The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1863-07-28 00:00:00

MONDAY.

Mr. Justice Wille;-too-1-1-Js- -seat on the Bauch at
ten_ o'clock.

W amine. STANLEY.—Mr. M. Smith, Q C., Mr.
Karnak., Q C., and Mr. Pinder, were counsel for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., Mr. King.
'lon, and Mr. Huller Were for the defendant. —Mr.
Pinder stated that this was an anion of ejecta:dent,
from certain lands in North Tedworth in this county.
The defendant denied the title of the plaintiff to
recover, and that was the action they had to try.
Mr. Smith stated that his client was the heir-at-law,
and Mr. Coleridge said he was entitled to open the
case.—Mr. Coleridge said be represented Mr. Sloane
Stanley, the defendant on the mud, and he had to
address the jury first, became he admitted that on.
lees he succeeded in setting up the will of Mrs.
Asehetou Smith under whom he claimed the property,
the plaintiff was entitled to enoorod. The plaintiff
wastbe heir-at-law of Mrs. Anheton Smith, be being
the eldest son of Mr. Assheton Smith's eldest
brother. The defendant was the nephew of Mrs.
Anheton Smith, and he was the third son of her
sister, Mrs. George Sloane Stanley, the wife of a
clergyman. Mrs. Aisheten Smith, widow of Mr.
Aseheton Smith had amongst other properties a large
estate at Tedworth, which was partly in the county
of Wilts, and partly in the county of Hampshire.
Mr. Webber wished to recover that portion of the
property at Tednortli, lying in this county. If,
, however, be showed that that property was be.
questhed by Mrs. Asslietoe Smith's will to the defen-
dant, then he was entitled to hold it against, him.
The quantity of land in dispute was between 3,000
and 3,100 acres, worth about £1,700 a-year, which
is a portion of the property held by Mr. Anbeton
Smith sod his family for a great number of years.
He believed that as far back as the middle of the
last century Mr. Aseheton Smith, the grandfather
of the late Mr. A. Smith, became possessed of con-
siderable property in both parishes—North and
South Ted worth. These parishes adjoin each other,
South Tedworth being in Hampshire, and North
Ted worth in Wiltshire. The Tedworth property
c sis ed of the manors of North and South Ted-
worth. Mr. Smith also possessed the tithing of
Collingbourne, in Wiltshire, and about 800 or 700
soros at Miley Wood, which was not far ofi from
the re .t of the property. During the last century
the pr petty inoreseed by secretion by the then Mr.
Aseoeron Smith, who died in 1829, and the late Mr.
A. Smith then enooroded tb what was then the
Tedworth property. In 1831 he added to the pro-
perty the manor of Tedworth Zoon, which was in
the pariah of North Tedworth. together with the
manor of North Tedworth. In 1832 he made some
addition, and also in 1840. 1641, and 1657. Mr.
Amnon° Smith died in 1858, and be was then the
owner of almost all the property in the parishes of
North and South Tedworth, and also a large property
in Wales, which, however, formed no part of the pre-
sent action. tie also had about 500 acres of leasehold
land in Hampshire. He had no children, and at his
decease, having made his will in 1657, be bequeathed
the whole of his property, with the neeption of a few
legacies, absolutely t • the late Mrs. Aetoo Smith,
hie widow. His will was dated the 22nd of July,
1867, and he died on the 15th of September, 1856.
The annuities, amounting to £6BO per annum. he
requested should he charged upon the estate at Ted-
worth. When Mrs. Ambeton Smith came into
possession of the property, sue was thee in a feeble
state of health, and she did not live long to enjoy the
large property of which she had became poisoned.
On the 9th of November, 1858, she made her will,
and it was upon the provisions in that document that
the question they bad to determine arose. The will
was a very bag and elaborate document, sod he
would endeavour to pat them in possession in outline
vorbat were the provisional' the will, and what was tbe ,
scheme she bad in view in dispoeiag of her large pro-
perty. She bequeathed the Walsh property first of
all to Mr. Frederick Drummond and Mr. Thomas
Best; and she requested the trustees of that
to raise upon it £40,000, which was to be employed
in pipelining the Tedwarth property. In re.
to the Tedworth estate the will stated 1 give and
devise my mansion-house at Tedworth, in the county
of Hants, and all my manors, farms, hersditamente,
devised by will to me by my said husband, subjeolto
the minutiae, all of rAioU moon, IC, aro is the

