The Sun.
London, England, 1855-04-04 00:00:00

stal holds the office of curate of the chapel at Islington.
My church was very well attended while I officiated.
It was a very large church, capable of holding 2,000 or
3 000 persons, and generally 1,400 or 1,50 attended.
I never opposed the power of the bishop, but objected
to his right to remove me. I received a second letter
from Islington. I had no other means of obtainitg,
a livelihood except the ministration of this church.'
I ultimately left. The statement in the letter of
the defendant, that I had intimidated my pari-
shioners, and induced them to sign memorials in

Evan 3 to watch the conduct of Mr. Robinson and his

wife.

Was not then in the police force.

On thell7th

of January went to Cheltenham for that purpose 7 and
on the 19th watched Mr. Carrington's house. About
halt-pat 10 o'clock Mr. Robinson went in there. I re-

inained about half an hour. Before that had seen Mr.

and Miss Carrington go out. About two hours after
inet Mr. Robinson and Mrs. Evans riding together.

They were not attended. Watched the house from
January 19th up to March 9th. Was there every morn-
ing from half-past ten to two, and from half-past two to
six. Mr. Robinson called every day, and sometimes
twice a-day. Saw him and Mrs. Evans riding together
three times, and walking ten or twelve times on the ter-
race. On Saturday, 28th January, saw Mr. Carrington
leave the house, and then saw Mr. Robinson come up
on horseback. He met two ladies coming out of the
door ; they were Mrs. and Miss Carrington. He went
in and stopped about 10 minutes. In the afternoon saw
Mrs. Carrington, Mrs. Evans, and another lady walk up
and down the terrace. Mr. Robinson came up and

my favour, is not true. There was only one
memorial in my favour, and I did not even know of the
fact until after it had been sent in. My parishioners
were very much attached to me. When I took the reel-
_

dente of the curacy, it was 3 mere shell, and I had to
paint and paper it, and laid oat a large sum of money for
a poor curate. I wanted to be paid for these repairs and
for my furniture before I left, and I applied to the de-

. _
fendant with that object but could not obtain the money
and the defendant merely renewed the offer of the mis-
sion to Chichester. My salary at Islington was ss. a-day,
ald there were certain dues which would raise my salary
to about 1501. or 1601. a-year. I was obliged to take
all my furniture away with me, and all the money I
received was 601. ; 30/. of this was due to me for :,a-
lary. I had to pay my solicitor 201. for his costs,'
and the 101. was all I had for fixtures I left in
the house. Cardinal Wiseman was aware of my in-
tention to educate young gentleman fir the universities,
to enable me to pay the rent and taxes of the house, and
lie promised to ;assist me in this endeavour. Before 1
left, Islington, Cardinal Wiseman withdrew my faculties.
The reason for doing so was because I asked for the
money I had expended on the house. Before the cardi-
nal went to Rome, I wrote him two letters of apology,
and I did so with the utmost sincerity, and actuated by
a desire to be re-employed. After these letters had been
written, I saw the cardinal at his palace in Golden-
square. I was shown into his reception-room, and I
went on my knees and asked him for pardon and for-
giveness. We were both affected, and I left the house
with Dr. Doyle, who had accompanied me, and I
thought all was forgotten and forgiven, and I had done
nothing whatever to provoke him or annoy him until
the period when the libel was published. After I was
removed from Islington, by the permission of Dr. Grant,
the Bishop of Southwark, I read masses in that district,
for which I received about 401., and that is al!. I had
to live upon small donations from my friends. After
this action was brought, I was prevented from perform•
ing this duty, and I have had no means of supporting
my self. . _ _

-.joined them. Saw Mrs. Evans leave the party acd go
int ) the house. In a few moments she came out and

whispered something to Mr. Robinson, who had stepped
ack. After walking a few yards, she then left him
again, and went into the house. She remained about
LWO minutes and then, corning to the step of the door,
stood upon tiptoe and beckoned to Robinson. Robinson
went up to her at once, and entered the house. They
remained there about 20 minutes. The blinds of th.•
first floor windows were down. When Mrs. Evans and
Mr. R'kinson came out they walked towards Bay's-hill,
and he saw Robinson take her by the hand, swing her
round, and they walked hack again. In June, received
an intimation that Mrs. Evans was in London, and on
the 26th of June saw defendant come out of his mother's
house, and followed him to his lodgings in George-street.
He then went to No. 2, Bryaustone-street. In about 20
minutes saw him come out with Mrs. Evans and a young
gentleman. They went to Hyde-park to a review of the
Essex Rifles. On the following day went to Mrs. King,
the landlady of No. 2, Bryanstone-street, and en-
gaged lodgings there. Engaged to pay her 251. a month
for the use of the whole house. Told her his name and
his purpose, and she said she could not assist it, but that
he might engage the whole house, which he did. He got
a person named Mrs. Grocott, at two guineas per week,
to enter the house, and act as cook therein place of Mrs.
Kiug's cook, who was leaving. Gave her a gimblet,
which Dr. Jones, of Manchester-square, gave him, and
instructed her to make a hole in the door of the draw-
ing-room.

contending that it fully supported the statements made
in his opening speech.
The Court adjourned at a quarter before nine o'clock.

