The Sun.
London, England, 1855-11-29 00:00:00

on their 500 shares. Many of the persons who
signed the deed were not responsible men. 5,000
shares had been signed for by "stags," on the payment
of 6d. per share. (Laughter.) One of these stags signed
his name twice, once iu full, and the other abbreviated.
Some of the names in the deed were those of persons under
age., There were only from 8,000 to 9,000 shares
paid on at the time to which he alluded. On one occa-
sion the directors paid back the money paid on 1,000
shares, in consequence of a quarrel between this person,
and Mr. Morgan, and the Board. Mr. Princeps was
stated to be an East India merchant, but he was known
as a "guinea man ;" that was a person who was on boards,
and was paid aguinea forsuch attendance. In April, 1854,
the company owed 15,0001., including money borrowed to
lend again ; the only money available at that time was
5001. cash at their bankers, and the money lent ; there
was no vested property, as stated in one of the financial
statements, and which had been produced. The balance
sheet was made up to meet the public eye. There was,
however, at the time, money in agents' hands. The
report, of the committee of directors, in Lord Drumlan-
rig s handwriting, but not signed, witness found after
he left the company, amongst his papers. He did not
purloin it, as bad been represented.
Mr. Thomas, the Bristol agent, corroborated the
evidence relative to the representations made to Mr.
Ayre as to the flourishing state of the company. He
wrote in a letter to the company that Mr. Ayre had a
notion he should become a director, and had alluded to
the expenses of the company being great. He supposed
his attention must have been called to the expenses.
The directory referred to a Bristol board to be estab-
lished.
By Lord Campbell—He believed Bevan was acting
under the authority of the board, notwithstanding the
strange manner in which he wrote him using the terms
" stick to him," "no humbug," &c. iVitness neyer re.
ceived his 501.
This was the defendant's case.
Mr. Sergeant Shee then called evidence to rebut Be-
van's statements relative to the state of the company.
The learned judge having gone through the evidence
The jury retired, and, on returning into court, deli.
vered a verdict for the plaintiffs.

CRIMINAL COURT.—(This Day.)

OLD COURT.
(Before the Lord Chief Baron.)

CIIARGE OF MURDER.—DanieI Lorden, 38, labourer,
was indicted for the wilful murder of his wife, Catherine
Lorden.
The prisoner was also charged with the like offence
upon the coroner's inquisiticn.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Clarke conducted the prosecu•
tion. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Parry.
It appeared from the opening statement of the learned
counsel for the prosecution that the prisoner had for-
merly been a weaver, but had been unable to sup-
port himself by that occupation since Christmas last,
and from that time he had maintained himself
and his family by working as a labourer at the
docks. The prisoner, his wife, a daughter 18 years old,
and two sons, aged respectively 12 and 14 years, occu-
pied a single room in a house in Parliament-court,
near the Artillery-ground, and it appeared they were
in very distressed circumstances, and that on the even-
ing of the 17th September a raffle was to take place
at a public-house in the neighbourhood, out of which
the prisoner and his family were to receive some
benefit. The. prisoner, his wife, his daughter, 'some
other of his relations, and a man named Kingston,
were at this raffle, and it appeared that the prisoner
was very much intoxicated, and during the evening
a quarrel took place between him and same of his
wife's relations, and the prisoner was turned out
of the room with considerable violence. The party left
the public-house soon after 12 o'clock at night, and it
appeared that Kingston accompanied the deceased
and her daughter to their house, and they had a pot
of leer at the door. At this time the prisoner came
home, and he appeared to be very angry at finding King-
ston with his wife, and he went into his own room and
threw a piece of wood out of the window, which struck
Kingston, who challenged the deceased to fight, and he
came down stairs and they bad a scuffle together, and
both fell to the ground, The prisoner, after this, went
again into his own house, and it appeared that his con-
duct was so violent that the deceased and his daughter
were afraid to go into their own room, and remained on
the staircase until the morning, when the two sons went
out to their work. The daughter subsequently went
away, and it appeared that the unhappy deceased
shortly afterwards went into the room where the
prisoner was, and almost immediately afterwards
there were the sounds of a scuffle, and the
deceased was heard several times to shriek out mut.
der. After this had occurred some lodgers in the house
heard the deceased leave her room and go down stairs,
and she was followed by the prisoner, and in a short time
the cries of murder were repeated, and the prisoner was
then heard to leave the house. Very soon after this the
deceased woman was seen in a sitting posture upon the
landing of the staircase, and at first it would seem that
she was thought to be asleep, but it was eventually dis-
covered that she bad reeeived a stab or wound in
the throat, and that she was quite dead. It appeared that
immediately after the fatal occurrence had taken place
the prisoner proceeded to the police station and said that
be had come to surrender himself for killing his wife,
and a constable was sent with him to his residence, and
the prisoner then handed to the constable the knife with
which the fatal wound had bee❑ inflicted. The prisoner
subsequently made another statement in which he ad-
mitted that he bad stabbed his wife.

The above facts were established by the evidence of
numerous witnesses, but in the course of the cross-exami-
nation by Mr. Parry it was elicited that the accused
was a woman of most drunken habits, and that she was
in the habit of constantly getting drunk and coming
home late at night, and on these occasions it was her
custom to behave with great violence to the prisoner,
and be bad on several occasions left the house to escape
from her. It also appeared that there was a suspicion
that the deceased was on too intimate terms with
Kingston, and that she had admitted that she had
stayed out all night with him at a coffee shop. It
also appeared that the prisoner was not addicted to
habits of intoxication, but that he was a very hard-
working, industrious man, and that during the time he
was engage,' as a weaver he was frequently employed
from 10 in the morning till 12 at night to endeavour to
support his f tinily. It also appeared that upon one oc-
casion during a paroxysm of fury the deceased had bitten
the prisoner on the leg, and he was still suffering from
the injury he received upon the occasion.
Mr. Parry made an eloquent address to the jury on
behalf of the prisoner, and he urged that although there
was no doubt that the prisoner had caused the death of
his wife, yet that, under the circumstances of the case
they would be justified in acquitting him of the crime of
wilful murder, and in finding him guilty only of the
lesser offense of manslaughter.
The Chief Baron having summed up the jury returned
a verdict of guilty, recommending the prisoner to
mere-, upon account of his previous quiet charact r.
The Lord Chief Baron then passed sentence of death,
telling the prisoner not to entertain any hopes of his
life being spared.