The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, AUGUST 28, 1861

Imperialist force, and some important outworks
taken. A few Englishmen who were trafficing in
the creeks in lorchas, illegally of course, were killed
or wounded by the Imperial troops. Some of them
found refuge in Chinkiang, a place 50 miles east-
ward of the Taeping capital. An English vessel
was fired on from Nanking, and the gunboat Hardy
has gone to see into the matter.
" From Shanghae we hear of another case of
rowdyism,
w e w
erwhiche
stabbed has resulted
v Nh knives. t in t b
e death
The
acts
f
two
men hof
ruffianism atnhiesrme
wwieltl-ehpeeerapmeteradtieffideantityniignhdtiaienetvhere
ihg bazaar,whe
were the guilty parties.
" Major Gordon has made no great movement
since we wrote last; he is reported to be busy in
i
making his observations, and there s no desire for
his proceeding to operations an hour sooner than he
thinks fit. We should say that with Gordon near
Soochow, the Imperialists in the outworks at Nan-
king, and a splendid Imperial fleet on its way out
to the Yang-tsze, the rebel cause is on the wane.
One of the most cheering signs of the times is the
comparatively small amountofbloodshedwithwhich
the return to Imperialism promises to be effected.
Major Gordon's last operation was not so sangui-
nary as that previous to it, and it is likely his neat
will be less so; while the wholesale desertions from
the rebel army seem to offer an easy mode of even-
tually dissipating the entire body. Desertions took
place at Nanking, and Gordon states that both he
and the Tartar general are accustomed to recruit
from the ranks of the enemy. The headquarters
of the Anglo. Chinese force has been removed from
Sunkiang to Quinsan, and Captain Stack retains
the post of commandant.
"From Ningpo, poor accounts reach us as to the
condition of affairs there generally. Much dissatis-
faction has been caused by an Englishman having
been shot by the French authorities. He was charged
with selling firearms to the ietels, and tried by a

court martial, consisting of four English officers
and a French colonel. The story goes that the
four English officers pronounced in favour of
acquitting the man, and sending him from Saotsan,
where he was tried, to her Majesty's consul at
Niogpo, The French colonel wished him to be shot.
Smith (as the man was named) was forwarded to
Shaoshing, which is held by the Franco• Chinese
Contingent, if we mistake not, and there he was
taken out at night and shot. We ought to be
jealous of our authority in matters of this kind; and
if the facts are as stated the case will be one for
inquiry.

" From Amoy and Fulichau there is no news.
" From S watow we learn that various endeavours
to buy land on the new Keaout site, which is leased
in perpetuity to the British Crown, have fAiled.
Ii
is to some extent disgraceful that our privileges in
China should be waived whenever their enforcement
is likely to excite opposition, but the disgrace is
probably better than the trouble and ill-feeling that
would arise from the use of coercive measures.
Sir F. Bruce, at all events, takes this view, and
is no longer in favour of settlements, preferring
to allow merchants to build at the ports wherever
they can get land. Serious consequences may yet
arise from such t view of the case. We may draw
attention to a letter from Swatow, defending her
Majesty's consul from the imputation of having
acted weakly in the matter of selecting, upon the
south side of the river, a site for the consulate, after
having been insulted by a mandarin from Canton,
who was deputed to arrange for giving him pos-
session of the north or Kealut site.

"We lcarn from Manilla that the loss of pro-

party by the fearful earthquake is greatly over
what was estimated. That of the Government
alone is put down at thirteen millions of dollars,
and the losses of private individuals will amount in
the aggregate, to about twenty-sir millions, mak-
ing nearly forty miaions in all. It is almost in-
credible that so large a destruction of property
should be attended with so comparatively small a
loss of life. Hundreds of Chinamen are seeking
passports to return to their own country, having
become seriously alarmed by the disaster.
1 "Arrangements have been made for rebuilding
1 the Church tower at Canton, which fell down some
I time ago."

Painful Case of Suicide in the Regent's

Caul

Last night an inquiry was held at the Mile-end
workhouse, Ban crof t-road, by Mr. John Humphreys,
coroner, respecting the death of Wm. Pullen, aged
70 years, who committed suicide under very distress-
ing circumstances.