county of Rant., to the me of Francis Sloane
Stanley," the defendant in this action. He
abstained for a moment from addressing any
argumenta to them as to the true interpretation of
al„, wilL She also made several alMsances, which
were upon the most liberal scale, for the maintenance
of any such tenant for life during hie minority.
Further she gave to the tenant for life the power of
charging £l,OOO a-year open the Tedworth estate
for the benefit of any wife or wives he might marry.
He might charge not more than £5OO a-year for any
one wife, and, and if he married two, the charge
upon the property should not ex £l,OOO. There
was also an allowance of .0 ,i It made for the
children, £20,000 for any • family, and if more
than one family it should-hot exceed £40.000. The
total charges she contemplated were .C 40,000 for the
benefit of the children; £l,OOO a-year for the benefit
of the wives or husband, and £730 annuities greeted
by the late Mr. Manton Smith, and that of his wife.
The £40,000 to be raised on the property in Wales
she requested should be used in the purchase of land
adjoining the Ted worth estate. She also dieposed of
the furniture to the defend int, which she desired
should remain as heirlooms of the family. Very largo
personal bequests, amounting in all to about £67,000
were also made, and the remainder of her estate was
left to Mrs. Homage. That was the provisions of
the wiU of Mrs. Artistes% Smith, and those with
which they had to deal. The question of course mom
which they had not failed to observe, as to the pro-
visions in the will with regard to the Ted worth
estate. The question really was did she mean to
bequeath to the defendant only that portion
of the Tedworth estate in the county of Hants,
or was the land in the county of Wilts also
Included in that bequest —The learned judge said
that was a question of law. He should not put that
to the jury.—Mr. Coleridge observed that there WAS
no other property belonging to the testatrix which
was not bequeathed separately. The case cams
before Vice-Chancellor Wood, and he was in posses-
sion of his judgment. He considered itS question
fier the jury to determine with the assistance of the
pale, if it be clearable. —The learned judge said the
opinion of his brother Williams was very decided
upon the point, that the jury had nothing to
do but to find s verdict as to the Lots, when that
was found it was for the Court to put the proper
omistruction on the law. Be should not think of
askinlithejary what the will meant. —Mr. Coleridge
thou t the question of intention was for the jury to
decide. It was indeed partly for the jury and partly
for the judge. Ile had the authority of Mr. Justice
Mask for what be had stated. The learned counsel
continued that Mr. Fladgate received instructions as
to Use will, and he bad drawn ups very elaborate
document The will was placed before the Vice-
Chancellor, and a rule was filed in Chancery for the
purpose of getting a declaration from the Court,
that the land in dispute passed under the will, and
that the heir at-law was to be restrained from taking
possession. Amongst other defendants which were
necessarily made was the plaintiff in this action, Mr.
Webber. A great many witnesses were examined
with regard to the facts connected with the property
of which it was material to inquire into, for the pur-
pose of ascertaining what was the meaning to be con-
strued by the wills. to the disposition of the property.
One of those witnesses had since died, Mr. Northeast,
the steward of the property. He was examined and
cross-examined in Chancery, and some portions of
his evidence he would now read to them. Mr.
Coleridge then read the depositions, which stated
that he was appointed steward of the property in
1828. It bad always been known as the Tedworth
Estate, and there was no division dividing the two
counties of Wilts and Hants. There was about 2,500
acres in South Tedworth, which realised annually
about £1,650. The mansion house involved a great
expenditure, and he was of opinion that it would
require £6,000 a-year to keep it up in its
present condition. The two parishes of North
and South Tedworth had for a long time been
considered as one perish; only one school
served for both parishes, and the two livings were
held by one clergyman. Divine service was held
alternately in each parish church. He admitted in
cross-examination that Mr. Assheton Smith possessed
property at Shipton, which he formerly held under
the Dean and Chapter of Winchester. Subsequently
be became possessed of the property, but the Dean
and Chapter had reserved the manorial rights, and
they were up to this time the lords of the manor.—
The learned conned said the Vice-Chancellor made
the declaratiou which had already been mentioned,
but be allowed the heir-at-law to bring this action
within one year, which he had done. (A plan was
here produced of the property wherein the boundary
of the two counties was denoted.) Mr. Coleridge
