The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-16 00:00:00

SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

STA'

MANCHESTER, April 14.—Advices from India
were to hand yesterday, including telegrams from
Bombay to the 28th and from Calcutta to the 27th
of March, At Bombay there was an active market,
and shirtings had advanced since the 17th of March
is. per piece. Yarns had also advanced. At Cal-
cutta the sales had been large, and 71b. and 841 b.
shirtings had advanced ls. per piece. Bannermill
40's twist had advanced per lb. These advances
were since the 16th of March. The letters from Cal-
cutta are to the 9th of March, and are not only en-
couraging, but give reason to expect the improve-
m ants of later date to hand by telegraph. In our
last report of the Manchester market we stated that
there was a probability of an improvement here to-
day, and the anticipation proves to be correct; but
it has not been so decided in respect to cloth as in
yarns. In yarns there has been a very consider-
able business, chiefly for India. Tae home trade
have also been buyers, and the Germans to somo
ezteni-, where lots at suitable prices have been avail-
able. There has also been a good deal of inquiry
for yarns suitable for the China trade, and some
few sales are reported for that market. The market
closes very strong, at an advance of about ja,d. per lb,
upon most kinds of yarn, with a decided upward
tendency. In addition to the advices above referred
to, there is a report current of a later private tele-
gram from Calcutta to the 30th of March, reporting
a further advance on both cloth and yarn, with an
active market. In the Manchester cloth-market
business has been done in shirtings and longcloths
at an advance of 3d. per piece on the rates of last
'Week, and there has been some little excitement ;
but the amount of business has rather disappointed
the expectations of manufacturers, who had cal-
culated both on higher rates and more business
than they have found to be practicable. One cause
of a more limited business in cloths than had been
anticipated is that yarns are too high, and this
has stood in the way of producers, who find it
impossible, with such rates, to take contracts
within the limits offered by buyers of cloth.
Printing cloth is not so much in demand, and the
business to-day has been mostly limited to pur-
chases of fabrics suitable to the markets of India.
Cloths such as are made for other markets are
rather firmer in price, owing to the activity for the
East, but wherever the sellers of such fabrics are
tempted to ask any advance it checks business. To
some extent this is the case in yarns as well as in
cloths. Messrs. John Slagg and Co. report :—" The
market continued very quiet to the close of the
week, 'without any change in prices. Yesterday
and to-day there has been more inquiry, owing to
the improved accounts to hand by telegraph from
Bombay and Calcutta; but there has not been so
much business done as was expected, buyers being
very reluctant to give the advanced prices generally
asked."

1 Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England.
The following report has been present, d to the
Right Hon. Sir George Grey, G.C.8., M.P., her
Majesty's principal Secretary of State for the Home
i
Department, &e.;—

" General Register-office, S merset.house,
March 28,1563.
" Sir,—.l have the honour to submit to you my annual
report for the year 1861.
" The progreee of population in England in the last
quarter of a century may be stated roundly and in such a
manner that it may be remembered without difficulty. Each
quinquennial period added a million or a little more to the
account. In 1836-40 the population Was rising through its
sixteenth million ; in IS4I-45 through its seventeenth; in
1846-50 through its eighteenth ; in 1851-55 through its
nineteenth ; and in 1856-60 through its tWentieth million.
In the middle of 1861 it is estimated to have reached
20,119,496. The English registration now comprehends
within its scope a population greater by the present popula-
tions of London and the three Ridings of Yorkshire com-
bined than it was when the national system was established
in 1837.
,‘ In 1861 the Marriages were less numerous than they had
been in either of the two progotis years; the births were
more numerous then they bad ever been in England ; and,
though the Taar was healthy, the deaths were more nume-
rous than they had been in 1860, which was still healthier.
"In 1861 there were enrolled of persons who married
82,000 more than had been registered in 1841, 20 years be-
fore; 91,000 died more than in 1841; and 181,000 children
' Were born more than in the same year. The aggregate num-
ber of names entered in 1861, as of persons who had mar-
ried, who had been born, or who had died, is 1,458,932.
" On an average of 24 years 1,639 persons were married,
3,318 children were born, and 2,229 persons died to ICO,OOO
of the population; but in 1861 the respective numbers were
1,628, 3,461, and 2,163. Marriages were rather below the
standard mark of activity. The birth-rate was high. The
death-rate was below the average.
" The excess of births over deaths in the year was 261,292.
The conjunction of a high birth-rate with a low death-rate
caused that access to be greater than the usual amount,
which in the present stage of the population may be stated
as nearly 245,000. About 30,000 English emigrants left
their country for foreign and colonial settlements in 1861.
‘, MARRIAGES.