APRIL 3.

His lord,hip took his seat on the bench shortly after
nine o'clock, and Mr. Watson proceeded to address the
jury for the defence. The case had been supported by
the testimony of the worthy Mrs. King, whose name was
assumed, and by the other company who acted as spies.
They were asked to believe those spies in order that the
plaintiff might get a verdict to do away with the settle-
ment, and then go to the House of Lords for a divorce,
but it would indeed make him blush if those gentlemen
who were the honour and glory of our land, entertained
the matter. What had been the relationship of the de-
fendant ? He had been the old and valued friend of the
gentleman before him (Mr. Carrington) ; he had been
the friend of the children since they were children ; he
had dined with them and taken tea with them, and had
that intercourse with them which existed amongst
friends, and which was done without any imputation on
their characters. Whether the defendant had been pay-
ing the attentions of a lover even before or after the
marriage, there had not been a single witness called to
prove it ; the fact was, the defendant had been most
intimate with the family, and the father now believed
in the innocence of his daughter and in the honour and
hone,ty cf his friend. He then commented upon the
characters of the various witnesses that had been called,
and in the strongest terms denounced the conduct of

Cross-examined—l was ordained in 1833 at Stony-
hurst. I was act a professed Jesuit in the society to
which I belonged. I bad not taken the solemn vow
that is required before a member is considered as a
professed Jesuit. I had been employed in missions
connected with the society in England before I left
The Rev. Dr. Lygo was provincial master of the society
in England in 1847. He called upon me to take the
lost solemn vow to place myself at the disposal of the
Pope for foreign missions about this time. I was aware
that if I was called upon to take the vow, and refused,
I was subject to dismissal, and it would be considered
discreditable to be so dismissed. I was never called
upon to take this solemn vow ; but I told him that if be
commanded me I would take it, but if it was op-
tional I should decline doing so, for reasons which
I stated to him. I left the society in consequence of my
asking to be released from my vows. When Dr. Lygo
was aware of my objections to taking the solemn vow,
he at once released me from taking it, and allowed me
to leave the society. I was appointed second priest at
Islington, under Mr. Lee, after this. He was an aged
man, and lived in lodgings, because he would not incur
the responsibility of keeping up the vicarage-house. The
latter was under repair, and Dr. Griffiths gave me 1501.,
which he expected, no doubt, would be expended in re-
pairs, but there was no understanding between us to
that effect. I was under a vow of poverty when [ left
the society, and I was received as such. It is a disputed
point whether a clergyman of our religion in England is
removable at the mere pleasure of the bishop, and the
clergy have petitioned Rome on the subject, and no
answer has been received. The clergy consider that
the bishop has not the power to remove a clergyman
arbitrarily. In a regular hierarchical system a bishop,
of course, bas the power to discharge a curate at his
pleasure. Ido not consider the defendant had any
moral or religious right to remove me. I expended
my money upon a distinct understanding, and I
should not have done so if I had thought I was liable
to be removed in such a manner. I laid out altogether
between 3001. and 4001. for the repairs of the house
and furniture. Ido not think there were more
than twelve or fifteen hundred Catholics in the parish
of Islington. In one of the letters I wrote to the de-
fendant I expressed my decided disinclination to leave
the curacy, and I disputed his power to remove me. I
had no document to satisfy him that I had made any
arrangement with Dr. Griffiths that I was not to be re-
moved. In our church an inferior would not dare to ask
for such a document from a superior. We are much in
their power and control that no priest would dare to say
to his superior, " Put this in black and white." He
would not do it, but would most probably say, "This is
not the man for me." Dr. Griffiths died about 6 months
after my appointment to the curacy at Islington. The
affairs of the church were reported to be, in a bad condi-
tion at the time when I was removed, and my salary
eras in arrear.

To Mr. Watson—When he engaged with Mr. Evans,
told him his charges were one guinea a-day, and 12s.
hotel expenses. It was finally settled that, as thrf case
might last three or six months, ho should have 15s. a
day and expenses. In London his charges were 7s. 6d.
a-lay and cab expenses. Does not expect any present
in this case beycnd his expenses. Sometimes gets a
present. Has had 251. and 501. sometimes. People
generally do give something if he succeeds. All he has
got out of Mr. Evans as yet is 501. or 601. Never knew
Sirs. King until he went to her house in Bryanstone-
street—never, upon his honour. (Loud laughter.)
His Lordship—Don't speak of yoar honour, sir.
Witness—l meant my oath, my lord.
Mr. Watson—Don't talk of your honour, or there we
shall leave you.
His Lordship- -Honour with a man who carries on 'a
private business of that kind !

