The Sun.
London, England, 1855-10-27 00:00:00

LioNDON, SATURDIY EVENING, OCTOBIVR

I' II fr,

CRIMINAL COURT.—(This Day.)

OLD COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice Willis, Mr. Baron Alderson, and
Mr. Baron Martin.)

Conviction of Sir John Dean Paul,
Strahan, and Bates.
SECOND DAY.

The Judges took their seats this morning at 10 o'clock•
when the trial was resumed.

The first witness called was Mr. Abrahall, registrar of
the Bankruptcy Court, but before he was examiaed
The. Attorney-General asked if this evidence could be
receiv.ed

Ba ron Alderson said the admission of this evidence
was more a question for the consideration of the court
than the jury. The question was whether they should
tell the jury this was or was not evidence in this case,
upon which they (the jury) were to act.
Tar. Baron Martin said the judges had given the
po'Llat great consideration.

Mr. Abrahall, examined by Mr. Serjeant Byles, pro-
d aced the fiat in Bankruptcy, dated 11th June, 1855.
Mr. M. J. Tatham was the petitioning creditor. They
surrendered on the 12th. Their first examination was
on the 25th. There was a joint declaration of the bank-
rupts, but no examination.

The declaration, dated 25th June, 1855, was put in
land read. It stated that the bankrupts had made a full
disclosure of all and every security deposited with them,
which they had sold, pledged, or otherwise converted,
or had been done at their direction. In the schedule of
securities was entered 5,000 Danish 5 per Cent. Bonds,
belonging to Dr. G-iffiths, bought by Strahan and Co.
No date given when the purchase was made, but that
they had been deposited with Overend, Gurney, and
Co., and sold by Foster and Co.
The separate statement of Sir John Paul was put in
and read. It was dated on the 18th June, and stated
that the accounts filed in the Bankruptcy Court con-
tained a true account of all the securities of my custo.
mere, at any time pledged or converted by me, the par.
ticulars of which will be found in the banking books,
the green stock-book, and the ledger.
Mr. Parry called their lordships' attention to the stMe-
ment of Mr. Bates being a little different from theirs.
It did not state the securities were pledged by him.

Baron Alderson—Then it is not a disclosure.
Mr. Parry said whatever the effect of it was he con-
sidered himself bound to direct their lordships' attention
to it.

Mr. Lewis, attorney for two of the prisoners, was ex*
amined by Mr. Serjeant Byles. He stated that u:ad:er
the advice of counsel he advised the prisoner to ?make
the statements in question, with a view, an- tongst
others, to making a disclosure within the statute.
The statements were produced to the Cory missioner
in Bankruptcy, and the bankrupts requester', to hand it
in, as their statement with regard to the sermr; ties which
they had received from their customers, arid the manner
in which they were disposed. Upon that the Commis-
sioner stated that no creditor had asked for it, but they
were at liberty to hand it in, if they th ought fit, to the
official assignee. The statement war, then handed in,
and the Commissioner signed them. After that it was
given to the official assignee, and then to the solicitor
to the fiat, who examined the on the truth of the.
statements which the bankrup cs signed.
Cross-examined by the Attorney-General—At the
Bankruptcy Court Mr. P
y who attended for the
bankrupts, asked if the
might be examined with
reference to the statement of the securities to be de-
-1 livered in. The Com missioner said if some creditor
wished it, they might, be examined, but on their own ap-
plication he refused? it. Mr. Parry said, then I formerly
tendered this dec,",aration of bankruptcy, and his Honour
might accept it or not, but under the bankrupt statute
they had a right to do it. His Honour said they might put
in what they liked if they signed. Witness did not hear Mr,
Parry ask Mr. Lawrence if he wished to ask the bank-
rupt any questions. He had had rio previous communi-
cation with Mr. Lawrence, other than ask him to bring
up the bankrupts for examination, but he refused, and
witness had to pay the expenses and bring them before
another commissioner than the commissioner to the fiat
for the first examination. At that time they were in cus-
tody; on criminal warrants. Oa the morning of
2`'.4d June there had been an examination of
the prisoners ; in the afternoon of that day he ap-
plied to the Commissioner for a warrant to bring the
bankrupts before him to make a disclosure with reference
to those securities.