George Osborn, 11, Road-street, Mi!e-end, said
that deceased was his grandfather, and had, witness
was sorry to say, robbed his (deceased's) son some
time since, and there had been great ill-will in con-
sequence. Deceased, on account of the shame, at-
tempted to cut his throat, but was prevented. A
few days since deceased's son, finding himself dying
from disease, sent for his father, and said "I forgive
you." They were both greatly affected, and the
son died. Deceased seemed to be out of his mind.
Joseph Clarke, bargeman, said, that on Monday
week he saw the deceased get on the parapet of the
Globe Bridge, over the Regent's Canal, and in a very
wild manner leap off into the water. The uncon-
cealed way in which the act was done caused 200
or 300 persons to gather immediately, and with
much difficulty he was got out of the water alive.
He was quite excited, and said, " Why are all these
people here ? Ido not know why I did it." He
was taken by the police to the infirmary.
Dr. Forster said deceased died from fever result-
ing from the immersion.
The jury returned a verdict, that deceased died
from the effects of immersing himself in the Re-
gent's Canal while of unsound mind.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.--CROYDON, Aug. 27.
(Before Baron Bramwell and a Special Jury.)
WOOLLEY V. POLE.

THE CAMPDEN HOUSE FIRE.-THIRD DAY,
The proceedings in this extraordinary cause were again
resumed this morning, at ten o'clock.
Mr. Bovill, Q.C., Serjeant Ballantine, Mr. Moreweather,
Mr. Henry James (specially retained), and Mr. Rosher,
appeared for the plaintiff.

Mr. Lush, Q. 0., Mr. Denman, Q,C,, and Mr. Garth
were for the defendant.

The following additional evidence was given :
The witness Crozier was recalled, and he explained by
plan the route he took to put out the gas on the night pre-
vious to the fire, and he pointed out the different places he

Went into. He said that Mr. Woolley sat upon tho stairs

on the front staircase while ho was engaged in extinguishing
the gas and fastening up the offices. When he had finished,

he said that ho and fir. Woolley went back to their bed-

rooms by the principal staircase, and it was upon this stair-

case that they met the Temples.

In answer to a question put by one of the jurors,
The witness said that there was no accommodation for
;my one to sleep in the green-room, except a large sofa.
Mr. Edward Norton Clifton said—l am an architect and
surveyor, and have been employed in those capacities by
the London and Westminster Bank and the Globe Insur-

ante Company, and have had great experience in the matters
connected with my profession. I have carefully examined
the model and the plans of this building, and I am of opinion
that it would take £17,783 to replace the building. If oak

and chesnut beams were used, as they were in the old build

ing, the expense of reinstating the building would be much
Larger. An ordinary dwelling-house, built with ordinary
_ _

timber, would come to the amount he had mentioned.
Cross-examined--I never saw th 6 house before the fire;

and I only form my judgment from the plans.
Mr. Major Rhodes llawkings said—l am an architect, and
I acted for Mr. Woolley after the fire, being at the same
time in communication with Mr. Freeman, the surveyor of
the Sun Fire Office. I commenced my operations in April,
and I informed him that I had plans of the interior and ex-

tei ior of the building, and showed them to him, and he
made some plans himself from them. The communications
with Mr. Freeman continued down to the month of October,
1862. (Some correspondence betweeen the parties was here
put in and read, the object being to show that down to this
period the negotiations were going on upon the understand-
ing that the premises were to be replaced by the insurance
companies. In the last letter written by the solicitor to
the Sun, he stated that they were under a mistake as to its
being obligatory upon the company to reinstate the building.
The letter also required from the plaintiff, at his own ex-
pense, an estimate of the supposed coat of reinstating the
building, accompanied by plans.) The witness said in
order to prepare such an estimate as the fire office required
an expense of nearly £5OO would have been incurred. It

would have been necessary to make plans and estimates just
as though the house was to have been actually rebuilt.
Baron Bramwell said that he thought this construction
ought not to have been put upon the application of the
company. All they evidently required was a rough estimate.
The witness went on to say that he agreed with Mr.
Clifton that the expense of re-erecting Campden House
would be £12,500, and in addition to this there would be
the architect's commission, that would amount to £5OO or
£6OO more, and other expenses.
Mr. Hardwick, another architect, gave similar evidence.
Ellen Perry said—l was housekeeper in Mr. Woolley's
service, and went with the family to Brighton in the autumn
of 1861. I am sure that no furniture was removed to
Brighton from Campden House, I remember the candles
being purchased. I had asked for some candles previously,
and a portion were taken down to Brighton, and they were
there before Mr. Woolley went to London the last time
before the fire. I have been in Mr. Woolley's service 14
years, and I know it was the custom to cover up the furni-
ture and fittings with brown holland and paper when the
family went out of town. The furniture that was at Brighton
was taken from Tonbridge Castle.
Cross-examined—l am still in Mr. Woolley's service. I;ei
keeps fewer servants now than he used to do. He has only
myself, a housemaid, and the Butler Crozier at present in
his service. The greater portion of the candles had been
consumed before the fire. Besides the furniture that was
taken from Tonbridge tome furniture was taken from Camp-
den House.

