., F Shares, 1 5-16 dis.—, l l t e to 1 01 Thirsk, 14— London and North- Western, 12 0 c g " - e1i0 9 , 4 1 51 ,,,,,_Dittel i , i ss Quarters, 3 p.— Ditto, Fifths, 3 15-16 P.„ i r i l av id,,r„, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference, 9 3 4-'4 a l- gl —Ditto, Halves, 21 dis.—North Staffordshire, V ol e, - South Staffordshire, 2 1 j8 dis.—South-Eastern and —York and North Midland, 23 : %. DEC. 4. MANCHESTER, STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market was firly. trdS . 10 0 i c and a fair amount of busin ess h as been done. The 'sl4'; tions were as follow : Lancashire and York s hire; Ov er Ditto, 201. F Shares, 1;'( 3 c. dis. Ditto (koch‘ter, Union), 6 1 / 2 dis.— London a n d North-Western, sajw.bee $ ajw .bee ce , Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, 23 3 / 4 and Birmingham, Quarters (C), 2% P.,, — ; prefor e t ri re 9 3 / 4 —Ditto, New 6/. Preference, 63. 9d. P . 4 15"" and Dover, 21 1-16—Caledonian, Preference, - Lancashire, 10 1 4—York and North Midland, 23N• ss YORK, DEC. 3. were del cee' I Souch:El: 0 STOCK EXCHANGE.—The transactions t o ed 6 per , r i,, follow : —North British, Preference (guareo) 4' l k --1 ,,ic1 , —Ditto, for five years, and 5 per cent. in perpetuitslorth o' Newcastle, and Berwick, 17 1 / a York WI land, 23w. - ADVICE TO PUSEYIT E k a f i n b d: t y t O eu . : f e n l o o t th remain ic i t n ua a i n s, establishmentawnbibcirlb tilm°tieauguS"aff"d: main candles."—Punch. „i, c e .,, of [ADVERTISEMENT.] --Holloway ' s yee dh--, - ,„ i . 001 1 t he Cure for Dropsy.—Extract of a letter from I" . n f SO r n u Of Leamington, dated Oct. 15, 1850. "To rr- r - A e :us YTit. for Sir,—lt is with gratitude that I write to io"" 0 ",0 Pr . ' year! wonderful cure effected on myself by trking,lbout so" severe case of dropsy. The disease appear ed des trie: le to since, and notwithstanding the various rente oie .„ - e a the different medical men I consulted, all se 0 110 t " - ou r mach It !, „king Your check its progress. At last I was so could scarcely walk. At this crisis I commeoceuntion t k ° all valuable pills, by means of w hich, an d strict at g o ld W 1 ,2 4r Druggists,printed andec directions , o n a t s , Strand, London. Plroaresionrowiltlrofwecatyirs VsrteadbrisbOleA :O w n ri iii the a Ist G ----- On the ‘ - )d ni the Itidi heltellba—Lost, i , i ll° - inst. at Cromwell-terrace, Ilarrow wife of Frederick Banbury, Esq. ou ch, OF A DA U GHTFR. ..,110 DP . " On the Ist inst., at her Majesty's Dockyard, Po r..'" j, the lady of Captain Mould, Royal Engineers. wife ° On the 3(1 inst., at Stockwell-villas, Surrey, the Wilson Nicholson Ee . inst., n r s d t n " e rat I s ':a.rFßnil R e A :r- H l B : 9o' d ; l e . , C ot , MARRIED. Lie utel ti op el On the :d inst., at St. James'3, Westminster, rol e on , Colonel Alexander, of the sth Bengal Cavalry, t° 4 gat youngest daughter of the late W. Ho o p er, Esq., u house, Ross, Herefordshire. 13i e° ' DIED. On the 30th ult., at Torquay, the i ta'i 'sle' r Robert Hughes, vicar of Llanidan, and rector u.., of . i f borough, Anglesey. , , .. -;' 4 ‘ ' i'' ir j itx,A • 4 On the 30th ult., in WiltraiLesestant;,El,t,g Be4,10:Lp11 the late 13enjamin-BlaekdetrlTlLlii" 4Bl ,. * !, lG Vion t rV i Aged 51, ,, On the Ist luSt;. at 31ttd' .i.i.,-i.9;,,,,,,,,vi,64,fe5, Eaftneo t eel - " ''''Y .(l '''' P , ( 1 ., g 4 '', .a; fr ,s, P *l WIV PPM 11 1) Aun-Silinen' Oa the TA inst. * , it. : 4 - 40)Amtwo. , ___,0 1 ~,,,--,,,,,,1 °too j ios Alary,ltlie wife of thelley344l3agalle Wiagiortio, tht the..4th. ,, inst: - OM Betiagfortl-Arieg9' , w , dt ~,........1_,.. /--.0 4314°- , 11 911 f t . .i, .- , driitlid;#449,ll,-Atalfilin anon::" rlsitio. • __,x...„,„,' - ii , ve t 9 Jbluiv friftferllgitiflotinso jo t No. 110., S.trand, 'Printer, at l Vrf , " •, 0 Nall - Strand, in the Precinct of theSaioy. in Middlesex, Thursday, D ec ember bs 185°' 4