The witness was further cross-examined at consider-
able length, but nothing important was elicited.
A wooden mode'_ of the floor of the house, No. 2, Bry-
an,tone-street, in which was the drawing-room in ques-
tion, was placed before the jury, and Mr. Field deposed
that it correctly represented the premises.
Sarah Grocott, High-street, St. John's-wood, one o
the witnesses examined at the last trial, deposed that she
was employed, as already stated, by Mr. Field, and that
she looked through the hole bored in the room, and wit-
nessed the act of criminal conversation. She adhered
to her former statement in every respect.
During the evidence of this witness, Mr. Watson re-
marked that it was a great pity there were several
females in court.

Field throughout the whole transaction. He then con-
trasted their statements, which be argued showed many
discrepancies. • He believed that the " whole set" had
entered into a conspiracy to carry out this action, each
well knowing, should it succeed, they would be well re-
warded. 'With regard to the remark about hooking the
fish, that might have come from Mrs. Robinson in the
most friendly manner ; but,. at all events, it would have
been much better if it had not been repeated. The
learned gentleman concluded in a powerful appeal to
give the matter their best consideration and attention,
for by the law he was unable to call the parties them-
selves, who would in the most emphatic manner deny
the slander that had been heaped on them, and he was
therefore confident of a verdict of not guilty.
His lordship proceeded to sum up. He said this was
an action for compensation in damages fur the loss of
the affections and for the seduction of the plaintiff's wife.
The defendant, of course, denied that he was guilty,
and plaintiff was therefore bound to bring evidence to
satisfy the jury of his guilt, and the first question was
had he so established his case ; if so, what compensation
ought he to receive ? Towards the close of the case the
' plaintiff's counsel brought forward evidence to prove the
existence of great intimacy between the defendant and
Mrs. Evans before the marriage. If that is to be cre-
dited, it would be insinuated that the parties had crimi-
nal connection at that time, and it certainly was very
remarkable that when the marriage took place there
did not appear to have been any suspicion of it. His
lordship then reviewed the evidence of some of the
witnesses, and remarked that the counsel for the de-
fence had alleged, that when the blind was pulled
down, when the parties were is London, it was to
keep the sun off. He left the jury to decide that.
He cautioned the jury against allowing their feelings to
lead their judgment. He said this because he could
not suppose that he could detail the rest of the evi-
dence to them without reviving the feeling of indigna-
tion which they must have felt yesterday on hearing
the account Field gave of himself and of his occupation.
For the first time in his life did he hear a man avow
publicly that his profession was that of a hired spy. He
told you that, having been for 20 years an inspector of
detectives, he had retired on a pension, and when he re-
covered his health he had commenced on his own account
as " a detector of frauds," &c. What thought they of
the sort of profession of a man writing on his door
" spy," to be hired at so much per day ; for he said,
"My price is 7s. 6d. a day in London, but in this in-
stance I bargained for a guinea a day and expenses for
keep, but finding it likely to occupy several months I
agreed to accept 15s. a day and 12s. allowance, for the
purpose of pursuing parties from place to place whom
I am appointed to watch." He was afraid it would
introduce an element into the stats of this country
if they were to have people who made a pro-
fession of this. They found a person had been
introduced into the house in the capacity of
cook ; might not a footman, or- the servant who
dressed their wives, be also introduced similarly ? And
to what base and villanous purposes would the services
of such people be turned when once introduced to their
confidence ? There was something so shocking, so re-
volting, to see a mac standing up before the public, pro-
claiming himself to be a hired spy by profession. He
was afraid he was departing from the gravity of the
bench, but the matter made him anxious to remember
the caution—don't let their feelings be led against their
judgment. After explaining various parts of the case,
his lordship concluded by stating that if they thought
that criminal intercourse had taken place, they must so
return a verdict, and estimate the damages according to
what the injured husband had lost. If they did not
believe the witnesses, they must return a verdict of not
guilty.
The jury then retired (12 o'clock), and were absent a
considerable time. On their return into court, they gave
a verdict for plaintiff—damages, 5001.

Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—lt is a great pity they should
have. to be reminded of it.

