The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-28 00:00:00

,
- •
THE SUN3°3 LONDON, MONDAY EVENING 'MARCH 28, 1853.
*
i ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. the lady, it appeared, was residing at Cirencester, at an steam-boat, and we lived together in the cottage for 1 evidence at present before them did not make out the PIarCES OF SHARES.
fo
, inn, and was evidently in want of money. The defendant, about three or five weeks. It was my object to have a i fact of the marriage, and on that ground that the plain-
unt') Wbtion HOME CIRCIIIT.—KDMSTON MARCH 26. who was in London, wrote to her, stating that he residence openly situated, so that I could see every one tiff had failed to prove his case. -4.
IN BANKS, ASSURANCE, AND OTHER COM-
had been about all the morning to try to get two pounds who approached, as I was afraid of the sheriffs officers, The jury here interposed, and said this was the view
PANIES' STOCK.
(Before Mr. Baron Alderson and a Special Jury.) and send her, but had been unsuccessful. His family and the outer gates were locked, and I always kept the they took of the matter. They did not desire to give
_ _
SUN OFFICE, Six o'clock. JARRETT V. TOLLEMACHE. would do nothing for him, and he himself was penniless. keys. Elizabeth Acford was not called by my name any opinion with regard to the fact whether the marriage From the Official List.
This actibn was brought to recover a sum of money Under these circumstances, he advised her to call upon while we lived at this cottage. I don't know that she in Scotland did take place or not, but they were of
PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY EVENING,
------.
alleged to have been expended in necessaries for a person a respectable solicitor, whom he named, and advised her was called by any name, certainly not by that of Mrs. opinion that the. evidence now before them did not esta- LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 24.
TA_TTERSALL'S named Elizabeth Acford, who was represented to be the to explain to him how they were situated, and ask him Tollemache. She accompanied me once or twice for a Nish the marriage to their satisfaction.
..
wife of the defendant. to write to his mother, and he said that, if this were walk on a Sunday, which was the only day I could go Mr. Baron Alderson said the jury had come to a very JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
(THIS EVENING.) Mr. Bramwell, Q.C., and Mr. Bovell were counsel for done the fear of exposure would induce them to give him out without fear of arrest. I never introduced her to any proper conclusion, and ,upon that finding the verdict
—4,— the plaintiff ; Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. M. Chambers, some money. He advised her to act as though it was of one in Scotland as my wife, and I swear I was never would be for the defendant. Dividend Amount
Q.C., appeared for the defendant ; Mr. Wales was also her own accord, and not to say a word about his having married to her in Scotland or anywhere else. All the This case concluded the business on the Home Circuit. Name of •Company.
Annum. per of
Shar Paid. P ice.
NONORTHA MPTONSHIRE STAKES. engaged in watching the case, as it was understood, in advised her ; and he said if she did so everything would time she was with me I was in considerable difficulties, , e.
4to 1 agst Defiance. behalf of Lady Dysart, the mother of the defendant. turn out all right., He afterwards wrote a seer d let- and I believe that, by the letters I wrote to her, I was MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—WARWICK, MARCH 26. . ' £s.d.£ s. d.
7to 1 agst Hobby Horse. Mr. Bramwell, in opening the case, said that the plain- ter, in which he advised the lady to apply to the gentle- the first to put it into her head to set up the claim to be (Before Chief Justice Jervis.) Australasia........... 6k per cent. 40 0 0 40 C 0 93
British Is orthAmerican 6 . per cent. 50 0 0 , 0 u 0 s”i
7to 1 agst Dabchick. tiff, Arthur Jarrett, was a person in a humble condition
life, being the relieving officer to one portion of Lam- man he had mentioned before in his capacity of clerk to Lady Huntingtower. CREW. CON.--DOWELL V. SHELDON. Commercial of London. 61. per cent. Ice 0 0 ',ll 0 0
ofthe magistrates, and asked for al summons against him Cross-examined—l was born in 1820, and in 1842 I The plaintiff is a chemist and druggist at Birmingham, Colonial •••• •......... 31. per cent. 100 0 0 ir o o
16 to 1 agst Lady Blanche.
61. Per cent. 25 0 0 25. 0 0
Meth parish, and the defendant was the Hon. William for deserting her, and he told her to appear hostile to was a bankrupt. In 1844 I was insolvent. At the and the defendant a tavern-keeper, at Birmingham. The ionnTn. (her. Bk. f•l3 to 1 agst Tobolski (taken). Felix Lionel Tollemache, commonly called Lord Hunt- him, and say that she was compelled to take this step on time I went to Scotland the Commissioners of Taxes had action was for damages for criminal conversation with London and Cointr.s.. 6'. per cent. cent. n 0 0 220 10
