The Sun.
London, England, 1855-01-13 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—Jan. 12.

EQUITY COURTS.
(Before the Master of the Rolls.)
LORD 131COUGHAM V. LORD PAULETT.
His Honour delivered judgment in this case, which
was argued some time ago. The plaintiffs are executors
under the will of late Duke of Cleveland, and the case
was brought on as g special case for the opinion of the
court on the constrAction of a clause in the will of the
testator, directing that his debts, legacies, legacy duty,
the costs of proving his will, and the execution of the
trusts thereof should be paid out of a specified fund. The
estates are considerable, and the costs of carrying the
trusts into execution are expected to be heavy. The
real question in the mat was whether the costs of car-
rying the trusts of the will into execution so far as re-
garded the real estate should be paid out of the personal
estate.

His Honour held that the clause had a limited mean-
ing, and that the costs of executing the trusts of the
various estates, and interests created by the will and
codicil, must fall on the cestui qne trusts, and where
some act was done which was mutually for the benefit of
the persons interested in various parts of the estate, or
in all parts of the estate, such as the appointment of new
trustees, those costs would have to be borne by the cestui
quo trusts-in proportion to their several interests,
-

(Before Vice-Chancellor Kinders/ey.)
siIINN V. HOBBS.-ATTEMPTED =BERT,

On this case being called on,
The Vice-Chancellor said he had received two letters
from two of the parties interested, who are ladies, offer-
ing him a handsome present in the event of his deciding
in their favour. He was astonished at any one taking
such a course ; indeed it was almost too ludicrous to be
believed ; but he should hand the letters to the Regis-
trar, with liberty to the other parties in the cause to
take copies of them, as was usual in such instances.
IN RE THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH'S ESTATES.

This was a petition of Lord Churchill, praying the
sanction of the Court of Chancery to two purchases of
some land for 3,5001. The usual reference had been
directed as to the propriety of the purchase, and to the
conveyancing counsel as to the title, which had been
found to be satisfactory ; but the conveyancing coun-
sel had required the presence of the cestui que trusts
before him.