By Sergeant Bytes—There was no understanding be.
tween witness and Mr. Lawrence.

By Baron Alderson—Dr. Griffiths' attorney was pre-
sent at the Bankruptcy-court, but did not interfere.
Mr. Sergeant Bytes asked for the production of the
green stock-book and ledger. The green stock-book
contained no statement relative to Dr. Griffiths' secu-
rities.

The Attorney-Genersl said that was the reason why
he wished to have the green stock-book produced.
The books were produced and examined. The ledger
contained two entries in Sir J. D. Paul's private account
to which attention was called.

Mr. Baron Alderson said, the green stock-book did
not affect the case at all. It appearsd to be a book of
stocks on which they received the dividends.
Mr. Sergeant Byles asked the Attorney-General if it
was intended it should affect the case ?

The Attorney-General said he was not aware it did.
The ledger was examined, and in the private account.
of Sir John Paul was entered on the credit side, 12,2841
ss. 01, the proceeds of the sale of the 5 per Cent. and 3
per Cent. Danish Bonds, sold by Foster and Co., and on
the debit side was entered the cost price of the substi•
tuted securities pledged with Ocerend, Gurney, and Ca.
Mr. Sergeant Byles then called evidence as to the
pledging of these bonds, to prove the truth of the bank-
rupts' statements that the securities were pledged.
Mr. Bois, clerk to 0 verend, Gurney, and Co., examined
by Mr. Sergeant Byles, said that the bonds re-purchased
by Mr. Hill were the same numbers as those deposited
with them by Mr. Young, solicitor for Sir John Paul,
on 80th April, 1855.

Mr. Savery proved the payment of the coupons on the
above bonds to the prisoners.
This was the case for the defence.

The Attorney-General said it now became his duty to
address the jury on the evidence that had been adduced
for the defence, and in doing so he had no desire nor
wish to do anything but discharge faithfully and honour-
ably a public duty that had been confided to him. As he
said at the commencement of the trial, it was not the
desire of the prosecution, nor those who represented
them, to act harshly or vindictively towards the de-
fendants in this case ; but they had a public duty to
discharge which must be faithfully and earnestly dis-
charged. The case divided itself into two parts, one
of which was more immediately . for their consi-
deration, the other for that of their lordships. In
the first place, had the prosecution made out its case
against the defendants that would bring them within the
terms of this indictment ! The second part was that,
supposing the first was proved, had the defence set up
by the defendants brought them within the protecting
provisions of that clause of the statute which enabled
persons who had committed an offence to evade the penal
consequences by making a disclosure under circumstan-
ces required by that statute ! In the first place, had it
been proved that the defendants, or either of
them, had made away with, contrary to the form
of the statute, securities entrusted to them by
Dr. Griffiths? It was not, nor could it be de-
nied, securities belonging to Dr. Grltfiths bad been
entrusted to them for safe custody, and amongst them
were 5,000 Danish 5 per Cent. Bonds, which was the
subject matter of this trial. Now, with regard to Sir
John Paul, it could not be denied nor for a single mo-
ment disputed that he did make away with those seen
rities in contravention of the terms of the statute. But
his learned counsel relied on the defence he had set up,
which, if that failed him, he must be found guilty of the
charge. He (the learned Attorney-General) admitted
there was a distinction in the case between Sir John Paul
and the defendants Strahan and Bates—there was more
difficulty about the case as regarded them. It was true
that Strahan had made a clear and explicit confession of
having made away with the securities belonging, as he
said, to Dr. Griffiths, by depositing them with Overend,
Gurney, and Co., in 1855 ; but it was said, however,
that, inasmuch as this charge, as preferred on the part
of the prosecution, related more immediately to the se,
curities disposed of by Sir John Paul—the original
securities of Dr. Griffiths in March, 1854 —the con-
fession of Strahan did not affect the case as regarded
the present charge in the indictment. Sir F. Thesiger,
on the part of Strahan, put it to them that
that admission must be taken to the full extent to which
it was made, and to lead them fairly and reasonably to
the conclusion that Strahan knew nothing whatever of
the transaction in which Sir John Paul was the leading
actor in March, 1854, and the learned counsel had also
put it to them that they were bound to take the whole
of Strahan's statement, in his interview with Dr. Grif-
fiths, as entirely true to the full extent of the letter.
That, however, was a proposition to which he
(the Attorney-General) could not accede. He could not
go with him in saying that everything a man said in
extenuation when a criminal prosecution was hanging
OTOX him and when he wax oodoavouxiag to mitigate