By Baron Bramwell—When Mr. Woolley and the family
went to London they
used to let the Brighton house, and at
one time I remember a bill being put up to let it. Ido not
know how Mr. Woolley came to
go up to London in March,
justbeforethe fire, but I heard something said about his
going to hire a new gardener.
Mr. G. Springer said—I was at Notting-hill on the morn-
ing of the fire, and I saw the appearance of a fire and went
in that direction and gave an alarm to the firemen as I went
along. I discovered that the fire was at Campden House, and
I knocked at the front gate but could not get any answer.
At this time the reflection of the fire could be seen through
the windows in front of the house. At this time there were
no firemen or policemen at the spot, but I heard Mr. Woolley
calling out "Thieves I" and "Murder I" I assisted in re-
moving some pictures from the adjoining house, which is
occupied by Mr. Egg, and three-quarters of an bour elapsed
before any engine arrived. 1 saw Mrs. Temple jump from
the window, but at first I thought it was a bundle of clothes
that was thrown out.
Cross-examined—The first thing I saw at Notting-hill
was an appearance of red smoke. When I got to Campden
House, I at first tried a aide gate, but it was fastened, and
appeared to be locked. The smoke from Campdeu House
appeared to be blowing in a north-west direction towards
Mr. Egg's house. When I first saw the fire it must have
been about half-past three o'clock.
Mrs. Charlotte Hazel, housekeeper to Mr. Egg, said that
on the night of the fire she and a fellow-servant were the
only inmates of the house, which was next to Campden
House. She was awoke by a great noise, and awoke her
fellow-servant, and she was about to get up when Temple
came running along the leads, and said "For God's sake
let me in, my wife and child are burned to death." We got
him into the room with some difficulty. He was a good deal
burned. At this time no one was there but Temple, and the
house was in a complete blaze before the engines came up.
She heard some one screaming from Campden House, but
was unable to say whether it was a man or woman's voice.
Cross-examined—Temple was dreadfully burned, when I
left hold of his hands the flesh seemed to peal off them.
By the Jury—Witness did not know how Temple got
upon the leads, nor how ho got out of Campden House.
By Mr. Denman—When witness had dressed herself, she
went to give the alarm to a person named Ellis, who lived
close by, and he tapped at the window to show that he heard
her, at least she understood so. She did not see Ellis at her
master's house for at least twenty minutes after she had
called him.
Miss Emily Robinson said she lived with Mrs. Stevens, in
Gloucesteeeplace, close to Campden House. She was awoke
on the morning of the fire by Mrs. Stevens, and upon going
to the window she saw smoke and a lurid light. Mr. Wool-
ley was brought in about half an hour after this. Temple
had come in before him, and his wife had been brought
there previously, but he did not seem to be aware of it. Mr.
Woolley was accompanied by Crozier. He appeared in
great agony of mind. A short time after Mrs. Temple had
been brought in, her son, Richard Temple, also came in.
She looked occasionally at Campden House, and saw the
ceiling and other parts of the house fall, but twenty minutes
elapsed before the fire seemed to break through the front of
the house. She could see the reflection of the fire through
the windows for some time before the flames actually burst
through.
M aria Crozier said—l am the sister of the witness Thomas
Crozier, and I went to see him at Campden House on the
13th of March, a few days before the fire. I saw that the
pictures and other things were covered over, and it took two
hours to uncover them to enable me to see them. The house
was as full of furniture at this time as it had ever been.
Owen W. Clift said—l am a carpenter at Kensington, and
I have been employed to do work at Campden House from
1848 to 1855, and had no other occupation. I was chiefly
engaged in joiners' work and carving. There was a great
deal of old carving work, and I was employed to alter it,
and convert it to certain purposes that were decided upon.
I remember putting up one carved chimney piece which oc-
cupied me and Temple three or four months, and then Tim-
brell was set to work upon it, and it was completely covered
with gold. Timbrell was employed at the house continually,
to my knowledge, for seven years. Another gilder was em-
ployed before Timbrell, and a great many other workmen
were also employed. The witness then described a variety
of expensive alterations that were made in the house by him-
self and the other workmen, and he said that he believed he
had received from £BOO to £l,OOO for his own labour alone.
The jury interposed at this stage of the case, and inquired
whether it was necessary to go into any further evidence as
to the value of the contents of the house.
Mr. Lush said ho would admit that Mr. Woolley had laid
out a great deal of money upon the house.
Mr. Bovill inquired if he was to understand that his
learned friend admitted that the fittings were worth £7,000.
Mr. Lush said he would admit that they might have cost
Mr. Woolley £7,000, but at the same time he should con-
tend that they would not be worth anything like that sum
to pull down and sell,
Mr. Bovill asked if he would admit that it would take
£l,OOO to replace them.
Mr. Lush said he had no objection to do that. He did not
dispute the cost of the fittings, but he disputed the alleged
value of the furniture,
which was insured for £5,000.
The witness then stated that the house always appeared
to him to be full of good and valuable furniture, and it was
in the same state only a short time before the fire.
Cross-examined -A gentleman named Baylis acted as the
adviser in matters of taste to Mr. Woolley, and they were
very intimate. Witness was employed by Mr. Temple.
A statement made by Timbrell, the person referred to,
previous to his death, was here put in and read. It was to
the same effect as the evidence given by the last witness.
He expressed his opinion that the articles purchased by Mr.
Woolley were genuine specimens of antique furniture of the
most rare and valuable description, and that it would be
impossible to replace them. He also stated the he had ex-
pended nearly £l,OOO in the purchase of geld r the pur-
pose of gilding. lie estimated the value of i turnittere
at £6,000 or £7,000, end the fittings at £l,OOO.
Eobcrt Finch proved that he w.ee formerly in the service

