The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-23 00:00:00

2111 E MOORS, FORESTS, AND FISHING&

50
25
100
St.

The eventful " Twelfth" opened the grouse shooting
season under very promising circumstances. The
propitious weather of the spring and summer left the
the
unusually numerous, strong, and healthy ; and
deeds of the first day of the shooting are in some
„7"tances perhaps unparalleled. Moors which in for-
Zer Years yielded very indifferent sport, have suddenly
sprung into importance ; and from every side the same
' is borne to us—of capital sport, abundant game
and
• splendid weather. The 12th was rather a hot and
day for the moors, and was dazzlingly clear.
The heather, the lochs and rivers, the lichened crags,
and the bare mountain tops glistened painfully in the
Clouded sunshine, and tempting as was the abun-
baill;t game, half the sportsmen who took the moor were
1,-"ged partially to succumb to the great heat of the
f and seek th friendly shade of a birchwood or corrie
-"r at least a couple of hours after noon. The number
of game bagged on the 12th must have been prodigious.
The country is deluged with presents, and the price of
,:I(3nse, instead of being from about 4s. 6d. to ss. 6d. a
'air, as it has usually been at this early period of the
-eason, from 2s. to 3s. 6d. at the Invernes mar-
ke,_ ,is now
I,a‘• On the 13th, we believe, no less than two large
15-118 and a mail coach, filled to over-flowing with game-
f°les were unloaded at the Perth railway station, and
for '
1,1 the most part the boxes contained grouse from the
• Highlands. At Aberdeen, the importation of
been was no less formidable—great quantities having
eeu sent by the day coaches from Inverness, Moray-
and the adjoining districts, and by the steamer
torn the extensive moors of Caithness.
In the forest deer-hunting has been well rewarded.
ik 'the continued drought has, for the time, spoiled the
11gliug of the northern rivers, by stopping the water
ro'Plies. Whilst last week any one who could handle a
was almost sure of at least two or three grilse in
thecnurse of a day's fishing, this week only the upper ,
of the river can be successfully fished. The same
abundance
case in most of the Highland rivers—there is
rev.,lldance of fish, and we only wait a fresh of rain to
''lre in full force the fine an ling of this season. The
Pey
dry seems to hold up better than' most rivers in this
ct-li„"asen. Mr. Gillmore Rothes, Mr. Powell, and
47,-1. anglers, have had good sport, and the Banffshire
eat'‘na/ mentions that Mr. Jackson, Craigellachie, had
viiitl?red, with his own rod, sixty salmon and grilse,
en three weeks, on the Aberlour fishings in the
"eY.-----Invernegs Courier.

St.
St.
20
St.

1241
12i
St.

25
10
1.0.6

RAILWATB.

Business done
this day.

PREFERENCE SHARES.

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, AUGUST 23, 1853.

THE CHARGE AGAINST MB. NORMAN

WILKINSON.

Mr. Norman Wilkinson, 9, Threadneedle-street, share
dealer, appeared before the Lord Mayor, at the Man-
sion-house, yesterday, upon a summons issued at the
instance of the East India Company, to answer the
charge of having unlawfully bargained with a person,
whose name is unknown, for the purchase of an office in
the gift of the East India Company, contrary to the
statute.