said the question reallywaa, did Mrs. Mahoton Smith
really intend that the property should be divided,
and was the meaning which WU to be placed upon
her will such that Mr. Webber was entitled to take
all that was in the county of Wilts, and Mr. Stanley
the property in the county of Hants. At the time
Mrs. Smith died she became possessed of two very
extensive properties, and it appeared from the will
that she was desirous of separating those two pro-
perties, or at all events of making two generate and
distinct families, bemuse she bequeathed the mansion
house at Carusrvonshire, and requested that the
donne should reside in it for six months in the year,
and that he 'boob( assume the name of Manton
Smith. She bequeathed the Tedworth property, sad
12111140 the mansion house the depository of the heir-
looms of the family, and throughout the whole will
there was not the least indication of the smallest in-
tention on the part of the testatrix to separate that
which had been for years the entire Tedworth estate.
It appeared from Mr. Northeast's evidence that for
great length of time the whole of this property had
been held together by Mr. A. Smith, and his pre-
decessors. As far &shying memory went back, there
was no time when the Tedworth estate did not ex-
tend into both parishes. Throughout the will, after
the first description of the property, it was spoken of
as "the Tedworth estate aforesaid." It was a re-
markable fact that the annuities bequeathed by the
late Mr. Astheton Smith were charged upon the pro-
perty in the counties of Hants and Wilts, and the
same expression used in his will was copied into
Mrs. Manton Smith's will, when she bequeathed
the ,e5O annually to Attwell, her late husband's
valet That he (Mr. Coleridge) considered was a
conclusive proof that she was speaking of the same
property throughout the wilt The plaintiff laid
claim to the property in the county of Wilts; but it
bad been proved by Northeast's affidavit that there
was no natural division of the two counties. It
would be very inconvenient so to divide, as it pained
through in many places fields, and one house. If she
had intended to have acted in the manner alleged,
she could have more easily have divided the farms.
The £40,000 to be charged upon the Welsh property
would not be sufficient to bring up the value of the
Hampshire property to the aspens which the main-
tenance of the house would necessarily entail. The
learned counsel also referred to the use of the word
" manors," in the demise. It was a singular fact
that there was only one manor in the county of
Hants, and he contended from that, that the
testatrix intended to convey both the Hamp-
shire and Wiltshire properties to Mr. Sloane
Stanley. At the end of Mr. Coleridge's opening, the
learned judge suggested that the matters In dispute
should be made the subject of a special ease
for the opinion of the Court of Common Fleas.
He could see that a number of objections would
be taken to the evidence, and the result would
be if he came to a wrong decision on either
of thee, the ease would come on for trial
again without any decision being come to upon
the substantial points. —Mr. Montague Smith said
he was willing to accede to such suggestion, but Mr.
in both counties was undivided, and thatit was known
neessee°l.6lgweree wishthenadcaltblede c'ald,wbot4propred thsTBt:eveprairopewrtity.
by the name of the" Tedworth estate." —Mr. Smith
declined to address the jury, but said he should call
two withers, to disprove the opening statement of
Mr. Coleridge, that there was only one manor be-
longing to the late Mr. A. Smith, in Hampshire.—
Mr. George Webb, &meths °Soo of Mr. Woodham,
clerk of the peace for Hampshire, produced the regis-
itrehdicht"detpoltiontoymfowrerethegrauyeantealb76 the proprietor
3y
of Tedworth for the manor of Doyley. A deputation
was granted by the late Mr. A. Smith, in 1815.
James Holdwav said be had been keeper at Doyley
woods since 14128. There was • pound, there where
cattle was impounded.—Mr. T. Lamb, solicitor of
Andover, was called by Mr. Coleridge, and stated,
that since Inn, he had been steward of the or
of Hurathourne Tarrant. He had never beard of
there being any manor of Doyley, nor of any courts
being held there. —The learned judge then put
the following Teatime to the jury. I,—Was it one
property, called and known as the Ted worth Estate.
2,—Was it enjoyed altogether as one property by
Mr. Smith 3, —Was the boundary of the estate
marked by any natural or artificial division' 4,—
Was the house largely disproportionate to the rest
of the property, increased by the £40,000 from the
Welsh property' By direction of His Lordship the
jury returned • verdict for the defendant on those
points, leave being given to the plaintiff to move the
Court above upon such of the evidence and findings,
as the Court might consider relevant to the construc-
tion of the will. The evidence as to tbe manor of
Doyley was also left to the consideration of the Court
above.