" The number of marriages in the year was 163,706, The
proportion to the population was 814 per cent. ; or in every
hundred persona 1.628 were married (the average being
1.639). The marriage-rate has been accelerated since 1849 ;
for in the 12 years 1850-61 it has been in a majority of
cases 11 per cent., and not in any year below 1.6 per cent. ;
whereas in the 12 years 1833-49 it was in a majority of
years under 1.6 per cent., and only in two instances 1.7 per
cent. The prosperity of the people during the later period
found its natural expression in the increased frequency of

marriages.
" Out of the total number of 163,706 marriages, 130,697
were solemnised according to the rites of the Established
Church. Of the latter number 102,953 were after publica-
tion of banns ; 20,090 by licence ; 40,048 by superintendent
registrar's certificate; 16 by special licence. This state-
ment, however, does not represent the real numbers with
perfect accuracy, as 3,588 marriages were not distinguished
in the registers in respect to these particulars, It will not
be far from the truth to state that for one person who is
married after licence five are married after banns.
" The number of marriages performed otherwise than
agreeably to the forms of the Established Church was 33,000.
Roman Catholic marriages were 7,782; those in the regis
tered chapels of other religious denominations 12,182, those
of Jews 262, of Quakers 58, while marriages contracted in
superintendent registrars' offices were 11,725. In 18.51 the
marriages in the Established Church were about 131,000;
in 1861 they were nearly the same number. In 1851 those
not performed in the Established Church were about 23,000 ;
in 1861 they were 33,000. It appears from these figures that
an increase of 9,000 which the total marriages in 1861 exhi-
bited as compared with those in 1851, was appropriated by
persons who married according to other rites than those of
the Established Church.
" In 1861 there were in England and Wales 4,564 build.
ings belonging to Roman Catholics and Dissenting denomi-
nations, and registered for the solemnisation of marriages.
A. third part of that number belonged to Independents,
1,000 to Baptists, 895 to Wesleyan Methodists, 551 to Roman
Catholics, 193,t0 Calvinistic Methodists, 152 to Unitarians,
137 to Scottish Presbyterians, 141 to various other bodies
who have not yet acquired numerical importance.
" Although the eleventh division (Monmouthshire and
Wales) does not contain half the pOPulation Of London,
there are 710 religious buildings registered for marriages in
that division, while in London there are but 309. Cheshire
and Lancashire have little more than the population of Lon-
don, but the registered buildings in those counties are twice
as numerous as those of the metropolis.
" Ra.marriages—There were more than twice as many
marriages between widowers and spinsters as between bache-
lors and widows—the respective numbers were 15,067 and
7,034. Widows were married in greater number by widow-
ers than they were by bachelors.
" In 100 men who married the proportion of widowers
was 14 ; in 100 women who married the proportion Of
widows was 9.
"The marriages of widowers bore the highest proportion
in Samersetshire, where they were 16.8 per cent. of the
total number. The smallest proportion was in Hereford-
shire, where it
.was 9'62. In the latter county the number
of widows who obtained husbands was almost as great as
that of widowers who got wives, though on the average of
England the number of widows marrying is only two-thirds
of that of the widowers who marry. After a destructive
war, or in districts where men are engaged in unhealthy
occupations, there will be few widowers, but many widows;
and the alliances which they respectively contract will also
be few and many.
" For one widower who marries a widow there are nearly
two who marry spinsters.
"Minors—Of persons who married under 11 years of age
there were thrice as many men as women ; the exact num-
bers were 31,927 and 10,415. In 100 males who married
6.36 were not of full age; in 100 women 19.50 had not at-
tained the age of 21 years. In Buckinghamshire, Hunting-
donshire, Staffordshire, West Riding of Yorkshire, and
Durham more than a fourth part of the women who mar-
ried encountered the duties and responsibilities of the mar-
ried state while they were still under age. Of young men
manying before their majority the largest proportion was
in Buckinghamshire, Huntingdonshire, and Bedfordshire.
Life in London appears to discourage and repress early
alliances, for the proportions were only 3.48 for males and
and 13.51 for females. The expensiveness of house accom-
modation is, no doubt, one important restraining influence
in the metropolis.
"Signatures of Persons Marrying—Of marriages in
which neither man nor woman can write his or her own name
there were 26,333 in 1861. The total number of men who
signed the marriage register with marks was 40,204, that of
women 56,770. But the schoolmaster is abroad over 2ng-
land ; and, though the absolute number of persons who sign
with marks is not reduced within the last 20 years, it has
been prevented from increasing with the number of the
marriages, In 1861 the marriages were more by 41,000
than they were in 1841; but the men who signed with
marks were hardly more in 1861 than they were in that
earlier year, and the women were rather less. The mark
signatures fell from 41 per cent. of the marriages in 1841
to 30 per cent. in 1861.
" Of 100 men and 100 women who married 75 of the for-
mer and 65 of the latter wrote their names in the registers.
In an educational comparison, based on the mark-test,
there is no English county which stands so well as London
—and this superiority holds both with men and women,
though only in a small degree with the latter. The proper.
tions of persons in London educated so as to be able to write
their names are 89 and 82 in 100 of those who marry.
" The greater amount of ignorance in the military art of ,
writing is found in the following counties, where the pro-
portion of marrying men able to write fell below 70 per cent.:
Berkshire, Hertfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Huntingdon-
shire, Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk, Nor-
folk, Wiltshire, Cornwall, Herefordshire- , Shropshire,
Staffordshire, lionmouthaire, North and South Wales. In
the Welsh division, which includes Monmouthshire, the
proportion ranged so low as 60 and 65. Hampshire, Devon-
shire, Rutlandshire, and still more the East and North
Rilings of Yorkshire, Northumberland, Cumberland, and
Westmoreland, may be mentioned among the better edu-
cated parts. Generally the men in the northern counties,
have received more education than those in the southern.
" It is deserving of notice that, by the marriage-signa-
ture test, the women in Sussex, Berkshire, Hertfordshire,
Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and a few other counties, are better
educated than the men ; but in the northern portions of the
kingdom this anomaly is not observed; and it is a very
grave fact that women are not better educated in Lanca-
shire than they are in North Wales.
" BIRTHS.
" In 1861 the births of 696,406 children were registered ;
355,972 were boys, and 340,434 were girls. These numbers
are exclusive of the still-hem, who are not required to be
registered. The birth-rate was 3'461 per. cent. of the popu-
lation, or one birth to 29 persons living. It was higher than
the mean rate, which is 3.318, or one to 30. The highest
that has been obtained since the Registration Act came into
operation was 3.504, in 1859.
" Sex—Males were born to females in the proportion of
104'6 to 100. In Northumberland the proportion of male
births was as high as 108; in Rutlandshire nearly as high
as 100. Somersetshire presented the only exception to the
rule ; in that county the boys were in the proportion to girls
of only 99 9 to 100.
" Seasons—lt invariably happens that births are more
numerous in the first six months of the year than in the
last six months. If 1,000 be taken to represent the aver age
[ApvenTlSEMENT.l—Holloways Pills.—Management
proportional
of Health.—The complex composition and the delicacy of number of births in each quarter then the
the functions of the human body are ever tending to pro- t numbers in 1861 will run in the March, June, September,
unless the blood be maintained, in a pure state. and December quarters, as follows :-1,007, 1,064, 980, and
:iruhci es diseasemhst
deis rable object can be accomplished by a jult•c 949.
dolls use of these purifying pills,
These pills which have the " Children Born out cf Wedlock—The number of illegi-
of regulating the stomach,
bowels. Jets • they over- timate births was 44,157, of which 22,728 were births of
liver, and
act as alteratives, tonics and gentle aperients .
biliousness, constipation, males, 21,429 those of females. Of every 100 births in wed-
andcome fiatulence, loss of appetite,
arum-
Y other inconveniences which should never be ne- lock and out of wedlock 6.3 belonged to the latter category.
In London the proportion of the illegitimate was only 4'4
gleeP"l" fear of worse results. Holloway's pills surpass
all other m.,1; per cent. ; in Norfolk it wee 10.3 ; in Westmoreland (a well
sick headac-li
es
for
alleviating
ts which detract
`7,414 indigestion, heartburn,
educated county, where men and women can write their
so largely fro:
treousness and low spin ,
tried those pills. hlippiness of thousands who have never
names), it was 10.6; in Cumberland, 11.2, In Monmouth-