Mr. Clarkson, instructed by Messrs. Lawford, solici-
tors to the East India Company, appeared for the prose-
cution ; Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Hawkins, instructed by
Messrs. Burchell, attended for the defence. The City
Solicitor attended as adviser of the Lord Mayor.
The justice-room was crowded with gentlemen con-
nected with the East India-house, and with members of
the Stock Exchange, and merchants.
Mr. Clarkson, in a lengthened statement, recapitu-
lated the details which he entered into upon the occasion
of applying for the summons on the 9th inst., and hav-
ing put in evidence some correspondence between the
secretary to the East India Company and the defendant,
in which the latter declined to give up the name of the
person with whom it was alleged he had been in treaty
for the cadetship in question, proceeded to call Mr. %V.
A. Wilkinson, the hon. member for Lambeth, and bro-
ther of the defendant, who underwent a precisely similar
course of examination to that to which he was originally
subjected, with the exception that he was now sworn.
At the conclusion of the hon. member's examination in
chief, the following questions were put to him by
Mr. Clarkson—Do you know the person whom your
brother named to you as the party with whom he had
been in treaty ?
Mr. Wilkinson--Yes, I do.
Mr. Clarkson—What was his name?
Mr. Wilkinson—l decline to give you the name, and
I wish to state to the court why I think I am justified
in so doing.
Mr. Bodkin objected to any reasons given by the wit-
ness for his refusal being entered upon the depositions.
Mr. Clarkson insisted upon whatever was uttered by
the witness being made part of the depositions.
The Lord Mayor said he thought that the reasons of
the witness ought to be recorded.
Mr. Wilkinson—l decline to answer the question put
to me, because as I am advised and believe there is no
proper foundation for this charge, and consequently no
proper foundation for this question. I have every dis-
position to give every information in my power upon
the charge attempted to be laid upon my brother, but I
consider that this question forms no part of that harge,
and is not within the scope of the evidence which I
have sworn to give.
Mr. Clarkson then applied for permission to
ocross-
examine Mr. Wilkinson, on the ground that he was an
witness, which request, after being
part of Mr. Bodkin was
ultimatelyunw i llstrenuouslyinga
ancd h c
edoe
opposeddstitl hostilebut
utth e
which failed to elicit anything
further than had already been stated by the hon. mem-
ber in his previous examination.
Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin—Can you charge your
recollection with the distinct words used by your brother
in any one of the conversations about which you have
been examined ?

vv
Mr. Wilkinson—No, I cannot.
Mr. Bodkin—Did you in the first instance learn from
your brother that a friend of his had presented him with
an appointment for his son ?
Mr. Wilkinson—Was going to present him.
Mr. Bodkin—And had offered it ?
Mr. Wilkinson—So I understood ; that was my first
impression.
Mr. Bodkin—Without any mention whatever of any
consideration of any kind ?
Mr. Wilkinson—Not at that time.
Mr. Bodkin—When your brother afterwards told you
that he inferred from the language of the party he was
talking with that some money was expected, did he also
tell you that he had taken the advice of a friend, who
told him that such a transaction was illegal ?
Mr. Wilkinson—No, not at the first ; that was at the
second occasion.

Mr. Bodkin—Did he soon afterwards tell you so ?
Mr. Wilkinson—Some little time after that he told
me so. .

Mr. Bodkin—He told you that he had spoken to a
friend, who told him that if he agreed to such a proposi-
tion it would be illegal ?
Mr. Wilkinson—Yes, something to that effect ; that
he had better take care what he was about, for he was
doing something that was wrong.
Mr. Bodkin—Did he tell you that that friend informed
him that if he inquired at the India House he would see
the declaration that was required to be made, and which
would of itself show the illegality of such a transaction ?
Mr. Wilkinson—Something to that effect. He told
me that there would be a paper to be signed.
Mr. Bodkin—Did he tell you that he went to the
India House and saw the form, the declaration ?
Mr. Wilkinson—l do not know that he did.
Mr. Bodkin—Did he tell you that lie saw the form of
the declaration ?

Mr. Wilkinson—l understood him that he had seen a
paper, or that his friend had told him that there was a
paper.

Mr. Bodkin—That he had seen it?
Mr. Wilkinson—l understood that he had seen it.
Mr. Bodkin—Did he tell you that that form of de-
claration satisfied him of the illegality of such a trans-
action, and that he would have nothing more to do with
iN
Mr. Wilkinson—Yes.

Mr. Bodkin—Did he ever tell you that he had ever
agreed with this party to give a sum of money for the
office in question, or entered into any treaty of that
kind ?

Mr. Wilkinson—No, he did not.
Mr. Bodkin—Now, you have said something about a
commission in the army ; did your brother tell you that
his private opinion was that such an appointment might
be sold as a commission in the army ?
Mr. Wilkinson—No ; I do not remember that he did.
Mr. Bodkin—Now, with the exception of what you
have told us, do you know from your brother of any
bargain whatever, or any treaty for this appointment ?
Mr. Wilkinson—Nothing more than what I have
stated.