Mr. Watson said it would be necessary for him to put
several questions to the witness which it was not well
that females should hear, and their presence was a re-
straint upon him in the discharge of his duty.
His lordship directed the sheriff to intimate that
females had better withdraw, and several women, re-
spectably dressed, and many of them young, whose pre-
sence up to this period had attracted considerable re-
mark, then left the court.
The witness described the peculiar manner in which
the act took place. She further stated that on the 10th
of August she was walking with Mrs. King in Portman-
square, when Mr. Robinson came up and asked why she
went against him, and why she caused so much talk
against him in the neighbourhood ? She said it was not
she ; and he asked why there was so much talk about
him ? She said, "Ask yourself the question, Mr.
Robinson. It is not you I pity, but the Carringtons
and the family." He said if she went against him he
would have clever men employed, and he would bring a
conspiracy against her. She said she had gone out of
town to avoid the matter ; and he said, " Can't you go
out of town again ?"
To Mr. Watson—Did not mention this conversation
at the la-4 trial.
The witness was cross-examined at considerable length
by Mr. Watson, in reference to the act which she de-
posed she witnessed, but she repeated her former state-
ments.
MN. King, the party who let the apartments in
Br' anQtone-street, and who Wag examined at the former
trim, deposed to the facts of the hiring of the rooms by
Mr. Robinson, his subsequent visits to Mrs. Evans, and
the act of criminality which she alleged she also wit-
nessed through the hole bored in the door. She also
corroborated the evidence of the last witness regarding'
meeting the defendant and conversing with him, when
he said if she would find the cook and go away it would
be much better for her, because she would rue it if she
went against him. She said he asked what had he
ilo:me that she should go against him ? and she replied,
" Ask yourself ;" arid added that she was sorry fur him,
but she could not help it. He said, no matter whom
Mr. Evans brought against him, he would fight his cause
out.

In answer to other questions put in cross-examina-
tion, the plaintiff said that he should have given up posses-
eion of the house the moment he received the money he
considered he was entitled to. At one time he made a
demand of 6001., but he subsequently only asked 1001.,
and upon the cardinal pleading poverty, he said he con-
sented to take the 601., contrary to the advice of his so-
-1 ci tor, and he did so for the sake of peace.
Sergeant Shee then asked the witness whether he had
not requested some of his parishioners to write or sign
i a remonstrance or memorial to the cardinal upon the
,abject of his dismissal, and he put a letter into his hand
at the same time.
Mr. Boyle said he was quite ready to explain this
matter. The fact was, that, in the Roman Catholic
communion, where many of the parishioners were poor
and ignorant, they regarded the priest as their father,
and he was always looked upon in that capacity. lie
frequently wrote letters for them, and he remembered
that he wrote this one at the earnest request of the party.
It contained a request to be allowed to go to confession
at Easter to witness instead of to a stranger. The
name of the person appeared to be torn off, and he
should like to know who it was, as it would show that
he had acted most ungratefully and unfairly in inducing
him to write the letter for the purpose, as it appeared,
of handing it to the cardinal, or his solicitor.
Sergeant Shee said he did not believe any signature
had been torn from the letter.
Baron Platt, upon looking at the document, said it ap-
peered to him that the name had evidently been torn
from the letter.
, In further cross-examination, the plaintiff said be had
not heard it stated that the word made use of by the
cardinal in his original letter was " renvoyd- and not
" repuls6," but he considered one equally as offensive as
as the other. He was never either expelled or dismissed