of the Hon. Mr. Curzon, and he had occasionally acted as
waiter at Campden House when there was a party. He
gave the same evidence with regard to the furniture, and
said that he had been in Apsley House, Kensington Palace,
and a great many noblemen's houses, and he had never seen

one more fully or elegantly furnished. He said there was
not a single vacant place where a picture or an ornament

could be put up. Ilis observation on the house extended
down to the month of March, 1862. On the morning after
the fire he went to Mr. Stevens's, and saw Temple, and he
made a statement with regard to the origin of the fire.
Cross-examined—Upon some occasions when witness at-
tended to wait ho was in livery. Mr. Woolley provided the
livery. had seen as many as 400 persons present at

some of the parties.
Mr. J. Cotton said he was formerly a furniture dealer,
and had had great experience in all classes of furniture, and
attended all tha principal sales, and had seen most of the
noblemen's show houses. In 1859 he asked permission to

look over Campden House, and he considered the furniture

most valuable and worth at least £3,000 or £9,000, and in
fact some cf it could not be replaced. It it had been sold

by public auction ho believed it would have fetched more
than the eum he had mentioned, and that people would have

given half a crown for a catalogue solely for the purpose of
seeing it. Mr. Woolley gave hint permission to take his
friends over the house to see it, and he was there in Nov.,

.861, and alt the furniture was there at thaz time. It would

take a lifetime, even if a man had the money, to get up

such another collection of ancient and valuable furniture.

Cross-examined—l heard that Mr. Woolley was in the
habit of attending sales, but I am not aware that good
things are sometimes picked up at sales very cheap.
Mr. James Tompeett, a gentleman residing at Torquay,
gave similar evidence with regard to the quantity and value
of the furniture and fittings in Campden House.
Cross examined—He had seen Campden House more
crowded with furniture than it was after the furniture had
been rum:lye-1 to Tonbridge Castle.
In answer to a question put by the jury, the witness said
that he did not at at y time miss anything material in the
shape of furniture from Campden. House.
The original lease of the premises was then put in. It
contained the usual covenants to insure and keep the build-
ing in repair. The bum of £6,000 was given for the lease
for 99 years, and the plaintiff was bound to insure to the
full value of the building.
Baron Bramwell—l suppose the lease contained the usual
covenants for re .entry for any breach of covenant ?
Mr. Bovill said that it did.
Baron Bramwell—Then, if he had not insured to the full
amount, ho would have been liable to lose his £6,000?
Mr. Bovill said that was so.
Mr. Lush—And he did insure for £l,OOO at first.
The various policies were next put in. The effect of them
has been already stated, and it will be unnecessary to re•
peat them. The insuran'e upon the furniture for £5,000
was made in November, 1861.
Mr. H. B. Lennard said that he was on intimate terms

with the plaintiff, and he had frequently been to Campden
House, and was well acquainted with the nature of the
furniture and the fittings contained in it. To the best of his
judgment, and having some knowledge of the value of an-
tique furniture and fittings of this description, he was of
opinion that they could not be replaced for less than £15,000.
The witness added that an uncle of his had fitted up a much
smaller house in Hy-de-park Gardens in a similar style, and
it cost him £28,000.
Cross-examined—A man would be very lucky indeed if he
could purchase such a lot of furniture as there was in Camp-