LEEDS, April 14.—There is no change in the
state of the woollen cloth trade noticeable this
morning. There was but a moderate attendance of
buyers in the cloth-halls, and purchases were greatly
confined to small parcels of light goods. Good
diagonals still seil well, and they are scarce. The
manufacturers throughout the district keep in fair
employ, yet withal stocks are slightly on the in-
crease, the spring trade hitherto having proved less
brisk than had been anticipated. There is no quo-
table change in prices either of wool or goods.
NOTTINGHAM, April 14.—At this Exchange-hall
to-day there was a quiet feeling in the demand for
lace yarns, but holders were disinclined to transact
business except at fully Friday's rates. For hosiery
yarns extreme prices were asked, but only a limited
number of orders were placed. Spun silk was quite
as dear; other kinds maintained their value. Brown
nets were still in limited request, and prices are yet
unremunerative in proportion to the value of the
raw material.

ROCHDALE, April 13.—The flannel trade is active
considering the season. There was a fair attend-
ance of buyers in the market to-day, and they were
disposed to operate pretty freely if manufacturers
would have made any concession in prices, bat they
adhere firmly to late rates, alleging that neither
the cost of wool nor the wages paid to the operatives
will, allow of reductions being made. The prospects
of the trade are held to be satisfactory for both the
home and the foreign trade. Yorkshire goods, ex-
cept " scourers," sell slowly, the season of the year
rendering them too warm for wear. Wools re-
main steady in price, but manufacturers are cautious
buyers.

DUNDEE, April 14.—The better qualities of flax
have been in good request since last market day,
and prices are quite as firm as before. To-day a
number of sales are reported, chiefly of Riga and
Konigsberg marks, and the market closed steady, if
not strong. At Memel all the flax offering is re-
ported to have been bought up. Prices have given
way a little at Riga, and now there are no buyers
at 46 roubles for K. The dealers at St. Petersburg
are firm in their demands, and no business is doing.
Considerable sales have been made at Archangel, at
full prices. Although fine jute is steady, the large
quantity to be put up to auction in London to-
morrow has stopped business here to-day, and few
sales are reported. Yarns have met a fair demand,
especially for early delivery, at last week's rates.
The American advices received to-day reports a
quiet market at nominal prices, owing to the con-
tinued violent fluctuations in the exchange. The
West India letters, also delivered to-day, are not so
encouraging as before, it being difficult to make
sales at the advance necessary to meet the rise on
this side. Nothwithstanding these advices, there
is no change in the demand either for coarse or fine
goods to-day, a moderate amount of orders having
been given out.

