The Sun.
London, England, 1863-01-15 00:00:00

HAY MARKETS.

SMITHFIELD.—Meadow hay, £2 Os to £4 5s Od ; clover,
do., £3 10s to £5 108; and straw, £l:2s to £1 16s per load.
A heavy trade.

CIIMBEILLAND.—Meadow hay, Os to £4 6s; clover,
108 to £5 8s Od ; and straw, 12s to £1 16s per load.
Trade dull.
WHITECIIAPEL.—Meadow hay, £1 16s to £4 ss; clover
do., £3 lOs to £5 lOs; and straw, £1 12i to £1 16s per load.
A slow sale.

Mr. James Fagan, who represented the county
the
Wexford for some years in the Imperial Parliament,
Liberal interest, died on Monday, in the 6.ci year of his
age, at Donabate, in the county Dublin. 8
the Etna
THE GREAT E A
fog the pilot deemed it
Great ASTERN.— d
vie
state that in consequence
prudent not to take theof dense
Eastern out on the 3d. She
would leave New York on the if4tll_,_J
the weather cleared up.
THE ALABAMA AGAIN.—lhe amalea Guardian
of the 24th ult. say,:—The Confederate steamer
Alabama, Captain Semmes, capt ured the American barque
Parker Cooke, Fulton master, bound from Boston to Port-
au-Prince, with a cargo of provisions, on the 30th ult., off
the Mona Passage. The Alabama took Captain Fultoa
and crew and about 300 barrels of provisions from the barque
and then set her on fire. A few days after the capture of
Parker Cooke, the Confederate steamer fell in with the
American schooner Union, from Baltimore, bound to Port
Maria, with a cargo of flour, dal , for Messrs. A. Linndo
and Brothers. Captain Semmes. finding by the papers of
the schooner that the cargo was the property of British
subjects did not detain her, but forced the captain to sign a
bond of 1,600 dols. Captain Fulton and the crew of the
Parker Cooke were then put on board the Union for Port
Maria, where they arrived on the 6th. Captain Fulton
came to this city and reported himself to the American
Consul. We learn that the Alabama laid three days off
the Mona Passage, waiting for the American steamer Navy
Bay."

The Rev. I. Macnaught, who resigned the in-
cumbency of St. Chrysostom's Church, Everton,
about a year ego, in consequence of a radical change in hie
religious belief, has just published a recantation of him
"errors." He declares his scepticism to have been a
"mistake," and i►e desires once more to enter upon the
work of a minister of the Church of England.

THE YELVERTON CASE.

The following correspondence appeared in the
Scotsman:—

Chambers, 60, Hanover. street,
Edinburgh, Jan, 12, 1863,
Sir,—My attention has just been called to the London
Examiner of Saturday, the 10th inst., in which there ap-
pears an excerpt from a letter written to the editor by Mrs.
Forbes, who claims to be the wife of Major Yelverton.
This letter contains statements which are untrue and
grossly offensive towards the lion. Mrs. Theresa Yelver-
ton, my client. These cannot be allowed to pass without
retractation and apology ; but in the absence ofMrs,Yelver-
ton from this c unity, I refrain from doing more than to
make this public intimation, through you, that ulterior
proceedings must necessarily follow upon such a libel ac
this.

I wish that this lady had adopted Mrs. Telverton's
example during her long four years of anxious and
trying endeavours to establish her rights in the courts of
law. Though she has been most grossly calumniated by
Major Yelverton's friends, she has never retaliated by one
word, even of remonstrance. She has been content to bear
patiently the remarks of the public and the press as the
consequence of her being engaged in h public suit; and
the only thing that she has done. in order to sot herself
right NI ith the public, and to correct the imperfect and par
tial knowledge of the press—seeing that they will continue
to offer comments on her case—is simply to print in extinso
those letters which, when read in the shape of garbled
quotations, have been tortured to her discredit. She has
never said one word against the woman who has been put
into a position by Major Yelverton's conduct only a little
less painful than her own ; and I regret that, when these
proceedings are now drawing to a close, this other incident
should have occurred to add increased bitterness to the dis-
pute.—l am, sic.

JAMES SOMERVILLE,
Solicitor for the
Hon. Mrs. Theresa Yelverton.
[The following is what appeared in the Examiner, in.
eluding the excerpt above referred to :

IVe readily giveal part of a letter
, from one of the two ladies claiming to be the wife of Major
Yelverton. We thought we could rely upon the informa-
tion currently circulated respecting the circumstances of
Mrs. Forbes marriage; but, if we have been misled, we
extremely regret the remarks that have given unmerited pain
to the lady. It appears certain that the marriage did not take
place so recentlyafter the death of the lamented and respected
Professor Forbes as we had supposed. For the rest, too,
HS
insertionTELvEl to tTth Oler
mcaAtseur.
i
we are bound to take the lady's word until or unless the
contrary statement that has been put forth can be sub-
stantiated. Our correspondent is quite mistaken in
numbering us amongst the admirers and partisans of the
pursuer. We have been neither, as reference to our pages
will show. We quote only the material part of the letter,
because as a whole it was not written for publication. It is,
however, only in the lady's own words that we can be sure
of giving just and fair expression to her statement.
" I was not aware of ',the claim,' &c. &c. I knew nothiv
about the woman. I believed she was a cast off mistress,
cast off on account of her own treachery and falsehood, and
whom my husband had not seen for four years. I knew
nothing about her, her name, family, nothing. I married
with all the publicity announcing my engagement to
friends and relations could give. I never heard of the sham
ceremony in the Papist chapel until after I was married.
Both my relations and myself made all possible inquiries as
to the character 'of the man with whom she was uniting
herself,' and the result was nothing but praises of his
honourable, amiable character. No ono knew of his liaison
with ' the pursuer;' and, until she dragged him down to
her own level, his character stood at the very highest. My
husband, Edward Forbes, died November 18, 1854. I
married William Yelverton June 26, 1858. . . . I need
hardly add that I was not aware of the pretended Scotch
marriage, &e., &c. As the whole story is devoid of truth
from the beginning to end, and was not invented or put
forward until two years after it is alleged to have taken
place, neither Major Yelverton nor myself could very well
know it by intuition. I know of no ' claims' of any one's,
nor did any person. ' The pursuer' was in Edinburgh the
whole week before our marriage, knew of it, and spoke of
it. A wits would have done something to prevent ire tak-
ing place ; a revengeful mistress let it alone, in order to
revenge herself the better upon her lover. The proof of
this is in the Scotch evidence of Mrs. Stalker.")