The Sun.
London, England, 1862-10-17 00:00:00

have appealed to the magistrates for protection.
The shopkeepers said that they understood the
riot was to be renewed, and that the navvies en-
gaged on the dock works were organising for a
rescue of the prisoners. In consequence of this
communication the Birkenhead magistrates sent a
deputation to the Liverpool Watch Committee to re-
quest the aid of a strong detachment of the Liverpool
police, by whose aid it is hoped the designs of the
rioters may be frustrated, and due protection given
to the inhabitants.

BIRKENHEAD, 11 P.M

Contrary to general expectation, the rioters did
not renew their attacks. It is believed that this
was owing to the advice of some of the leading
priests, and to the fact that in consequence of the
arrival of a considerable body of the Liverpool
police force, a riot would have been speedily quelled,
and the ringleaders apprehended. Large numbers
of people, however, crowded the streets up to a late
hour.

THE ALLEGED PROFLIGACY IN A

TVO.REHOUSE.

The inquiry into the circumstances of the alleged
profligacy at Bethnal-greenWorkhouse was resumed
yesterday afternoon by Mr. It. B. Cane, one of the
Poor-law inspectors, in the board-room of the
workhouse.
Mr. Angel, of Guiidhall-chambers, represented
the memorialists; Mr. Lewis, sen., of Ely-place,
Holborn, appeared on behalf of Mr. Merrick, the
master of the workhouse.
The inquiry was appointed for 11 o'clock, but the
professional gentlemen did not arrive till 1, shortly
after which the following evidence was proceeded
with :
Mr. Edward Joseph Southwell, examined by Mr.
Lewis, said that he was clerk to the board of guar-
dians of Mile-end Old-town, and vestry clerk of
that hamlet. On the 30th of October he saw Sarah
Anne Skinner, and she said that Mr. Merrick was
the father of the child of which she was then preg-
nant. Witness asked how it happened, and she said
she had been sent up to make the nurse's bed, and
the master came up while she was there. In reply
to a question she said the intimacy only took place
once. When the child was about a month old she
stated that the occurrence took place on a Sunday;
that she had been admitted into the house early in
the month of March, 1861; that the connection be-
tween her and the master took place shortly after;
and she repeated that it was only on one occasion,
and that she left the house on the 7th April, and
the child was born the 6th of January.
By Mr. Angel—As vestry clerk witness first
inquired as to her settlement when she was admited.
It was not by any means the practice to inquire in
similar cases into the particulars of the occurrence
that resulted in the birth of a child. He (witness)
had seen Mr. Merrick officially two or three times
before. Doubting the statements she made as to the
intercourse, he (witness) asked the girl the questions
mentioned. He doubted that Mr. Merrick would
so compromise himself by such an act. He saw Mr.
Merrick the next day on the subject purposely, hav-
ing previously sent him a statement of what the girl
had said. He (witness) might have heard from Mr.
Merrick that Mr. Macdonald knew something of the
matter, and stated to him that Mr. Merrick had
denied it. Mr. Macdonald might have said that
Merrick wanted to bring him into it, but he took no
particular notice of what he said. Merrick might
have been in the house when the interview took
place with Macdonald ; but he (witness) would not
swear that Macdonald said, "He (meaning Merrick)
is in the other room, and I will have nothing to do
with it." Merrick had called on witness twice since
the summons issued for the inquiry. He (witness)
recollected Mr. Angel calling on him for permission
for the girl Skinner to attend the police court, in
order to take out an affiliation summons. He (wit-
ness) declined to allow it unless an application was
made to the board, and Mr. Onion being one of the
guardians, witness reminded him that there was
time for the purpose. Mr. Onion was at the time
in company with Mr. Angel, who said he appeared
on behalf of that gentleman.
Mrs. Edwards, examined by Mr. Lewis, said that
she was matron of St. George's, Hanover-square.
In 1860 she was head nurse in the infirmary of Beth-
nal-green Workhouse up to October, 1861. She
remembered Sarah Anne Skinner coming into the
infirmary on April 20, and remaining there till the
lst of May. She complained of a pain in the knee,
superinduced by kneeling, and she was, therefore,
excused from work. She never in any way com-
plained during that time that the master had taken
any liberties with her. During the time she (wit-
ness) was there the master behaved with the greatest
modesty to all the females in the house.
Mr. Henry Balderson, examined by Mr. Lewis,
said that he was engineer at the Bethnal-green
workhouse from February to July, 1861, and knew
Mary Anne Skinner, while she was an inmate.
She solicited him (witness) improperly more than
once, and he rebuked her and told her that he was
a married man. After that she spread a report in
the house that she had seen improper conduct be-
tween him and Mrs. Donne. He complained to
the master, and when brought before that officer,
she denied having said anything of the sort. He
(witness) had frequently seen Skinner and Gibbs,
the sweep, talking together, and if she had sworn
that she never knew him till the present month she
had sworn falsely. She (Skinner) had said a great
deal to witness.
Mary Ann Donne examined by Mr. Lewis—No
improper familiarity had ever taken place
between herself and last witness. Skinner had said
so, and was taken before the master in consequence,
and she denied ever having said anything of the
kind. The master always behaved himself with
decency, propriety, and morality. If Skinner had
said that she never knew Gibbs till the 10th of the
present month it was false, and she was always run-
ning after him.
Mr. Lewis said that he did not propose to call any
other evidence except the master himself.
Mr. Angel hoped that Mr. Merrick would be ex-
cluded from the room while his (the memorialist's)
further witnesses were examined. He thought Mr.
Merrick should be examined before the other evi-
dence was given.
The Inspector said that it was the invariable
practice to call the accused party after all the other
evidence had been given, and he saw .no reason to
alter the practice hitherto adopted.
On the re-assembling after the adjournment,
Mr. Angel called and examined.
Charles Nettlefold, who said he was superinten-
dent of out-door labour at the Bethnal-green work-
house. He knew Mr. Frank Morton, and in June
last or thereabouts, on a Monday, he heard a con-
versation between Green and Morton. The latter
named said, that if he saw the girl Skinner he
would not know her. This was in relation to an
affiliation case by the girl Skinner against the mas-
ter. He (witness) was asked if he knew Skinner,
and said it was not likely, as the girl had not been
in the house while he (witness) had been in office
in the house.
George William Shines, examined by Mr. Angel,
said that is March and April, 1861, Morton, Ald.
ridge, and himself (witness) were the clerks in Mr
Howard's office, and attended from nine till eix, ex

