The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-16 00:00:00

THE SUN LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING JULY IG, 1862,

made that there had been a battle, that it
was not a decisive one ; but that it was unmis-
takeably a victory. Yesterday morning it was
announced in all the papers that there had been
fighting; that General M'Clellan had made a suc-
cessful movement ; but that the Government impe- 1
ratively forbade the publication of the particulars.
This did not look like victory ; and the people, who
are not so easily hoodwinked as the official mind
imagines, construed the prohibition to mean that
M'Clellan had been defeated. The whole city was
in a state of the most intense excitement. The
sultry air was sultrier with rumours of disaster.
‘Vall-street was almost demented with alarm, and
every kind of Stock went down. The Illinois Cen-
tral Railway Shares tumbled 2 per cent. ; Eries,
per cent.; New York Centrals, 1,1- per cent, ; and
Government Stocks found no purchasers at a decline
of l per cent. The friends of the South, who, in
ordinary circumstances, say but little, were jubilant
with delight, while the enemies of INl‘Clellan, who
deny his generalship, because he has no sympathies
with the negro, and cares nothing for the abolition
of slavery, were equally pleased at the idea of his
discomfiture, which seemed to be but the accom-
plishment of their own prophecies. The crowds
before the newspaper offices were so dense as to
render the street impassable for hours, and amid all
the buzz and hum of the conflicting rumours that
every moment brought forth, changing and shift-
ing from disaster to victory, and from victory to
disaster, was to be heard one deep, unvarying growl
of discontent against the Secretary of War, who
would not let the truth be known, whatever might
be its character. At length came authentic details,
published in an extra of one of the morning papers,
from which it appeared that there had been three
days' hard fighting ; that the struggle virtually
commenced on Wednesday, and was renewed on
Thursday and Friday ; and that the results were
feaeful slaughter on both sides, the abandonment
by .11‘Clellan of his position on the Pamunkey
river and the White House; and his occupation of
a new line of battle and a new base of operations
between the Chickahominy and the James. To-
day the best face is put upon the matter by Wall-
street and the press. It is loudly maintained that
the fight was a victory, but those who are fain to
believe that it was so are compelled to admit
that the circumstances are wofully like a defeat.
Every means are employed to keep up the spirits of
the people ; and, though no later news has been
received as yet (Tuesday afternoon) than to mid-
day of Saturday the 28th, it is confidently asserted
by all whose wish is father to the thought, that
M'Clellan entered Richmond on Sunday as a con
queror. It is difficult, however, for any impartial,
or even partial observer who reads the various ac-
counts that have been published in this morning's
papers to believe anything of the kind, or that
M'Clellan has done more at the very best than
achieve a fortunate escape from destruction. It is
alleged by his friends, who largely preponderate
over his political foes and professional rivals, though
neither of these are scarce, that he never received
half the reinforcements that were promised him, or
that were necessary to his success, and that nothing
but consummate skill on his own part, and perfect
accord between him and his army on the other,
saved him from defeat and the Republic from humi-
liation An uneasy feeling pervades the public
mind ; and the bluster of those who would still
cry " Victory" if M'Clellan were in full retreat on
Yorktown is counted at its proper value, and only
helps to increase the general alarm. Nor is this,
great as it is, the only humiliation of the moment.
General Hunter has withdrawn his troops from
James Island. The attack upon Charleston is a
coup inanque, and cannot be added to the few causes
of glorification for the approaching 4th of July.
Washington, and more especially Baltimore, is not
safe from a sudden attack; for, though General
" Stonewall" Jackson is reported to be at Richmond
it is possible that he is not a day's march from the
Shenandoah. General Curtis is retreating from
Arkansas into Missouri, while Beauregard—alive
and vigorous somewhere, though no one can put
his finger upon the exact spot—has not only neu-
tralised and for all active purposes extinguished
General Halleck, but has confounded the councils
and rendered abortive all the schemes of all the
Federal Generals in the South-West by the
masterly secrecy of his late retreat. He is vir-
tually übiquitous, and the Federal General who
would 'pounce upon him is as much puzzled to
know how to deal with him as Falstaff with Dame
; Quickly. He is neither here, there, nor any where
else, " neither fish, flesh, nor fowl, or good red
herring." But he is able, by the mystery of his
movements, to render useless one-third of the
armies of the Union. If it be the goodwill and plea-.
sure of Mr. Stanton, the electric telegraph will con-
vey, before this letter is in type, the later news of
the good or ill fortune of M'Clellan before Richmond
between Saturday evening and the time at which
I write. If the news be that of a decisive victory,
all the world will know it. If it he that of a drawn
battle, a resultless attack, or a more or less serious
defeat, nothing of it will be known. But if it be
that of a crushing disaster, the intelligence will fly
in spite of all the efforts of the Government to pre-
vent it, and will reach London before this letter.
WEDNESDAY MORNING.