the feeling and resentment of a man wronged by him,
was to be implicitly believed. Strahan saw Dr. Griffiths
in order to appease his feelings and avert that prosecu-
tion which was impending over him, and he naturally
put the case to Dr. Griffiths in a manner least calculated
to irritate and offend him. In conciliating his friend
' he was not likely to inform him the bank had been tam-
pering for two years with the securities lodged
with them for security—that they sold the se-
eurities in 1854, repurchased them, and again
disposed of them to Overend and Co. in April, 1855,
but to put the case to him that it was done at a moment
•f temporary depression, and that it was the first time
ho had ever embarked in such a transaction. They
knew, however, too well, by the experience of every-day
life, that when once the boundaries of honesty and
honour were overstepped, those of truth were very soon
lost sight of. He must ask them to look at all the cir-
eumstances, and not be bound by the statement
of Strahan. What, he would a-sk, was the ease
against Strahan ? Why, not merely his declaration
of having made away with securities in April, 1355, but
the fact that the firm hail been embarking in those trans-
actions to an extent perfectly appalling, and which had
been made stronger evidence against the prisoners by the
production of the bankrupts' proceedings than at the
commencement of the case. By those proceedings it
had been shown that securities to the amount of
113,000/. had been dealt with in this was' by the pri-
soners, of which 12,0001., including the 5,0001. of
Danish Bonds now under investigation, belonged
to Dr. Griffiths,. Was it possible in the face of that
that his learned friend could ask the jury to believe
that those transactions were entered int) and carried
on by a single individual of the firm without the know-
ledge and cencurrence of the other members of that
firm, except in the last instance that had occurred
because that was the proposition of the learned counsel
who appeared on behalf of Bates, who called their atten-
tion to the fact; that this was the only joint proceeds of
their transactions. He the (Attorney-General) found
that there, was a private account of Sir J. Paul's, and
that. Therefore Bates must have in the most perfect
!Simplicity and honesty believed that Sir J. Paul was
paying into his private account moneys which he had
obtained from securities sold or deposited by him with-
out the knowledge of Bates. He must have been in
perfect ignorance of all these transactions, on the part
of Sir. J. Paul, to make his learned friend's point good,
and who, with a certain show of triumph, appealed to
tb at account in establishment of the proposition. But
that account, it appeared to him (the Attorney-General),
was not only fraught with the greatest suspicion, but
produced the cogent, if not conclusive, guilt of those
parties. That was plain to his mind ; and he submitted
there was conclusive proof on the face of the private ac-
count of Sir J. Paul that the dealings in securities de-
posited with the bank was known to all the members
of that firm, and that they were co-operative parties to
the transactions. If they turned to the account, it was
plain and palpable on the face of it that it was a colour-
able account—an account called the private account of
Sir J. Paul, but, in fact, an account into which all those
transactions, involving the disposal of securities, were
entered. What, he would ask, became of the thousands
of pounds raised by this firm on the securities deposited
with them! Why that they found their way into the
private account of Sir J. Paul, which bore no resem-
blance to the banking account of an individual gentleman.
It dealt not with items such as men in their daily re-
quirements needed, but large sums of money, none of
which, excepting in two instances, were under 5001. This
private account, it should be recollected, the other
partners were convergent and familiar with, and there
was no other form in which the proceeds of those secu-
rities, when disposed of, could be carried to the benefit of
the bank than that of putting them to the account of one
of the partners. Of course it was most desirable that the
clerks the banking-house should have no notion that
the principals of the firm were dealing with the securi-
ties of the customers, and raising money by sale or ne-
gotiation of them. And how could that be done ?
Only by carrying the proceeds of such sales or negotia-
tions to the private account of one or other of the part-
ners, when it would find its way into the tills and drawers
of the bank, available as much for the purposes of the
house as if it had been put to the joint account of the
three partners. That being so, how does the account
stand ? He (the Attorney-General) found that, for 1854,
the sums drawn by Sir J. Paul evidently had reference
to large monetary transactions, and not those of the
ordinary transactions of a gentleman who draws on his