Re-examined by Mr. Clarkson—Can you tell us the
name of the friend of whom you have spoken as having
put your brother on his guard ?
Mr. Wilkinson—No ; I cannot.
Mr. Clarkson—Have you never heard his name ?
Mr. Wilkinson—l may have heard his name ;my bro-
ther may have mentioned his name to me, but I cannot
remember.

Mr. Clarkson—Endeavour to recollect, and tell me
whether you are prepared to swear that you do not
know. You say that you may have heard.
Mr. Wilkinson—l should be very
sorry to mislead
you. I might mention one, two, or three names, and
not the right one ; it may have been one or two persons,
but I do not know who it was.
Mr. Clarkson—Did he mention the name of one or
twopersons! _ _

Mr. Wilkinson—l have no doubt he did ;I do not
know why he should not, but I do not remember.
Mr. Clarkson—Has not this matter interested you,
and have you not been endeavouring to recollect the
circumstance ?

Mr. Wilkinson—No, I confess I thought it exceed-
ingly immaterial as to who it was who told him that
fact.
Mr. Clarkson—However' you mean to state upon
your oath that you positively do not know who it was ?
Mr Wilkinson—l positively do not know who it was.
I might make a guess.
Mr. Clarkson—Tell me whom you guess it was.
Mr. Wilkinson—No, I will not ; that is the reason
why I will not mention it.
Mr. Clarkson—Do you believe that you recollect the
name ?

_Mr. Wilkinson—No, I do not think I do.
Mr. Clarkson—Have you any doubt that he men-
tioned his name to you ?

Mr. Wilkinson-ZI dare say he did ; I have no doubt
he did ; because we are in the habit of mentioning the
names of our friends to one another.

Mr. Clarkson—Do you mean to pledge your oath that
you do not believe you know that person ?
Mr. Wilkinson—l do not know him. I believe I
may have heard his name. I may have been told it was
one person or another. My brother has a great many
friends. I should be very happy to tell you. I cannot
have any possible reason for concealing it.
Mr. Clarkson—Do you believe that you know who it
was ?

Mr. Wilkinson—l believe that Ido not know who it
was. I might mention a person's name, and I might be
wrong.
Mr. Clarkson—Have you heard the name of that
person since the last examination!
Mr. Wilkinson—No.

Mr. Clarkson—Have you seen that person since the
last examination ?
Mr. Wilkinson—No.

Mr. Clarkson—Have you seen the person whose name
you refuse to give me, who proposed to your brother to
procure him this appointment, since the last examina-
tion
Mr. Wilkinson—No. _ _

Mr. Clarkson—Have you heard from him ?
Mr. Wilkinson—No.
Mr. Clarkson—Have you written to him ?
Mr. Wilkinson—No, I have had no ;tort of communi-
cation with him—that is the shortest way.
Mr. Clarkson (addressing the Lord :Mayor)—l have
now to apply to your lordship that Mr. Wilkinson, for
his contempt of this court in contumaciously and wilfully
refusinc, to answer this question, without any just ex-
cuse, be' committed by your lordship's Warrant for seven
days.
Mr. .Bodkin inquired whether his friend, Mr. Clark-
son, had any further evidence to offer against the de-
fendant ?

Mr. Clarkson replied he had no further evidence to
offer at present, and that he called upon the court to
order the defendant to enter into sureties to answer any
charge that might be preferred against him on the part
of the East India Company at the C entral Criminal
Court.

Mr. Bodkin then addressed the ben ch at very con-
siderable length, and submitted that hir a learned friend,
on the part of the prosecution, had not m.ade out any case
which would justify his lordshipin holdin g the defendant
to bail. The utmost that had been a ttempted to be
proved against the defendant was, that a certain party
whose name had not transpired, had offe red to procure
him an appointment for a member of his family in the
gift of the East India Company. It had. been distinctly
stated that the party who had made that offer was not a
member of the Court of Directors, or irc any way con-
cerned in the administration of the affa ire of the com-
pany, and that as soon as Mr. Normal t Wilkinson be-
came satisfied of the illegality of tra Jacking in any
appointment within the gift of the comp 'any, he at once
abandoned all mention of having anythi ug further to do