LEICESTER, April 15.—There is very little alte-
ration in the hosiery trade; some departments are
dull, and the market generally is far from being
active. At Loughborough and Hinckley business
is depressed, and the workpeople are suffering.
Yarns continue firm, at high prices. There are no
stocks of hosiery on hand. In wools there is not
much doing, and prices remain without material
change.

The Fatal Prize Fight at Hackney Marshes.

Yesterday morning Mr. John Humphreys, Mid-
dlesex coroner, resumed at the London Hospital the
inquiry respecting the death of Samuel Rivett, aged
24 years, who was killed recently by a man named
Howlett in a prize fight in the Hackney Marshes.
The court was crowded.
Mr. Horry appeared on behalf of Samuel How-
lett ; Mr. Watson represented the deceased's friends ;
and Mr. St. Aubyn watched the case on behalf of
William and James Hammond, who were alleged
to have held the stakes for the encounter.
Howlett was brought up in charge of Inspector
Kerressey under a warrant from the Secretary of
State.

One of the fresh witnesses examined was
John 011ey, signalman on the Great Eastern
Railway, who said that on the morning of the fight
he was on the line, and. he saw there was a fight in
a field. He went to it, and found a man acting as
second to Howlett. Deceased was a much smaller
man than the other. At the last round deceased
was knocked down by a blow. He alone fell. The
deceased was not sensible when he fought the last
round but one. His second picked him up from
the grass, put him on his feet, and Howlett imme-
diately rushed in and knocked him down again.
Time was not called. Witness did not hear the
second say, " The - can fight still." Deceased
was not in a condition to fight the last two rounds.
When knocked down in the last round he remained
on the ground for seven or eight minutes.:Theother
second witness believed he had seen at a fight in the
same field before. The umpire wore a round hat
and a rough coat.

The Coroner said that he was afraid another ad-
journment would be necessary. By giving time
to the police, there might possibly be a chance of
obtaining the presence of the seconds, who had
hitherto avoided arrest.
The jury, after some consultation, agreed to a
further adjournment.

shire and Wales, where education is low, illegitimacY is trot
high, the proportion of 'children born out of wedlock to the
total births being 6 or 7 per cent.
" Among illegitimate children the proportion of males
born to females is hither than it is among the legitimate.
"It has been shown that the birth rate of England (with-
out reference to the distinction of legitimacy) was 3.46 in
1861. But the rates in the several counties exhibited con-
siderable variety. Among the least prolific populations were
those of Surrey (the extra-metropolitan part of it is here
referred to), and Sussex, where the rate was 3.05 ; and
though in Kent (extra-metropolitan) it was 3.30, it is found
that the birth rate was low in the districts adjoining the
metropolis, which most readily absorbs within its vortex
the men and women of marrying age who live near the edge,
and who otherwise would form connexions at their homes.
But the lowest example of birth-rate was found in North
Wales, where it was 2'953, The highest were in Warwick-
shire, 3.69; in Lancashire, 3.77 ; in the West Riding, 3.71;
and in Staffordshire and Durham the birth-rates rose to
4.02 and 4'03.

"DEATHS.

"The deaths of males were 222,281; those of females
were 212,833—the total, 435,114. The death-rate was 2.163
per cent. The mean rate of 1852-61 is 2221.

"England was generally healthy. The mortality was
below the average in all the counties, with the exception of
those that follow : —Buckinghamshire, Huntingdonshire,
Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, Norfolk, Shropshire, East and
North Ridings of Yorkshire, Northumberland, Cumber-
land, and North Wales.

" Sexes—Males died at the rate of 2.268 per cent. of the
male population. Females diel at the lower rate of 2.063
per cent, of the female population. It equal numbers living of
the sexes are taken the deaths of males were in propottion
to those of females as 110 is to 100. But in the population as
actually constituted the females have a great preponder-
ance, and the deaths of males were 104 to 100.
"Seasons—The mortality was below the average in each
quarter, but the spring quarter was comparatively the
healthiest.

" GEORGE GRAHAM, Registrar-General."

Further Examination of the Rev. Thomas
Wycherley.

At the Lambeth Police Court yesterday, the Rev.
Thomas Wycherley, late minister of a Baptist chapel, at
Clapham-rise, and who has been in custody for a week on a
charge of receiving £2 in bank notes, wed knowing them
to have been stolen, was brought up on remand and again
placed at the bar before Mr. Elliott for further examination.
The court was much crowded during the lengthened
examination, and the proceedings partook of additional
interest by the fact of the young woman, Mary Ann
Newton, being brought from Wandsworth Prison, on the
Secretary of State's order, to give evidence against the
prisoner.

Mr. Chipperfield appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Neale for the defence.

When the prisoner was placed at the bar the young
woman Newton was brought into the court in the custody
of one of the warders belonging to the Wandsworth House of
Correction.

The Witness commenced her evidence by saying that she
was a married woman, the wife of James Newton, a soldier
at present serving in India, and that she was at present a
prisoner in the House of Correction, Wandsworth, under-
going a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment for robbing
her mistress, Mrs. Levy, of Stockwell, with whom she had
lived as servant for four years and three months. In her
examination, by Mr. Chipperfield, she said she knew the
prisoner from the first time of her attending the Baptist
Chapel in Clapham-rise, of which he was the minister, and
which was about six months before she left the house of
her mistress, and he (the prisoner) was quite awara of the
fact that she was a married woman. He used to come to
the house of her mistress to officiate as a minister.