Mr. Osborne, for the petitioner, said that all parties
were now before the court, and he asked his Honour
to :make the order confirming the purchases, without
sending the matter back to the conveyancing counsel.
The Vice• Chancellor said he could not dispense with
the rule requiring the approbation of the conveyancing
counsel, without exception. Hence the matter must
be sent back to the counsel, who had already advised
upon it before the order could be made.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
THE QUEEN V. T. H. MARSHALL, ESQ.
This was a rule obtained last term, calling upon
Thomas Horncastle Marshall, judge of the county
court of Wakefield, to show cause why a criminal in-
formation should not be filed against him, upon the
ground that, on the 19th of August last, he maliciously
refused audience to William Shaw, a barrister re-
tained on behalf of the plaintiff in the cause of Furs
nies v. Hauxwell, then called on for trial in the said
court. The application was made on the part of Mr.
Shaw, who distinctly charged the judge with being ac-
tuated by malicious motives in the course which he had
pursued. The affidavit of Mr. Shaw set forth that he
was called to the bar in the year 1844, that he was a mem-
ber of the Northern Circuit and West Riding Sessions,
and practised in the county court of Wakefield, of
which Mr. Marshall was the judge. On the 19th of
August last, having been retained for the plaintiff in the
case of Furniss' v. Hauxwell, Mr. Shaw, at the time
appointed for the sitting of the court, viz., ten o'clock,
entered the court, and took his seat in the place as-
signed to counsel. At half-past ten the judge entered,
and Mr. Shaw as a mark of respect, rose up. The
business of the court then commenced, but the judge,-
interrupting the business, demanded of James Alfred
Shaw, the reporter of the Wakefield Express, why he
continued to come into the reporters' box, from which
he (the judge) had Lad him removed twice before ? The
reporter, who was in no way related to, or connected
with Mr. Shaw the barrister, then rose from his seat,
and the judge went on to ask him if he was the au-
thor of a report which bad appeared in his (the re-
porter's) newspaper ? The reporter replied that he was
responsible for the report, and that it was a true report.
The judge retorted that the report was false ; that he
could give the reporter credit for any amount of igno-
rance ; but that there gni more than ignorance in the
report—there was mafice. The judge then ordered
the reporter to leave the box, but the latter refused,
alleging that, as the court was public, he bad
a right to be there. The judge eventually
directed an officer forcibly to expel the reporter from
his seat, and to remove him to another part of the court.
This was accordingly done, and he was placed on a seat
where there was no accommodation for reporting ; but
he soon after left the court. Mr. Shaw was the only
barrister present during these proceedings, but he took
no part in them whatever, either by word or gesture.
The business of the court then proceeded for a few
minutes, when the judge, again interrupting the busi-
ness, said to the applicant, Are you, Mr. Shaw, the
author: of that report Mr. Shaw respectfully rose, and
inquired to what report his honour referred ? To which
the judge, in a sneering and contemptuous manner re-
plied, " You know very well to what report I mean."
The judge, after soma inquiries of the usher of the
court, referred to the case of Hodgson v. Meeson, in
the Wakefield Express, and then said, " Now, Mr.
Shaw, did you write that report ?" Mr. Shaw, in a re-
spectful manner, replied as follows •—" Your honour, I
am astonished at such a question being put to me from
the bench ' • if asked elsewhere, I would have answered,
and even here, although I cannot recognise yourhonour's
right to put it, I will reply to it, if you will be good
enough to show me the report to which you refer." The
judge immediately replied, "Then you decline to answer
my question ?" To which Mr. Shaw answered that he
had not so declined. The conversation then ended, and
the business of the court was then resumed, and continued
for about half-an-hour, till the cause of Furniss v. liana-
well wasicalled on. Mr. Shaw then rose and said, "I appear,
your honour, in this case as counsel for the plaintiff," but!
he was interrupted by the judge, who said " Stop, sir !
The judge then took a book from his desk, and after
referring to it for a short time, looked at Mr. Shaw,
who had been standing during the interval, and the
latter, thinking he was to go on, recommenced by say-
ing, " As I was about to explain, your honour, in this
case." The judge again vehemently interrupted by say-
ing, "Did I not tell you to stop, sir ?" Mr. Shaw again
stopped, and continued standing for two or three minutes,
when the judge said, " I shall not hear you, sir." Mr.
Shaw respectfully asked upon what ground, and the
judge replied, "You have declined to answer my ques-
tion ; it is a contempt of court, and I shall not allow
you to practise until you answer it; I must not punish
the innocent and permit the guilty to escape.' Mr.
Shaw again tendered himself as the plaintiff's counsel,
but the judge refused to hear him, and adjourned the
case in order that other counsel mightl be retained. Mr,
Shaw then returned his brief and left the court, which
he had not since attended, though he tad been offered
several retainers. Mr. Shaw's affidavit stated that on
the occasion in question, as well as on all previous occa-
sions, he had conducted himself most respectfully towards
the judge, and had never been betrayed into imbecolning
conduct or language. He further explained that he had
been counsel for the defendant in the cause of Hodgson
v. Meeson, tried before the said judge on the 3d of June
last, and that at the request of Mr. John Robinson, the
editor and proprietor of the Wakefield Express, be had
furnished for that paper a report of the trial from the
notes taken on his brief, and while the facts of the case
were fresh in his recollection. Ile had at the same time
directed that the report should be submitted to the re-
porter, and compared with his shorthand notes. He
declared that the report so furnished was a faithful and
true report.
The present rule having been granted,
Mr. H. Hill, Q.C. (with whom was Mr. Hardy), now
showed cause on the affidavit of Mr. Marshall and others
that set forth, first, that the report of the case of Hodg-
son v. Meeson was unfair and incorrect in several par-
ticulars, and went intu a full account of what took place
on the occasion of the trial. This, it was contended,
would a ell account for any slight irritation Mr. Mar-
shall had exhibited when alluding to the report of that
case, especially as a leading
in the paper, reflectin article had been written
the case, founded o on Mr. Marshall's conduct in
unfair report, ng what it was contended was an
Lord Campbell—I ammorf.opsinhia•on that this rule must
be discharged. Had
without having first taken any stepw ine"le
to this court
sr any other tribunal,
then, on the case he has made,
very strong grounds for our interfereence!uld hjauvaegebaecetn
and if a
act-
ing maliciously is guilty of a misdemeanour,
judge acts, as it is said Mr. Marshall acted emrtta9th of
August, in so addressing Mr. Shaw, asking
tions and then silencing him, there would beras'tluouea; grounds for saying that it was done maliciously. strong
is shocked at such things happening before a regular
tribunal ; but, in my opinion, according to the practice
of this court and to expediency, Mr. Shaw, by apply-
ing to the Lord Chancellor, has precluded himself from
coming to this court for a criminal information. This
is an application to us to try and punish Mr. Mar-
shall. The granting of that writ is always in the dis-
cretion of the Court, and I think in the exercise of that
discretion we ought not to grant a criminal information
when an appeal has been made to the Lord Chancellor
and failed. The rule will, therefore, be discharged,
but, under all the
circumstances, certainly without costs.
Mr. Justice Coleridge,and Mr. Justice Wightman
concurred with the Lord Chief Justice.
Rule discharged vithoiit costs.

