The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-27 00:00:00

THE StIN, :LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 27 1855.

have arisen. On the 12th of July there was sent out
100,0001., and subsequently 240,000/. ; and shipments were
still being made to meet all probable demands.
Mr. GL ADSTONE suggested that the papers which con-
tained the agreement with the Turkish Government to pay
10s. a ton for the coal mines should be laid upon the table.
Mr. ROEBUCK hoped that those papers would be ac-
companied by an account of the sums paid to the Turkish
Government, not as royalty, but as profit.
Mr. WILSON—The papers on the table would explain
the whole matter.
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY BILL.

Lord J. MANNERS said that this bill stood on the pa-
per for Monday next, and as it would give rise to consider-
able discussion, he wished to know, in case anything oc-
curred to prevent its coming on on that day, if the noble
lord would state to the house that it would not be pro-
ceeded with this session ? _ _

Lord PALMERSTON—This is a bill which has come
down from the House of Lords, and it may be taken at any
time after we have disposed of the business which is to go
to that house.

depended upon the material condition of their parents ;
and he feared that the unhappy war in which we were en-
gaged would sink that material condition still lower, would
diminish the number of scholars and increase that of cri-
minals. On the subject of a Minister of Education, he
hoped the house would come to an understanding as to
some general scheme before they agreed to that appoint-
ment.
After some remarks from Mr. Philipps, Mr. Hadfield,
Mr. Lloyd Davies, Mr. Thornton, Mr. Kinnaird, and
others, Mr. Barnes withdrew his amendment, and the
original vote was agreed to.
The vote of 215,0001. for Irish education was also agreed
to, after some discussion on the propriety of erecting a con-
servatory in the grounds of the model farm at Glasnevin.
Some other ♦otes were agreed to, after which the house
resumed.

EXCISE DUTIES BILL.

The house then went into committee on this bill.

On clause 5,
Mr. I. BUTT moved an amendment to obviate the injury
which it was apprehended the bill would do to the Irish
maltsters. He thought that the bill ought to be postponed;
or, if not, that the committee ought to adopt the amend-
ment, which was to insert after the word " revenue," in
the 16th line of the fifth clause, the words " for the follow-
ing purposes— that is to say, in the case of the distiller."
Mr. F. FRENCH supported the amendment.
Mr. O'BRIEN was astonished to find such new-blown
vigour on the part of the two hon. gentlemen who had
just spoken against a bill which was so anxiously looked
for in Ireland.
Mr. CAIRNS thought the bill, as far as it was concerned,
was a bill which the distillers ought to thank the right
hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer for. But
he did not see that it was necessary, in order to benefit the
distiller, to sacrifice the maltstor. He thought that an
arrangement might be made by which a great boon would
be conferred on the distiller without giving the maltster
reasonable cause of complaint.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, in
order to put the distiller from grain and the distiller from
malt on an equality, it was necessary to have a drawback,
and the arrangement sought to be established by the bill
was a fair one to all parties. He should oppose the amend-
ment; and if it was carried, he should feel it to be his duty
to abandon the bill. (Hear.)
After some discussion, the committee divided—
For the amendment 29
Against it
Majority against the amendment —3l

On the motion of Mr.-M'AIATION,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER agreed to
allow beetroot sugar, on payment of the duty, to be used
in distillation.
Mr, BROTHERTON moved that the house do now ad-
journ.
The motion was withdrawn.

After several orders of the daywere disposed of, a motion
was made in reference to the Education (Scotland) Bill,
and the house was counted out at half-past 2 o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-JuLY 26.
PARTNERSHIP AMENDMENT BILL.

Motion made, and question proposed, " That the chair-
man do report progress :"—Whereupon, motion made, and
question proposed, " That the chairman do now leave the
chair." Question put, " That the chairman do report pro-
gress."- The committee divided : Ayes, 89; Noes, 41.

