The Sun. — London, England, 1850-03-27 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, March 26. (Before Mr. Commissioner PONBIANQUE.) IN RE Ch ARLEs JOSEPH CARTTAIt, The bankrupt was a solicitor and newspaper pro prietor, of Greenwich. He was also coroner for that division of Kent. He now passed his last examination without oppo sition or remark. The balance- sheet bas 'the following items :—The unsecured debts are 4,1521. ; there are also 3,3901. on account of a deed of assignment. The assets are — good debts, 374/. ' • property, 16/. The losses include , a sum of 2,l 94/. by the West Kent Guardian, of which the bankrupt was the proprietor. (Before Mr. Commissioner FANS.) IN RE JAME., ELLIS. _ The bankrupt was the proprietor of the Cremorne • Gardens and the Adelaide Gallery. He now came up on a balance-sheet, prepared by Mr. Hutton, to pass his last examination. Subjoined is an abstract of the accounts from November 15, , --.`,_1845, to October 13, 1849 Dr. , . To creditors £12,343 10 3 'Sundry mortgages on property at Cre morne Gardens, held by Mr. Simpson and Mr. Jacquet, and relinquished by them, less as per arrangement with ' the assignees, of 11,3771. 4s. I Id.; 11,281/. 4s. 11d. Liabilities as per contra ... . Profit on sundry refreshments furnished at Cremorne Gardens, Adelaide Gal lery, Italian Opera, and Lyceum Sa loons; balls at Hanover-square and • Princess's Rooms, and Baker-street Cattle-show ... 30,141 12 1 SUNDRY ADMISSIONS AS UNDER:- Cremorne Gardens 20,005 8 11 Adelaide Gallery 21,396 16 7 • Hanover-square Rooms ••• ••• 103 2 0 Ball, Princess's Theatre ••• ••• 154 14 6 Capital on 15th November, 1845 ••• 750 0 0 96 0 0 4,310 0 0 £89,300 4 4 Cr. By debtors ••• ••• ••• ••• 29 12 6 Property 19,674 14 7 Total amount of debts agreed to be re linquished and settled by Mr. T. B. Simpson, 15,1191. 2s. 4d., and for which Mr. Simpson agrees to pay ... 2,086 7 3 Property held by creditors ••• 81 0 0 Liabilities as per contra ... 4,310 0 0 Tolls payable to Mr. T. B. Simpson— . Cremorne Gardens ... ..• Adelaide Gallery ... Royalty of Cremorne Gardens, payable to Renton Nicholson ... Sundry expenses— Cremorne Gardens . Adelaide Gallery ••• Italian Opera Saloon ... Lyceum Theatre Ball, Hanover-square Rooms ... Bal Masque, Covent-garden ... Ball, Princess's Concert-rooms ... Crockford Rooms ••• ••• General trade expenses ••• Interest and discount ... Law' expenses ... • House and personal expenses .. Losses— Adelaide Picture Gallery Sale of property under fiat Bad debts Balance at bankers Deficiency •• 3,710 2 9 1,401 1 11 ... 7,354 9 3 39,225 18 0 17,046 3 0 792 11 6 155 12 11 91 8 4 120 17 2 10S 18 6 44 5 0 986 15 11 5,025 8 4 2,987 17 3 925 10 11 377 13 5 2,405 12 3 20 15 6 2 15 1 9 7 7 £89,300 4 4 Among the creditors are :—Bass and Co., City road, 211/. ; Blumenthal and Co., Crutched-friars, 547/. ; Donaldson and Dixon, Mark-lane, 134/. ; Darby, Lambeth, 1091.; Foulkes, Stockwell, 1,3801.; Grimble and Co., 799/ ; Imperial Gas Company, 523/. ; Last, Joseph, West-street, Smithfield, 24.51. ; Miller and Reilley, 1051.; Pook, John, Golden square, 300/. ; Reid and Co., Liquorpond-street, 6421.; Simpson, T. 8., Great Russell-street, 3,9591.; Tasker, J., Idol-lane, 6351. The item of property, 19,6741. 14s. 7d. includes the lease and good-will of Cremorne gardens, 2,2851.; building improvement., 6,4371. ; • fixtures and fittings of Cremoroe-gardens, 4051. The sum of 19,6741. is said to be the total cost of Crc morne-gardens. The expenses of the gardens are thus made up : Fire insurance, 74/. ; printing, 2,959/. ; gas, 1,752/. ; rent, 1,948/. ; rates and taxes, 658/. ; balloon expenses, 2,515/. ; theatrical expenses, 735/. ; fireworks, 1,186/. ; wage , , 8,6931. ; advertising, 2,7371.; band expenses, 4.8001.; theatrical salaries, 4,6051.; sundry trade expenses, 5,805/. ; expenses : of tournament, 5121 ; cost of licence, :241/. • total, 39,925/. The total expenses of the idelaide Gallery are. 56,2721. ls., and include rent • 2,8001., band and expenses 7,5671., salaries 1,012/., • wages 2,394/. :The rent of the Italian Opera Saloon is entered at 760/. The receipts for admission into Crernorne-gardens were—in 1846, 3,181/. ; in 1847, 4,944/. ; in 1848, 4,556/. ; in 1849, 5,094?. The receipts at Batty's tournament were 8661.; for seats in balloons, 1491.; at the esplanade bridge, 2361.; at the row, 1551.;. at Burns' cottage, 231.; of the pano rama of Mexico, 211/. ; of the bowling alley, 1431. • The receipts for admissions to the Adelaide Gallery were—in 1846, 2,441/. ; in 1847, 5,619/. ; in 1848, 4,459/. ; in 1849, 5,815/ ; total, 18,3261. The amount paid for refreshments from 15th November, 1845, to 13th October, 1849, was 23,323/. 2s. 91 The total receipts for the same were 53,464/. 14s. 103., and in , elude the following items :—Cremorne-gardens, 1846, 8,Q26/.; 1847, 10,977/ ; 1848, 9,719/. ; 1849, 1,791/. Adelaide Gallery, 1846, 1,546/. ; 1847, 2,833/. ; 1848 and 1849, 3,783/. Italian Oplra Saloon, 2,208/. Ly ceum Theatre Saloon, 168/. Bal Masque at Covent garden Theatre, 203/. Crockford's Rooms, 260/. Mr. TAYLOR, for the assignees, did not think that better accounts couli be furnished. Mr. LAWRANCE applied for an allowance, on ac, . _ count of the voluminous character of the accounts. his HONOUR ordered an allowance of 251. to be made for this purpose, and passed the bankrupt's ex amination. (Before Mr. Commissioner Gouutuari.) IN BE T. W. BOULTON. . • - The bankrupt was a potato salesman in Broad court, Bow-street. Mr. Dawson supported, Mr. Bagley opposed the granting of his certificate. The chief ground of opposition sustained against the bankrupt was, that he had been in partnership with a Mr. Cufflin, and that he had during that time drawn largely from the assets of the firm. After Mr. Cuftlin had taken upon himself the payment of the debts of the firm, the bankrupt had violated the terms of an agreement, and commenced business in direct opposition to his late partner. The bankrupt's debts were upwards of 5001., his assets 21. 15s. The COMMISSIONER suspended the certificate two years; protection not to be granted unless the bank rupt shall have been in prison six months. IN RE R. RAWLINS. The bankrupt was a linendraper, in Queen's-row, Pimlico. Mr. Parker opposed ; Mr. Lawrance sup ported his application fur a, certificate. The bank rupt's debts were about 1,1001., his assets nominal. The COMMISSIONER suspended the certificate six months, on the ground of reckless trading; when issued, to be of the second class. Protection was _granted. IN RE J. PYM. The bankrupt was a merchant in Broad-street. His case has been alreany frequently noticed. lie this day pissed his last examination, and obtained on order for his discharge from prison. Mr. Lawrence appeared for the creditors; Mr. Hawkini for the bankrupt. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. ROME CIRCUIT, Maid tone, March 25. CRP WN SthE.—(fore Mr. Ju*tica Matn.E.) George Kipps, a man apparently more than fifty years of age, surrendered to answer an indictment for misdemeanour, in having unlawfully taken a girl named Charlotte Jeffrey, under 16 years of age, away from her part nts without their consent. Mr. Decides prosecuted, and Mr. Campbell appeared for the defendant. Charlotte Jeffrey, a good-looking young girl, de posed that her father kept the Bell public-house at Kemsing, and she was living there at the time this occurrence happened. She knew the defendant, who was a married man and had several children, a nd f he resided near her father's house. On the 28 t h o May she went to his house on a visit, and the defendant's • -wife asked her to remain and take care of a child while she went out on an errand, and she and the de fendant were left together, and upon this occasion he took some indecent liberties with her, and he at the same time told her not to tell his wife. After this time he repeated his indecent conduct upon several occasions, and he repeatedly told her that he wished he was not married and he would take her away with him, and he several times asked her to leave 'ner father and mother and go away with him. During this period he sent her several letters, which he told her to burn; and also a lock of his hair, and she gave him one of hers. She also wrote several " letters to him. On the 18th of November she met the prisoner by appointment at the church gate, and they went away together to Cobham, where they slept, and the next day they went on to Sheerness, and afterwards to King's Ferry, where her father and mother, accompanied by a constable, overtook them, and she returned home with them. When she left her father's house she took away a bundle co n t a i n i ng h er clothes, and also 145., and this money she gave to the defendant. _ _ Vv Cross •examined—The defendant gave her a poetry book before he wrote any love letters to her. She burned his letters as be bad requested. Her mother, upon one occasion, had beaten her on account of her suspecting that she was too