Mr_ Chipperfield—He used to visit you at the house of
your mistress ?

Witness—Yes; he visited me as my pastor, but the
first time he came was by mistress's consent, and I intro-
duced him to mistress. That was two or three Sundays
after he came to the chapel, and the only refreshments he
had on that occasion was his tea. He had refreshments at
other times, but these I paid for out of my own pocket,
and were not the property of mistress. The first property I
took belonging to mistress were two chains and three rings,
and these I pawned. The next things were the notes. I
do not know how many there were, or what they were.
Some I changed ; I think three. One was at Hunt's the
linendraper's, one at Limes', and another at Clement's;
and the prisoner had one to change for me, and brought
back the change. Some of the notes I threw away.
Mr. Elliott—What do you mean by saying you threw
away the bank notes ? You know you are sworn to tell the
truth and the whole truth, and you had better do so. You
have stated that the prisoner had one of the notes to change
for you, and that he brought you back the change ; had he
any portion of that change for himself ?

Witness—No, sir, he had not any of it.
Not two pounds of it ?—No, sir, not any part of it.
What was said by the prisoner when you gave him the
£5 note F—lle said he would get change, and he did.
You have told Morton, the officer, that the prisoner had
half of the notes you had stolen, which would be half the
£so—l did not say so ; what I said was that he had part of
the notes.

Morton, the officer, was here re-called and swore posi-
tively that after the commitment of the witness for trial,
she said to him " I now know my fate. Wycherley had
half the notes. It was him I meant when I said I did not
wish to bring others into trouble."
Mr, Elliott—You have heard what the officer has stated :
what have you got to say to it ?
Witness—That I did not tell him any such thing. I
only said he had part of the notes.
Morton—You said half the notes.
Mr. Morton—Where was the prisoner when you gave him
the note to change ?

Witness—l gave it him at mistress's gate, and asked him
to get change of it for me. He got change for me the same
evening, and I paid him £2 out of it, which I had borrowed
from him four or five months before.

Why it is only this moment you told me and repeated
the assertion on oath, that the prisoner had not £2 or any
part of the change, but gave you the whole £5 ; what do
you mean by swearing in so reckless a manner P—Well, I
did pay him £2 I borrowed of him.
You only account for four of the notes ; I now ask you
what you have done with the other four ?—The notes were
in a roll when I took them, and I am sure I did not know
how many there were of them ; but I did not tear up any
of the notes that I know of, but I did destroy all the things
I had before I gave myself up.
Why, just now you said you threw part of the notes
away ; what do you mean P—No, I did not throw any
away; they were all in a roll when I took them.

One of the notes you have stolen, and which has been
paid into the Bank, has your name on it; when did you
change that ?—I signed them all.
Mrs. Levy—And what did you do with the gold you
took out of my drawers as well as the notes ?
Witness—l did not have any gold. I took the notes out
of the purse and left it with whatever it might contain in
the drawer.

To Mr. Chipperfield—l signed my name to all the notes,
not immediately after I took them, but when about taking
up the dinner on the same afternoon. I did so in the
kitchen.

Mr. Chipperfield—Now, who told you to do so ?
Witness (after a lengthened pause)—l did so on my own
accord.

Now what was your reason for doing so ?—Witness (after
another lengthened pause)—Because I thought I should
have to sign them when I went for change, and therefore
that I should do so at once.

Was there any person present when you so marked the
notes ?—Yes ; the other servant, who is now present.
Are you sure the prisoner was not there P—Witness
(pausing for some time)—No, I think not.
Was he there when you took the notes P—Yes, he was.
(Sensation.)

Had you told the prisoner that the notes were in your
mistress's drawer, as it appears you had seen them before
you took them ?—Witness (hesitating)—No, I did not.
Had the prisoner ever been to your mistress's bed-room,
where these notes were kept ?—No, never.
You got the permission of your mistress to visit your
mother at Yarmouth I believe about the middle of Febru-
ary. What time did you start on your journey ? Early in
the morning, as the train started at half-past six, I went
in a cab, which I had ordered on the night before.
Did you see the prisoner on that morning?
Yes ; he came in the cab and accompanied me to the
Eastern Counties Railway, and stayed there till he saw me
off by the train.

Mr. Elliott—Then it was not true, as you told your mis-
tress, that your uncle was to accompany you to Yarmouth ?
Witness--No sir; it was not true. I went to Yarmouth,
but only stopped one day there. I then returned to town
and took the train for Tunbridge. While I was there the
prisoner came up to me in the street, and touching me on
the back said, " What have you done ?" He said he had
heard I had robbed my mistress. I said it was true, that I
was sorry for it, and should give myself up. He took me to
a coffee-house, and told the woman there to take care of me
for the night, and the next day I came with him to town,
went to the police station, and gave myself up.
Did you meet the prisoner by arrangement or mere acci-
dent ?—By accident.
Who can believe that—that without any intimation of
your going to or being there he should have met you by
mere accident at Tunbridge ? I wish to ask you what you
have done with the two £lO notes you have stolen. One of
them has been paid in, and has your name on, and you
must know where you changed it did not change any
£lO note. I did not know I had rt. £lO note, and when told
by the woman at the public-house that the one I offered for
change there was a £lO note, I took it back and put it
back.