00 1714
13 to 1 agst Kingston (taken). ingtower, son of the Earl of Dysart, a nobleman of very account of her being in a destitute condition. This he a claim against me, from which I was not released by plaintiffs wife. The plaintiff married a Miss Harris, Londn and Wcstminsir 61. per cent. 100 0 0 20 0 e —35
ireiand.. :11. per :cwt...
15 to 1 agst Happy Joe. ancient fa' mily and of large possessions. The action was said would compel his family to do them justice. In an- my bankruptcy. I had also incurred a debt to Israel the daughter of a broker, after cohabiting with him London
roiTi Provincial
... 61. per cent. 50 0 0 10 0 0
12brought to recover compensation for the support of a
ointntlio flllAaefks t rta 1 it•
other letter the defendant told the lady he had been at Alexander and other persons between my bankruptcy three years, and on the 24th of December last plaintiff Diiica2!:fNig 0 0 .2.. 00 0 48%
to 1 agst Alp.
lady and three children. That the children were really St. Albans, and that a person there was going to intro_ and my insolvency. I believe that the Crown can issue left home to see his relations in Leicestershire. Miss National of 1re1E;i;c1....... 41'. per)er crit: 50 0 0 22' 10 0
(186111.. pp.
ceert
.cB:B,nbts..
2250 00
00
2105 04,
00 —76 4
12 to 1 agst Postulant. the children of the defendant he believed there was not duce him to a fool who would give him 6001. for his ac- writs out of England into Scotland or Ireland. I can- Fanny Harris, a sister of the plaintiff's wife, resided
t. bs. 25 0 0 25 0 0 57
NI). Provricial of Eng. I 61. per cent. 100 0 0 35 0 0
CHESTER CUP. the slightest doubt, and he believed that the only ques- ceptance for a thousand, and he was going to give half not say without looking at my accounts whether with her as a companion ; and on the Christmas-day she our:
12 to 1 agst Trifle. lion in the cause would he, whether their mother was the money to tke person who was the means of his get. any other persons had obtained judgments against and an elder sister were taking tea, when the defendant I South Australia .7...: 161.,Pp.. et.
0 0 25 0 51
35 to 1 agst Little Jack, the wife of the defendant, and he believed he should lay ting the money, and when he obtained the balance he me. Before I went to Scotland, Elizabeth Acford had came in and asked for some cigars, and Mrs. Dowell
evidence before them which would leave no reasonable would "rig out his dearY" in the state she desired. He gone down to her friends in Devonshire. This was after asked him into the parlour, introducing him as Mr. Union of ....... 61. per cent. 210 0
WHITTLEBURY STAKES. doubt of that fact. The circumstances under which the went on to say that he was disgusted with this country, we had lived together in the way I have described. I Edwards and he stayed tea with them. A Mr. Price Union of Madrid 11., .... 7/. per cent. 504 00 0 I,g 00 0,3 to 1 agst Lady Audrey (taken). claim arose were of rather a peculiar character. It ap- and had some thoughts of going abroad and taking her don't recollect if I wrote to her to join me in Scotland, but also looked in, and cards were introduced and continued _
7to 2 agst Charley (taken). peered that about the middle of the year 1849, the with him. In another letter, the defendant having heard very probably I did. Before we went to Scotland she till four in the morning. During the evening some INSURANCE COMPANIES.
plaintiff, in his capacity of relieving officer, was called that the lady was ill, wrote to her to inform her that a went by my name, and she did the same afterwards. I familiarities were observed between the defendant
METROPOLITAN HANDICAP. upon to visit a case of a lady and three children, who doctor lived opposite the inn where she was staying, to went by the name of Tollemache in Scotland, but I don't and Mrs. Dowell by her sister, Miss Harris. At half- Dividend Amount
Name of Company. per of Paid. Price.
13 to 2 agst Contentment. were living in the parish, and whom he found in a state whom he advised her to apply immediately, as he said he know what name she went by. My man servant knew past 4, on the party rising to separate, Mrs. Dowell
Amium. Share.
I
16 to 1 agst Terpsichore. of utter destitution. By the direction of the board of was a very good man, and what was better, ‘, would that we were not married. She used to take her meals showed Mr. Price and the defendant to th door, and her ----------
14 to 1 asst Pegg-v. guardians he gave them relief, and continued to do so for stand eternal credit." at the same tablewith nie, and the servants called her two sisters went to bed ; but half an hour transniring, and. ~,,,_ 1 £ s. d. £ s. ii I