intimate with the defen dant. She did not believe that the reason her mother beat her was because she " looked wicked" at the men, but she would not swear that this was not the reason. She never before wrote letters to either young men or old men. She knew very well when this occurred that the defendant was a married man and that he hail 'eight children. She made no complaint to the defendant's wife of his having acted indecently towards her. Sarah Jeffery, mother of the last witness, deposed that her daughter was not yet sixteen years old. She remembered the day that she went away, and imme diately suspected that she was gone with the de fendant. Having procured the assistance of a con stable, she and her husband started in pursuit, but did not come up with them until the Tuesday follow ing, when she found her daughter and defendant together at King's Ferry. She had suspected that there was too great an intimacy between the de fendant and her daughter for some time before she went away. William Jeffery, the father of the girl, proved that she went away without his consent. James Upton deposed that after the prisoner had been taken into custody he told him that he took the girl away on purpose to destroy the peace of mind of her mother. Mr. CAMPBELL then addressed the jury for the de fendant, and he read portions of some of the letters written by the girl to show that she had gone away of her own accord. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty. The Learned JUDGE, in passing sentence, said, that the conduct of the defendant had been most atrocious. He WAS a man advanced in life and married, and had a large family ; but still it was evident he had laid a deliberate plan to seduce and ruin this poor young girl, and he had then unblushingly admitted that hi( intention was to destroy the peace of mind of her m )they. If he had the power to order the defendant to be hanged for what he had done, he did not think any one would consider the sentence too severe, and he felt himself called upon to pass upon him the full sentence prescribed by the statute for the offence of which he had been convicted. The defendant was then ordered to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years, to pay a fine of 501. to the Queen, and to be further imprisoned until. such fine should be paid. James Taffy, 49, indicted for embezzling 701., the moneys of James Dean, Thomas Edward Frater, and others. Mr. Knapp and Mr. F. Smith prosecuted, and Mr. Parnell defended the prisoner. It appeared that the prosecutors were members of a benefit society at Chatham, which was not enrolled, and the prisoner, who was a member of the society, acted as secretary and kept the accounts, and by means of false entries it was alleged that he had de frauded the society to a very considerable amount. The Leained Judge, upon the opening statement of the counsel for the prosecution, expressed an opinion that the prisoner did not stand in the position of a servant so as to fulfil the requirements of the statute in a case of embezzlement. He was a member of the society which was alleged to have been defrauded, and it could not be said that he was a servant to himself. Mr. KNAPP said that this difficulty had suggested itself to him upon perusing the depositions, but he felt it to be his duty to lay the circumstances of the case before the Court. Mr. Justice MAULS, addressing the jury, remarked that it was a great pity that these societies did not get themselves enrolled, because then trustees were generally appointed; and had that been the case in the present instance, the prisoner might have been indicted as their servant. It was not for him to give advice, but it was clear from the prevalence of of fences of this description that something should be done to protect societies like this, as under the pre sent system a cunning fellow was enabled to rob them almost with impunity. As he was perfectly satisfied the prisoner did not come within the definition of a servant, as required by the Act, it would be useless to occupy their time by hearing the evidence, and they would therefore at once acquit him. Tne jury accordingly, under his Lordship's direc• tions, returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The prisoner was then charged upon another in dictment with forging a receipt for 401. 133 , with intent to defraud the same society. Mr. KNAPP said he was very sorry for the sake cf the public and of the poor persons who had been de frauded, that for the reasons stated by his Lordship he was compelled to abandon this case also. The jury therefore returned a verdict of Not Guilty. William Williams, alias George Ammoner, 45, a very respectable-looking seafaring man, who wore the Acre medal, and also a decoration of the kingdom of Spain, was indicted for forging a letter cf attorney, with intent to defraud John Oliver. Mr. F. Smith prosecuted ; Mr. Parnell was for the prisoner. It appeared that in July last the prisoner went to a Mr. Solomon, a navy agent, at Chatham, and asked for an advance of money, representing that his name was John Oliver, and that he was a third-class gunner on board her Majesty's ship Dolphin, stationed on the coast of Africa, and that he had a considerable amount of prize-money due to him for the capture of slavers and for wages; and upon his producing a forged car tificate of the captain of the Dolphin to that effect, a letter of attorney was drawn up, which the prisoner signed, and Mr. Solomon then advanced him 50/. It turned out that the prisoner's story was entirely false, and upon the arrival of the real John Oliver in England, in November last, the fraud was discovered, and the prisoner was sought after and apprehended at Plymouth. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty. Another indictment of a similar character against the prisoner was then brought forward, but to this he pleaded "guilty." He at the same time implored the merciful ponsideration of the Court upon the grounds that he bad been twenty-five years in her Majesty's service, and that he had lost a pension of 301. a year through this transaction. He was sentenced to be transported for seven years March 26. (Before Mr. Justice MAULE and a Common Jury.) BRYANT V. LEIGH. This was an action for seduction. Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Simmons were for the plaintiff ; Sergeant Shee and Mr. Creasy for the de fendant. Mr. CHAMBERS said that the plaintiff in this action was Ambrose Bryant, an innkeeper at Edenbridge, in this county, and the defendant was Henry Leigh, who carried on the businesses of farmer, surveyor, and land agent, in the same ;neighbourhood; and the action was brought to recover damages from the de fendant for having seduced Mary Anne Bryant, the daughter of the plaintiff. It would appear that there had been no intimacy between the parties until the month of August, 1847 ; and at this time the plain tiff's daughter was about twenty-four years old, and the defendant nearly fifty. In that month the young woman had gone on a visit to a relation, and upon her return by the train the defendant got into the same carriage, and he entered into conversation with her, and asked permission to accompany her home, and expressed his intention to visit her on the follow ing day. He did so, and from this time an intimacy sprung up between them, and the defendant was a constant visitor at the house of the plaintiff, and he repeatedly promised to marry the daughter. In the month of January, 1848, the plaintiff was unfortu nately from home upon business, and the defendant took advantage of the opportunity afforded by his absence to overcome the scruples of his daughter, and succeeded in accomplishing her ruin, and the result was that she became in the family way. The defen dant continued to profess honourable intentions, and upon one occasion he fixed the period for the marriage, but postponed it upon some excuse of business, and he went so far as to give the young woman money to purchase ft wedding ring. At length she entertained a suspicion that he was upon intimate terms with a widow lady named Stevens, residing in the same neighbourhood ; but upon her taxing him with it, he indignantly denied it, and asserted that he would never marry any other woman than herself. The suspicion, however, turned out to be well founded. Shortly afterwards the defendant married this lady, and upon an application being made to him to make some repa ration for the injury he had inflicted upon the plain tiff and his daughter, he very coolly remarked that she ought to affiliate the child, and he afterwards said that he had consulted his lawyer, and he would rather spend 2001. than settle the matter, or make any com pensation. The Learned Counsel then stated that the young Woman was delivered of a child, which was still alive, in the month of October, 1848 ; and he said that owing to the conduct of the defendant towards the young woman shortly before, and which would be detailed to them in