COMMON PLEAS.
COURT OF n
Banco.
Sittings i
(Before Chief Justice Jervis, Mr. Justice Maule, Mr.
Justice Cresswell, and - J -r• Justice Williams.)
LEFROY V. cIuDLAND.—LIBEL.
The plaintiff in this case was an attorney, and the de-
fendant was a magistrate of the county of Somerset.
It appeared•that the defendant, had
: al Court,
Lis wife under a decree of the Ecclesiastical apart from
whilst living
written a letter to her which imputed an improperiacted as
con-
nexion between her and the plaintiff, who had • 1
her solicitor in the proceedings in the Ecclesiastica
Court. The letter was sent to the plaintiff, and he
thereupon commenced the 'present action to recover
damages for libel, and at the trial before the Chief Jus-
tice in Middlesex, the jury gave a verdict for the plain-
tiff, damages 1,0001. A rule, however, was subsequently
Obtained, calling upon the plaintiff to show cause why
there shoal not be a verdict for the defendant, the
principal point being that there had been no sufficient
publication of the libel. The case was to-day called on 1
for argument.
Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., and Mr. Barnard appeared

for the plaintiff; and Mr. Serjeant Byles and Mr. Han.
nen hit. the defendant.

After some observations from counsel, it was arranged
that the action should be settled upon the terms that it
should be left to the Chief Justice to say for what amounb
the verdict should be entered, and that, as there were
one or two communications which it was not advisable
to read in public, his lordship should hear one counsel
on each side in private, after the court had risen.
The case was disposed of accordingly.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
(Sittings in Banco.)
WWI'S V. COMBE.-ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE.
Mr. Edwin James and Mr. Petersdorff appeared for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Hawkins represented the de-
fendant.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a person
in humble circumstances, to recover compensation in
damages from the defendant, Mr. Combe, a member of
the firm of Combe, Dellfield, and Co., the well-known
brewers, for alleged negligence on the part of his ser-
vants, by which the plaintiff's child had sustained serious
injury. It appeared that the child, a little boy two
years of age, was, together with other children, play-
ing in the street at the time the defendant's dray,
driven by his servant, was proceeding slowly down
the street. The drayman, who was sitting on the
side of the dray, did not see the little boy, who was
knocked down by one of the horses, and the wheel
passed over his body. The child, after the accident, was
removed to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, where he re-
mained for ten weeks, during which time he suffered
most severely. The medical testimony went to prove
that the injury was of a most serious character, and
from the symptoms exhibited the child might become
deformed. The evidence adduced on behalf of the de-
fendant was in direct opposition to that of the plaintiff,
and attempted to prove that there was no negligence
on the part of the drayman, but that the injury sus-
tained by the child was purely the result of accident.
The learned judge having summed up the evidence,
left it to the jury to say whether or not they thought
the driver of the dray had sufficient command over
his horses when sitting on the shafts. If they were of
opinion he had not, that amounted to negligence, and
the plaintiff would be entitled to their verdict for such
an amount as they considered the justice of the case
required.

The jury having retired, returned into court after
a short absence, with a verdict for the plaintiff - -
Damages 501.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Tan. 12.

MANSION-HOUSE.---J. Patey, charged with hav-
ing stolen five pieces of iron from the premises of an
ironmaster in Upper Thames-street, and J. Sallie, who
carried on business on the other side of Southwark-
bridge, charged with having received the property
knowing that it had been stolen, were put to the bar
before Alderman Wire.