METROPOLITAN HANDICAP.
13 to 2 agst Contentment.
16 to 1 agst Terpsichore.
14 to 1 agst Peggy.
CITY AND SUBURBAN.
10 to 1 agst Jouvance.
TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS STAKES.
4.-; to 4 agst West Australian and Sittingbourne.

DERBY.
9to 1 agst West Australian.
12 to 1 agst Cineas.
12 to 1 agst Orestes.
15 to 1 agst Honeywoocl.
16 to 1 agat Reiver.

AMERICA.

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
LIVERPOOL, MONDAY, Half--past 4 p.m.
The British and North American mail steam-
ship Cambria, Captain Miller, passed Holyhead in-
ward bound to this port, at half-past two o'clock.

She would leave Boston on the 16th and Halifax
to the 18th, and will convey dates from
Canada and the United States four days later
those brought by the Humboldt at Southampton than
on Friday last. She will arrive in the Mersey in
time for her mails to leave at four o'clock on Tues-
day morning for the mid-day delivery in London,
and for crossing the Channel at Dover by that
night's mail steamer for the Continent.

Mr. Bramwell, Q.C., and Mr. Bovell were counsel for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. M. Chambers,
Q.C., appeared for the defendant ; Mr. Willes was also
engaged in watching the case, as it was understood, in
behalf of Lady Dysart, the mother of the defendant.
Mr. Bramwell, in opening the case, said that the plain-
tiff, Arthur Jarrett, was a person in a humble condition
of life, being the relieving officer to one portion of Lam-
beth parish, and the defendant was the Hon. William
Felix Lionel Tollemache, commonly called Lord Hunt-
ingtower' son of the Earl of Dysart, a nobleman of very
ancient family and of large possessions. The action was
brought to recover compensation for the support of a
lady and three children. That the children were really
the children of the defendant he believed there was not
the slightest doubt, and he believed that the only ques-
tion in the cause would be, whether their mother was
the wife of the defendant, and he believed he should lay
evidence before them which would leave no reasonable
doubt of that fact. The circumstances under which the
claim arose were of rather a peculiar character. It ap-
peared that about the middle of the year 1849, the
plaintiff, in his capacity of relieving officer, was called
upon to visit a case of a lady and three children, who
were living in the parish, and whom he found in a state
of utter destitution. By the direction of the board of
guardians he gave them relief, and continued to do so for
a period of nine months, and it appeared that then, the
case of the lady having been investigated, some persons
interfered in her behalf, and a lodging of some kind
was provided for her and her children. Soon after-
wards, however, she again became reduced to distress,
and a second time applied to the plaintiff; who was so
impressed, from the information he had obtained, with
the hardship-of the case, and struck by the misery
and destitution in -which she was left by the defen-
dant, that; to avoid the necessity 'of sending her to
the union workhouse, which was the only alternative,
he resOlved to take the lady and • her children into
his own house and provide them there with such neces-
saries as they. required, in the hope that the defendant,
who he had no reason to doubt was the husband of the
lady, would one day do her justice, and at all events re-
pay him the amount he expended for the support of his
wife and children. As he had ,before said, there was no
doubt whatever that the children were the 'Children of
..
Lord Huntingtower, and he would now state the circum-