evidence, her delivery was of the most painful description, and for six months after wards she suffered most severely from illness, and under these circumstances the plain t iff came before a jury to obtain compensation in damages from the de. fendant for the very serious injury he had received at his hands. Mary Ann Bryant deposed that she was the (laughter of the plaintiff. He keptth o e th N e V r h e e h at il s d h r e e a n f Inn, Edenbridge. There were four at present living at home. Witness was er t d w i e e n dg ty ei -s h ix t years of age last December. H er mother years ago, and since her death witness had managed the domestic business of the house, and she was to be paid 141. a-year wages. Knew the defendant, who is a farmer, builder, and surveyor of timber. lie occupies five farms. The defendant told her that he wag upwards of fifty years of age. This was before her misfortune. In August, 1847, witness went with: a young woman to visit a relative at Brenchley, and on her return she saw the defendant in the rail way carriage. She knew him by sight, but had never spoken to him before. Witness had a bunch of hops in her hand, and the defendant began to con verse with her about them, and when they got out the defendant proposed to accompany them home, and he went pact of the way, and when they parted he promised to visit her the following day and bring a bunch of hops to show her. He accordingly came and re mained there until ten o'clock at night, and the de fendant paid her a good deal of attention, and when he went away he said he should come again very shortly after. He visited her again in a few days, and continued frequently to come to see her from this period, and he generally spent h;s Sundays with her, and appeared to lead her to believe that he intended to make her his wife. On the 18th of January, 1848, her father was away from home on business, and she and three brothers were left in charge of the house. The de fendant came in about seven o'clock, and remained until two the next morning, and in the course of that evening he told her that he fully intended to make her his wife, and there was no one else he could be happy with, and she unfortunately yielded to his solicita tions. The family were all gone to bad, and the affair took place in a little back parlour. Toe de fendant after this appeared more attentive than before and visited her more frequently, and she believed more than ever that he intended to make her his wife. Upon one occasion he sent a sovereign to pay for a beer score, and as there was nine and sixpence change, he told her to buy a ring with it. She re plied it would not buy a good one, and told him to buy one himself, but he replied that it would not look well for an old man to buy a wedding-ring. She bought a wedding-ring afterwards, and the de fendant put it on her finger, and told her to wear it as a token of his love. She had worn that ring ever since, and the defendant took away a ring which she had been in the habit of wearing, and said he should keep it, as it was an emblem of his love, to which, like the ring, there was no end. Wit ness did not mention the matter to her father, because he bad no wife, or any other daughter but herself. The defendant afterwards asked her to go to London to get married, and she consented to do so as soon as she could prepare her dress. The defendant said her clothes would do, and she then told him to appoint his own time and she would be ready, and he said the marriage should take place at the end of a fortnight, but when the time arrived he made an excuse for not going, as he had business with a gentle man named Streetfield, to whom he was agent. After this he continued his visits, but kept postponing the day for the marriage. In August she was far ad vanced in the family way, and one day she saw the defendant driving by in his cart with a widow lady named Stevens, and she reproached him for doing so. He told her not to fret, and said he could not bear to see her weep. Witness said she could not help it, as he was deceiving her, and she had heard he was going to be married to Mrs. Stevens. The defendant re.. plied, " No, my dear, it is not likely I shall leave my babe and you.' Witness continued crying, and said if her father came to know it he would banish her for ever, and she had no mother to take her part. The defendant, upon this occasion, told her that he had 2,0001. besides his farming business, and he cried, and said he would never marry any one else. Shortly after this conversation the defendant called her attention to the report of a trial for seduction, " Brown v. Yardley," and asked her what she thought of it, and she replied that she thought it was very cruel, and the defendant said he should be ashamed to treat any young woman so. On the sth October the defendant was at her father's house, and he wanted to kiss her, but she told him she would not permit him to do so while he carried that widow woman about in the manner he did. The defendant slid he should never think of having Mrs. Stevens, while she lived. At this time she was far advanced in pregnancy, and the defendant said if it was a boy it should have his name, and if it was a girl it should be christened Martha, which was his mother's name. She told him she should never live to see it, and the defendant became angry, and shook and squeezed her violently In consequence of this violence she was taken very ill, and was obliged to go to her bed, and on the 20th October she was confined of a male child. She continued ill for upwards of six months, and was unable to do any work ; and during this period she bad a nurse and medical attendance, and was supported by , her father. Cross-examined—Her father formerly kept a beer shop only, and the defendant signed a certificate of his good character in order to enable him to obtain a spirit licence. Witness was the only person who waited upon the customers, but there was a girl kept to do the household work. They had a very good run of business at the beer-shop. Her grandfather previously kept Marsh-green Farm, which was now occupied by the defendant, who obtained possession of it by giving 201. a year more rent than her grand father. Her father, of course, was not very well pleased at the conduct of the defendant. She was aware of this unpleasant feeling when she first became acquainted with the defendant. Two of the farms occupied by the defendant were the property of the lady whom be has married. She had no curiosity to ascertain what the defendant's property consisted of. It was not customary for ladies to ascertain what amount of acreage their intended husbands were pos sessed of.—(A. laugh.) She believed the Marsh green Farm was about a hundred acres. She did not sit and drink with the defendant. Her father knew they were together, but he might have sup posed that she was waiting for orders. In 1844 she stayed for eight mouths at a public-house at Bletch • ingly, kept by a person named Sheerman. Remem bered a gentleman named Littlewood staying at this house. He was driven away from a public-house in the same neighbourhood for b.ing found in bed with the landlord's daughter. He left his horse and chaise behind.—(A laugh.) Did not make acquaint ance with this gentleman. Was never in his bed room while he was there. No such charge was ever made against her. Knew a young man named Lashman. He used to frequent the house at Bletch ingly. She had never been found fault with about him. Defendant did not say how much he was over fifty years of age. She never told her father that she was in the family way, but her grandmother found it out, and told her father, and it made him very ill, and he took to his bed. The immorality with the defendant occurred between ten and eleven o'clock, and he stayed until two the next morning. Could not say when it happened again. She did not keep any account of it. Could not answer the ques tion whether the intercourse always took place in the same back parlour, but it was repeated on a number of occasions. Mary Jenner proved that she nursed the daughter of plaintiff during her confinement, and that she was in attendance upon her from October, 1848, to the succeeding January, and during that period she said she was unable to do anything for herself, or to assist in any way in the household affairs. Samuel Munday, a schoolmaster at Edenbridge, deposed that in October, 1849, he went to serve a writ of summons upon the defendant, and he asked him not to do so at that time, as his wife was by, and also to try and hush up the matter, and he said he thought the plaintiff's daughter ought to have affi liated the child, and not to have brought an action. The defendant made an appointment to meet him the same evening, but he did not keep it, and he could not serve the writ upon him for several days, and when he did so the defendant said he had consulted his lawyer, and his money was all tied up, and he would spend 2001. rather than settle the matter. The