The Alderman, who had from time to time adjourned
the case in the expectation that the prosecutors would
have made particular inquiries about the parties accused,
and the mysterious circumstances connected with the
charges which were some days ago detailed in the public
papers, asked whether any further evidence had been
elicited, and the following is an abstract of what took
place upon the subject :
The only evidence against Patey as the thief was, it
nay be recollected, that of Sallis, the suspected re-
ceiver, who stated that Patey brought the iron to his
premises about six o'clock in the morning, and was
to call for the price of it in the course of the day
on which the property was stolen and deposited on
the premises, and who gave Patey into custody in
the evening of the same day, for having attempted
to sell it.

Mr. Hobler, for the prosecution, said he had no fur-
ther evidence to produce, and that as the two prisoners
could not, according to the statements made, be both of
them committed with any chance of conviction, he was
desirous that the man accused of receiving, being charged
with an offence more dangerous to the community,
should be sent for trial, if the magistrate entertained the
same opinion.
Mr. Wontner, who appeared for Sallis, submitted that
his client had exonerated himself, by showing that Patey
was the person who had brought the iron to the pre-
mises, and by giving him into custody when he called to
receive the money.
Patsy said his mother, who could prove that he
was ill in bed at the time it was stated that he was de-
livering the iron, was present, to show that it was quite
impossible that he could have been out of his room at
the time.

Mrs. Patey then presented herself, and swore that her
son was in bed with his wife at the moment he was said
to have brought the stolen goods to Sallis's yard, and
that she never heard that her son had been involved in
any criminal difficulty before. The witness detailed
several circumstances in corroboration of her statement,
and underwent cross-examination by Mr. Hobler, which
led to the conclusion that she had come forward-merely
for the purpose of getting her son out of the danger of
committal, and was ready to say anything to effect that
object.
Upon the part of Sallis Mr. Woniner called witnesses
CLue of whom, a respectable person, made a statement,'
which, although not at all calculated to exonerate that
prisoner from the imputation of being the receiver,
added to the belief that Patey was the thief. The other
witnesses called, however, gave such evidence as obliged
the alderman to say that he did not believe one word
uttered by any of them.

After amoa strict investigation into the case, which
was con.tidered to be one of peculiar importance to
tradesmen,
Alderman Wire said he had no doubt that wit-
nesses, whose evidence had been framed for the occa-
sion, had been brought forward by both prisoners. He
had no doubt whatever upon the subject himself, and
he lamented that facilities were given by men who
were apparently conducting extensive establishments
with some character, to the disposal of property
stolen, and conveyed too at an hour when honest and
iidustrious people were going to their work. It was
palpable that the iron had bean brought into the pre-
mises of Sallis by a thief, and that Sallis had no objec-
tion to deal with the thief, and had appointed a time for
the payment of the price, whatever it might have
been, of the produce. It was evident, too, that the
mother of Patsy had perjured herself, for she had
sworn that she had never known her son had ever be-
fore been in any difficulty of a criminal nature, for it
had been ascertained that Patey had been imprisoned
before for dishonesty, and that there was no depen-
dence to be placed on any representation she had
made. The matter involved a great deal of con-
tradiction and legal difficulty, and there appeared
to be no chance of a eoaviction in the event of a
prosecution of either of the prisoners, for the only wit-
ness against Patey was his fellow-prisoner. -Under such
circumstances the only course left for the magistrate to
pursue was to discharge both prisoners, with the con-
duct of whom it was necessary that the public should
be made acquainted. The alderman, in conclusion, said
he thought the prosecutors ought to have taken care in
such a case to have acted more vigorously in the in-
vestigation, but he said that without imputing the
slightest blame to their solicitor, who had, he had no
doubt, acted completely up to their instructions.
The prisoners were then discharged, and Patey's
mother, who had been temporarily committed for per-
jury, was also discharged with a severe reprimand.