den House for a sum like £2,000 or £3,000. The articles
that were in it were such as were only seen in palaces.
Mr. G. F, Duncombe deposed that he was connected with
the Art and Science Department of the Kensington Museum,
and he had been acquainted with the plaintiff for some years
and frequently went to Campden House to see him, and he
was there on the Thursday before the fire. He had always
noticed that the house was fully and most beautifully fur-
nished, and he saw no difference on this day. When he
went Mr. Woolley was denied to him, but he heard his voice
and came out of the library, and he asked him to go to him.
He appeared to be at work, and had on an old suit of clothes,
and he observed that a number of books were lying about
open, apparently to dry or air them. He also noticed that
varnishing appeared to be going on, and that some calico or
cloth of some kind was hanging from the ceiling apparently
for the purpose of covering the pictures and the carving. He
was quite sure that varnishing was going on at this time, for
he put his card upon a table, intending to write something
upon it, when he was told that Mr. Woolley was not at
home, and he found some varnish upon the card, and he
kept it as a memento of the burning of Campden House.
Mr. Bovill then said that at present this would be the case
for the plaintiff; but as so much had been said on the pre-
vious day by his learned friends upon the subject of the pur-
chase of the candles in Oxford-street, it had been thought an-
visable to bring forward the people from the shop, in or der
that the matter might be explained. They were not yet in
attendance, but he expected they would 800/1 come, and he
should then ask his lordship to allow them to be examined.
blr. Lush said he had to objection to that being done.
The witness referred to, Mr. Greaves, tallow chandler in
New Oxford-street, came into court during the adjournment
and he was examined. His evidence, however, only wont to
show that in January last sixty pounds of candles of the
ordinary household description were purchased at his shop,
and sent to Mr. Woolley's house.
This closed the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. Lush then proceeded to address the jury for the do •
fendant. He said it was now his duty to law before them
the case he proposed to make out on the part of the fire
office in answer to the present action. He felt bound to
thank them for the patient attention they hal paid to the
evidence for the plaintiff, because after the plausible tale
that had been told them it was possible they might have be-
come impatient at the amount of time that had already been
occupied and considered that no answer could be given to
such a ease. He was sure, however, that it was unnecessary
to inform them that the defendants would never have put
forward the defence they had done, and which was one cal-
culated to be almost destructive to their interest as a com-
mercial undertaking, if they had not fully believed there
was good foundation for it; and although the alternative
was undoubtedly a terrible one, he should ask the jury to
say by their verdict whether the plaintiff was proved to have
been guilty of the crime of arson or not. After some further
preliminary observations he said that his learned friend had
accused them of delay ; but what would have been said if
such a charge as this had been made without the fullest
consideration. And as to giving Mr. Woolley into custody,
what would have been said in that case, and would it not
have been urged as an act of great cruelty towards Mr.
Woolley, and that the insurance company had deliberately
closed his mouth by making the charge in order to save pay-
ing him the money? It appeared to him that a great deal of
the evidence that had been adduced might have been spared.
There was no doubt that he had spent the whole of his
wife's fortune, and a considerable portion of that of her sister
upon this house ; but he submitted that it was clear that at
the time the fire happened Mr. Woolley was almost at the enc.i
of his resources. There was only a small portion of his wife's
sister's fortune remaining, and the expense of keeping up
the establishment must have been much greater than Mr.
Woolley could bear. The jury would remember the extra-
ordinary preparations that were made shortly before the fire
to cover up nearly the whole of the windows, and the most
experienced members of the fire brigade would give their
opinion that under ordinary circumstances a building such
as this, the walls of which were of very great thickness,
could not have been consumed in such a short period by fair
means. They would also remember that the hour at which
the fire occurred, namely, just before daylight on the Sun-
day morning, was a period when the most deathlike stillness
prevailed in the metropolis, and this would ba found a mat-
ter of importance. They would also bear in mind that Mr.
Woolley had given his own account of the fire,and he would
show that in a great many
particulars he had not spoken
the truth. He should contradict his own statement with
regard to his having called out " Fire" and " Murder," and
he should prove by the evidence of a police-constable named
Rogers, and other witnesses. that the first that was seen of
the plaintiff was after be had forced his way into the gar •
den, and he there found Mr. Woolley, standing in his shirt
and perfectly quiet, with his arms folded across, and he
made no inquiry about the Temples. He should show by
another witness that while grouping about in the dark in-
side the house, ho fell over something which turned out to
be a suit of clothes, and near the same spot was a pair of
dress boots. These clothes were in the passage leading to
the kitchen, and before the witness could obtain possession
of them, the fire broke through the kitchen, and he was
obliged to make his escape. If these clothes really were in
the position be had mentioned, for what purpose could
they have been placed there. ROW could they account
for the fact in any way consistently with the plaintiff's in-
nocence? With regard to what had been said about the
shirt that was worn by the plaintiff, he did not know that it
was material what shirt he wore, but the case on the part
of the defendants was that on that night Mr. Woolley had
not gone to bed at al, and, therefore, it was more probable
that he should have had a day shirt on than a night shirt.
The learned counsel then proceeded to comment upon the
evidence that had been given with regard to the character
of the fire, and he said he should show by the evi •
deuce of one witness who was looking attentively at the fire,
that it first appeared at the back, and in course of only a few
minutes it seemed to spread over the whole house, and the
trips were seen in every room, and every portion of the
house seemed to be on fire. Three o her witnesses living in
the neighbourhood would speak to the same fact; and one
witness who was sitting up attending upon a sick relative
would prove that so far from Mr, 'Woolley having given an
alarm, the first thing that broke the stillness of the night was
the rattle of the policeman. It would also appear that in leas
than an hour—little more than half an hour in fact—the
whole of this immense building was surrounded, and before
6 o'clock the place was a heap of ruins, and had burned itself
out. Those who were well conversant with such matters
would tell them that in alt their previous experience they
had never heard of such an instance of destruction of pro-
perty. His learned friend had bean appealed to by his lent-
ship and asked whether he proposed to give any account as
to the origin of the fire, and they bad heard what explana-
tion he had given. It was admitted there were only two
fires in the house, and they were at a considerable distance
from each other, and could not have caused the result that
took place. Atter the admissions that had been made as to
the manner in which the house was prepared by placing the
' paper ar.d the cloth from the to the floor, he thought