widow Stevens, who at this time was married to the defend ant, was present at the time, and she said that she had given orders to the workmen on the farm not to go to the plaintiff's public-house on pain of dis missal, and she added that the action should not do him any good. This was the plaintiff's case. Sergeant Sacs then addressed the jury for the de fendant, and said that the defence he was instructed to offer, and according to those instructions, which he was bound to lay before them, was, that the statement of the plaintiff's daughter with regard to the conduct of the defendant was not true, and that in point of fact no such intimacy or connexion as that which had been spoken to by her had ever taken place between them. The jury would see that it was utterly im possible for him to produce any evidence to show this was the case ; and all he could do was to call their attention to the circumstances as they appeared by the evidence, and to ask the jury whether the reasonable inference to be drawn from those facts was not the one he had suggested, namely, that the young woman was not speaking the truth when she asserted that the defendant was the father of her child under the cir cumstances narrated by her. The case rested entirely upon the evidence of the young woman herself; there was not the slightest attempt at corroboration ; and he urged upon the jury that if it was true that the defendant had been so constantly at the house, as was stated, nothing could have been easier, at all events, than to have proved that fact by °tier testi mony. If, however, the jury should think that they could place reliance upon the evidence of the daughter of the plaintiff, it appeared to him that they must be of opinion, at the same time, that this was not a case of deliberate seduction, but that the de fendant, by going to the house of the plaintiff to take refreshment, bad fallen into company with this young woman, and that she had listened to his improper proposals, and was as much to blame as he was ; and that in such a case a very small amount of damages would cover the injury that had been sustained by the plaintiff in the present action. Mr. Justice MAITLE having summed up, the jury, after a very short deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 2001. (Before Chief Justice WILDE and a Special Jury.) THE MAYOR AND CORPORATION OP ROCIIIISTER v. LEE. This cause, which has been going on for five days, was late to-day brought to a conclusion. The object of the action was to establish the right of the corporation to levy certain tolls upon coals brought within their jurisdiction. The case for the defendant closed on Monday night, and this morning the Attorney-General made a most powerful and convincing reply on behalf of the cor poration upon the whole case. The Learned CHIEF JUSTICB summed up most elaborately, and the jury having retired, after an lib- THE SUN, LONDOV, WEDNESDAY EVENING, sence of not more than five minutes, returned into court, and gave a verdict for the plaintiffs upon all the issues. OXFORD ClRCUlT.—llereford, March 25. The business began to-day at nine o'clock in both courts. When last Mr. Baron Platt came the cir cuit he found that though the petty jury were obliged to attend here at nine, the grand jury were not sum- moned till eleven. This arrangeinen - t did not meet with his Lordship's approbation, and he accordingly this time ordered that both should be summoned at the same hour. We mention this circumstance, as it may be a precedent to other judges for giving some check to that marked tendency in sheriffs to consult the convenience of grand jurors and special jurors, and of common jurors to the least possible extent. There were four causes entered for trial, of which two were for special and two for common juries. One of the latter was an undefended action of ejectment by a martgagee against a mortgagor. The second was (Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.) JONES V. TEEM). This was an action for breach of promise of mar riage, to which the only plea on the record was that the defendant did not promise. Mr. Sergeant Allen and Mr. Gray ware counsel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Skinner for the defendant. Mr. Sergeant ALLEN, in stating the case for the plaintiff, said :the was the daughter of a reverend gentleman, who had been for thirty-six years curate of the parish of Much Cowarne, in this county, and who had eight other children, all of whom were placed respectably in We. The defendant was a farmer, living on a farm of his own of about 100 acres, . near Overbury, in Worcestershire. Both parties were of suitable ages, the plaintiff being about 30 and the defendant 36. A brother of the plaintiff's went to reside in Fakenham, in Worcestershire, in 1847, and the plaintiff went to keep house for him, and she soon afterwards became acquainted with the defendant, who asked leave of her brother to become her suitor. After that his visits became frequent, and in June, 1848, he went on a visit to her father's house to ask the consent of the family to the mar riage. This was given, and it was arranged that the wedding should take place in the course of a few months. In September he went again on a visit, and then it was agreed that the wedding should take place in a month. Soon after that the plaintiff went to re side at another brother's, and from that day to this the defendant never answered any letter written by the plaintiff or her father. In short, from that time the case was wrapped in entire mystery, and the defendant had not by his pleading suggested any rea son for excusing or justifying his sudden and heart less violation of his solemn promise. All that he had pleaded was that he had never promised to marry the plaintiff. If he, after gratifying his vanity by en gaging her affections, thought proper to cast her off— a slighted thing, injured in reputation, health, and spirits, and reduced to a state from which she would probably never recover—tbe jury, be trusted, would give the amplest compensation which money could supply for the injury thus coldly, cruelly, and heart lessly inflicted on her health, hopes, and prospects. Thomas Edward Jones, examined by Mr. GRAY lam an excise officer, living at Droitwich. My father is Daniel Jones, curate for thirty-six years of the parish of Much Cowarne, in this county. Plaintiff is my sister, and is thirty years old. I have four brothers living and three sisters. In 1847 I went to live at the village of Overbury, in Worcestershire. I there became acquainted with the defendant, who is a farmer, and farms his own estate. lam not positive as to the number of acres on it—from 80 to 100, I believe. In April, 1847, I took a house in Overbury, and began houe keeping, and my sister came to me in May. In April, 1849, I removed to Fakenham, twenty-two miles from 0 ;erbury. When I was at Overbury I introduced defendant to toy sister. He used afterwards to visit me occasionally. In January, 1848, his visits became more frequent, and almost daily. In that month he spoke to me about my sis ter, and said he wished to become a suitor to her, and asked my consent, which I told him I could not give without some consideration. He repeated the request three evenings following. The last evening I consented. He told me he had spoken to the plaintiff, and that she had consented provided that it met with my approbation. He continued to visit the plaintiff very regularly for some time after wards. In April, 1848, on the Saturday preceding Ifidlent Sunday, he wished me to accompany himself and my sister to my father's residence, for the purpose of asking the consent of the family. I was not able to accompany him then, as my business did not allow me. He continued his visits unremittingly till Whitsuntide. On the Satur day before Whitsunday he requested that I should accompany him and his sister and my sister to Much Cowarne. I consented, and we four went on the Monday in Whitsun week, and stayed till the Thurs day. On the Wednesday evening, when my father went to bed, while the defendant and his sister and my mother and the plaintiff, and a brother of mine, were present, and the plaintiff and defendant were sitting by each other near the fire and whispering together, the defendant turned round from my sis ter and said to my mother, " Will you give your consent to my marying your daughter ?" She said she had no objection, but would leave the matter in my hands, as I knew the parties better than she did. The defendant then asked if I would consent; and I replied that he knew what my opinion was on the subject. The plaintiff and the defendant then re sumed their conversation in whispers. We all came back on Thursday evening. He continued his visits till the following September, when my sister went ou a visit to my father for three weeks or a month. Before her return, the defendant came to me, and said that, if he had known her situation was so un comfortable, he would have married