Miles Receipts.
opened. NAME OF RAILWAY.
1855. 1554. 1855.
ERITIBH. £ X .
72 Aberdeen .......... - ........ ..... 1,439 1,929
37 N Belfast and Ballymena - ............ 396 767
17 Belfast and County Down.. - • • • • • .• 116 220
33 Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire 1,661 1,993
261{a Bolton, Blackburn, and West York .... - -
117 Bristol and Exeter .. - ......., .... ~ 4,4 6 4,610
189 k Caledonian. ....... ..., „.„ _ _ 9,711 11,395
142 Edinburgh and Glasgow .. ~ .. ~ 4,841 4,713
9434, Cheater and Holyhead ••.•.. - - 3,255 4,600
6} Cork, Blackrock, and Passage •• •• • • 181 181
20 Cork and Bandon - - ...... -••- - 190 260
56 Dublin and Belfast Junction •• ••• • •• 748 819
63 I Dublin and Drogheda." • ......... 939 1,137
6
Dublin and Kingstown • • • • • • • • •• • • •• 672 675
16% Dundee and Arbroath ••••••• • • • • . • • 543 511
31 Dundee, Perth, and Aberdeen Junction 748 826
25 Dundalk ana Enniskillen...... ••• • • • 179 274
68 East Anglian.... -•• • •
81% East Lancashire .• • • ................ 3,879 5,283
417 Eastern Counties and Norfolk.. ••• • 3 14,544 17,477
78 Eastern-Union • ..• • • • • • • • • .. • • • • • •
6 Edinburgh, Perth, and Dundee •••• •• 2,427 3,354
Exeter and Crediton.. • • ...... • • • • .. 23 143
22 Furness Railway •• • ••••••- • • .. • • 333 494
183 Glasgow, and South-Western •• • ... - ,181 6516
21 3 Great Northern and E. L. •••. • • •• ••.156,141 18,,716
188 Great Southern and Western (Ireland) 4,348 4,930
242 Great Western ••• • • ••••••••• 15,678 19,874
25 Irish South Eastern • • • • •• • • .. • • •• •. 227 306
90 Lancaster and Carlisle 5, •••••••• 370 5,153
260 Lancashire and Yorkshire.. ••• • • • .... 16,585 19,205
- Leeds Northern .. • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
169 Liverpool, Crosby, and Southport •• • . 281 316
553 i London and North Western ..... •• •• 37,027 46,173
5%. London and Blackwall - • ..• •• • . .... 1,036 1,215
174 London, Brighton, and South Coast.. 8,094 10,171
267 London and South We5tern......... 10,020 11,436
GO Londonderry and Enniskillen ... . 305 508
- Manchester, Buxton, and Matlock, &c. - -
171 Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire 6,095 8,304
916 Manchester and ScnthJunction- .. - 566 708
28 Maryport and Carlisle • • - • • • • • • •• - 602 787
498% Midland - ...- ........ _
12616 Midland Great Western (Irish) ••• • • • 1,60 2,545
37 Monklands -............-- - - - 529 574
781(, Newcastle and Carlisle.... • ..... _ - 2,577 3,034
119 North British --....--. • • • ~ _ ~ 4,972 4,933
- North Staffordshire .............- - -
461 i North-Western ........., _ _ •
_ ~ 619 664
851,/, Scottish Central - .............. „ „ 1,964 2,579
32 Scottish Midland • • ............. „ 593 841
29% Shrewsbury and Birmingham .... - 874 960
48 Shrewsbury and Chester • • •••• .. - .. - -
30 Sliropehiro Union ................ .. 644 793
573,1 South Devor.• • ..... . .............. 2,203 2,12 G
209 South Eastern- ........ ,•-„ „ „ .„ 14,269 17,291
1621: South Wales ..................„ _ 3,219 4,523
97 South York., Doncaster, and Goole .. - -
38 Taff Vale ....- - ..... - .......... 2,530 2,861
36 Ulster. •• •• - •• •• •• •• - •........... 1,111 1,102
77 Waterford and Limerick • • - ...... - - -
25 West Cornwall .... - -... , ....... 479 515
12 Whitehaven Junction ............... 290 315
682 York and Newcastle, and Berwick &
York and North Midland & Leeds - -
FOREIGN.
5714 Dutch Rhenish •.•••• - - - - • • .... 874 354
263 Lyons and Mediterranean •••••• • • .. 7,141 8,604
63 Monterean and Troyes .... - 527 1,728
63 Namur and Liege ...... - .......... - -
445 Northern of France .... - .......... 24,197 20,162
697 Orleans and Central* .. ..... ........ 26,528 30,854
240 Paris and Lyons .., .... • • •......... 14,256 25,176
82 Paris and Rouen. ...... • . - • • • • • • .• 7,335 7,914
892 Paris and Strasburgh .. .. •. • • ..., .. 24,179 33,064
59 Rouen and Havre • • • ... •• . .. 3,183 3,285
157 Western of France ...... •• • • •• •• - 3 916 6,710

THE LONDON GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT.

WHITEHALL, JA:. 10.
Tho Queen has been pleased to grom`, the Oleo of one of
the Lords of Session in Scotland to James Cranford, Esq. ,
her Majesty's Solicitor-General for Scotland, in the room
of the Right Hon. Andrew Rutherford, decoased.