the jury would see that if this paper was set fire to it would
have accounted for the fire appearing in every room almost
at the same moment. Some attempts had been made by his
learned friend to cast imputations upon Temple, but this
person had every inducement to support the interest of Mr.
Woolley, ,as he owed him a considerable sum of money,
and would no doubt have employed him again. He was
bound, however, to speak what he believed in his conscience
to be the truth, and he would tell them what occurred
within his own knowledge on the night in question. He
submitted that it was rather an extraordinary proceeding
for Mr. Woolley to have gone downstairs with Crozier on
this night, and that he should have sat upon the stairs
while Crozier was, as he said, fastening up the lower part of
the house. The person he had referred to, Temple, no doubt
was under the impression that after the house was on fire
no attempt was made to save him, and immediately after he
left his room the staircase fell, and he believed that his wife
_ _

and son had been destroyed. He would, however, tell them
all that. occurred me this night, and he should contradict the
evidence that was given by Mr. Woolley and Cr. zier in
several particulars. Another fact of considerable signifi-
cance, as it appeared to him, would be the evidence of a
person who was well acquainted with Mr. Woolley and
Crozier, who would prove that although they had positively
stated that they did not leave the house after 11 o'clock, he
saw them walking arm-in-arm at half past 3 o'clock to-
wards the house, in a street called Church-street; and the
case on the part of the defendants was that Mr. Woolley had
not been to bed at all on this night, and that the clothes and
the pair of boots to which he had alluded were placed in the
position where they were found for some purpose the nature
of which could be guessed at by the jury. Tho learned coun-

Bel then referred to Mr. Woolley's et atement of the circum-
stances connected with the fire, and said he should contra-
dict him in several mast important considerations. One fact

vouched by Mr. Woolley himself in this report was that
nearly-three quarters of an hour elapsed before a policeman
made his appearance, when the fact was that the roof fell in
in less than that period and the premises were entirely con-

sumed. It was also false to say that the fire broke out imme-
diately under the bedrooms of Mr. Woolley and Crozier, or
that they were in the position of immediate danger which
they represented, and he urged that these statements had
been drawn up with a view to prepossess the public N.vith an
impression favourable to Mr. 'Woolley. It was not true that
the fire broke out where they represented ; but, on the con-

Crary, it was first seen in those rooms that had been papered
and varnished in the way that had been described. He need
not tell them that there was an impression in the minds of

the Temples that Mr. Woolley had not made any attempt to
alarm them when the fire happened, and on the Tuesday
after the fire Mr. Temple wrote a letter toMrs. Temple, evi-
dently for the purpose of propitiating her, The learned
counsel read the letter, which congratulated Mrs. Temple
upon her escape, and requested that she and her husband

should not devote any attention to business affairs, as it
would tend to retard their recovery, and contained other
statements as to his conduct at the time the fire was dis
covered which he said he should be able to positively contra

In this letter he also made use of the expression-

"Thank God, my presence of mind never left me for a
moment," so that he said he must have been aware that
what he was stating was false. He would now refer to th e