P.S. I have only time to add before the depar-
ture of the steamer that there is no news from
Richmond, good or bad, and that the President, in
answer to an address submitted to him, and signed
by the Governors of 18 States, has issued a procla-
mation calling out 300,000 additional troops for the
suppression of the rebellion.

IMILIVAY INTELLIGENCE.

LONDON AND NORTHWESTERN.

The adjourned Wharncliffe meeting of this com-
pany was held yesterday at the Eustou Station, Mr.
R. Moon in the chair.
Mr. R. SATILL having read the notice of adjourn-
ment,
The CHAIRMAN said there now remained three
bills on their list undisposed of. No. 7 would not
be submitted, and No. 14 had been rejected by a
committee of the House of Commons, so that N 0.13
was the only bill he had to submit. It was a bill for
authorising extensions of the Oswestry, Ellesmere,
and Whitchureh Railway, and for other purposes
The powers for working the main line by the
North-Western Company were extended to the
extension line sanctioned by the bill. The capital
authorised for the extension line was £60,000.
He concluded by moving a formal resolution ap-
proving the bill, which was agreed to unanimously,
and this concluded the Wharncliffe meetings of the
company for the present session of Parliament.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-July 15.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
.Sittings, at Nisi Prins, at Guildhall, before Lord
Chief Baron Pollock and Common Juries.)
BAXENDALE V. SMITH.

This was an action against a contractor for the
alleged negligent relaying of a road over the Under-
ground Railway.

Mr. Collier and Mr. C. Pollock were counsel for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr.
Bowen for the defendant.

The plaintiffs, the well known carriers, owned a
" trolley," which, on the day in question, was loaded
with an iron girder weighing 19!-, tons, and drawn
by 20 horses. This apparatus was crossing from
Albany-street, Regent's -park, to the Portland-road,
on its way to Clapham, where the girder was to be
used in some works on the London, Chatham, and
Dover Railway, when it sank about a foot in the
roadway, and was damaged to the extent of about
£22. The accident took place at a part of the Mary-
le bone. road above the Underground Railway, where
the road had been relaid about a fortnight.
The defence was that the contractor in relaying
the road had complied with all the requisites of the
act of Parliament, and that the " trolley," with its
load, being of enormous weight, the plaintiff's ser-
vants ought to have selected the opposite side of the
enclosure, at the end of Albany-street, which had
been re-opened nine months, and was in a harder
and firmer state, and more equal to such unusual
traffic. A considerable amount of evidence was
adduced on both sides.

The Lord Chief Baron, in summing up, said he
presumed that the defendant had an interest in the
question far beyond the amount of £22, or he
would hardly have gone to the expense he had
done in support of his case. His lordship said
he understood the meaning of the act of Parlia-
ment to be that when the company had constructed
the railway and arched it over they should put
the road in as good a condition as they found
it, and that the public should not be abridged
in any way whatever of their lawful use of the
road. The principal question for the jury was
whether " trolleys " with these heavy weights
formed a portion of the recognised traffic of London,
and ought therefore to be provided for by those
who had the charge of the different thoroughfares.
After the jury had been in consultation a short
time one of their body asked the learned judge
whether he thought the act of Parliament meant
that the first day the road was open it should be
in as good a condition as the old road.