&KITH v. BROTHIRHOOD.—This WU • special jury
mum —Mr. Collier, QC., and Mr. Lopes were
counsel for the plaintiff ; and Mr. M. Smith, Q.C.,
and Mr. Kingdon for tbe defendant.—This was an
action to recover damages for a wrongful
The defendant pleaded that he did not
mpg, the plaintiff for a twelvemoeth, that
he was incompetent, and that previous to
bet dimnimal he was habitually intoziostad.
From the opening statement of Mr. ()anew it ap-
peared that the plaintiff is an assistant engineer and
surveyor, and the defendant is • large contractor on
the Great Western Railway. For some time prior
to 1862 the plaintiff was in the employ of Menem ,
Chilli', railway oolstructore of Shrewsbury ; but
when the work was completed he inserted an aver.
tisement in the Builder for a similar situation.
This was replied to by Mr. Brotherhood; and
the plaintiff went to Chippeebein on the 6th of
May, and had an interview with the defendant.
He engaged him at a Wary ot £l5O a-year.
He entered upon his duties immediately, and
Mr. Drotberhood advanced him £2.6 on eimonnt

of his salary to enable him to bring his wife and
dfamefeinlydanfrotmatS,threlswaburYa•year.. ThlieerciZtedies oalbtheones of
°b.
were to trace plans, and to measure work ittre
defendan; and him sub-oontniotom No oomplitilli
was made against him, and he was first sent to
superintend the works on the Clifton Mmyhenk
Railway. In October Mr. Brotherhood wain&
him to remove with his wife and family Ite
Wheatley near Oxford, to superintend some weeks
on the line Dein High Wycombe to Oxford.
As he had removed his family only in
he complained to Mr. Brotherhood, and he oonesaisit
to give him £2O to forego the rent of the bowie se
Climpenham, and a small sum due on the AL
advanced. He accordingly removed to Orkwdskire,
and he remained at Wheatley up to the time of Ye
discharge. No complaint was ever made, and glo
only reason to be attributed to Mr. Brotherhood isr
having acted as be had done was because the plaintiff
had not followed out his instructions in meassehag
oertain excavations "full enough," the explanation
being that the larger the dimensions the groaner Mr.
Brotherhood's receipt.. Accordingly on one at
two occasions Mr. Smith included the lasseme-
went* of certain excavations, in order did
Mr. Brotherhood might obtain his toeinighptz
sheet. Finding that the directors were axe
Mr. Brotherhood determined to make a Nispe4od of
this engineer, and on the 29th of December, withont
any previous complaint, Mr. Smith received
instructions to attend the defendant's office, Nhirik
he did. Mr. Brotherhood then " You are die-
missed ; I hear that on are in the habit of setae,
ntexicated." He did not allow him to make a
defence but immediately discharged him. After his
dismiss:l he obtained another 'situation in the eerriee
of a Mr. i lion. --The plaintiff was called, and proved
the above facts. He denied having bum
, away from business on the 'Mid and
24th of December last, and also that be had our
been intoxicated on the works.—Mr. Wilma, his
present employer, was called, Ilr ho stated that he
found the plaintiff in every way competeut, and Mr.
William Clings, his late employer, expreesed himself
in similar terms. The segment of Folios et
Wheatley, and several other witnesses were called,
who denied that they had ever seen the plaiatiff in-
toxicated, and one of the men in the service of de-
fendant, stated that Mr. Smith was upon the works
both early and late, and that be had never emu him
intoxicated. —Mr. Smith, for the defence, called Ilk.
Brotherhood, who denied having engaged the plain-
tiff by the twelvemonth, but by the fortnight. He
had frequently complained to him of his intemperate
habits, and he had himself seen him into:ice/NE
That was the reason he d' him. His (da4*
dent's) son gave the plaimi s wale .410 in its. et
, notice. Several witnesses were called who staked
that the defendant was in the habit of getting ixi-
toxicated. The learned counsel severally oddness.,
the jury for their respective clients, his lordship
summed up, and the jury returned a verdict forth.
defendant.

Thia concluded the Assizes.