WHITEHALL, JAN. 11.
The Queen has been pleased to grant the office of her
Majesty's Solicitor-General for Scotland to Thomas Mac-
kenzie, Esq., advocate, in the room of James Craufurd,
Esq., appointed one of the Lords of Session in Scotland.
DOWNING-STREET, JAN. 10.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint the Collector of
Customs for the Colony of Van Diemen's Land to be a
non-elective Member of the LogiNsls,tive Council of the said
Colony.
BOARD OF TRADE, WHITEHALL, JAN. 11.
The Right Honourable tre Lords of the Committee of
Privy Council for Trade and Plantations have received,
through the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, a copy
of a despatch from her Majesty's Minister at Lisbon, re-
porting that the Portuguese Board of Health has declared
all the ports of Great Britain " clean" since the Bth of
December last, with the exception of London and Glou-
cester, which are still considered " suspected" of cholera
morbus.

BOARD OF TRADE, WHITEHALL, JAN. 12.
The Right Honourable the Lords of the Committee of
Privy Council for Trade and Plantations have received,
through the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, a copy
of a note from the Netherlands Minister at this Court, a
translation of which is subjoined, reporting the substitu-
tion of a light of increased power in the Straits of Sunda,
in the place of the one which has hitherto existed.
(Copy.)
(Tr a nsl ation.) Loudon, Jan. 6, 1855.
My Lord,—According to the instructions of my Govern-
ment, I have the honour to acquaint your Excellency that
the Minister of Marine at the Hague has received a notice
that on the Ist September last the light of the fourth size,
situate on the 4th angle of the Strait of Sunda (East Indies),
was extinguished and would be replaced by a light of
greater power (that is to say of the second size), and that
due notice will be given of the time at which this light
will be exhibited.

(Signed)

BENTICK.

WAR•OFI;ICE, JAN. 12.

6th Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Staff-Surgeon of the
Second Class James Prichard Moline to be Surgeon, vice
Taylor, promoted on the Staff, Jan. 12.
2d Dragoons—James Brander Dunbar, Gent., to be
Cornet, without purchase, vice Nugent, promoted, Jan. 12.
9th Light Dragoons—Surgeon John Harry Ter Jones,
from the 56th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Grant, promoted
on the Staff, Jan. 12. •et
11th Light Dragoons.—Cornet Charles Ley King to be
Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Dunn, who retires, Jan. 12.
Henry Fraser Dimedale, Gent., to be Cornet, without pur-
chase, vice Annesley, promoted, Jan. 11. Robert Arthur
Brooke, Gent., to be Cornet, vice King, Jan. 12.
17th Light Dragoons—Lieutenant W. J. P. Watson to
be Captain, by purchase, vice Morgan, who retires; Cornet
George Heblethwayt Lutton Boynton to be Lieutenant, by
purchase, vice Watson, promoted, Jan. 12.
Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards.—Captain George
Robert Fitzßoy, from the 41st Foot, to be Lieutenant and
Captain, without purchase, vice Ramsden, killed iu ac-
tion ; Lieutenant James Alfred Caulfield, from the 17th
Foot, to be Lieutenant and Captain, by purchase, vice
Bourchier, who retires, Jan. 12.
let Foot—Lieutenant John Alexander Chrystie to bo
Captain, by purchase, vice J. A. G. Campbell, who re-
tires, Jan. 12. To be Lieutenants without purchase--
Ensigns Albert Seagrim, from the 36th Foot, F. J. Pon-
sonby Hill, from the 36th Foot, Sherlock V. Willis, Dun-
can C. Brock, James Creagh, Joseph H. Fawcett, Jan. 12.
sth Foot—To be Lieutenants without purchase—Ensigns
F. Hedworth Williamson, A. Bower St. Clair, William
Connell, Jan. 12. To be Ensign without purchase—Ensign
John Joseph Grinlinton, from tho 65th Foot, vice Howley,
promoted, Jan. 11. To be Ensigns by purchase —John
Wolseley Fetberston-Haugh, Gent., Jan. 11. ; John Cla-
rence Boyce, Gent., Jan. 12.
7th Foot—Lieutenant G. W. Wallace Carpenter to be
Captain, by purchase, vice W. R. Browne who retires ;
To bo Lieutenants without purchase—Ensign James
Francis Hickie, from the 59th Foot ; Ensign Napier D.
Robinson; Ensign Edgar John Disney; Ensign Honour-
able Edward FitzCiarenco, Jan. 12. To be Ensigns by
purchase—James Kennedy M'Adam, Gent., Jan. 11; John
Emilius Elwes, Gent., Jan. 12.
_ .