The Lord Chief Baron said he believed that was
the meaning of the act ; and, in his opinion, if the
proper means were adopted, a road might at once
be made as hard as any thoroughfare over which
the traffic of London had passed for twelve months.
His lordship then suggested that if they were not
agreed in opinion they had better retire and con-
sider their verdict.

The Foreman—We are equally different in
opinion.

- The Lord Chief Baron—Perhaps the parties may
come to some arrangement.
Mr. C. Pollock said that, on the part of the
plaintiff, he was prepared to agree to the discharge
of the jury.
Mr. Serjeant Shee said he would prefer taking
their verdict.

The jury then retired, and after being locked up
some time the Lord Chief Justice Baron sent for
them and on their return the foreman said they had
made no advance to an agreement, six being one
way and six the other, and that there was no chance
of their arriving at a verdict.
His Lordship then discharged them.
This was the last day of the sittings before the
long vacation.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before Sir C. Cresswell.)
IN THE GOODS OF LETITIA WINYATES, DECEASED.
Dr. Deane, Q.C., made an application to the
Court to grant probate of several papers which had
been found in the box of the deceased, who was a
lady residing at Cheltenham. The lady died at
Weston-super-Mare, where she had gone on a visit.
She left a sum of £5OO between her four sisters,
one of whom, a married lady, Mrs. Christmas, was
appointed executrix, with Sir Edward C.Winyates,
brother of the testatrix, the other three being spin-
sters. The whole sum was left to the last surviving
sister. The question was whether the will was
valid, a signature to the will having been torn off
by the deceased, the will itself being contained on
several sheets of paper, and duly executed as to the
first, numbered respectively No. 1, No. 1 A, No. 2,
No 2 A, No. 3.
His Lordship said the matter was too important
to be dealt with on motion. The will must be pro-
pounded in the usual way.
IN THE GOODS OF SOPHIA BALLIS CAPEL (DR. GRIFFITHS
JONES).
In this case the notorious Dr. Griffiths Jones had
propounded a will purporting to be the will of the
above-named testatrix, but in the progress of the
cause, in consequence of his admission that he had
been guilty of perjury, and the verdict of the jury
having been against him on the four issues, viz.,
undue influence, not duly executed, incapacity, and
fraud, he is at present undergoing a sentence for
the criminal offence. He now entered a caveat
against the Queen's proctor proceeding further, and
prayed not to be dismissed from the cause.
Dr. Spinks urged that the fact of Dr. Griffiths
Jones having admitted the perjury, and the cause
having terminated, he was not entitled further to
obstruct the proceedings of the court.
Sir C. Cresswell said that if Dr. Jones had pro-
ceeded at the time that his counsel, for shame of
his client, had retired from the cause, it would be
for consideration whether the court was prepared
to grant the application. A length of time had
elapsed, and no step had been taken. Dr. Jones
must, therefore, be dismissed from the cause.
IN THE GOODS OP THOMAS DONCE.
In this case the testator, au illiterate person, put
his mark to a will which had been drawn up for
him, but the will was drawn up in the name of
John Donce instead of Thomas Donce, and 'the per-
son who drew up the instrument had since become
deceased. It was contended by Dr. Swabey that
the court had granted probate where a mark had