from the Society of Jesuists. He was answerable for
the costs of the first trial, but his friends had assisted
him in getting up this present trial. He had received
assistance from Dr. Worthington, a clergyman of the
Established Church, and other gentlemen. ,
Mr. Hyan, a gentlenAn connected with the Audit-
office, and who was one of the plaintiff's congregation
at Islington, said he had frequent opportunities of see-
ing him, and he always considered him a most pious,
zealous, and attentive clergyman, and he was particu-
larly kind to the poor and the sick, He also said that
when he heard of the intention of Cardinal Wiseman to
remove him, he spontaneously drew up a memorial to
the cardinal, praying that he might be allowed to re-
main, and in a very short time this memorial was signed
by 1,100 of the plaintiff's parishioners. He said he re-
membered reading the libel that appeared in the Univers,
and it caused him great regret. He had no doubt that
it was intended to apply to the plaintiff.
The plaintiff was recalled, and he stated that when he
leit his curacy at Islington, the defendant gave him a
sort of certificate of good character. He had some dif-
fic alty in obtaining one in the form usually given, and
the. defendant wanted to make it appear by the docu-
me at that he had retired voluntarily Irons the curacy.
eswhx
op
1,1 i
lee
there
a ae hud
have
wvls iweas:
been
astonishment
anycalled
t author
foundation
Itruhe that
rfootf
for the
otnthohistesh
oacl
iwhbsaeirltng,hgeaolster
thatct woa ristd
hnihneoasawdsl
thait
been made against the plaintiff, and he said the
case
rese tved itself merely into a question of assessmenntoowf
clan lava. The jury wiil then have to consider what
dar• lag es ought to be awarded for the malicious attack
ma le cny Cardinal Wiseman upon the poor harmless man,
wl o h ad never done him any wrong, but who he had
en dew voured to crush with the utmost malignity. The
le arne d counsel then made some remarks upon the evi-
dences„ and upon what he described as the contemptible
att erupt to explain away the malicious intention of the '
deft no ant, by endeavouring to show that the word dis-
m is: eC, had been used instead of expelled ; and he con-
thud ed. by asking at the hands of the jury for his client,
exen iplary damages for the injury that had been inflicted
upon t him by the defendant.
St rgeant Shee then addressed the jury for the de-
fend art.
N r. Baron Platt, in summing up, sa;d, that he and
the jury bad nothing whatever to do with either Pro-
test: int or Catholic, and their only object was to discover
the ;ruth, and to decide according to the evidence laid
heft) re them. The plaintiff charged the defendant with
•
havi rig published a malicious libel concerning him, and
he a- bed for damages for the injury hesustained in
coast Taen ce of the publication of that libel ; and he had
musts ty
that he could not help
.expressing his regret
au a. gentleman like Cardinal Wiseman, a scholar, and
s libeller. That the charge
=wine ca tegory with a malicious a mars q if high attainments, should appear classed in the
tiler,' co old be no doubt ; and a libel coming from the
Thad') n 1 -;ainst the plaintiff amouted in law to a libel,
lei" t to lop a man as Cardinal Wiseman was, of course,
e.'"'"t' A to have much more effect than if it was
l plead
"tt' mi by an ordinary ers( n. The defendant had not
that the charg a 1"
and
by
e?-• a justifict', P that counte he admitted
and : 11 the othe'rr' false. The jury
won) 1, ther,f4i:4 lie had made were
their linty to say 1.1.er the nature of these charges,
aeta in the case, and it would then be
puhl estion of the libeleinnjj'''Y
was ' artitled to for th
viq"'t aToun of damages the plaintiff
he had sustained by the
To esinry, after deliberaltlnigeli°,.°'
reti a..les I a verdict for the pliiinZ about twenty minutes,
Iffs damages 1,0001.
—,............
NOM 'HERN CIRO UlT.—Liv.
EVANS V. ROBINSON,
(Coe tamed fro our impression of oi., Aram 2.
Yesterday.)
Charles Frederick Field, late inspector of the ra tro
p4litan de teptive police, examined by Mr. Bergeeani
Wilkins--j rn January, 1854, was employed by Mr.