banker for his daily requirements. The first charge he
found entered was 10,0201. to Sims and Co., brokers ;
May 31, "self," 30,0001. (e sum which a gentleman did
not often draw for) ; and on the Bth of May a sum of
3.0001. Against that he found was entered on the credit
side a balance, to start with, of 9,978/. 13s. sd. On the
16th March, 30,0001., corresponding with the sem with
which he was debited on the 3d May. Oa the 16th
March, 12,2811. 55., which corresponded in amount
with the cheques received from Messrs. Foster and
Braithwaite, the proceeds of the Danish Three per Cents.,
and the 5,0001. worth of Danish Five per Cents., the
property of Dr. Griffiths. The Attorney-General then
referred to several other entries for large amounts to
Sir J. Paul's private account, one of which, to his credit,
was dated the 22d of August, 1854, for 6,1371. 10e.,
which was admitted to have been received from
the disposal of these securities, and which went
to make up a balance in his favour of 27,3391.;
and this is the gentleman whom his learned friend
asserted was in such circumstances of personal embar-
rassment as to render it necessary to resort to the con-
trivance of supplying the house with funds. When they
looked at these transactions, to the amount of thousands
involved, it was impassible to entertain the least doubt
or hesitation that this was not the private account of
Sir J. Paul, but was an account of the disposal of se-
curities to meet the emergencies of the day. Was it
possible for a moment to doubt that Strahan and Bates,
who were actively engaged in the management of the firm
and its affairs, must not have known well the state of
this private account of Sir John Dean Paul's ? Was
it for a moment to be doubted by men of ordinary in-
telligence and apprehension in those things, that
Strahan and Bates must have known of the disposal of
these securities, nnd if they knew of them they must of
necessity been a party to the transactions. He bad no
wish to strain the case unjustly against the prisoners,
or to put it to the jury higher than they thought the
case he had submitted to themes warranted on the evi-
dence produced—and he asked them if it did not bring
home to their minds the conviction that Strahan and
Bates were parties to and privy to the transactions in
which Sir J. Paul was personally concerned. If they had
any doubts on the matter they would of course give them
the benefit of theni, but if not, after coupling the other
circumstances of the case with those to which he had
directed their attention, it would be their duty to find
the prisoners guilty. He now came to the other part of
the case, that of the evidence that had been produced
on the other side, whereby it had been shown that the
whole of the prisoners had disposed of certain securities
which were not the original securities of Dr.
Griffiths, but securities substituted after the originals
had been sold, and it would appear to stand thus—that
Dr. Griffiths' securities were sold in March, 1854,
which were substituted by the firm by others purchased
in Juno of that year. They knew from the evidence of
the broker that he received orders from the firm of
Straban, Paul, and Co. to 'purchase for Dr. Griffiths
5,0001. Danish 5 per cent. bonds, which was a
circumstance not unworthy of consideration to deter-
mine the question whether Strahan and Bates were
concerned with Sir John Paul in the sale of the
original securities, because if those securities bad been
sold by Sir J. Paul, without the knowledge of Strahan
and Bates, for his private purpose, and placed to his
private account, he could have understood Sir J. Paul's
going into the market and purchasing new securities
with which to replace the old ones ; but he was totally
at a loss to understand why the firm should have sent an
order for the purchase of securities to replace those pre-
viously sold it they had not all of them been privy to the
making aevay with the original securities. They, how-
ever, did so, and Sir F. Thesiger bad contended the new
bonds were the property of Dr. Griffith:, and that he
would have been enabled to maintain his right to them
as against the claims of the assignees under the bank-
ruptcy for the benefit of the general body of creditors.
These were the securities deposited with Overend, Gur-
ney, and Co., and the defence relied upon was, that al-
though they had been guilty of an offence under the
statute in so disposing of the new securities, they
had not been indicted for that offence, end therefore
they sought to get rid of the charge for which they were
called on to answer by showing they hau been guilty of
another misdemeanour. That brought him to the cons
sidoration of the question of the bankruptcy proceedings,
and which the learned Attorney-General considered did
not apply in this case. They sought to get rid of the
original transaction by making a disclosure of the second
transaction. This, he contended, was no answer to the
first transaction.