stances under. which he and their mother .ecame con-
nected, and the evidence by which he should .endeavour
to establish the fact of a contract of marriage having
been made between them, according to the forms of the
Scotch law.• The name of the lady was Elizabeth Apford,.
and she was 'the daughter of a respectable farmer in De-
vonshire ; and it appeared that the defendant upon see-
ing her expressed a violent passion for her. He asked
the consent of his mother, the Countess of Dysart, to
their union, and upon her refusal to grant it, his case on
the part of the plaintiff must be, that the defendant took
the lady to Scotland, and there married her. The jury
were perhaps aware that by the law of that country a
marriage was a much more simple proceeding than it was
in this country, and indeed almost any ceremony would
amount there to what was termed a contract of mar-
riage, which was perfectly binding upon both parties,
and it was a very strange thing that their cautious
neighbours were satisfied with much less solemnity in a
proceeding of this important character than was required
in the disposal of any goods er.chattels of the most
trifling amount. He should be able to show them, there-
fore, that some sort of ceremony was performed, and he
was also in a condition to prove that the defendant him-
self had stated that what took place in Scotland was the
more binding, because he was the son of a Scotch peer.
This marriage occurred in 1844 ; and it appeared that
the parties lived together as man and wife until 1848,
and during that period, three children, all girls, were
born. During all this time they lived together as man
and wife, and passed by the same name ; but at the pe-
riod he had mentioned, whether the defendant's passion
had cooled, or that the lady had become older, or from
some other cause of which he was ignorant, the defendant
abruptly broke off the connection, and left his wife and
ohildren to be reduced to a state of utter destitution, and
ever since, with one exception, which was almost too
paltry to be mentioned, he had never afforded them the
slightest assistance. The plaintiff, under these circum-
stances, was compelled to bring the present action, and
he said that when the jury had heard the evidence he
should lay before them, he believed they would entertain
no doubt that the lady in question was really the wife of
the defendant, and that he was liable to the plaintiff for
the expense he had incurred in supporting her and her
children.

The following witnesses were then examined :
Mr. A. Jarrett deposed that he was the relieving offi-
cer for one of the districts of Lambeth parish, and the
plaintiff in the present action. In July, 1849, his at-
tention was called to the case of a lady, who was called
Mrs. Tollemache, and her three children. He found
them occupying one room in a house in Princess-square,
and in very great distress and destitution. Witness re-
lieved them. In September, 1850, he was again called
upon fo see the same lady and her children, and found
them in the same state. Upon this occasion, from in-
formation he had received, he was induced to take the
lady and her children into his own house, where they
remained from the 19th September, 1850, to the Ist of.
April, 1852, and during that period he expended alto-
gether for their support the sum of 1981.
By Sergeant Shee —I 112 d no communication with
Lord Huntingtower's solicitor before I took the lady into
my house. The parish solicitor, I believe, did apply to
him, and I heard that an answer was received, to the
effect that the woman was not the wife of Lord Hunt-
ingtower.