Cross-examined by Mr. Watson—Did not sayanytbing
of this conversation at the last trial. It took place while
waiking from Portman-square to Cavendish-square. Has
borne the name of King for six or seven years. Her real
name is Walsh. Declines to answer whether Mr. King
visited her in Bryanstone-street. Lived in Brydges-street,
Covent-warder., for a short *tinge, and kept a cigar-divan
there. Carried on that business only a very few months.
In reference to the management with Field as to the in-
troduction of Mrs. Grocott, witness stated that she knew
Mrs. Grocott was introduced for the purpose of watch-
ing Mrs. Evans, but she promised her (witness) that she
would not watch. (Laughter.) Never told Mrs. Evans
or Mr. Robinson of it, because she bad promised not to
tell it. She promisei Dr. Jones, of Manchester-square.
She told her own servant of it, and several other per-
sons.

Mrs. Ann Price, another of the witnesses of the for-
mer trial, stated that she came to the service of Mrs.
King during the time Mrs. Evans was lodging there, to
assist in makieg an inventory of her furniture. an d
while there met Field, the detective officer. Was in
the room adjoining the drawing-room, when the cook
came to her, and called her to look through a hole
bored in the door, which she did. The witness then de-
scribed the act of criminality which she stated that she
witnessed.
Cross examined by Mr. Atherton—Saw Mr. Evans,
the plaintiff, within the last few moments; spoke to him,
but does not think be bad time to give her an answer.
Her hu4band is in Australia. For some time before he
went bad been to a certain extent separated.
Chas. Jeffrey Morgan deposed that he took the mea-
surement of the drawing-room in the house No. 2, Bryan-
stone-street, and that the model produced is correct, ac-
cording to the admeasurement upon the scale of one inch
to a foot.
Walter Salmon, formerly in the employment of Mr.
Carrington, was examined to prove the frequent visits
of Mr. Robinson to Mrs Evans before her marriage. Me.
Rubinson on coming in every day gave a-peculiir whiStle
which all the family knew, particularly Miss Carrington.
Miss Carrington was several times dressing when be came,
and on bearing the whistle came out with her enter dress
to meet him. Saw them most days going out together•
alone. Sometimes Mrs. Carrington would go out, but
very seldom. Mr. Robinson and Miss Carrington were
sometimes alone is the drawing-room together.
Charles Crush, also formerly in the service of Mr. Car-
rington, deposed to Mr. Robinson's visits to Mrs. Evans
before her marriage, and that he bad seen Mr. Rubinson
kiss her. He once saw Mr. Robinson follow her as she was
going up the stairs, and kiss her on the stairs. In 1853
frequently saw Mrs. Evans walking up and down in front
of the houses for some time, when Mr. Robinson would
meet her, and they would go off together. This was ge-
nerally on, Sunday evenings, during church time.
To Mr.Atherton—Mr. Robinson appeared to be very in-
timatemuch as a friend with Mr. and Mrs. Carrington. When
e.chnetelrdeßobinsonm,
Boston,aabrnentatt
ostfik,hkiybos-isunds
sMgtr
ihatvitosealsriidtnCgiivantlererrtcyiolnahgwhdetroonn
wrong
be
indeeddid not o feel
eal
that he
ruwnads
bonnetf
tot
in ar
otpf,
fi ma,iylst.efnelhplaoimwd:sndeoretypamonseetlisd.-
r times employed
wdir .t
them—that
mob—fbnyt:
aMnt rl
with
dityh wh.a ss Robinsonair
arms
drive
out on the road after a lady, take her up, and then
Evans. Once looked into the fly, and saw Mrs. Evans
around her, and his breast leaning against hers. This
was in July or August, 1849. He told some persons. Viet
he would never drive them again, because three men on
ItnLaekrirgd outacrii,reodthelo "f
your u
--them, turn themg
hte out,r.This
y are
mnakicg a brothel of your fly." (Lsughter,) This oc-
on the day when he looked into the window, as
he hed ile.cribed.
Mr. G. Sehonswer deposed that he knew Mr. Robin-
sun of the Carrington family before the marriage of
Mrs. Evan.;. Shortly before the marriage he met the
debn n ida,t oin vine Suky morning at the club, and defendant
Ktid, " Lfoyd Evans is going to marry Miss Carrington ;
was a slippery fish, but we have hooked hitii at last."
Since the marriage, has frequently seen Mr. Robinson
and Air,. Evans riding together, and has seen Mrs.
Evans riding
black mare of Mr. Robinson's.
To Mr. Watson—Has also seen Mr. Robinson with
Mr. and Mrs. Carrington as an intimate fiend of theirs.
The remark at the club was made openly, and before
several gentlemen, and it created a great deal of talk at
the time. Is sure he said, "We have hooked him.
The letter of Mr. Evans to Mr. Carrington, and the re-
ply alluded to by the Attorney-General, were then put
in.

The case on behalf of the plaintiff here closed.
The Attorney-General summed up the plaintiff's C 358
to the jury, commenting upon the evidence adduced, And

TRW MTN, LONDON. WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 4 18/16.

OFFICIAL DESPATCH FROII FIELD
MARSHAL LORD RAGLAN.

(From the London, Gazette of Last Night.)

WAR-DEPARTMENT, APRIL 3.
Lord Panmure has this day received a despatch and its
enclosures, of which the following are copies, addressed to
his Lordship by Field-Marshal the Lord Raglan, G.C. B.:—
Before Sebastopol, March 20, 1855.
My Lord,—lt is with deep concern that I transmit for
your Lordship's information the copy of a letter which I
received on the 18th instant, from General Canrobert, an-
nouncing, with every expression of concern, the death of a
British officer, who appears to have wandered into the
French camp, and not answering the challenge that was
repeated three times was shot dead by the French sentry,
whose post he had approached.
This officer, Surgeon Le Blanc, of the 9th Foot, occu-
pied a tent near the hospital huts of his regiment, situated
at some distance from the encampment of the regiment
itself. He was a gentleman of most temperate habits, and
was occupied in reading, when suddenly, upon the alarm
sounding, he rose from his seat, leaving his candle lighted
and his book open, and walked out, He was never seen
alive afterwards.
It should be explained that shortly after the close of day
on the 17th there was a very heavy tire on the left of the
French right, which was inaint ai ned for severalhours. None
of the English posts were attacked, but it was considered
prudent to get the greater portion of our troops under arms.
Mr. La Blanc was shortsighted, and probably mistook his
way from the first, the night being excessively dark, for he
was foiind far distant to the left, and must have wandered
from our position without knowing the direction in which
he was going.
Being anxious to ascertain the facts of this unfortunate
case as correctly as possible, I have set on foot an inquiry
to be conducted by English and French officers, in associa-
tion with each other; and I propose 'to do myself the
honour to send yon their report.
I have addressed a similar letter to the General Corn
mantling-in-Chief.—l have, &c.,

RAGLAN.