AYES-89.
Anderson, Sir J. Evart, J. Morgan, 0.
Baines, lit. lion. M. Ferguson, Sir R. Mowbray, J.
Ball, E. Fitz Gerald, J. Palmerston, Visct.
Barnes, T. Forster, C. Pellatt, A.
Beaumont, W. Goderich, Vie. Pilkington, J.
Berkeley, 11. F. Goodman, Sir G. Ricardo, S,
Berkeley, G. Greene, John Roll, P.
Bethell, Sir R. Greville, Col. F. Russell, F. C.
Biggs, W. Grey, Sir G. Russell, F. W.
Bonham-Carter, J. Grosvenor, Ld. R. Scholefield, W.
Bouverie, Hon. E. P. Gurney, J. Szally, F.
Brand, H. B. W. Hankey, T. Seymour, Lord
Bright, J. Bristle, Alex. Seymour, H.
Brotherton, J. Holland, E. Stanley, Lord
Byng, G. Horsman, E. Stuart, W.
Cayley, 11. Hume, W. Sullivan, Michael
Cecil, Lord R. Kennedy, T. Villiers, C.
Chambers, T. Kershaw, J. Walpole, S.
Cobden, R. Kinnalrd, A. Water park, Lord
Cockburn, Sir A. J. E. Lang ton, H. G. Whatman, J.
Cowper, W. F. Lee, W. Wickham, H. W.
Crauflird, B. 11. J. Lewis, Sir G. C. Wilkinson, W.
Crossley, F. Lockhart, A. E. Willcox, B.
Davies, J. L. Low, R. Williams. W.
De Vere, S. Luce, T. Wilson, J.
Duke, Sir J. Maguire, J. Wrightson, W.
Duncan, Viscount Massey. W. Wyndham, W.
Duncan, G. Maxwell, J.
East, Sir J. Meagher, T. TELLERS
Elliot, J. Moffatt, G. Hayter, W.
Ewart, W. Monck, Viscount Mulgrave. Earl
- -- -- • -

—..___, .. _
NOES-41.
Barrington, Viscount Gregson, S. Parker, R.
Beckett, W.
Blackburn, Peter IT:3:117o' Edward sawle, C.
ii, G. A. Seymer, H.
Bramley-Moore, J. 114nleY, J. Smith, M.
Butt, I. Herbert, S. Spooner, R.
Cardwell, E. Ilindley, C. Strutt, E.
Christopher, Robt. A. Jolliffe, Sir W. Thornely, T.
Crook, J. M.t.lann, J. Vance, J.
peedes, W. Marjoribanks, D. Vernon, G.
Dillwyn, 14, Michell, W. Whitmore, H.
Fitzgerald, W. Mitchell, T. Wise, A.
Forster, J. Nuutz, G.
Frcwen, C. Naas, Lord TELLERS
Gladstone, W. Napier, J. Brown, W.
Glyn, G. North, Col. J. H astie, Archel.

THE LATE DISTURBANCES IN HYDE-
PARK.

INQUIRY INTO THE ALLEGED MISCONDUCT
OF THE POLICE.

The Commissioners took their sea-s yesterday morn-
ing shortly after 11 o'clock.
The court was densely crowded.
Mr. Ellice said that one of the witnesses who had
sworn to a certain policeman, called on him this morn-
ing to say he should not attend to identify the police-
ma❑ unless he (11r. Ellice) guaranteed the payment of
his expenses. He informed him he could do no such
thing, and referred him to Mr. Mitchell.
The Chief Commissioner said they had no power to
award compensation to any witness, and he thought Mr.
Ellice had done perfectly right in not promising to pay
any expenses.
The first policeman called was 413 A, who Mr. Oliver
swore he saw strike a man, but Mr. Oliver this morning
was unable to identify the man other than by his

number.
John Winters, 413 A. said, he had been in the force
41 years, and before that he was G years in the Irish
constabulary. He was 28 years of age. At half-past
4 o'clock orders were given to clear the carriage-way.
Witness, with 470 A, proceeded to do so by striking at
the railing and desiring the people to go back. Mr.
Mair was near and said he would not go back. 470 A.
said, " I'm only obeying orders." Mr. Mair said,
" Damn your orders ; I'll not go back ;" and called on
the people not to do so. 470 A went to him, when Mr.
Mair pushed him in the chest. He saw Mr. Mair ap-
prehended and conveyed away in a cab.
Cross-examined by Mr. Mitchell—Are you sure it was
470 A?