9th Foot—To be Lieutenants without purchase—Ensign
Thomas Taylor, from the Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment ;
Ensign Charles James Borton ; Ensign Thomas Reliant,
Jan. 12. To bo Ensign by purchase—William Augustus
Elinhirst, Gent., Jan. 12.
11th Foot Assistant Surgeon Peter Divorty, M.D.,
from the Staff, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Marshall,
promoted in the 65th Foot, Jan. 12.
13th Foot—Quartermaster-Serjeant Thomas Hoban to
be Ensign, without purchase, Jan. 12.
14th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon William Kelinan Chal-
mers, M.D., from the 18th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice
Denny, promoted on the Staff, Dec. 12.
17th Foot—To be Lieutenant without purchase—Ensign
H. Adolphus H. Versturmo, from the 59th Foot ; Ensign
Frederick Archibald Macreight, from the 3d Foot,
Jan, 12. To he Ensign by purchase—William Henry
Parker, Gent Jan. 12.
. . _

18th Foot—To bo Lieutenants without purchase—En-
signs Jacob Francis Bryant and Walter Blake Burke, from
the 40th Foot ; Ensign Thomas Durand Baker; Ensign
Wm. Kemp, Jan. 12. To be Assistant-Surgeon— Acting-
Assistant-Surgeon Andrew Semple, vice Chalmers, pro-
moted in the 14th Foot, Jan. 12.
19th Foot—Ensign Thomas Thompson to be Lieutenant,
without purchase ; George Forbes, Gent., to bo Ensign, by
purchase, Jan. 12.
Captain,
owo tii7k Het uptue
caunat i rWA nerlyl
nAgT i t
Mitchell be
to be Lieutenant, without purchase, Jan. 12. To be En-
signs by purchase—Henry Wormald Mason, Gent., Jan.
11 William Young, Gent., Jan. 12.

21st Foot—Brevet-Major John Henry Cooke, from half-
pay unattached, toj be Captain, repaying the difference;
Lieut. F. R. E. Burnside, from the (list Foot, to be Cap-
tain, without purchase. To be Lieutenants without pur-
chase—Ensigns James Gregorie 11`Donald. Tulloch, from
the 32d Foot ; Thomas Bruce, Humphrey Fowler (Adju-
tant), Stanislas G. B. St. Clair, T. Barchell Hollway,
Thomas Coakley, Jan. 12. To be Ensigns by purchase—
Thomas Hennis Green, Gent., Jan. 11; Robert O'Halloran
Clay, Gent., Jan. 12.
23d Foot.—Ensign Charles Grantley Campboll Norton,
from the 52d Foot, to be Lieutenant, without purchase ;
Boscawen Trevor Griffith, Gent., to bo Ensign, by pur-
chase, Jan. 12.

24th Foot.-=Captain Charles Frederick Gibson, from
half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice Hartshorn, who
exchanges ; Lieutenant William Douglas Hall Baillie, to
be Captain, by purchase, vice Gibson, who retires ; Ensign
John Henry Armit to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice
Baillie, Jan. 12.
28th Foot—To be Lieutenants without purchase—En-
sign E. S. R. Smyth, from the 67th Foot ; Ensign John
Godfrey Day, from the 48th Foot ; Ensign Francis Bro-
digan ; Ensign Wm. Alfred Steward ; ensign Frederick
A. Magenis, Jan. 12, To be Ensign by purchase—Alex-
ander Lyon Emerson, Gent., Jan. 12.
30th Foot—Captain Thomas gtevenson, from half-pay
Staff Corps, to be Captain, Jan. 12. To be Lieutenants
without purchase—Ensign Christopher J. H. Tolcher, from
the 59th Foot ; Ensign George Phipps Prevost, from the
85th Foot, Jan. 12. _

33d Foot—Lieutenant W. H. Parry to be Captain by
purchase, vice Quayle, who retires, Jan. 12. To be Lieu-
tenants without purchase—Lieutenant John Trent, from
the 81st Foot ; Ensign Charles Whately Willis ; Ensign
Arthur Edward Augustus Ellis; Ensign Hon. Raymond
H. De Montmorency, Jan. 12.
34th Foot--Tyssen Sowley Holroyd, Gent., to be En-
sign, by purchase, Jan. 12.
39th Foot—Lieutenant E. Beauchamp Mannsell to be
Captain, without purchase ; Wm. Henry Palmer, Gent.,
to be Ensign, by purchase, Jan. 12.
40th Foot—Ensign Charles Francis Brooke to be Lieu-
tenant, without purchase, vice Hewett, appointed to the
20th Foot, Jan. 12.