been made and a wrong name was written opposite
to it.
Sir C. Cresswell said that the case was different,
in that case the instrument purported to be the will
of the person who put her mark to it. The mark was
undoubtedly genuine. But this was the will of John
Donce, and Thomas Donee. He would take time to
look for a precedent for such a proceeding.
JAGO V. JAGO AND GRAHAM.
In this case;Sir F. Slade moved for a rule nisi for
a new trial on the ground that the verdict was
against the evidence, and also upon the ground that
one of the witnesses in the cause had declared dur-
ing its progress that she had been mistaken in the
date she had assigned to the facts she had sworn to
I in her evidence.
His lordship, having read the affidavit, said there
was a want of sufficient description, which would
have to be amended.
NORRIS V. NORRIS-JUDGMENT.
Sir C. Cresswell said this was a suit for judicial
separation by the wife, on the ground of the hus-
band's cruelty, and there were circumstances de-
posed to in the evidence which led him to express
an opinion that he should have been relieved from
' the necessity of giving a decision. The parties had
not thought proper to follow that advice, and it
only remained for him to pronounce judgment.
There were persons who at the time that court was
constituted were very strongly of opinion that the
publication of disclosures such as might from time
to time take place could not but be prejudicial to
society. In some cases that was true, but he was
satisfied that in others the shame and disgrace that
must attach itself to parties must produce an influ-
ence upon all who were not blinded by vindictive
feeling
The same object might well have been
accomplished in that case, but for some pecuniary
matters over which the Court had no control. The
case having come before the Court, the petitioner
must have known that her social position must be
seriously affected by it, and that she would be asked
questions respecting her ante-nuptial relations with
the respondent which it would be inconvenient to
answer. The respondent, on the other hand, appeared
forllo intelligible purpose except to cause those public
his wife's an te. nuptial frailty
disclosures respecting
and her mother's conduct. The marriage was so-
lemnised in July, 1860, and final separation took
place in September, 1861. A charge was made
against the respondent of having perpetrated acts
of cruelty upon his wife, under circumstances pe-
culiarly heinous. The learned judge recited the
charges specified in the petition, which are unfit for
publication, but they were of a nature in them-
selves happily rare and almost impossible to be cor-
roborated. The Court would require more cogent
evidence than had been offered before it would
pronounce. The petitioner had sworn that on the
day of their separation, the respondent had pointed
a pistol at her, and that, ,he having looked firmly
at him, he lowered it and did not fire. It was re-
markable that this circumstance was not men-
tioned at the time. Abe Parker, the highly re-
spectable solicitor who had gone down, and before
whom the question of separation had been discussed,
was also silent upon this subject. It was difficult,
any one of the acts of cruelty
therefore, to select
which had not been condoned, and the circum-
stance of their having lived in connubial intercourse
after the most heinous of those imputed was totally
inconsistent with the notion of their remaining un-.
condoned. The Court would not, therefore, grant
the (berets on the evidence adduced. These young