SALISBURY.—Crrr Perrr diratooss, VOIDAT.
Before the Mayor, (J. Style, Eaq.,) and John Hooey,
fisorurrum.—lsabella and Ellen Bailey were
with stealing two ladies cloaks, the property=
fladam, draper, Canal. Mr. Coombe, draper, el
Butcher-row, on Saturday, Wive Information to Mr.
Superintendent Callow that two women had visited hie
shop. and that after they had left he mimed • par Si
boots. He pointed out the two women of whom be
bad suspicion, and the superintendent watched them
for upwards a 0 hour. He saw them go three
and endeavour to take another pan of boots frotr2
the nail outside Mr. Coombe' shop. Sergeant M
was afterwards put on their track, and he saw tit=
prisoner, Isabella Bailey, go into Mr. Haelarn's Mien
she remained there about • minute, and then came eel
and ran across the Canal. The officer inquired et Mr.
Huhim if he had lost anything, and he then ropilyd Is
the negative: but, about • quarter of an bent atter.
ward& he ditouvered that two ladies' cloaks were
sing, and he gave information to the police.
woman, after leaving Mr. Haslam's shop, went into the
Wheataheal Inn, where ahe and her sister had taken
lodgings. They *ere in an upstairs room when the
officer entered the home, and be immediately wort to
them, and charged them with stealing two capes. On a
chair behind where the elder prisoner was standing, be
found the two mom, which were identified by Mr.
Moho: as his property. He took the.. into custody,
and OR the younger prisoner was found the pair of boob
stolen from Mr. Coombs' shop. The prisoners pleaded
guilty, cal they were each sentenced to three months
Imprisonment with hard labour.

IiTIALING as ACCulLDloll.—Elizabeth Waters was
charged with stealing an accordion, the p_ropert_y of Yr.
Sewell, pawnbroker, Milford-street. P.C. Drowmitt
having received information of the robbery, followed
the prisoner into Pennyfarthingstreet, where ate
dropped the accordion on geeing the officer in parssit
of her. The prisoner pleaded guilty, and vu meioses*
to 21 days' imprisonment.
COUPTT PETTY 13E55101te, TUVIIDA.T.—Before Z.
Hiniman, Esq. iChairnian), Sir B. Hulas, Bart., W. L
Matobrun, Fp., W. Pinckney. Esq., and A. 1). Haney,
Esq.
billlol.lB AKSAULT.—George Carter vu summoned
for having violently assaulted William 'Vines, as the
30th of Jane, at Woodford.—lt appeared that MGM
disturbance took piece between the wives, which we.
afterwards joined in by the husbands. The defendant
accused the complaisant of having said something dis-
respectful in reference to his daughter, and the quarrel
ran so high that wishing to cool the •ffair,the defendant
threw • pail of water over the complainant. After he
had done so he struck him with, head with the bueteti
and afterwards gave him • blow on the forehead with
the bottom of the pail, which indicted a very severe
wound. The complainant bled profusely, and he was
obliged lobe removed to the Salisbury Infirmary, where
he remained for a fortnight. Ile suffered very tam*
from the wound, and he bad not yet reeovered, in
cross-examination by the defendant be denied that
be struck the defendant's wife, or that he attempted to
assault Carter. Junes Finhani and Josiah Conduit
were called by the complainant, and then described the
assault, showing that the defendant had used consider-
able violenee.—The defendant denied that he had strode
the complainant, but contended he held the pail ',Ur
defend himself, and that the complainant ran his
head against it—Frederick Fry, Jacob Stokes,
and Johan:lab Witt, supported the defendant's
statement, and swore that complainant streek
the defendant's wife before Carter samulted him. The
magistrates told the defendant that he was liable to a
heavy penalty, but as there appeared to have been
great provocation they would only inflict a fine of ffl
and expenses, or in default three weeks' imprisonment.—
The defendant said be would go to gaol, but afterwards
relented, and paid the money.
STZeLING AYPIA/L Alfred Gerrish and Charles
Blake were summoned for having stolen a quantity of
apples, the property of Kr. John Woodcock, at Nether-
harapton, on the 11th of July. —Thedefendante pleaded
guilty.—The complainant saw the defendants in the
orchard, knocking the apples off the trees, and whoa he
overtook them he found a number of apples intheir
possession.—The defendants were fined 10t. and film
expenses, or in default 14 days' imprisonment.
The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Salisbury has re-
cently licensed the following gentlemen :—The Bev.
Alfred Child, Clerk, M.A., to the Gurney of Maids.
Newton, Dorset; the Bev. Henry Deane, Clerk, 8.A.,
Fellow of St. John's College. Oxfotd, to the Carney
of St. Thomas' of this city; and the Hey. Matthew
Mortimer Finch, Clerk, WA., to the Curacy of
Donhead St Mary. with Charlton, Wilts*.
Our townsman, Mr. John Keynes, of the Castle-
street nursery, has been most successful at the annual
exhibition oi roses, held on Thursday and Friday at
Birmingham, where he carried away no lees than five
prises. In the nurserymen's class open to all England,
he won the second prize of £5 for 96 varieties, single
Criss ; the first prise of £6, for 48 varieties, single
truss; the first prize of £6 for 24 varieties, three trusses.
In the open class he won the first of 03, for 24 new
roses, single trusses, and the second prize of 1.1, for
the beet new rose. The Birmingham papers speak
highly of Mr. Keynes' rases, one of them stating that
the first prize for the 48 varieties was unanimously
admitted to be far the beet in the show, and perhaps
the best that has ever been exhibited.