The Lord Panmure, &c.
(Translation.)
Head-Quarters, March 18, 1855.
My Lord,—l am grieved to have to inform you of an
event, much to be regretted, which painfully engrosses the
French army and its Commander-in-Chief.
Last night, whilst the troops were kept perpetually on
the alert, an English officer presented himself before the
line of the 18th Regiment, established near the watch
tower behind our trenches of the left attack. Although
summoned three times by the qui sire the officer did not
reply ; the sentinel fired, and he was killed on the spot.
I can hardly understand how this unhappy officer found
himself at such an hour so far from the English camp. I
believe that his death can only be attributed to his owu
imprudence ; but I do not the less deplore this event,
which must also be attributed to the natural emotion of a
young soldier, who, in the midst of the events which
marked last night, rigorously executed the military regu-
lation.—l have, &c.,

(Signed) GL. CANRQBERT,
General-in-Chief of the French Army
Field-Marshal Lord Raglan, &c.

TILE LONDON GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT,

At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 31st day of
March, present, the Queen's most Excellent Majesty in
Council.

This day the Right Hon. Dudley, Earl of Harrowby,
and the Right Hon. Edward Pleydell Bouverie, wore, by
her Majesty's command, sworn of her Majesty's Most
Honourable Privy Council, and took their respective
places at the Board accordingly.
Her Majesty in Council was this day phased to appoint
the Right Hon. Edward John, Lord Stanley of Alderley,
and in his absence the Right Hon. Edward Pleydell Bou-
verie, to be President of the Committee of Council ap-
pointed for the consideration of all matters relating to
trade and foreign plantations.
Her Majesty in Council was this day pleased to appoint
the Right Hon. the Earl of Harrowby, the Chancellor of
the Duchy of Lancaster, to be a Member of the Committee
of Council on Education.

At the Court at Buckingham Palace, March 31, her
Majesty having been graciously pleased to deliver
the custody of the seals of the duchy and county palatine
of Lancaster to the Right Hon. Dudley, Earl of Harrowby,
the oath of Chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, was this
day, by her Majesty's commend, administered to him
accordingly.
CROWN-OFFICE, APRIL 2.

MEMBER RETURNED TO SERVE IN THE PRESENT PARMA.

MENT
City of Gloucester—William Philip Price, EN.

NOTICE TO MASTERS OF VESSELS TRADING
TO RIO GRANDE DO SUL.

Board of Trade, Whitehall, April 3.

The Right Hon. the Lords of the Commitee of Privy
Council fur Trade and Plantations have received a despatch
from her Majesty's Consul at Rio Grande do Sul, notify-
ing that British shipmasters visiting that port have been
in the habit of calculating the Brazilian "Palm" as equi-
valent to nine inches British, and to signal the draught of
water of their vessels (which is notified in Palmos) accord-
ing to this estimate.
This custom, although sanctioned by the sailing direc-
tions with which shipmasters are usually furnished for
their guidance, is stated to have led to many mischiefs and
inconveniences.

Her Majesty's Consul at Rio Grande do Sul has there-
fore officially ascertained from the Captain of that port
that the exact equivalent of the Brazilian Palmo, as used
there, is eight and three-quarters inches, British measure.
British shipmasters trading with the port of Rio
Grande do Sul are accordingly warned, that when hoist-
ing the signals of the draught of water of their vessels,
in order to enter or leave that port, they should signal
the exact draught of water calculating the Brazilian Palmo
at no more than eight and three-quarters inches British ;
as by doing otherwise they hoist signals of less draught
of water than their vessels require, thus increasing the
risk of their vessels being injured or lost upon the bar,
and giving the authorities at the bar the opportunity of
attributing to th, fault of the masters the casualties which
occur. Shipmasters also render themselves liable to a
heavy fine for signalling incorrectly.

NOTICE TO MASTERS OF VESSELS TRADING
TO RIO GRANDE DO SUL.

Board of Trade, Whitehall, April 3

The Right Honourable the Lords of the COnaWittee 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 Rio do
Janeiro, inclosing the translation of a circular note issued
by the Brazilian Minister for • Foreign Affairs respecting
the practice' by masters of British vessels of attempting to
cross the bar at Rio Grande do Sul, without waiting for
the proper signal for entrance ; a copy of which translation
is subjoined.