Mr. Baron Alderson said he was entirely of opinion
with the learned Attorney-General on that point. The
disclosure was no statement with regard to the first
offence, but an answer to that which was.
The learned Attorney-General said, the admis-
sion must be a bona fide one, and not put in to
defeat the ends of justice. The disclosures were made

without any desire being expressed up( In the pa)

creditor.

Spirit of the Public Journals.

(Front the M *ming Post of this day.)
Rumours of a coalition fly about on all sides, and
politicians who affect great insight into the back
scenery of public affairs talk oracular mysteries to
their friends and admirers touching things that aro
to be when next the great council of the nation as-
sembles for the despatch of business. Lovely peace
is said to be at hand, and Lord J. Russell, Mr.
Bright, Mr. Disraeli, and Mr. Gladstone are the
four outriders. Garlanded with olive, and inex-
pressibly amiable, they join hands and embrace
like lasses and their swains beneath the mistletoe
on Christmas-eve. They have been bitterly op-
posed, they have impugned each other's public
spirit and political morality, they have bearded ono
another, and quarrelled over crotchets like dogs
over the' same bone. But the alarm of war has
scared then out of their own identity, and seeing
nothing but ono another's virtues, and held by a
curious coincide:ace of interest and similarity of
prospects, they declaim against the very thing that
erewhile they agreed was indispensable to the vin-
dication of international morality and the best in-
terests of the human race. 6o says Rumour. But
Rumour may be true or false, and we do not pre-
sume to endorse what she says. There is much to
be said both ways. If we look at the names of
the parties who are to head this coalition, and io-
for to their antecedents, the chances aro certainly
against their working amicably together in the ser-
vice of the country. But they may perhaps risk the
experiment. Lord J. Russell is so uncertain that
his best friends never know when they have him.
His eccentricities are more undeterminable the
longer he lives. No public man or public writer
woud be so rash as to predict, oven remotely,
what course Lord John would pursue in any great
crisis of public affairs. Let the past suffice. We
do not wish to rake up old grievances, but it is im-
possible not to be guided and influenced by the
general convictions that his previous conduct has
left upon the mind. The chances, then, are about
equal that he will or will not unite with an anti-
war and pro-Austrian coalition. Then there is
Mr. Gladstone. After all he has said and done,
this way and that, who will certify what course he
will steer, or that he will be able to keep the point
towards which he professes to advance. Nobody
doubts the manly integrity of his purpose, but
who has a moment's confidence in his stability ?
Until he has been swung at Gresithithe and had
his compasses adjusted, there is no chance of his
answering to the helm, and no proper ground o
confidence in him as an administrator of the func-

tions of Government. Mr. Disraeli, again, 1;s
many brilliant qualities, but a very limited follow-
ing. The identical men who are content to assist
him by their votes in his attempts to get his
party "in," would decline to follow his leading
when that object was accomplished. The
great Conservative party is for the war. Mr.
Disraeli does not, however, represent that
party, and would probably be glad to exchange
the somewhat cold support he at present re-
ceives for the more exciting and noisy applause
which his appearance in a new character might win
for him from the disjecta membra of former Minis-
tries. The only man of the four whose course has
been uniformly consistent, and whose " line" may
be safely calculated, is our old friend, the pacifico-
pugnacious John Bright. And it is just because
we can well forecast his course of action, his views,
and his speeches, that we doubt the possibility of
their amalgamation with those of the three other
names now before the reader.

But indeterminate as the chances are, we must
contemplate the possibility of tie rumour being a
true one. But what a contemplation is it l There
have been extraordinary coalitions in the world.
" Fortes" (or, as a printer once facetiously put it,
Faxes), " vixerunt ante Agamemnon." And Dis-
raeli and Gladstone, after all their past bitterness,
may yet come together on the same side, and flank
the same side of the Speaker in the House of Com-
mons. Precedents of such combinations are not
wanting, though, unfortunately, the instances of
their ever effecting much public good are few
and far between. Certainly the last coalition was
not the least incongruous, as it certainly was
one of the most unfruitful of anything good. It
was the Aberdeen Government that lot us in
for the war, and was demolished because it could
neither carry it on nor get us out of it. Yet the pro-
posed
coalition is even more incongruous and un-
promising. There is Mr. Bright, opposed to all
war, under any circumstances ; Mr. Gladstone
opposed to this particular war, or at least to its
continuance ; Lord John Russell, opposed to every-
thing in general, and nothing in particular, sup-
porting to-day what he opposed yesterday, with
the fullest likelihood that he will overthrow to-
morrow what he maintains to-day—a statesman
who is never sure of himself, and has an inconve-
nient habit of letting his friends down at the very
moment that they have most right to count upon
his help. Last of the quadruplate comes Mr.
Disraeli, who, last Whitsuntide, went through a
martyrdom of misery lest Lord Palmerson's Go-
vernment should conclude an ignominious peace
during the recess, and whose spasmodic grief and
misgiving choked his utterance, and spoiled that
beautiful speech which was to have overthrown the
Ministry, and installed the Opposition in the confi-
dence of her Majesty.
It is impossible not to ask what have these men
in