cept on Saturdays, when they took it in turns to
go away at two. An attendance book is kept,
and the one produced is that used in March and
April last year. One day last week Morton
took the book out of the case in which it was kept,
and made an alteration in it. The time of arrival

and departure on the 16th of March was in witness's
handwriting. On the 23d, the following Saturday,
the time of Morton's leaving had been altered from
six o'clock to two o'clock, and on the 16th when
witness entered six o'clock both entries had been

altered to two o'clock, On Thursday, the 21st,
Morton left at six o'clock. On Thursday, the 28th,
Morton was at the office till six o'clock. The en-
tries enabled witness to say that he was there all
day, and he never saw one of the workhouse girls
in the office on either of these days with Morton.
Morton and Merrick had lately been on very
friendly terms apparently, and very much together.
Mr, John Bohn, examined by Mr. Angel, deposed
that one day in the present week Morton took the
attendance-book for March and April, 1861, from
the rack, and wrote something in it.
The deposition was then signed, and the witness
left the room in a state of high dudgeon.
Miss Louisa Merrick, examined by Mr. Lewis,
deposed that she was matron of Bethnal-green
workhouse, and the daughter of the master. She
had been matron since 1858, on the death of her
mother. Witness knew Sarah Skinner, who had
been under the charge of Mrs. Pomeroy, as cleaner,
and she had made no complaint to her. On the
16th of April Skinner was placed in the kitchen for
instruction in cooking, and previous to that time
she had neverbeen.engaged in the kitchen. It was
no part of Skinner's duty to take up water to wit-
ness's father's mom. It was not her duty to be in
the kitchen on a Sunday before the 16th of April,
but she might have been there unknown to wit-
ness. Skinner remained in the kitchen until the
Ist of May, and when she left witness gave
her the usual outfit of everything. About three
months after she called and asked to see
Brown, the cook. After her (witness's)
mother died
witness the clothes left by her were given
away, excepting a few thin which kept.
Cross-examined by Mr. Angel—Witness had
told Mr. Smythe that the girl Skinner would suit
him, and at that time no complaint had been made
of Skinner's bad language.
l‘lr. Theobald Merrick, examined by Mr; LaWis,