her previously, and he proposed to me that he should fetch her home with his horse and gig I accompanied him to my wentfather's t sister and his sister og to eth fe e t r ch on he a r v h is o i m t into e My Monmouthshire in Octo ber. I and defendant went to Gloucester to meet them on their return, and bring them home. I re moved to Fakenham on the 18th January. Before I left, my sister went on a visit to defendant's house, and remained there from the 17th to the 21st Jan. His mother and sister lived with him. On the 22d she came to my new house at Fakenham. He brought her back, and when he did so, be said she should not remain there much longer, and that, though separated for a few months, she should make herself comfortable, and that if anything happened to him before she saw him again to deprive him of life, all he possessed should be hers. All this time my sister and I visited the defendant's house frequently, and the subject of the marriage was mentioned on several occasions in the presence of the defendant's mother and sister, and the mother often said it would be the happiest day of her life if she could live to see the day of their marriage. When I lived at Fakenham, the defendant came on a visit to my house three or four times, and stayed each time from three to five days, and was as attentive as before to my sister. I never spoke to him about his property, but s hould think it worth 3,0001. Cross-examined by Mr. SKINNER—WouId not swear that his farm consisted of more than fifty acres. It was a leasehold. It was possible that I was all the time courting defendant's sister. I was courting her. I knew the defendant nearly a year before I knew his sister. When I used to call it made no difference whether the brother was at home or not, as I practised the whispering too.—(Laughter.) I asked her to marry me, and she at first agreed to marry me. After she had known me longer she changed her mind. When was it that she told you she did not like you as much as she had ?—I cannot charge my memory. It was in May or June, 1849. It was about the same time that the intimacy between the families ceased. What prevented you from continuing to visit her ? —A decision between ourselves.—(Laughter.) Do you mean to sue her for breach of promise of marriage ?—That remains for more mature conside ration. The result of this action would not affect my decision in the least. I have not heard that defend ant has had a paralytic stroke. I see the defendant in court, and he is greatly changed, especially his countenance, I adhere to the statement that I do not know when I first courted defendant's sister, or when she and I broke off. We lived at Overbury, about 500 yards from each other. It was more than twelve months between my first knowing him and visiting him at his house. Re-examined—Defendant never gave any reason for breaking off the intimacy with my sister. In June, 1849, defendant was complaining, but there was little or no alteration in his appearance. I have not, to the best of my knowledge, threatened to bring an action against his sister. It was not I who broke off the engagement with his sister. Elizabeth Jones—l am the mother of the plaintiff. She is about thirty. I have seen the defendant, and remember in Whitsuntide, 1848, his coming to my house with my son and daughter and his own sister, and there staying till the following Thursday. His conduct during that time was that of a suitor or lover. On the Wednesday he asked me if I had any object to his marrying my daughter in a month. I answered that I had no objection, and that at present she was under her brother's protection. In September, 1848, I saw him at our house again, and his conduct was the same as before. Since that time I have not seen him. The plaintiff has written to him repeatedly, and my husband has written once to him. My daughter has been rather ill since. Dr. Bull, examined by Mr. GRAY—I practise as a surgeon in Hereford. Have attended plaintiff from August to November last. She was ill. She was suffering from great derangement and nervous de bility, which induced me to ask if she felt uncomfor able, or had any anxiety of mind. Cross-examined—l see defendant. He seems to MARCH 27, 1850. look if he had had a paralytic stroke. I see that on his moving his countenance. Mr. Slurirsur, addressed the jury in mitigation of datoage,i, contending that as the defendant had suffi-red a paralytic stroke, the plaintiff could not have suffered any loss from his not fulfilling his original intention ; and that it would have been ex tremely improper and unfeeling in him to prosecute an arrangement made by him in good faith before Providence had visited him with his fearful affliction, and that the real author of the action was not the plaintiff or her father, but her brother, who sought to avenge the slight cast upon himself by the defend• ant's sister, who, when she came to know him better, loved him less. It was, in fact, the brother's action, and he trusted that the jury, by the amount of the damages which they should award would not en courage him in such a course of proceeding. Mr. Justice PATTESON, in summing up, said the only issue was whether the defendant promised to marry the plaintiff, and if the jury thought that he did, the next question for them would be to consider what amount of damages they would award to her. The jury deliberated for ten minutes, and then found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 50/. NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, March 25. CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.) WOOD V. COOPER—SEDUCTION. This was an action on the case brought by the plaintiff, Mrs. Sarah Wood, for the seduction of her daughter by the defendant, whereby she had lost her daugh ter's services, and had been put to great costs and charges. The defendant pleaded, first, Not Guilty ; secondly, that the plaintiff's daughter was not her servant; and thirdly, that the plaintiff had not been put to any costs respecting her. Mr. Bliss, Q C., and Mr. Pashley, appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. S cam mers for the defendant. Mr. BLISS, in opening the case, said it belonged to a class of cases unhappily too often the subject of in quiry. The plaintiff complained that her daughter had been seduced by the defendant, and when he added that in addition to the disgrace which the de fendant had brought on the plaintiff's family, that his victim had since died in childbirth, he had given them a brief outline of the sad circumstances of the case. The parties were in a humble station in life, the plaintiff being nearly seventy years of age. For some time the plaintiff's husband had worked in a fac tory, and having accumulated a little money, he had set up as a grocer, and on his death had left the plaintiff his business to live upon. The plaintiff had four children, two of whom were daughters, and one was the subject of the present action. She lived at home and managed the house, owing to her mother's advanced age. The defendant lived in the same village, Glossop, at no great distance from the plaintiff, and was a married man and a journeyman cotton-spinner. working in the mill of a Mr. Sumner, in which mill B.ttty Wood, the plaintiff's daughter, had also worked. It was at this mill that the acquaintance between the parties had begun. The pregnancy of the plaintiff's daughter had not been discovered until immediately before she was delivered of a child on the 27th of April last. Three weeks afterwards she died. For a short time the deceased had refused to disclose the father of the child, until the doctor called in had used a threat that "he would not deliver her unless she declared who was the father," and then she had stated that the de fendant was the father. Communications had then taken place with the defendant, and he had sent her money, and made arrangements for her leaving home to be delivered, and also for the support of the child. After the death of the mother, however, the defendant absolutely refused to make any provision for the child, which the plaintiff was now compelled to main tain. These were the facts of the case, and the ury would, he trusted, give such damages as its distress ing nature demanded. Thomas Fielding, of Glossop, journeyman cotton spinier, stated that he knew the defendant, and that he had been employed in the factory of Mr. Sumner, of Glossop, for some years, as a cotton spinner. Wit ness was employed at the same mill, about three years, whilst the defendant was there. He knew Betty Wood, the daughter of the plaintiff. She worked at the mill whilst the defendant was there, and in the same part of the mill. He heard, about May last, that Betty Wood had had a child, and soon after he bad a conversation with the defendant about it. He told the defendant he had heard that Betty Wood had had a child. He asked witness who had told him. Witness said Charles Wood had told him, and that Betty Wood said he was to tell him (the