-Emma Alfyatt deposed that she went into the service
of the defendant and the lady in question in 1845. At
that time they lived in the Wandsworth-road ; they were
called Mr, and Mrs. Tollemache, and it was always un-
derstood that they were man and wife. Witness re-
mained with Mrs. Tollemache until 1849, when she left
her because she was unable to pay her her wages any
longer. In February, 1848, the defendant sent her and
her mistress into Monmouthshire, to a place called Blue
Brown House, and the defendant used-to come there to
meet the lady, and when he was absent they continually
corresponded together. In September, 1848, witness
and her mistress returned to London, and went to lodge
at a Miss Pottle's, in Kennington-lane, and in October
of that year a quarrel took place between the defendant
and her mistress, and they never lived together after-
wards. The defendant, during the time she lived with
him, frequently changed his name, but her mistress al-
ways went by the same name that he did, and they al-
ways lived together as man and wife. The first child
was born in September, 1845, the second in November,
1846, and the third in January, 1843. The defendant
always appeared to be very kind to the children, and the
oldest used to call him papa. When they lived in Ken-
ington-lane, the defendant and his lady passed as Mr.
and Mrs. Langford. They travelled about to a great
many places, and assumed many different names.
The defendant was frequently very short of cash, and
1 at one place a distress was put in, and they were turned
out of doors. Upon one occasion, when they were
living at Besley, something was said by the landlady,
which came to the knowledge of the defendant, and
he spoke to her upon the subject, and upon her saying
that it had been stated that he was going to separate
from her mistress, he told her to make herself contented,
for that her mistress was his wife, and if he married an-
other woman she could indict him for bigamy. This
was in 1846. The defendant at the same time said to
her that he had asked his mother's consent to marry,
but could not get it, and therefore he took her to Scot-
land, and as his father was a Scotch peer, it made the
engagement more binding. Upon another occasion she
went into her mistress's room and found her crying, and
the defendant said to her, " Here is your mistress blub-
bering because I have burned some letters." There were
some fragments of burnt letters in the grate at the time.
In October, 1848, when they were living in Kennington-
lane, the defendant came to the house one Sunday, and
there was a violent struggle between him and her mis-
tress, because he wanted, as she understood, to go into a
room to get some letters and destroy them. He did not
succeed in getting into the room, and after the scuffle
was over they went down stairs, and the defendant said
in the presence of the landlady that her mistress was not
his wife. The landlady asked him if she was not his
wife, why he had brought her into her house ? Her mis-
tress said that she was his wife, upon which the defendant
said, " If you had a thousand pounds you might gain
your rights, but where is it to come from ? My mother
will spend a fortune or thousands against it." This took
place on a Sunday, and the defendant created so much
disturbance that Miss Pottle threatened to send for the
police. During the scuffle, her mistress's thumb was
sprained by the defendant. When the landlady threat-
ened to call in the police, the defendant went away, and
he never came to the house again.
A number of letter were then put in, which had been
written by the defendant to Elizabeth Acford, during
the period of intercourse. They were all without date,
and merely signed " H." The contents were unimpor-
tant as regarded the issue in dispute, but some portions
of them created a good deal of amusement. In all the
letters he addressed the lady as "my dearest Lizzy." In
one of the letters the defendant requested the lady not to
write again to Devonshire-place, and entreated her to
keep her own counsel, and he said if she did, everything
yet would " turn up trumps." In another letter he pro-
mised to send her 21., and as she appeared to have inti-
mated to him previously that the butcher she was deal-
ing with had not yet objected to continue giving credit,
lie advised her to order in another large joint up on the
strength of it, as they did not knowwhet! he might
change his mind. Re likewise said that she could not
be aware of the price of feeding bottles for children, or
she would not have asked him to get one ; and he added
that a common soda water bottle was the very best
thing for the purpose, with a piece of leather put
the neck, for the child to suck through. In a third letterover
the defendant told the lady lie had
se-
coed " dear ' letter ust received her , and asked her to come to him
at Gravesend, with directions how she could do so in
a manner to escape observation. He then went on
to say that he had hired a cot for the baby, for which he
pay half-a-crowna week. Re then informed her
was to
that the son of his landlady had been very ill the day be-
fore in consequence of his having eaten two raw carrots,
and he had administered calomel to him, and also a tre-
mendous dose of castor oil, which had made him all right.
He likewise, in his letter, ordered her not to forget the
pots and kettles. In a fourth letter. t.he,,defendant ex-
pressed his sorrow at being absent from his dearest love."
He concluded thus :—" I am in verY,,lowThsepinriextsi tawndo
am truly wretched. I have no cigars.
1 letters were those which were much relied on in support
i of the plaintiff's case. At the time they were written