Witness—No ; it was 370 A. There was not a great
crowd where Mr. Mair was standing. He could not
say how wany people were behind Mr. Mair—
whether the people were three or four deep. To
the best of his recollection there were eight people
behind Mr. Mair. It is difficult for a person to push
back with so many persons behind him. He would
swear 370 A did not strike Mr. Mair on the hand. Wit-
ness did not strike the railing. He heard the order given
to keep the people back from the rails, but did not
know who gave it. 370 A called on the people to stand
back as ho walked along. As the police passed on the
people came forward again to the railings. He should
not like to be struck with a policemen's truncheon.
He should think people would express irritation at be-
ing so struck. He positively swore that he never
struck any one that day with his truncheon.
He did not see 370 A strike Mr. Mair, but the latter
punched the constable with his stick ; he heard orders
given that if a man created a disturbance he was to be
cautioned, and if he did not desist to take him into cus-
tody, but he could not say who gave the orders. A cau-
tion was given in Mr. Mair's instance by ordering him
to stand back.
The witness, who was repeatedly questioned by Mr.
Mitchell relative to the observations made by Mr. Mair,
appealed to the commissioners to know if he was com-
pelled to answer the questions so often put to him.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley told him yes ; the
commissioners would take care no improper question
was put to him.
By Mr. Commissioner Henderson—He pursued a man
from the Serpentine towards the Marble-arch, who was
knocked down by a man running between him and wit-
ness. He endeavoured to apprehend the man because
he had been creating a disturbance, and witness being
struck on the back by a stone that came from the direc-
tion where the man was standing. He did not strike
the man (who was called Benjamin Bencroft) when
he was on the ground, neither did he see him
struck by any policeman. The man never com-
plained of being struck by the police. He had
his face cut by a stone, and was also struck on the back,
and had his hat knocked off by stones. Stone throwing
was very general at one time. (Witness produced his
hat, which had a hole in it, near the top.)
Henry Edwards, 434 A, was 26 years of age, and had
been in the service four years. Before that he was in the
Ist Dragoon Guards, which he left owing to ill health.
He corroborated 413 A's statement relative to the ap-
prehension
of Bencroft,
Robert Burney, 370 A, was 35 years of age, and had
been in the service upwards of 12 years. Before that
he was a labourer. He had to clear the rails near 1
the crossing, and did so by knocking on the rails with
his truncheon as a caution. Mr. Mair refused to stand
had:. He said, " You fellow, who are you ordering
back. You have no right to order us back." Wit-
ness said ho was only obeying orders. Mr. Mair
said, " D - and b your orders, who are
you ?" He went up to him, and Mr. Mair pushed
him back. On going to take him by the collar
he made a thrust at witness in the grein with
his stick. He endeavoured to ward off the blow with
his truncheon, but could not say if in so doing he struck
him. At the station-house Mr. Mair admitted he had
assaulted witness, and that it was not the act of a gen
tleman, and he was sorry for it.
Cross-examined by Mr. Mitchell—The Superintendent
gave orders that the police were peaceably to request
the people to desist from creating a disturbance
before they took them into custody. He was two
yards from Mr. IVlair when be called out to him.
Witness, at the request of his superior officer, sat once
between Mr. Mair and his solicitor, at Vine-street
Station. Mr. Mair, when apprehended, did not appear
to like his grasp—very few people like the grasp of
a policeman. (Laughter.) He told Mr. Mair he " could
see he was a gentleman by his appearance, and that
he would act more cautiously with him than any one
else." Had Sir Richard Mayne acted as Mr. Mair, he
should have taken him into custody.
Mr. Mitchell examined the witness as to Mr. Hard-
wicke, in dismissing the charge against Mr. Mair, ob-
serving there was no imputation on his character ; but
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said be could
scarcely understand how Mr. Mair could have been dis-
charged and Mr. Hardwicke express his opinion there
was no imputation on his character, when it was shown
Mr. Mair was bound in recognisances to keep the peace.
Mr. Mitchell asked the witness how many times he
had been reported for misconduct ? He replied about
seven times ; and at first refused to state what they
were, and appealed to the Commissioners. He ulti-
mately stated them but they were of a trivial character.
Witness only apprehended Mr. Mair. He struck no
one, but he was repeatedly struck by stones thrown at
him.

Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley—You say you were
punished for " gossiping." What is the punishment ?
Witness—Fined from is. to is. 6d., according to the
time so occupied (he stated the gossiping sometimes was
with females).
Mr. Ellice proposed to recall Mr. Mair to examine
him in a similar manner to the course pursued by Mr.
Mitchell with reference to charges that had been
made against the police, but the commigsioners thought
Mr. Ellice should have questioned Mr. Mair, with a
view to show he was a man of violent temper at the time
of his examination. It would be an inconvenient
course to pursue such a line of examination and re-ex-
amination, as that now suggested.
The identification of the policemen was then gone

into.
385 A was called and identified by Mr. John Elan-
ford as the maa spoken to by him in his evidence.
429 A and 12 A were both identified by Mr. Robert
Sims.

At the suggestion of Mr. Ellice the commissioner
asked Mr. Sims if he had been in the police force, and
under what circumstanes he left it ? He said he was in
the force from 1848 to 1853, when he was dismissed by
Sir Richard Mayne. The report was that he had been
15 minutes absent from his beat. He was a marked man
for sometime before he left the force, in consequence of
his opposition to an arbitrary order of the late Superin-
tendent Marquard, compelling him to submit to drill
because they did not attend the Church of England. He
was for some time sent to " Botnay Bay," a section of
the K division into which a man is placed they wish
to get rid of. Mr. Duncombe presented a petition from
him to the House of Commons, and he courted inquiry
into his conduct in every way.
Mr. Ellice said the order of dismissal stated it was
for insubordinate conduct, insolence, &o.
Mr. Sims denied such was the case.
349 A was identified by James Martin, the naval
brigade man, who received several wounds in the
trenches before Sebastopol, as the policeman who struck
him.
80 C was identified by Mr. Stephens as the man who
refused him admission to Marlborough-street, but Eliza-
beth'llloxham could not identify him; 80 was the num-
ber, but there were men of the D division present.
21 C and 84 C were identified by Mr. Humphreys, and
84 C by Mr. Stephens and Mr. Nightingale, as the men
who assaulted Mr. Stephens.
Mr. Commissioner Armstrong said he concurred with
the witnesses who had stated there was a difficulty in
taking a policeman's number, from the indistinctness
caused by the scroll work round the figures.
147 A was identified by Mr. King as the man who
assaulted his son.
593 A could not be produced, being ill with fever in
Westminister hospital.
402 A was identified by Mr. Calrow as the man who
apprehended him.
375 A was identified by Mr. Berry and Mr. Blanchard.
The latter would not swear to P. S. 31 D, but he was
the build of the man spoken to by him in his evidence
he saw strike a boy.
344 A Mr; Charles Paniell was unable to identify ; he
was certain of the number.
363 A was identified by Mr. Henry Austin.
554 A Mn George Payne could not identify person•
ally, although he was nettnin of the number.
155 A (who appeared in plain clothe,) was identified
by Mr, Jamey Marsh, who complained of the policeman
being in plain clothes Instead of his uniform. 155 A
said he appeared in the same dress he wore in the park.
He had been in plain clothes for 10 years. Mr. Marsh
said he had seen 155 A on duty in the park since the
Ist of 3uly, And in uniform. lie went up to him and
looked him In the face.
The Inspector of the A division said the man pro-
(lilted was the only man in the division of that number.
He was employed by the Inland Revenue in checking
the omnibus numbers.
155 A said the last time he wore his uniform was the
day of the Duke of Wellington's funeral.
Chief Commissioner Wortley said it was evident Mr.
Marsh was
arribmistakn
Mr. M Paid e
if. he could sou t%o viti,3le of tire divi-
sion he could pick out the niv.u.
The inspector sd the
olborn checking numbe
rnillacinaptrhoediutctedjuwlya.s on duty in
ai

Chief Commissioner Wortley said there must be some
mistake, and the Commissioners could not help him.
147 A was identified by Mr. Sears. Mr. Smith could
not identify him, but was positive of the number.
Inspector Webb of the C division was identified by
Mr. Lewis Franklyn.
Mr. Marsh here informed the Commissioners he had
corrected himself with reference to the policeman's
number. He bad been to King-street station and iden-
tified the marl, whose number was 551.
The Chief Commissioner directed the man to be sent
for.