defendant) that the doctor would not deliver her of the child until she told who was the father, and that she said defendant was the father. The defendant did not say anything, but blushed red in the face. He told witness to tell Mrs. Wood that there should be nothing wanting on his part to bear the expenses. The defendant also told him that he did not think any other man knew what she was but him. He also said, " Tom, I think as well of that lass as I do of my own life." He also told witness that he had given Betty Wood 71. to go off with, to be delivered of the child, that no one should know anything about it. Before Betty Wood died witness told defendant that he had heard the child was going to be fathered on him. He made no answer. He very often had conversations with the defendant about the child, and defendant said that nothing should be wanting on his side in regard to the expenses. Betty Wood died in May, and after her death the defendant said he would not have anything to do with the child, and would pay nothing. He had heard that they had used her ill. Cross-examined—ls cousin to the plaintiff. He did not know that Betty Wood was 30 years ef age. The defendant and the plaintiff lived near each other, and Betty Wood knew the defendant was married, and used to go and see his wife and nurse his children. He did not knew that Betty Wood was a milliner. She had not worked at the mill for some time before she had the child, but he had seen her going down the road with " her breakfast and bagging" (tea) to the mill. William Robinson, overlooker in Mr. Sumner's mill, stated that the defendant worked under him. In May, last year, he had some conversation with the defendant about Betty Wood's child. Witness told him that it was reported they were going to father Betty Wood's child on him. Witness told him he had better make an arrangement to pay a weekly sum without having the child fathered The defendant said, " I have no objection, I have given her a good deal already." He waived the subject till after Betty was dead, and then he said it was advisable not to enter into any arrangement, for if he did they could do anything with him. At one time witness drew up an agreement in writing for the defendant to support the child, at the wish of both parties. Afterwards, when the defendant began to demur about supporting the child, witness told him he wished he had never known anything about it, as he had been made a fool of. Cross-examined—He knevithe family of the Woods. He had seen Betty a few days before her confinement. He could not tell what she had been doing for a living shortly before she died, of his own knowledge, and hearsay was no good there.—(Laughter.) She had been discharged from Sumner 's mill because of some disturbance in the mill. Evidence to a similar effect was given, and Mr. Sergeant 'WILKINS, for the defence, addressed the jury, who returned a verdict for the plaintiff. Damages, 25/. CIAO WN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.) John Grundy was indicted for having, on the 22d of last January, feloniously assaulted Mary Farn worth, with intent to murder her. Mr. Sowler appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. T. Pollock for the defence. It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutrix, that she was employed in a mill, and that the prisoner was her sweetheart. On the 22d of January last she was going to her work across a field to the mill, about a quarter to six in the morning, accom panied by a man named Massy Williams. It was quite dark. The prisoner was standing in the field. The prisoner had wanted to marry her three years ago, and she bad always refused him. He seized hold of her as she passed him and she asked him what he wanted ? He replied, that "He wanted her to promise him." She said, " Promise what ?" He replied, " Whether you will marry me or not ? " She answered, " She could not promise until she had seen her aunt." He answered, " He would make her," and shook a coal miner's pick in her face saying, " He had bought it on purpose to kill her, that he would wait no longer as he had waited long enough, and that he would either have her or her blood." He then asked her to go home with him, and put his arm round her waist, and they both fell. She screamed out " Murder," and he then stopped her mouth with his hand. He got up first, and as she lay on the ground he struck her with the pick on her head. The pick went through her bonnet and hit her head. He asked her if he had hurt her, and she said " Yes." He then asked her again if she would go home with him, and she again replied that he must wait a bit. He then struck her again three times with the pick while she was on the ground. She was afterwards taken home and attended by a surgeon. In answer to his LORDSHIP, the prosecutrix said she had had the prisoner in prison before for the same kind of conduct. lie had once stopped her and hid her shawl in a coal-pit, which she left in his hands to get away from him. The Learned Counsel for the defence contended that the prisoner was unable to distinguish between right and wrong. His LORDSHIP having summed up, The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and sentence of death was ordered to be recorded agiinst him. His LORDSHIP intimated that he would be taken care of. POLICE INTELLIGENCE IVES TM INSTE EXTENSITE R9lll3LitY DT A FOREMAN. —Waiter Sallis, a foreman at Messrs. Rigby's, the exteasise builders and contractors, Holy well street, Westmin ster, was placed at the bar before Mr. Broderipi, charged with stealing a great number of mahogany slabs and hoards, the property of his employers. Mr. W. Cumming, an inspector of the B division, stated that he had been engaged by Messrs. Rigby during the last ten days in investigating the cause ~f the late extensive fire at their premises, and from in formation he received in the course of that inquiry he was induced to go to 119, Lillington-street, Vauxhall bridge-road, where he found 20 slabs and planks of mahogany. lie subsequently apprehended the pri soner upon the charge of stealing them, when he said he could very soon clear. himself and account for it all by his book. &venal witnesses were called, whose evidence proved that in the month of November last a large log of mahogany was being cut at Messrs. Rigby's, for Messrs. Wigram, of B'ackvvall, and that the pri soner, who was superintendent of the saw-mills, and had a considerable quantity of valuable timber under his charge, about six weeks before Christmas last told Mr. Hutchinson, a builder, engaged in erecting some houses in Lillington-street, that he had some mahogany for sale, and ultimately sold him, at the rate of five pence per foot, the slabs and planks subsequently found by the police inspector, and for which Mr. Hutchin son paid the accused the sum of 51. 13e. It was further shown by the testimony of men employed in the saw-mills at Messrs. Rigby's, that alter the log of mahogany spoken of had been cut there, a cart was loaded with the planks and slabs, by direction of the prisoner, in his employer's yard, and owing to some suspicion existing in the minds of two or three of the men that all was not going on right, they made a memorandum at the time, and had the cart which conveyed the mahogany away watched to Mr. Hutchinson's, builder, in Lillington-street. It fur ther transpired that the prisoner had sold two other pieces of mahogany to a carpenter named Price, and Mr. John William Lyon, cashier to Messrs. Rigby, distinctly proved that the prisoner had no authority to dispose of any timber upon the premises, and no account whatever had been given by him of the sale of the mahogany slabs and planks purchased by Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. BRODERIP haVing intimated to the prisoner that it would be his duty to remand him for a week, in order that some further evidence to complete the case against him might be produced, inquired whether he wished to say anything at present, or would res serve his reply, if he had any, until then. The prisoner declined saying anything until a future occasion, and was remanded for a week. ()GERKEN WELL. Yesterday a respectably-dressed young Scotchman, who said his name was John Rice, residing at the Yorkshire Dining rooms, Duke-street, L sndon bridge, applied to Mr. Combe for advice and assist ance under the following circumstances : Applicant said that he came from Edinburgh about a week ago, and took lodgings at the above house. He had held the situation of clerk to the firm of a coal merchant, whose service he had left in conse quence of their going to California. He came to London with the view of procuring a situation, and on Thursday last he saw an advertisement in the Times newspaper stating that for a douceur of 101. a situation as clerk and collector could be provided for any respectable young man who was willing to ad vance that sum, and application to he made at the " Auction, Estate, and General Offices, No. 61, Theo