Do yen mean to aay you returned it to your mistress's
drawer ?:-.4 did, sir.

,
➢lr. Chipperfield—You have admitted that the prisoner
had been at the house of your mistress on the morning you
stole the notes. Now, I wish to ask you again whether he
has ever been to the bedroom of your mistress vhere these
notes had been stolen from by you?
Witness—He has not.
How did you get at the notes if the drawer was

locked ?—it was not locked. I noticed two or three days
before that it slipped open as we were about to move the
carpet, and I looked into it once or twice to see what was
there before I took the notes, but I did not inform the pri-
soner what I had seen there. The witness went on to spy
that the prisoner used frequently to visit her mistress's
house two or three times a week, and sometimes stopped
*there all night, when she made tip a bed for him in the
kitchen. She used to keep him out of charity, because she
considered him not well housed at home, as his lodging was
at a coffee-shop. The prisoner did not make love to her
particularly, but he used to talk of religion sometimes, but
not much. (Laughter.)
And all this took place, and the prisoner even allowed to
sleep there, without your mistress's knowledge ?—Nry mis-
tress did not care, so long as I paid for the things he had,
how often he came there, and it used to cost me a good bit
to provide him with breakfasts and what he had.
In cross-examination the witness said she made the
acquaintance of the prisoner by attending his chapel, and
before she asked him to her mistress's house she had Mrs.
Levy's permission, and in fact it was more on her mistress's
account that he came than hers, although it cost her (wit-
ness) a great deal to provide him (the prisoner) with what
he required. Her mistress had no objection how often the
prisoner came so long to she (witness) provided out of her
own packet the necessary refreshments for him. Indeed,
she said the oftener he came the better, as it would keep
witness out of bad company, as she had a wayward way
with her. (Laughter.) The first time the prisoner came
to the house her mistress asked her into the drawing room
to hear him pray. (Renewed laughter.) She received £lO
a year wages, and borrowed £2 10s. from the prisoner to
pay a doctor's bill. The prisoner knew nothing of the rob-
bery, and when she gave him the £5 note at the gate to get
changed she said she had got it from her mistress for her
wages, and on his bringing her the change she paid him
the £2 10s. she had borrowed of him. The prisoner bought
a turkey at Christmas, which he said he had paid 4s. 6d. or
55. for, and br3ught it on Christmas-eve, as he was to dine
there on the following day, and she (witness) bought the
sausages out of her own pocket. (Laughter.)
Mr. Chipperfield—As the prisoner had purchased the
turkey I think the least he could do would be to purchase
the sausages also. (Renewed laughter.)

The witness went on to state that her " missus" dined off
the turkey the next day, and that it fed the family for three
whole days. She did not tell her " missus" (as she called
her) at the time how she came by or who provided the tur-
key, but she did in a day or two after.
The witness in her re-examination was pressed closely
about borrowing £2 10s. from the prisoner at a time when,
according to her own showing,sho had to provide him with
necessaries from motives of charity, when her answers were
as unsatisfactory as the preceding part of her evidence, and
she was told to stand down.

The officer called into the box the young woman who
was fellow-servant with the last witness; but

Mr. Chipperfield, addressing the magistrate, said he had
been but just instructed in the case, and he should feel
obliged if the case was remanded at its present stage.
Mr. Elliott complied with the learned gentleman's re-
quest, and the prisoner was again remanded.