common ? Row can they govern together One
only common object can animate them—peace.
Peace at once—peace at any price. But what would
be the first effect of peace ? Supposing this incon-
gruous coalition to obtain peace at some price, what
must follow ? Their own dissolution as a Ministry.
Peace obtained, the only principle that held them
together would be gone. No single bond of unity
would remain. On every other point they are
wide as the poles asunder, and the conclusion of
peace abroad would be but the signal for the
commencement of the bitterest strife at home.
Such a Ministry could not exist a week without
danger to the country. Their miserable efforts
for peace would but end in smoke, and the last
state of the country be worse than the first.

MARKET NEWS.—(This Day).

COVENT GARDEN.

Wo had a steady demand for both fruit and vegetables
at full prices. The supplies wore seasonably large.
FRIIIT.—Pino apples, English, 3s to Gs per lb; colonial
is to 3s each ; hot-house grapes, is Gd to 4s Od per lb ;
foreign ditto, Od. to Os ; melons, 18 Od to 2. Gd each;
peaches, is Gd to 63; nectarines, 1. 6d to 4s per dozen ;
apples, 1s Od to 2s Gd per half sieve ; pears, 2s 04 to
5s per half sie.re ; plums, 5s to 7. per sieve ; green gages, Os
per punnet; apricots, is 6d to Lis 04 per doz.; common plums,
5s 0 I to 7s Od par sieve ; cherries, Od to Od per pound;
lemons, 4s to 88 04 per 100 ; oranges, 8s to lls per 100; fil-
berts, 6s to 9s per doz. lbs ; cobnuts, Os to Os ; almonds,
Os to Os per lb. ; walnuts, 8d to 101 per 100 ; figs, Os 91
to is 6d per doz. ; strawberries, Od to Od per pottle ; goose-
berries, is 61 to 2s Od per half sieve ' • curraets, 3s Od to
43 Od per half seive ; raspberries, 21 to Gd per pottlo.
VEGETABLEM.—Greens, is 6d to 3s 0,1 per doz. bunches;
red ditto. 2s to 5s Od per dozen ; French beans, 2s 0
to 3s 0,1 per half sieve ' • brocoli, Od per bund. ; potatoes, 60s
to 100 s per ton ; vegetable marrow, 44 to is per doz. ; peas,
3. to 5s Od per bushel ; broad beans, is Od to 18 9d per half
sieve ; turnips, 2d to 44 per bunch ; carrots, 3d to 1.1 per
bunch ; cucumbers, Os 2d to Os 6d each ; garlic, Od to
Os 8d per pound ; spinach, is Od to is ed per sieve ;
old onions, Os to Os per bushel ; new ditto, 2s 61 to 4s per
doz. bunches; leeks, Id to 2d per bunches ; shallots,
41 to 61 horse-raddish, 2s Od to 4s 01 per bundle ; parsley,
24 to 3d per bunch ; celery, Os 9d to is 3d per
bunch ; endive, is 3d to 2s 3d per score ; beet, is Od to 2s
pe: doz. ' • parsnips, Os 6d to is Od per dozen ; small
salad, 2d to 3d per punnet ; mushrooms, is 3d to 1s 94 per
pottle ; artichokes, 5s to Os per doz. ; cabbage lettuces,
to is Od per score ; sorrel, 6d to is per half sieve ;
radishes, is to is 3d per dozen hands ; tomatoes, 3s to 4s
per half sieve; chillies, is to is 6cl per 100; Brussels
sprouts, is Od to 2. per half sieve ; capsicums, is 6d to 2s
per 100 ; walnuts pickling, 6d to is per 100; cauliflowers,
!s to 5s per doz.
NEWGATE AND LEA.DENHALL.