(Copy.)
(Translation, Circular.)
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, .
Rio de Janeiro, Jan. 18.
It having come to the knowledge of the Imperial Gover-
nment that some captains of foreign vessels commit the error
of imprudently attempting to cross the bar of the province
of San Pedro do Rio Grande do Sul, without the signal for
entrance having been made br►the respective harbour was-
ter, wherefrom disasters have frequently resulted, I consi-
der it my duty, in the interest of national and foreign com-
merce, to call the attention of !I r.H.F. Howard, &c., to this
subject, hoping that he will on his part intervene, in order
that the captains of the merchant ships of his nation, who
seek the said bar, may comply with the established prac-
tice, and avoid committing an error which may be equally
prejudicial to captains themselves and to commerce in ge-
neral.—l avail myself, &c.,
(Signed) VISCONDE DE ABAITE.

OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, APRIL 2.
CORPS OF ROYAL ENGINEERS.
Second Captain Douglas Galton, on the Seconded List,
to be Captain.
Second Captain Henry William Barlow to be Captain
vice Craigie, killed before Sebastopol.
First Lieutenant Edward Metcalfe Grain to be Second
Captain, vice Barlow.
Second Lieutenant William Simeon Boileau to be Tint
Lieutenant, vice Grain.
OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, APRIL 2.
ORDNANCE MEDICAL DEPARTMENT.
Acting Assistant-Surgeon Sampson Roch to be Assipt-
ant-Surgeon, vice Protheroe.
ROYAL REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY.
Serjeant William Stewart to be Quartermaster, vice
Marvin, retired on half pay.
William Huke, Gent., to be Veterinary Surgeon.
OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, APRIL 2.
ROYAL REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY.
MAJOR-GENERAL TO BR COLONEL COMMANDANT.
Edward Charles Whinyates.
BREVET-COLONELS TO BE COLONELS.
Edmnitil Neal Wilford.
William Henry Pickering.
CAPTAINS TO BE LIEUTENANT-COLONELS.
Charles Lionel Fitzgerald, vice Wilford, promoted.
Philip Reginald Cocks, vice Pickering, promoted.
William Thomas Crawford.
Pierrepoint Henry Mundy.
William Henderson.
William James Smythe.
SECOND CAPTAINS TO BE CAPTAINS.
Charles Richard Ogden Evans, vice :Fitzgerald, pro-
moted.
Guy Rotton, vice Cocks, promoted.
Francis William Hastings, vice Crawford, promoted.
Henry Augustus Smyth, vice Mundy, promoted.
Paul Winsloe Phillipps, vice Henderson, promoted.
Edward Moubray, vice Smythe, promoted.
Frederick Hugh Chancellor.
Charles Waller.
Richard King Freeth.
Charles William Grey.
Francis Montagu Maxwell Ornmanney.
Edmund Palmer.
Francis Vansittart.
Leopold Grimstone Paget.
FIRST LIEUTENANTS TO BE SECOND CAPTAINS.
Frederick Close, vice Evans, promoted.
James Sinclair, vice Rotton, promoted.
Henry Synche Talbot. vice Hastings, promoted.
Willoughby James Wilson, vice Smyth, promoted.
William Henry Randolph Simpson, vice Phillips, pro-
moted.
Lewis William Penn, vice Moubray, promoted.
Henry R. Saunders, vice Chancellor, promoted.
Edward Geary Snow, vice Waller, promoted.
Win. Morri., vice Freeth, promoted.
Henry Ronny, vice Grey, promoted.
Charles Panlett Ream), vice Ounnanney, promoted.
John Morris 'Savage, vice Palmer, promoted.
Dashwood Jones, vice Vansittart, promoted.
Thome,. Edmund Byrne, vice Paget., promoted.
Ed ward Toddy.
Bill James Thomas Tonmkinson.
John Bowden Parkin.
Charles Johnston.
Thomas Samuel Poer Field.
Lawrence Augustus Bradshaw.
John M'Candie Campbell.
Win. French.
Edward Adolphus Seymour.
SECOND LIEUTENANTS TO BE FIRST LIEUTENANTS.
Hale Young Wiirtham, vice Close, promoted.
Henry Barlow Maitre, vice Sinclair, promoted.
Charles Wills Walrond, vice Talbot, promoted.
William James Smith Neill, vice Wilson, promoted.
Henry Le Guay Geary, vice Simpson, promoted.
Walter Brook Rice, vice Pew-, promoted.

Georg,' Uchter Itnox, vice Saunders, promoted.
William Norton P.4rsse, vice Snow, promoted.
Osborne Hall Goodenough, vice Morris, promoted.
Jas. Hamilton Pringle Anderson, vice Renny, promoted.
Jos. Nathaniel Portlock Dadson, vice Rotten, promoted.
Henry Chamberlayne Farrell, vice Savage, promoted.
Edward M'Laughlin, vice Jones, promoted.
Charles Fysho Roberts, vice Byrne, promoted.
Arthur Stewart Hunter, vice Toddy, promoted.
Graham Reginald Thackery Stevenson, vice Tomkinson,
promoted.
George Adam Crawford, vice Parkin, promoted.