TIMES.—It has been plain from the beginning of
the American war that the assumptions of the Fede-
ral naval commanders will be limited only by the
resistance of the British Government, -With a
Welles at the Navy Department and a Wilkes at
sea, the British trader must expect to endure every-
thing that his owe Government can be brought to
tolerate. It may be that the Washington politicians
think that John Bull's irritability was relieved
and his vanity gratified by the conclusion of the
Trent affair, and that now, with many of his ships
paid off and his mind bent on neutrality, he will shut
his eyes to any high-handed proceedings on their
part, and pretend to think that every merchant
vessel which is seized and carried off by the Federal
cruisers has only met with its deserts. But in this,
we think, they will find themselves as much mis-
taken as they have been in many other things
since the war began. There are limits to the for
bearance which even a great nation can exercise
towards a struggling but still petulant and presum-
ing Government. In the case of the Peterhoff these
limits have been passed, and the spirit of Commo-
dore Wilkes's proceedings gives but too much rea-
son to thick that this violation of international law
and common justice will not long stand alone. It
is extraordinary that a Government whose self-
esteem has received so many severe lessons should
thus persist in these petty aggressions on a nation
which has shown such a desire for peace, and yet
such preparedness for war, as. our own. While the
United States' Minister in Lundon, forgetful of
the immense purchases of warlike munitions made
by his own Government, is lecturing Earl Russell
on the duty of preventing British traders from at-
tempting to run the blockade; while he is striving
to interpret a breach of a purely domestic Act
of Parliament as an offence against interna-
tional law, and appealing to the friendship
and sense of honour of England to give his country
aid against her rebels, the naval officers of that
country are setting an illegal police over the seas,
establishing a blockade of British ports, and for-
bidding our trade with the neutral Republic of
Mexico. Now, the hostility of words we may
despise, and even the discourtesy which seems in-
born in the American nature we may pass over,
however irritating may be sometimes the display
of it. But an actual invasion of our rights it is
impossible to disregard, and it is in the interest of
peace that we would urge on the Fed. ral Govern-
ment a closer supervision of its naval corn-
mander's proceedings on the West India station.
General Butler, the " representative man" of the
dominant faction at the North, may think that the
time has' come to make the English Government eat
dirt for' its conduct in the Trent affair, but the
leaders of the party at Washington must, we pre-
sume, be prudent enough to restrain for the present
the desire of Commodore Wilkes to avenge the in-
dignity which he may think was then put on him.
That the utmost caution and discretion ought to be
shown in the seizure of neutral traders is a proposi-
tion too obvious to need argument. The restraints
to which a neutral nation's commerce is subjected
by a belligerent are grievous enough, We cannot
trade with the South; our manufacturers cannot
buy their great staple of the Confederates, nor
supply them with the multitude of articles which
a purely agricultural community requires. But
when it is further urged on the part of one of
these belligerents that necessity has no law, and
that for the purpose of reconquering their rebels
they will assume the right of putting an end to
commerce between the neutral ports of England
and Mexico, then it is time to interpose with firm-
ness and resolve. That such claims have been
made by Federal officers, apparently under instruc-
tions from Washington, appears from some papers
just presented to Parliament. Last summer the Bri-
tish steamer Adele, bound from Liverpool to Nassau,
was captured by the United States' cruiser Quaker
City. Every kind of illegality seems to have been
concentrated in this seizure. The Adele was cap-
tured near the British island of Abaco; the Ameri-
can vessel showed no colours, but chased her and
fired at her several times ; she was seized before the
result of any actual search could have proved that
contraband of war was on board, and finally the act
was done. She was sailing from one British port
to another. But what made the matter of most im-
portance was the statement of the flag-officer that
the Federal cruisers had orders to seize " any
British vessels whose names were forwarded to
them froth- the Government at Washington ; that
being bound from one British port to another
would not prevent the United States' officers from
carrying out these orders ;" and, further, " that
such were the definite orders that they were, when
and where met with, to seize British steamers or
vessels of which official information had been sent
them." This statement, our readers will agree, is
somewhat startling; but there can be little doubt
that it was true, for Mr. Seward, in the subsequent
transactions, though he superseded the instructions
which had no doubt emanated from Mr. Gideon
Welles, does not deny that they had been really
given.
Sir A. Milne of course communicated with
Mr. Stuart at -Washington, very justly urging that
though the captains of her Majesty's ships had
orders to show.all respect and consideration to the
belligerent rights of the Federals, yet "if British
ships lawfully cleared out from and bound to British
ports, without the slightest indication of their deviat-
ing from their route, are to be subjected to seizure
wherever found, simply because their names ate on a
list furnished to United States' cruisers, I cannot but
fear that a collison between our ships of war and
those of the Federal Government may be the result."
Mr. Stuart, on receiving this appeal, laid the
matter before Mr. Seward, and he was soon after
enabled to inform Earl Russell that Mr. Seward,
had read to him an instruction which " he was ad-
dressing in the name of the President to the Secre-
tary of the Navy, laying down rules for the future
guidance of United States' naval officers, which
essentially modify the instructions under which
they have been latterly supposed to be authorized
to seize certain ships irrespective of the observance
of international law." The instructions given by
Mr. Seward to Mr. Welles in the name of the Pre-
sident are simply an enunciation of the commonest
rules of naval law. The Secretary is informed that
British vessels are not to be captured in British
waters; that they are not to be fired into without
having been signalled to stop in the usual manner ;
that they are not to be seized without a search re-
sulting in a reasonable suspicion that they are car-
rying contraband, nor if it be evident that they are
trading between one neutral port and another.
These are the " instructions" which the President
of a Republic which is always parading a scrupu-
lous respect for law is compelled to address to his
own Secretary of the Navy at the instance of a
foreign representative. They are for the future
guidance of naval officers, whom it is also neces-
sary to inform that "official seals, or locks, or
fastenings of foreign authorities are in no case, nor
on any pretext to be broken, or parcels covered by
them read by any naval authorities of the United
States." This last injunction referred to the pro-
ceedings of the captain of the Quaker City, who
actually seized the mails carried by the Adele
between Liverpool, Bermuda, and Nassau, and de-
clared that he would detain the official despatches
from the British Admiral to the captain of the Grey-
hound, open them, and read them in the Prize Court.
We have called attention to these papers because
they show how utterly careless the United States'
authorities have been in observing either law or
courtesy in their dealings with us, and because the
capture of the Adele throws a light on the similar
outrage on the Peterhoff. It is quite evident that
the "instructions" of Mr. Seward, having served
their turn, are now being quietly ignored, and that
the former rule of seizing suspected vessels, "when-
ever and wherever met with," is again to be followed.
Unless a firm stand be made, there will be no end
to the indignities and losses we must endure.
HERALD.—There is nothing better for an effete
people than Government by centralisation —not
that the system is good or improving, but that
they can get on under no other. It is the
substitute for the worth that is at once active and
self-controlling, and simply means that when no-
body can be relied on for their personal deserts, we
must govern men by agencies which ask no per-
sonal deserts for their efficiency. Since the break-
down in character accomplished by the dissolute
regime of the Bourbons, and the demoralising plea-
sures of the Great Revolution, no Government has
been possible except one that included nearly the
whole vital action of the nation in a single mecha-
nism, and directed every Movement under the im-
pulse given by a single spring. It has been thus
that authority has had its way against all obstacles,
and that, invading almost every function of public
or individual usefulness, the people have been
brought into a state of pupillage in which nothing
is thought possible except so far as it falls under
the patronage or wins the support of Government.
The people live, move, and have their being in the
Government, rather than the Government in them;
and it has asked all the fever generated by com-
mercial gambling encouraged on the largest scale,
to win even the exception of the mercantile classes
from the groat rule that to be an orthodox French-
man one must be content to look upon Government
as the Providence whence is to come every boon
and whither is to. directed every service. The
question now mooted, whether the police of the
City of London shall be withdrawn from under its
present control, to be banded over to the Govern-
ment, is really only another form of asking, are we
arrived at the point at which a succession of the
greatest of political calamities placed the French
people at the beginning of this century P Have
we lost the virtues necessary to self-govern-
ment ? It is grown quite impossible for the authos
rities of the City of London to maintain in efficiency