circumstances in which Mr. 'Woolley was at the time of the
fire. He should prove that, in addition to the mortgage
to his sister, he had executed a bill of sale upon the whole
of the property that was in Campden House ; and it was
admitted that the quantity of furniture had been con-
siderably diminished, and yet he had gone on increasing his
insurance, and had become liable to pay still heavier pre-
miums. What, then, was his position at the time the fire
occurred ? They had heard the account he had given of his
own original position. He was undoubtedly a man who
originally was not possessed of any means whatever, but he
had fortunately married a lady who was possessed, no doubt,
of very considerable property. He wished them to under-
stand distinctly that he did not deny for a moment that he
had gone to great expense in the fittings, as they were
termed, of Campden House. lie would admit, also, that he
had foolishly, and he might almost say wiekedly,equandered
away the whole of his wife's fortune in this manner. They
should recollect that he had no revenue of his own to sup-
port his expenses with, and that when this fortune was ex-
pended he had no means whatever of supporting his esta-
blishment, and it was admitted that he had for a consider-
able time been dependant upon the income of Miss Cope, his
wife's sister, a considerable portion of whose fortune, he
might at the same time remind them, he had also squandered
away in the same manner. That these fittings had cost a
great deal of money he should not of course attempt to deny,
although what they would have fetched if they had been
pulled down and sold would have been quite another matter.
He was, however, calling their attention to the position of
the plaintiff, and to the probability that he should have
committed such an act as was imputed to him. Here was
a man who had spent a large fortune in fitting up a grand
place like this, who was talked about by everybody, who
was supposed to be enormously rich, but who in point of
fact had been living on his capital, and who had spent the
whole of it, and who at the time this occurrence took place
was really unable any longer to keep up that appearance he
had so long sustained, It was unnecessary for him to re-
mind them that many men in similar circumstances had
destroyed themselves rather than let their real position be
known to the world, and who could not bear the humiliation
of publishing their condition to the high and grand people
with whom they had been in the habit of associating; and
this was the suggestion he had to submit to them to account
for the probability of the commission of this act. Upon the
subject of motive, however, he would remind him that he
was not called upon to show any motive, and if he satisfied
them by reasonable evidence that Mr. Woolley had wilfully
set fire to this house--and no one else could have done it—
if the fire was wilful, it was their duty to say so by their
verdict. The learned counsel then proceeded to recapitulate
the point upon which he mainly relied in support of the de-
fendants' plea that the fire had been caused wilfully, and
said that with regard to the suit of clothes, he believed the
jury could come to no other conclusion than that after the
house had been sot on fire Mr. Woolley, who had not gone
to bed at all, had undressed himself in the passage down-
stairs, and had left his clothes there and had then gone into
the garden in his shirt, and in the condition in which ho
was found by the police.
The following evidence was then adduced for the defen-
dant:--

Mr. Joseph Temple said—l am a builder and carpenter, I
and reside at Notting-hill. I first became acquained with
Mr. Woolley in 1847, and I had worked for him from that
time down to the fire at Campden House. I was employed
very extensively, and latterly I had apartments in Campden •
House, and took charge of it while Mr. Woolley was away.
I never had any dispute with him, and I consider I was under
obligations to him. I remember Colonel Waugh living at
Campden House in 1855. I was at the house frequently in
November, 1861, and on the same night the family left for
Brighton I and my wife and son went to live there. Mr.
Woolley came to Campden House with Crozier about three
weeks before the fire. During the interval they were mostly
employed in varnishing and covering up the pictures and
the carving, The furniture was generally covered up, but
not the carving on the walls. I never saw that covered up
in the same way before. Mr. Woolley and Crozier seemed
to be on very friendly terms, and they frequently took their
meals together in the housekeeper's room and the library,
and I have seen them walking arm-in-arm together in the
streets near the house, both by dayand night. Mr. Woolley' is
sight was defective. The cloth was nailed to the top of the
room, and hung loosely down to the floor. This was done
in the hall, the ante-room, and the staircase. The hanging
of the cloth commenced immediately after the return of Mr.
Woolley and Crozier from Brighton. I understood from
Mr. Woolley that the object of hanging up the cloth was to
keep the dirt from the pictures and the carving. On the
day before the fire there were no curtains to the dining-
room windows, but on the night of the fire I observed some
tapestry over the dining-room windows and some drugget
over the hall windows. This must have been put up on the
Saturday, and when I saw it it was looped up a little on one
side, and but for this every particle of light would have been
excluded. I saw Mr. Woolley put up some of the drugget
and calico over the pictures, but I did not see him put any-
thing up at the windows. On the Friday before the fire I
was in the library, and I observed a number of books on
the table and floor standing on their ends open. I also no-
ticed on the staircase that paper was thrown loosely over
some of the carving, and a quantity of paper was placed
loosely in the middle of one of the rooms. It was the or-
dinary paper used for papering rooms.
Baron Bramwell asked witness whether paper of this de-
scription burned freely.
The witness said that it did.
The Jury said their experience led them to form a dif-
ferent opinion.
The witness said this paper was very thin and common
paper with very little colour in it, and it would burn freely.
He then continued—l believe there were not more than five
or six pieces----at least, I did not see any more. There may
have been as many as 40. I went to bed on the night of
the fire about a quarter past 11 o'clock. I had previously
been into the green-room and the housekeeper's room.
I took a ledger, in which I had been writing, from the
green-room to the housekeeper's room, and locked it
up in a cupboard. I had been writing
in the green-room
until about half au hour before I went to bed. I had been
indulging in sausages for my supper. (A. laugh.) The
sausages were not cooked in the house. Crozier came into
the room while I and my wife were having our supper.
There was nothing but dying embers in the grate when we
left the green-room, and we went up the best staircase, and
met Mr. Woolley and Crozier, who appeared to be coming
from the bedroom Roar. I said to Mr. Woolley, " Good
night, Sir." When Crozier came into the green room, he
asked for wood, and said that Mr. Woolley's fire was nearly
out, and that he wanted the wood because Mr. Woolley was
going to sit up to work, and lie at the same time said he
thought Mr. Woolley was taking leave of hie senses, When
I went to bed everything appeared to be perfectly safe. I
was awoke by the noise of crackling of fire, and when I got.
up I found that the house was in flames. I called nut to
my wife and son, and told them to fellow me, and I then
went towards the grand stairaase. The pine was full of
smoke and fire, and when I had got a slier. distenco I heard
toy wife say she could not come any farther, and I heard a
crash, and I saw my wife fall, as I thought, into the games,
I was about to go towards them, but found the smoke and
fire prevented me, I then recollected that there was a door
near, by which I might get upon the leads. I crawled on,
my bands and knees to this door, and after a good deal of