147 A, spoken to by the lad Charles James, was iden.
tified by him.
376 A, spoken to by Mr, staples, appeared in plain
clothes, but Mr. Staples could not identify him.
376 A said he was not in the park that day.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said probably Mr.
Staples had mistaken the number.

Air. Staples said he was not mistaken in the number.
370 A said he was on the sick•list at the time spoken

Mr. Staples said he thought he should know the man
again if he saw him.
398 A was identified by John James White.
385 A was identified by Mr. John Hodgson.
A number of other witnesses who spoke to specific
numbers were not present to identify the men.
The policemen were then called to rebut the charge
made against them, or explain their conduct. They
were first asked if they wished to be examined, and
cautioned as to any statement they might make tending
to criminate themselves.
385 A was the first man called. He denied striking
a man a blow that felled him to the ground, or kicking
a lad of 12 or 14 years of age under the rails. He took
a man to Vine-street station, but used no unnecessary
violence in doing so.
[Mr. George Blandford stated 385 A had a cut on his
lip, but witness had none.]
Cross-examined by Mr. Mitchell—There did not ap-
pear to be much difficulty in taking a policeman's num-
ber that day. Many said they would take his number.
Many persons said " That b has been busy, take his
number." He did not see any person take out a
pencil and paper and take his number. The police
formed in line to clear the road, when they requested
the people to go under the rails. They were much
opposed, and had to handle many to get them out of the
drive. From 15 to 20 were ordered by the sergeant to
clear the people from the north side of the drive under
the railings. The people on many occasions said they
had as much right in the park as the police, and would
not move. Every person that he spoke to gave him
that reply. A policeman's truncheon was always in his
pocket. The police marched into the park in double
file, with their truncheons drawn. Stones were thrown
at the police. Superintendent Hughes was in the park,
but he could not say what orders he gave. He
could not say how many people he struck that
day. He struck at ha man, and believed in doing so he
struck several people. The repeated rushes amongst the
crowd had the effect of preventing stone throwing from
a particular point. There was excitement in the park
at 3 o'clock, which did not subside until about 4 o'clock.
By Mr. Commissioner Henderson—He saw no one
intentionally struck with a policeman's truncheon.
Witness bad no recollection of shaking a young man,
who fell down. He took a young man into custody,
and led him along the carriage way, but used no unne-
cessary violence. He apprehended the lad for throwing
stones. Between three and half-past five o'clock he was
struck by stones with some violence.
By Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley—Three men
assisted him in taking one prisoner.
The witness did not appear to have any knowledge of
the circumstances spoken to by the witnesses who had
made charges against him.
429 A, Robert Bryden, has been in the service nine
years. He had no recollection of telling a man he would
mark him. Ho told a man, after cautioning him, that
if be continued shouting and yelling he would take him
into custody. A byestander said, "If the man bas done
wrong, why not take him into custody—it looks revenge-
ful." Witness replied, "It might be useful to him."
He denied saying the people had not pluck to fight.
He thought he recognised Mr. Sims as the man who
addressed him.
Examined by Mr. Mitchell—•He did not strike any
one that day. He saw stones thrown, but was not
struck. Witness was examined as to a horse being
frightened, ridden by a groom, who bad some difficulty
to sit him ; the gentleman's horse was not frightened.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said a gentleman
generally rode the quiet horse, and put his groom on the
rough one. (Laughter.)
Mr. Mitchell—This horse was too large for the groom
did not fit him. (Renewed laughter.)
Mr. Ayrton being in court, 387 A was called and
identified by him ; as was 551 Aby Mr. Marsh. 345 A
Mr. Smith could not positively identify ; he was much
like the man he spoke to in his evidence who assaulted
Mr. Maxwell.
The Court then adjourned till 11 this morning.

LAW INTIMLIGENCE.

JUDGES CHAMBERS.—JULY 26.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin.)
THE QUEEN V. BEVAN.