Time was when good Tea was readily obtainable—.
pure wholesome tea—and people generally seek sash
now. John Chinaman has not been slow in lindiamr.o.a•
that he can paw off his brown waste leaves by
ing all qualities alike, thus greatly increasing his cars
and the merchant's proem, at the consumer's expellee.
It is highly requisite that good Tee be again reedily
obtaioable ; Horniman and Co., London, thallium
import it Pure, without any mineral jaowder on Ms
enrlsce, being the strong, delicious, and Invigorating
spring sort.; the green • dull olive—not bluish;
the black not made inteneely dark: bang thus undis-
guised, it is reliable in quality. Supplied only in
Packets, thrott4h Horniman's own Agents. See adver-
Liniments in this ciav's paper.
Maus A trrotuirrre's Hair, during her Imprieonment,
became completely colourless. Such changes of coigne
may now be completely restored by Herring's Magnetic
Brushes, As , of which Dr. Hamill reports, "I regard
them as the most perfect Brushes hitherto made, as
respects their mechanical construction, and their
Ilapetical action." They are THE remedy for Gm
Hair, Neuralgia, Rheumatism,
N.B.—eoritterfeits are being seat.
Offices, 32, Basinghall-street, London.
A REAL BLUM:W.—No parent or invalid should fell to
too" Ilaizena." One trial will suffice to show the correctness
of the J ury of the lute Exhibition in proclaiming " Mauna"
"exceedingly excellent for food," and awarding to it the
two and only prize medals given to any article of its kind.
Now that it is becoming more generally known, our first
physician, are recommending it as the best, lightest, most
palatable. and most nutrit ous food for invalids and chil-
&en ; and prepared according to the directions given, it
nuy be made into the moat delicious custards, puddings,
mania blunanangea, and a aeon of exquisite dishes.
effecting • wonderful saving in num isinglass, Its.

Triggs:mut; Esecaturtrt.—Place on the opPer
bar of a grate, with the heads projecting about one inch
inwards, some ordinary LW:Um—in • few moments they
ignite. Then in the same position place a few of the
Patent Barely Matches of Bryant and May,
Ornicit JONITZ ONLY On ens aux,) and it wiU biftaf=
that they may remain for hours—in fact until the wood
becomes literally charred—without taking fire. We look
on this as a singularly interesting emifirmad= of the
Safety of the new klatch. Caro must be taken in both
eases to avoid acmes, coated with flame.

POILOWAY. PIMA Ounimarr. Maga aM gionin
Corn I.jnu.—Afl ak
Menem springing hem foul bleed, 11061ariosi
elmespbres. inn be eared Ise Oen noble
remedink Fever eve, imilams. breadoW di
stoma norgielato gag ham dinggdas godly LAT=
....ay ',mg WNW by Mad ungtalirl ts. 11041
ad nor onnidaalytO pnagglag dr pan and MP minerals el
tbi, body, and to saddling that reksedent, or
corrupt Thus tba a= I sot ftnt and gpligmgral. but
opiate and genossent on awanaM /rho have neraemft
:feed their no. sr have grebe( sUy teetlged. la ve ah
quarters of the globe, whosessmess of =ad sad allow.
gdaof C. 010.11011 =mod ingonging and hd, trim* of
ap =damming dignagiCiam Wen tbrwaSily fialilooll
Ilelle111).1110111641411.