bald's-row, Holborn." The applicant instantly made application there, when he found a place fitted up and covered with bills. and he had an interview with a fellow who put on an air of consequence, .and inti mated that he could procure for him a most respecta ble situation as clerk and collector, and it would be necessary for him to advance 51. on account, and he would negotiate with the parties, so that he (appli cant) might enter the situation on the following Mon day. He advanced the 61.. for which he was given a receipt signed " John James," and he left the place. On the Friday he received the following letter : _ _ " Auction Eitate and General Offices, Theobald's-row, London, March 22, 1850. " If Mr. Rice call upon Mr. John James to-morrow morning between ten and eleven o'clock, he will be at leisure to see him respecting the situation advertised is the Times newspaper. " JOHN JAMES." Applicant called at the time appointed, Ind saw Mr. James, who informed him that all was right, and said it would b. necessary for him (applicant) to advance another 51. to make up the 101. before he could get him the situation, and he might enter into the ser vice on the Monday week following. He began to suspect the party, and declined parting with more money, and on making inquiries he ascertained that numerous persons had been defrauded Gf their pro perty under exactly similar circumstances, and the neighbourhood was in continual confusion in consc•- quince of the parties who were duped applying to have their money returned to them, and ap?licant de termined on making the pre&ent application. Mr. COMM said it was lucky for hhn that he had not parted with the 101. He could not a'sist him ;ne could only recommend him to seek redress in the county court. The officers described the plan to have been carried on by a nest of designing fellows, who had for years past pursued their nefarious practices in the same manner in various parts rf London, and their victims were generally poor needy persons in search of employment. Applicant left the court, saying he would follow the advice of the worthy magistrate. CITY COURT OF SEWERS. Yesterday the commissioners assembled at Guild hall, Mr. Deputy Peacock in the chair. REPORT UPON MR. SIMON ' S SANITARY REPORT. The Committee upon Health brought up their re report upon the celebrated report of the medical officer of health, presented to the Court on the 6th of November. The committee were required to reporf, their opinion as to the course to be adopted thereupon, and especially with reference to those matters recom mended therein which do not come within the powers of the commissioners to carry into execution. The CLIXIRMAN stated that the report was one of great importance to the public, and had been the re sult of between twenty and thirty tneePings of the committee, and he recommended that it should be printed and circulated. The motion was at once agreed to, and the report was sent to the printer without being read. It is sup posed that the subject- matter will produce several dis cussions, in which the City community will of course be deeply interested. IMPROVEMENT AT ST. rAues. Mr. HAYWOOD presented a report on this subject, in which he stated that the plan proposed for throw ing open to the p u bli c th e wes t ern are a in front of St. Paul's Cathedral, and for widening the thorough fares around the cathedral, would afford a carriage way of an uniform width of forty feet between Paul's chain and Ludgate-hill, and thereby prevent the con stant inconvenience arising to the public from the stoppage of vehicles and the dangers of collision, so frequently occurring in the present state of that im portant thoroughfare. The report having been received, Mr. BARBER. took occasion to state that he bad re cently received a letter from the canons and minor canons of the cathedral, expressive of their desire to see the proposed improvements carried out ; and he hoped, after the liberal speech of his Grace the Arch bishop of Canterbury at the Mansion-house on last Friday, in connexion with the great Exhibition of 1851, that this project would meet with no obstruc tion to its completion before that event should take place, from those ecclesiastical authorities whose ap proval was an indispensable preliminary. Adjourned. --- --- EXTRAORDINARY ATTEMPT AT FRAUD AT NEWCASTLE. An application was made to the sittingma aglaissttr,abtes at the police-court in this town on Tues dy and Mr y Mr. W. J. Thompson, of North Shields,v i • R e g o Robert t extraordinary Clay, o f Newcastle, attempt at hearfrau ed i m d d e a n i C e e respect - - sons who had been lately app The particulars of the case are these : —ln i t n be F m ra o n n c t e b . of July, 1849, Mr. the same ' time e in business as brokers, received at C o ll a n b t e s 'Thompson and Mr. Clay , who ar l a e g t e te b r t s s fforromtbepbetr,suosnesofinmFierbaencieo,n apbudrpcoort„inmger atPar to shipisandNfaunrteNs,anretqesuelsotoin,ogoeoacthonosf o t f h c e o se al gen tlementthe prices specified in the instructions. These coals were to be shipped in certain French vessels, w hich had been chartered in Nantes, and several ' of the French ports in the Channel, by M. Moult, a French broker at Nantes. Fifty-six French vessels accordingly arrived in the river Tyne, con signed to these gentlemen, but, as the reference given by Michellon aryl Co. did not seem satisfactory, they a pplied to the French Consul at Newcastle, with the captains of the vessels, for his advice on the subject. An inspection of the correspondence satisfied him that the captains had been the victims of a fraud attempted on M-ssrs. Thompson and Clay, or the coalowners of Newcastle, by a gang of swindlers in France. Under these circumstances they declined to load the vessels, which were accordingly detained in the river for z-ever4l weeks, awaiting further instructions. The opinion of the Consul proved correct, for a 3 soon as the ficti tious house of Michellcn and Co. were aware that the loading of the vessels had been stopped they absconded. It then appeared that the house of Michellon and Co. had carried on their operations on a most extensive scale, the principal seat of their business having been established at Lyons, in the beginning of 1849. The parties were, Francois Pes re, a watchmaker living at Nantes, a liberated convict ; Auguste Michellon, ex clerk in the dockyard at Toulon, living at Lyons; :tt Fanny Battin, his wife; anti Jean Julea Dague soi-disant Saint Award, lsodowner and mer chant, lately a bankrupt, residing at Lyons. The principal part of their professed business was to rneive credit in foreign countries; and, at the same time that they had begun the transaction with Newcastle, they had given numerous orders in Switzerland for watches and jewellery, and, under false pretences, bad obtained authority from various persons to receive money in Jersey and North Ame rica. Information, however, having been received, suspicions were roused, and the susp.cted persons were arrested. A warrant from the Juge d'lnstruction at Nantes has been received in this town, through the Consul, re-questing the Mayor to take the examina tion of Messrs. Thompson and Clay, to he used on the trial as evidence against the prisoners, and it was arranged that such evidence should be embodied in an affidavit, and attested before the magistrates. The trial will take place at Nantes as soon as the prelimi nary proceedings are completed.—. Newcastle Journal. THE COUNTRY MARKETS. IPSWICH, MARCH 26. Our market this day was fully attended, and we had a more liberal supply of wheat. It sold at a trills advance upon late prices. B irley was in considerable supply, and many of the malsters being about to give up steeping for the season, caused it to drag heivily, and a reduction of is per quarter was gene rally submitted to. All other articles nominally the same. PER QUARTER. PIA QUARTER.. Wheat, red .... 37s to 3'a Peas . 26s to GOs Ditto, white Barley, malting Ditto, grinding 20s to 00. Malt . . . 001 to 00s Beans ... . 26s to 00. Flour, per sack ... 00s to 00. AVERAGES FOR THE WEER ENDING MARCH 23, 1850. Wheat ... Barley Oats ....... „ —s. Od. 13 „ 225. 9d. —l. Od. Beans Peas ..... HULL, Maack! 26. Messrs. Taylor and Bright's Circular states :—The weather since our last has been very severe, and on Sunday we had a heavy fall of snow. The trade has more tone and firmness, but transactions are still without extent. Our farmers mode rate their supply , and millers not being in stock, have to pal Is advance on last week's rates: foreign is held for more money, but sales are quite in retail. Malting barley neglected: grinding sorts go off at our currency, which is very low. Beans al - 0 offering at a speculative price. Not many oats held here, and for them, as well as peas, demand is limited. Linseed and cakes each somewhat better to sell. No transactions in rape seed ; while buyers have an advantage in rape cakes, of which the last few days have brought us some fresh arrivals. In bones but little passing. The following are the present prices of grain:— Wheat, English, red 34 to 37 Peas, white and yeL 24 27 Do. white ..... Dantzic and Ko- !Linseed, Black Sea 45 —46 nigsberg 4O —45 Do. Petersburgh 38 — 4 b Pomeranian and IDo. Riga& Archngl. 