41st Foot—To be Ensigns without purchase —Lieutenant
Wiliam Henry Gardner (Cornwall, from the Royal North
Gloucester Militia, Jan. 10 ; Charles Lewis Furlonge,
Gent., vice Thynne, promoted in the Grenadier Guards,
Jan. 11. To be Ensign by purchase—Stanley Robert
Robinson Smith, Goat., Jan. 12.
42d Foot—Lieutenant John Drysdale to be Captain,
without purchase, Jan. 12.
44th Foot—Lieutenant Wm. Fletcher to bo Captain,
without purchase, Jan. 12.
47th Foot—Ensign Edward Croker to be Lieutenant,
without purchase, vice Maycock, promoted in the 14th
Foot; Charles Van Renen Conway-Gordon, Gent., to be
Ensign' without purchase, vice Croker, Jan. 12.
49th Foot—Lieutenant John Thomas Cook, from the
Cambridgeshire Militia, to bo Ensign, without purchase,
vice Cahill,•promoted, Jan. 12.
50th Foot—Lieutenant Roderick Maingy Murchison to
be Captain, without purchase, Jan. 12; Ensign Thomas
Denote Lee to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice
Bond, deceased, Dec. 9.
56th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon William Double to be
Surgeon, vice Lanes, appointed to the 9th Light Dragoons,
Jan. 12.

60th Foot—Captain Edward Parker, from half-pay un-
attached, to be Captain (repaying the difference) vice
Brevet-Major J. K. Mackenzie, who exchanges, receiving
the difference, Jan. 12.
63d Foot—Ensign S. A. Y. Benyon to be Lieutenant,
without purchase, vice Morgan, died of his wounds ; Alfred
Grey, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, Jan. 11;
George Watlington Clutterbuck, Gent., to be Ensign,
without purchase, Jan. 12.
65th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon Thornton Marshall, from
the 11th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Prendergast, appointed
Staff-Surgeon of the Second Class, Jan. 12.
71st Foot—Lieutenant R. C. W. Stuart, to be Captain
without purchase, Jan. 12. To be Ensign by purchase—
Arthur Kindersley Blair, Gent., Jan. 12. To bo Assist-
ant-Surgeon—Acting Assistant-Surgeon John Grabham,
vice Simpson, promoted on the Staff, Jan. 12.
73d Foot—Hugh Fraser, Gent., to be Ensign, by pur-
chase, vice Henley, whose appointment has been can-
celled, Jan. 12.

81st Foot—Ensign Robert Wolseley O'Dell, from the
58th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Floyd, promoted, Jan. 12.
88th Foot—Caleb Robertson, Gent., to be Ensign, by
purchase, Jan. 12.
89th Foot—To be Assistant-Surgeons—Acting Assistant-
Surgeon Julius Wiles, vice Wall, promoted on the Staff ;
Acting Assistant-Surgeon Wm. Carden Roe, vice Gilborne,
promoted, Jan. 12. •
92d Foot—Serjeant-lfajor James George to be Quarter-
master, vice Donald 111'Queen, who retires upon half-pay,
Dec: 12.

93d Foot—Captain James Montagu Brown, from half-
pay Unattached, to be Captain ; Lieutenant James Spratt,
from the 35th Foot, to be Captain, without purchase,
Jan. 12.

94th Foot—Ensign William Edmondes Harness to be
Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Blair, promoted, by pur-
chase, to an Unattached Company; John Marriot Ay toun,
Gent., to be Ensign, by purchaso, vice Harness, Jan. 12.
95th Foot—John Joseph Bacon, Gent., to be Ensign
by purchase ; Lieutenant William Braybrooke, to bo
Adjutant, vice Macdonald, promoted ; Assistant-Surgeon
Francis Smith, from the Staff, to bo Surgeon, vice Browne,
deceased, Jan. 12.