difficulty succeeded in opening it, and in doing so my hands
were severely burned. I had to pass Mr. Woolley's room,
and there was no appearance of a fire in it at that time.
A Juror inquired of the witness whether he saw Mr.
Woolley, or whether he attempted to give any alarm to him.
The witness replied that he did not, he was in great suffix-
ing and very much bewildered.
The Juror remarked that notwithstanding he still repre-
sented that he had looked into the room and had ascertained
that there was no fire there.

The witness said that was the fact; but he could give no
explanation, only he had not called out to Mr. 'Woolley.
He then proceeded to state that having got upon the leads,
he succeeded in making his way into the house of Mr. Egg,
and shortly afterwards he found that his wife had jumped
out of the window and had been taken to Mr. Stevens's, and
that his son was also there. He said his attention was first
called to the subject of the fire about six weeks afterwards,
when Mr. Randall, the solicitor to the Sun Fire-ofilee
called upon him and showed him a statement of the articles
that were represented to have been destroyed in the fire.
The witness was Then examined at very considerable length
with reference to the different items contained in the claim ;
and it will be sufficient to state that the effect of his evi-
dence was to show that a great many of the articles that
were claimed for were not in the house at all, end that with
regard to others for which large sums were claimed, they
were comparatively of insignificant value. He also said
that during the whole time he was making his escape from
the house in the way he had described, he heard no shriek-
ing or crying for assistance, and the first thing he remem •
bered hearing was the sound of the policeman's rattle.
This witness was then cross-examined very severely by
Mr. Bovill. In answer to the various questions put to him
ho said that the list or statement he referred te might have
contained altogether as many as a thousand items, Mr.
Randall, the solicitor to the Sun Fire-office, when he called
upon him, showed him the list, and he looked over it with
him for about two hours and a half, and he gave him all the
information he could, and he took the list away with him.
lie believed that a gentleman named Freeman called upon
him, in reference to the fire, about three days after it hap-
pened, but he bad no communication with him, as at the
time he was blind. Mr. Teesdale, the plaintiff's solicitor
called upon him after Mr. Randall, and ho also showed him
a list, and he had some conversation with him respecting it
He informed Mr. Randall that Mr. Teesdale had called upon
him, but he did not tell Mr. Teesdale anything about Mr.
Randall having been there.
Mr. Bovill asked the witness how it happened that he
should have informed Mr, Randall that Mr. Teesdale had
called upon him, and had not informed Mr. Teesdale of Mr.
Randall having done so.
The witness appeared confused, and hesitated, and it was
some time before he gave an answer. He then said that he
could not tell why he did not say so to Mr. Teesdale.
Mr. Bovill still pressed the question, and the witness ap-
peared either unable or unwilling to answer it.
Baron Bramwell told him it was no use detaining the
Court in that manner—everybody could see what his rea-
son was, and he had better avow it. He thought, no doubt,
that he was to act in the interest of one side only.
The witness then admitted that this was the reason.
lie was then further cross-examined by Mr. Bovill with
regard to his evidence respecting the furniture, and shortly
after five o'clock the case was adjourned, the cross-exami-
nation of the witness not having been completed.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

b`

BRISTOL—Aua. 26.
At this day's market the supply of English wheat WAS
short, in good condition, and the trade was firm at former
values. In foreign more doing, and prices fully as high.
Indian corn 6d cheaper, and nothing doing in beans,