38 Hamburgh . 34 38 Do. Konigsberg .... 36 —• 3 9 Danish, Holstein, & Per ton. Friesland hussian and Odessa 30 35:D0. fine foreign ...... 61 5s Oats, English Do. iianish.... lO 12 Rapeseed Do. Friesland l2 14 Rape cakes...oos Od to E2s 61 Do. Russ. & Odessa 12 —141 Tares, English .3os 003 Barley, malting l9 —211 Do. foreign 20s 30$ Do. grinding........ 18 19 Guano 6l to 91 Ws Beans 2l 26 Bones, do ...... 00s Od to 85s Od Do. foreign .. .23 —251 Rye meal 6103 CORK, MARCH 25.—Flour—First 12s Od to 131 ; extra 14. ; seconds, lls Od to 12s ; households 9s to 10s 6d; thirds, 7s to 84 per cwt. Oatmeal los Od to 00s; Indian meal 6s 9d to 7s ; wheat meal, 9s 61 to 103 per cwt. Indian corn 130 s to 1321 6dper ton. Bran 3117 x6lto 4 Os per ton. Hay—Farmers 26s to 365; average 33s ; dealers 32s to 40s Od; average 31s per ton. &taw—Farmers 18s Od to 25s Od ; average 22s ; dealers 27s Od to 00s Od; average 00s Od per ton. Bread—Wheaten loaf 6d to 6P; household loaf 5d to sid per 41b. - Fresh butter, fld tO 10d per lb. Eggs —3sBdto 3s 10d per hundred. Coals': Newport 15s; Lydney 17s ; Landore 15s ; Best Neat Culm 14, per ton. Tallow 40s Od to 001 per orti Whisky, 25 o. p., 5s 9d per imperial gallon. Meat —Beef 4d to 6d; mutton 5d to 6d; veal Id 61,ct ; pork 30 to 31d ; bacon 6d to 7d ; sausages bd par lb. Hops 131 Os per cwt.., Bangor slates 3/ 2s 6d to 31 51 Po ton. Bark—Barbary 715 s to bibs; Valonia 14/ to 01; Preach 71 ss; English 01 per ton. Fleece Wool 10s to 12a per stone; Hemp 321 to , 0/ per ton. Fish— Scotch herrings 16s to 171; re a ditto 20s to 22s per barrel ; Newfoundland 910 s to 111 lo ton. Timber—Memel, 85s per ton; deals, first quality, 18s: second quality, 16s per 100. Hides—Market 141 to 2 01 ; salted 15s to 21s per cwt ; calf skins 2id to ehd per lb. Potatoes, white 8d to 10d ; Minions 12d to 131; Guano"; Peruvian, 111 lOs ; Ichaboe, 9/ per ton; Tar—Arelaange 4 191 per barrel. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS• BRISTOL, MARCH 26. STOCK EXCHANGE.—Tkm - e was little business done on Or Stock Exchange to-day, and prices remain wi bout la' provement. The transactions were—Great Western, Qua; ters, 13 3 /—Ditto, 171. Shares, 7 15-16 du.—Bristol Exeter, Thirds, .1 2 Midland, 35%. LIVEIttOUL. basal 26. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market was firm to-deft but the amount of business done was limited. The trans actions were as follow :—London and North-Western, 165% c.—Ditto, New Quarters, c. dis.—Lancashire and York' shire, Consol., 35—Ditto, Fifths,9 l ,4 dis. Ditto, Halves (Leicester and Swannington), 2ila c. dis . " York, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N. E. Purchase), 6 pet cent. till 1850, 7 1 4 dis. MANCHESTER, Manor 25. STOCK EXCHANCitt.—The market to-day was very fia t ' and there was not much business done. The transaction' were as follow:—London and North-Western, Manchester and Birmingham (C), Quarters, t,E n. p.—Lancashire and, Yorkshire, 34—Ditto, Fifths, 9 1 ,4 dis.—Ditto, Preference, 6 per cent., 12Y—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire , Eighths, 15 3 c. Ditto, Preference, 6 15-16 n.—Ditto (Grimsby Dock), 3 1 4—North Staffordshire, 10 1 ,E dis.--E lO4 Lancashire, 8 1 . BIRMINGHAM, Maamt 26. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The foie transactions to-day were as - - low :—Midland (Bristol and Birmingham), 1231/4—Shrew s ' bury and Birmingham (B), 61.8 s 9d. dis.—Shropshire Uniollt 3 1-3 dis. YORK, MARCH 25. 'ATOM EXCHANGR.—The transactions to-day were follow :—Great Northern, 7 1 ,4 York, Newcastle, and B!.r wick, 13%—Ditto (Newcastle Extension), 814—tiitto (u re N. E. Purchase,) 1 4. GLASGOW, Mason 25. SIOCK ExCHANGX.—The transactions to-day wer• follow: Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr, Halves (Nch 11!4—Stirling and Dunferm ine, 31. Is. ECONOMY of COST IN BUILDING No on' (pays Mr. Pugio in thy: Budder) would think u' putting firth a greAt drill, or pointed churebs° either an economical building or one easily construe' or even convenient, according to the modern acceP t. ; ti rn of the term. The cruciform plan entails numerci" practical difficulties, and yet. it is the very f o undalict of every great church in Chri s tendom. The enorcov o ; height, another remarkable symbolical feature, retiejl o a vast deal cf most costly and difficult construction. L h not imagine- that the designs of the ancient chill builders were framed with reference to opeaon3y or is: cility of erection; their great aim was to produce edifice that should illustrate the majesty of its purp o ,l; and they spared neither pains nor cost to accomplish ton end. Their works bear on their face the indelible e lfi l of faith, love, and devotion, and it is the unearthly•lo°o of these glorious fares which forms one of their greiT e d charms, and by which they are so nobly distinguis% from all other architectural productions. A noble Pl__!.A cruciform, lofty, and long, surmounted by spire-esPc towers, surrounded by lateral aisles and ehapelF, r i b vided with a screened choir and solemn sanctuary. At • all its costly and beauteous furniture, is as DO c : o s natural expression of Catholic religion in the • pre y of age as it was when the third Henry finished the chelf o f Westminster, or St. Louis dedicated the Holy Cher Paris. tegi [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Twenty Ulcers on the cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills.—Extract a from 0. B. Knocker, dated Mount Gambia, South Atotribp July 7, 1849. To Professor Holloway. Sir,—A co! at just come under my observation in which the efficacy ° rim Ointment and Pills has been fully proved. A man ° h 1 name of Joshua Smith had upwards of twenty ulcers °- 011 shins, which were so difficult to cure that almost everysre lb uloa had been applied without any•good e ff ect. Your be Ointment were then resorted to, and in about six wok was completely cured, and scarcely a mark is now to be e"f i b.. Sold by all druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Neal) Lent, 244, Strand, London. METS. On the 24th inst., in Eaton. s q uare, Mrs. Gathorne He* of a son. Oar, of a On the 24 s t o. h n inst., at Camberwell-grove , Mrs. J. J. Cl O' On the 24th inst., at Clarence-terrace , Regent'a.park, $ Macready. of a son. I C On the 22d inst., at Brighton, the lady of Colo nel Ote, M.P., of a son. n the 22d inst., at Lansdowne-cottage, aeon. C a v e n v d i ish ivb -ra i n t cit o, Wandsworth-road, Mrs. T. N. Harrison. o On the 22d inst., at Bath, the wife of Captain C. PL. of a daughter. On the 22d inst., at Edinburgh, the lady of Captai n Hutchinson, of a son. On the 21st inst., at B k al ii lir l ay E , B lreland, the Rev. Se t e b et e March, of Sudbury, Suffolk, to Catharine, daughte r late J. Hope, Esq., of M ag hera, Derry of On the 21st inst., at K enn ington, Henry Gardner, the Foxley road, to Elizabeth, the youngest daughter of Lett, Esq., of Lambeth, and St. Peter's, Thanet. Vi r • On the 21st inst., at St. Mary Magdalen's, Peckham, to Connor, Esq., of her Majesty's Consular Service, Chill. Leonora Lavinia, eldest daughter of Captain W. Wa r ' e E I.C. S. On the 23d inst., at St. Pancras Church, John Couls l Hancock. Esq., Dublin, to Matilda Louisa, third d a ughter y , P. E. Blatepi e l, Esq., of Doughty-street, Meck lenburg' square. DIED. On the 2.'3cl inst. , at Ventnor, Isle of Wight, G. W. Nicki , son, E q., aged 37, of the Norfolk. road, St. John' -wood. , On the ' , 4th inst., aed 23, Anne Emily William C. Clifton, E sq ., o f Sydney-Place, Onslow-squaral Brompton. house, Broa•l-street, Golden-square , of the Lion Broil' On the '24th inst., W. Huggins, Eecl , Mary, the wife 0 a s 4g. .4 . f• Oa the 25th inst., aged 22, Harriett, the wife o f wt. Br On ohton, of Br st ~ ixton-bill. 01 2 ug the 25th in at Fort-place , Bermondse y , Martha, wife of Mr. Cyrus Legg. On the 23d inst., aged 46, Anne, wife of Charles Joboerli' Esq., Rotherhithe. , 011 the 23d in t., at C olet- p lace. St. G eor g e' AO ,0n East, relict of the late Mr. J. Hy ett, of Gloucester, aged 80. :0 On the 23d inst., E loisa, second dau g hter of Mr. WY"' Brimat, of Kennington, Surrey, r e f Oa the 22d inst., at Brighton, aged 3, Elizabeth. rel:, of William Baillie, Esq., many years one of the C o oloi". sioners of Stamps. On the 22d inst., at Spring-hill College, Birmingham, Owl D oro thy Webb, widow of the late John Webb, Earl- , F r° of Doctors' -com mons , n u - 6.. 4( Li,ndon: Printed and Published by MURDO I. —„ T - 5 ifl i t -. 0 112 ''''' , " r4 . Printer, at The Sun Office- 1 ` ' L i • Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy. in the culla' ?ii , ddleaux, Wedriestly, March 27, 1850.