Turkeys, Os Od to Os Od ; Geese, 5s Od to 6s 6d each ;
Ducks, 2s 3d to 2s 9d ; tame Rabbits, Os Od to Os 03;
wild do., is to is 6d each; Pigeons, 6d to 8d each;
large Surrey Fowls, Os Od to Os Od ; middling, 2s Od to
33 Od ; Chickens, is 9d to 2s 3d ; Capons, 3s Gd
to 4s 6d ; Hares 3s Od to 4s Od. ; Grouse, 2s Od to 2s :W each ;
Pheasants, 3s 6d to 3s 9d ; partridges, 1s 3d to Is 9d each ;
Guinea Fowls,
to 7s 2s 6d to 3s Od each. Ostend fresh b
duzen ttery 1:
6a to 12s 6d, and English lls 6d to 14s 6d per o b
English Eggs, 8s Od to 9s Od ; French ditto, 50 Od
Oki
per 120.

BILLING-SG.A.TB.
Turbots, 3s Od to 15s ; Brills, 2s 6d to lOs each; Salmon,
is 6d to Os Od per lb ; Cod Fish, 2s 6d to 15s each ; Soles,
Rd to 2s 6d per pair; Eels, 8d to is Od per lb; Lobsters, l s to
2s 6,l ; crabs, 6d to 5 Od ; Whitings, 3s Od to 12e per doz. ;
Common Oysters, 163 to 20s ; Natives, 5Ss to 64s per 6,1 •
Mackerel, 60e to Os per 100 ; Smelts, is Od to 2s 6d per doz •
Skate, 6d to Od per 1b; Shrimps, is 6d to 2s 6d per gallon;
H
Bloaters, is Od to 11 6d per doz. ; Fresh Herrings, g€, &i
to Os per 100. ; Scotch do., 6d; Sprats, 8s Od
to Os Od Per
o Or
bushel ; Dorevs, is Od to 10! each;
doz. ; Pike 6d6d ; Sturgeon, 6d per lb addocks, 4s to 12 ;
Prawns, 4s Od is per
•
, Halibut, 6d pc;
Mullets6dto is 6d ;Plaice, 4d to is each
lb; Flounders, is 6d to Os per dozen.
BREAD.

10Thof wheaten bread in the metropolis are from
of household ditto, to 101 per 41b loaf.
idetoP ilid;
HIDES AND SKINS.
market hides, 561 b to 641 b, 3id to 3id ; 641 b to 72113, 3id
to Od ; 721 b to 801 b, 341 to 4d ; 801 h to 881 b, 4d to 4id ;
8813 to 961 b, 4}d to 4,(1; 9613 to 1041 b, 4id to 5d ; 104
to 1121 b Od to Od ; upwards, Od to Od ; Horse hides, 6s
6(1 to Os Od ; calf skins, light, 2s Od to 35 Od ; ditto, full,
6s 6d to Os Oil ; Polled Sheep, 3s 10d to 5s 2d ; gents, 38
8d to 4s 8(1 ,• Half-hreds, 3s 8d to 4s 8d; Downs, 3s Od
to 3s 6d ; Lambs, 25 9(1 to 4s 6d ; Shearlings, Os 0(1 to Os Od.

HAY MARKETS.
SMITHFIELD.—Meadow hay, 3/ 15s to 6/ 6s ;clovor ditto,
4/ Os to 61 15s ; and straw, 1/ 8s Od to 1/ 13s Od por load.
ti fair average supply and a steady demand.
CIIMBERLAND.—Meadow hay, 3118 s to 6/ 103; clover do.,
4/ Os to 6/ 12s ; and straw, 1/ 8s to 1/ 14s per load.
Supply tolerably good, and trade rather lira.
W lIITECHAPEL.—Meadow hay, 3/ Into 6t Gs; clover_ d 0.,.
4/ Os to 61 18s ; and straw, 1/ Ss to 1/ 136 per bad
Both hay Ind 'taw Tfer• is fair must, M fall Prima