In this case, well known to the public, an application
was made fora writ of habeas col:pus to bring the de-
fendant before the Insolvent Debtors' Court to be heard
on his application under the Protection Act. The mat-
ter was discussed before his lordship and yesterday de-
cided. Mr. C. V. Lewis was for the defendant.
It will be recollected that the defendant was convicted
of embezzlement as manager of the Deposit Loan Com-
pany, and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment. He
had petitioned under the Protection Act before his con•
viction, and, as the gaoler refused to bring him up on
warrant of the Chief Commissioner, the present applica-
tion was made.

Mr. Baro❑ Martin declined to grant a writ of habeas,
as the application was made on the part of the defendant,
and, u❑der the circumstances disclosed, he hid not think
it out to be granted.
Application refused.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—JULY 26.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fane.)
IN RE STRAHAN, PAUL, AND CO.'S BANKRUPTCY.
To-day was appointed for the last examination of these
bankrupts, who had carried on business as bankers in
the Strand, and whose case has excited so much interest
in consequence of the charges brought against them, on
which an inquiry is pending before the magistrates at
the Bow-street Police-court.
The Court was crowded, as on the last occasion, by
persons interested, although it was generally understood
that no examination of the bankrupts would take place
until after the return of Mr. Commissioner Evans, to
whom the case was allotted. The bankrupts were
brought up from the House of Detention by Lieut.
Hill, the Governor, under a warrant. of Mr. Commis-
sioner Fane, the presence of the bankrupts being requi-
site under the provision of the bankruptcy law.
Mr. Lawrance appeared for the assignees ; Mr. Link-
later for creditors ; Mr. Chidley for the Marquis of
Cianricarde and other noblemen. As the bankrupts
were only brought up pro forma, they were not repre-

rented.
Mr. Lawrance said that it had been arranged that the
examination should be adjourned until the return of the
senior commissioner, and therefore the business would
be simply for the receiving of proofs and claims.
The 9th of October next was then named.
Mr. Whitehead, the registrar, sat to take proofs, but
during the morning those rendered were admitted with-
out opposition.
The proofs admitted were estimated by Mr. Lawrance
to be about 70,0001. making a total of 300,0001., but up
to 3 o'clock the list had not been added up.
Amongst the proofs were several on behalf of
charitable institutions of which 'the bankrupts
had been bankers, and most of the claims were
for balances of accounts. The Honourable Lady
Caroline de Lambe proved for 1,9831. ; the Hon. Lady
Vassal!, the Earl of Seafield, &c.
No accounts have yet been filed, but it is expected
that they will be completed so as to be filed in due time,
so that there will be no impediment to the bankrupts
being examined :n the ordinary course, on the day to
which the examination is adjourned, the 9th of October,
as it is customary on almost all occasions to allow one
adjournment at the expense of the estate.
At the conclusion of the proofs,
Mr. D. E. Columbine applied, on behalf of Captain
Morris, R.N., for an examination of the bankrupts, &c.
Mr. Sturgeon, as counsel for a lady of the name of Ste-.
yens, who, it is understood, is a creditor for 15,0001., also
applied for the same purpose, to ascertain how the bank-
rupts had disposed of certain securities submitted to the
bankrupts.
After some discussion his Honour refused to allow
any examination to take place, as under existing cir-
cumstances, it might be prejudicial to other creditors ;
but the solicitor to the assignees (Mr. Lawrance) and
Mr. Bell (the official assignee) would afford every
facility for investigation, and he (his Honour) would
grant a private meeting for that purpose if it was
deemed necessary.
The examination was adjourned until the 9th of Oc-
tober next.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.—JULY 26.
(Before the Chief Commissioner.)
IN RE CHARLES WILLIAM WINCHELSEA BEVAN.
This case was reported on Wednesday. The insol-
vent was undergoing a sentence of 18 months, for em-
bezzlement, as manager of an insurance company, and
it was expected that he would be brought up, on his ap-
plication, under the Protection Act.
Mr. B. C. Robinson, who appeared to oppose, said
there were difficulties in the case to the insolvent's ap-
pearance, and, as the other side wished for a further
adjournment, be had no objection.
The Chief Commissioner granted an adjournment, re-
marking that it was a question whether a man who was
in prison for felony was a person to petition under the
Protection Act.
The case was then adjourned,