a corps of police less than Iit,OTY in number, without
being under orders received from the Home Office ?
ft hars been the relief of witty writers, and the te-
laxation Cf a cynical public, to make a London
alderman the type of individual dulness and muni-
cipal incapacity, but between the triflings of an
absurd literature and the serious deliberations of a
legislature the step is immense, and we are entitled
to ask the Government what is their opinion on the
popular prejudice, and how far they are prepared to
adopt it ? Have our Cabinet Ministers so entirely
restricted their knowledge of London aldermen to
the joint discussion with them of a Mansion House
banquet that they have collie at last to regard them
as fit for nothing else ls a judgment in mock
turtle the only judgment that Downing-street will
accredit to men who have had the unfortunate idea
of inviting it to a dinner ? Is its idea of a Lord
Mayoralty but a magistracy of Mansion House sur-
leitings ? Is it fancied because lazy urchins in the
streets have learnt, like their betters, to enjoy a
cheap laugh at a London aldermen, that the London
alderman is therefore at the bottom of creation ? Is
Punch, in short, 3 our only authority on the com-
petency of the magistrates of the City to do their
duty ? In this sense the bill to be introduced by
the Home Secretary may be looked upon as a test
question. Clearly enough, if the civic authorities
are not competent for the management of their
police, they are competent for none of the public
services to which they have been elected, and their
deficiency would imply at least an equal deficit
on the part of the liverymen. The proposition
places the whole system of local government on
its trial, for what are constituencies capable of
if they cannot secure in their election of magis-
trates an efficient control over the men en-
trusted with the simplest and humblest of the
aids rendered to the maintenance of public peace
and order ? If we go to the question of
fact, and try the tree by its fruits, we are far from
finding that the cese made out—whatever it be—
tells against the principle of local government. The
policemen of the City enjoy at least as good a cha-
racter as those of the metropolitan area. As a rule,
discretion, tact, and general worth, that befit the
subaltern officer of justice, are qualities better evi-
denced within the City boundaries. The character
of the chief reason advanced for the alteration almost
admits that these is no groundwork for proposing it.
It is not only an isolated but exceptional incident,
and when the most is made of it w, rrants no con-
clusion of the kind connected with it. The deficiencies
shown in the City arrangements for the procession of
the Princess of Wales, and for the illuminations
which took place on the day of her marriage, were
only part of a system of defect for which the Go-
vernment was at least as responsible as the City
authorities. It is idle to say, with Sir George Grey,
that he confided in the assurances of the Lord
Mayor, and had a reasonable belief that he and the
aldermen were competent to secure public order and
safety to life under circumstances having no relation
whatever to the means at their disposal. The
Government knew as well as the City the pro-
tective agencies at its command, and were better
fitted to comprehend how largely the need gene-
rated by the occasion they were. furnishing was
likely to exceed these. In restricting that portion
of the procession supplied by the Corporation to the
boundaries of the City, Sir George Grey centred
exclusively in Cheapside and Fleet-street attractions
which inevitably made them impassable, almost
under any power of police protection, with the essen-
tial disadvantage that the very means of order—the
police force—became elements of disorder in the
excess of the numbers they contributed to augment.
It was the same thing in the illuminations. In pro-
portion as:the City authorities, enthusiastic in their
loyalty, were ingenious in the profuse generosity
with which they demonstrated it, in that proper.
tion did the Government show itself inert in car-
rying out the measures which would have given a
corresponding expression to the national sentiment,
and kept in safe dispersion all over the metropoli-
tan area a population which, bent on sharing in the
festival, would necessarily cluster about the locality
made most interesting and attractive. Sir George
Grey'a policy.—as far as we can adjudge it—is
founded on a forgetfulness of his own share in the
confusion and mischief which marks the two days
of our national festivity, and the motion now before
the house amounts, in fact, but to a punishment of
the Mansion House for the shortcomings of the
Home Office.