people might have n tany days of happiness yet be-
fore them, but wil ;h the consequences, whatever
they might be, the Court had nothing to do.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-July 15.

GUILDHALL.—THE GREAT JEWEL ROBBERY
AT CAMDEN Tow-rt.—Julius Friedland, who de-
scribed himself as a watchmaker, of 1, Kenilworth-
road, Bethnal-green, was charged before Alderman
Challis with having unlawfully in his possession
19 gold chains and two gold watch-cases, the pro-
perty of Mr. Geo. Seeker, of 119, High-street, Cam-
den-town, from whose premises they were stolen,
with a large quantity of valuable jewellery, on the
attended for the prosecution;
28th.1s,f
ro.fLAelway last.
n.,
he received
of A
Alders-
there ihse,
Evans, 22, of the G division of Metro-
politan ia Inr.
cßearde,. conductedand rrom i
information
mdaettiboniac e.
Sergeant .
on of Mr Joseph, a refiner,
went to the tbl'r -
there saw seven gold Albert chains,
gate .street, an
neckchains, and seven gold'
o.
one gold key, five
c o mwma
su,
7nt. ihacatatt ithohene a
fo el withdr Old-street
at
r2rve,iters
Aecklaces. He had a
Joseph, the result of which
he
,property in
on seeing the prisoner in eustou.,
police-station, told him he had seen .
question, and that it had been identifies :As part of
the proceeds of the robbery committed u. 1‘14.r.
Seeker's premises in Camden-town, in May
lab
lie also told the prisoner he would be charged with
.. -
having them in his possession, and asked him what
account ho gave of them. The prisoner said he
bought them of a man named Myers, but he did
not know where he lived. He said he bought them
at his own residence; but on searching that place
witness found no appearance of a jeweller's business
being carried on there. At the police-station Mr.
Joseph produced two gold watch-cases broken up,
and said in the prisoner's presence and hearing that
the prisoner asked him to buy them.
Cross-examined—He knew the prisoner to be a
dealer in jewellery, and the prisoner said he had
been accustomed to meet Myers at sales. The pri-
soner made no reply to Mr. Joseph's statement.
Mr. Edward Joseph, refiner and silversmith, said
he carried on business at 81, Aldersgate-street. He
knew the prisoner. He purchased of him seven
Albert chains, one key, five neckchains, and four of
the necklaces produced, on the 2d of July last. He
paid him 325. per oz., which he considered was a
fair value for such articles. He purchased to the
amount of 30oz.13dwts., and the prisoner offered him
more which he did not purchase. About 1 o'clock
on Monday last the prisoner called and offered for
sale the two broken-up gold watchcases produced,
and in consequence of a communication he had re-
ceived from the police he detained the prisoner in
conversation and sent for an officer. At the police-
station he delivered the gold watch-cases to Ser-
geant Evans. He had made many purchases of the
prisoner both before and after the 28th of May last.
He had purchased diamonds of him to the value of
about £3O within the last fortnight.
Cross-examined—Heknewthe prisoner as a dealer
in jewellery and diamonds.
Mr. George Seeker, of 119, High-street, Camden
Town, said he was a silversmith and jeweller. On
the night of the 28th of May last his shop was
broken open and property of the value of £BOO stolen.
He could swear positively to two of the Albert
chains having been taken from his premises on that
occasion.

Mr. James Smee, a wholesale jeweller, of 38,
Wilmington-square, said he knew the whole of the
property produced, except the two chains identified
by the last witness. They were his own manufac-
ture, and sold by him to Mr. Seeker on the 27th of
March last. The gold of all the articles produced
was worth 31s. 6d. per ounce for melting purposes.
He also made the gold swivel produced, which was
found by Sergeant Evans at the prisoner's lodgings.
He marked all his goods with his own initials.

Mr. Lewis asked for a remand.
Mr. Beard said there was no evidence to connect

his client with the robbery, and he therefore asked
the magistrate to deal with the case as one of un-
lawful possession.
Alderman Challis said he could not take the same
view of the matter as Mr. Beard did, and he there-
fore remanded the prisoner, for the purpose of en-
abling Sergeant Evans, who had displayed great
sagacity in this case, to make further inquiries.
Remanded accordingly.

WESTMINSTER. ANOTHER UNFOUNDED
CHARGE OF PICKING POCKETS AT THE INTER-
NATIONAL EXHIBITION.—Joseph Hodges and Wm.
Searle, residing at Hatcham, Surrey, were charged
before Mr. Arnold with attempting to pick the
pockets of females at the International Exhibition
on Monday afternoon.
Mr. St. Aubyn appeared for the prisoners.
The evidence of two police.constables of the X
division, Nos. 121 and 117, was to the effect that
the prisoners were seen to go among a crowd of
persons and to go up to some females, whose pockets
it appeared to them they were attempting to pick.
In answer to Mr. St. Aubyn,
The officers stated that the prisoners were not
known to them.

Mr. St. Aubyn observed that there was no foun-
dation for the charge. The prisoners had come to
London the previous day with some friends for the
purpose of seeing the Exhibition. Hodges had
never been in London before. He was a servant to
a gentleman of the name of Thornton, a barrister,
residing at Hatcham, who gave him permission to
go with some friends to visit the Exhibition. His
emyloyer would give him a high character for
honesty and integrity, and he hoped that the ma-
gistrate would decide the case by at once discharg-
ing the prisoners, each of whom he would be able
to show were incapable of the charge made against
him. This was not the first case of a charge pre-
ferred against a person for attempting to pick
pockets at the Exhibition for which there was no
foundation.
Mr. Thornton was examined on the part of Hodges.
He stated that he was a very honest man, and was
incapable of the act with which be was charged.
He supported the statement of Mr. St. Aubyn. He
further stated that he had known the other prisoner
many years, who:was a man equally honest.
Other evidence was given, showing the highly
respectable character of the prisoners.
Mr. Arnold observed that this was one of those
cases which had been recently before the court
against persons charged with attempting to p'ck
pockets at the Exhibition. In one of these cases
he sent the accused for trial, as he did not wish to
impute a doubt upon the evidence of the constable
who had the charge. Another case had occurred
before Mr. Dayman, which was remanded, and
in this case the accused was discharged, the
character given of him by gentlemen of the
highest respectability being such that he came
to the conclusion he was incapable of the charge
imputed to him. It was becoming a most
serious matter that persons visiting the Exhi-
bition, and who are not known to the police, should
be, through the imagination of a constable,
charged with the offence that the prisoners had
been accused of. The characters given of the pri-
soners showed to him that there could not be the
slightest suspicion against them, and he was com-
pelled to say that in future he could not put the
slightest confidence in the evidence of 121 X.
The prisoners were discharged.
CHARGE OF BIGAMY_—A MAN WITH THREE
WIVES.—Eugene P. M'Carthy, a solicitor and
public notary in Ireland, described as having no
fixed residence, was charged with intermarrying
with Catherine Craigh, otherwise Cree, his former
wife, Mary Jane O'Brien, being still alive.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien, brother of the second wife,
residing at Queenstown, produced papers proving
the second marriage in July, 1854, at Dublin, and
he further stated that the prisoner subsequently
married Mary Ann Bunning, at St. James's Church,
Islington. The first marriage took place on the
29th of January, 1839.
Dr. James O'Brien, brother of the prosecutor,
corroborated the evidence.

The prisoner was remanded for the attendance of
the witnesses to attest the respective marriages.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET—CHARGE OF HAR-
BOURING PROSTITUTES.—Mr. Mason, landlord of
the White Bear, Piccadilly, was summoned for wil-
fully and knowingly harbouring prostitutes in his
house.

Mr. Atkinson appeared for the defendant.
Inspector Draper, C division, proved that on the
night of the 3d instant he visited the defendant's
house at various times from about one o'clock until
half-past two, and found a number of prostituted
and men assembled before the bar. On
these occasions he pointed out to the defendaon.otn:3htleiaomt
the women were prostitutes, and that soult: them
were The
were there when he paid a previous
defendant replied that he got his livii
the night
tutes. The number of prostitutes
odoakr g„ by prosti-
retreshment,
varied from 10 to 17,
others did not. There vvBeormeetstVo drunken men
among the customers.
ence of the inspector.
and Police Sergeant
Police Inspector Silvertvoind
Frinett corroborated theme ad
a strong appeal in
Mr. Tindal Atkinson made and contended that the
favour of the
pnedtctably conducted, and that the
late hours for purposes of re-
house was most
bar alone was open
a
freshment only-
dreef:
es barman p
keptroved that the bar was
The defendant not for the purpose of allowing per-
sons of open,
b
bad character to congregate together, but
only
to furnish refreshment to those who applied
for
mit.
r. Knox said he believed that the nightly scenes
in, the Haymarket and vicinity were not to be puttb
ieled in any other city in the world. The profigum
and abominations which were openly TiNiblg !IA