Mrs. Sophia Charge deposed that in 1845 she was en-
gaged in making a dress for the lady who was called
Mrs. Tollemache when she resided in the Wandsworth-
road. She saw the defendant there, and they lived as
man and wife. About the time the first child was born
the defendant appeared very anxious that it should be a
boy, and said he should be disappointed if it was not, as
a great deal depended upon it, and he should make them
all handsome presents. She was present upon one oc-
casion when Mr. and Mrs. Tollemache were looking at
a book containing the likenesses of Court beauties, and,
addressing Mrs. Tollemache, said, " You would have a
title too if you had your rights."
Miss Pottle deposed that she resided at Coburg-place,
Kennington-lane. In 1847, the defendant engaged
apartments in her house. Re said that his name was
Langford, and he introduced the lady in question as his
wife. They only stayed in her house a few weeks on
this occasion, but came a second time in September,
1848, and remained until the end of that year. This
time the lady came first, and one Sunday the defendant
came, and there was a great disturbance, and when she
went upstairs she found the panel of the bed-room door
broken in. Witness inquired what was the matter, and
Mrs. Langford said that her husband wanted to take
away letters and papers relating to their marriage. The
defendant then said he wished to speak to witness, and
she took him into the parlour, and the lady followed
them. The defendant then said that the lady was not
his wife. She immediately replied that she was. The
defendant then said that if she had a thousand pounds
she might claim her rights, but where was the money to
come from ?

The certificates of the registration of the births of the
children were then put in. They were all described as
being the children of William Felix Lionel Tollemache
and Elizabeth Tollemache, formerly Acford, and one of
the instructions for the registry was signed by the de-
fendant himself.

This closed the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Sergeant Shee submitted that there was not suffi-
cient evidence to go to the jury.

Baron Alderson said he could not decide that there
was no evidence, and at all events he should not stop
the case.

Sergeant Shee accordingly addressed the jury. He
said he appeared before them as counsel for Lord
Huntingtower, the son of the Earl of Dysart, a noble-
man undoubtedly of large possessions ; but they
must have collected from the evidence before them
that notwithstanding the rank and fortune of his
family, the defendant during the whole of these trans-
actions was in a position of extreme distress and mi-
sery, with little or no means to support his own rank, or
to support a wife, or even a person in the only position
in which he recognised the unfortunate woman on whose
behalf the complaint was now made. He should not
attempt to say a word in favour of the defendant on the
score of morality. There was no doubt that he had
sinned, and that the woman in question had also sinned ;
that they were both equally culpable, and that the con-
sequences of sin had followed their transgression. There
could also be no doubt that this person had a claim upon
the generosity and the justice of the defendant, and also
upon his family to that extent for some reasonable main-
tenance, and he believed that if she had considered what
was due to her real position, and had made a proper
application, it would have been attended to, and some
reasonable allowance would have been made her, and
the defendant in that respect would have made her all
the reparation in his power. When, however, acting no
doubt under the advice of others, she came forward to
set up a claim of this description, the defendant felt that
not only in justice to himself, but also to the lady whom
he had since married, and by whom he had issue, he had
no alternative but to resist such a claim, and state before
the world what were the real circumstances of the con-
nection between him and this person, and to show that
there was not the slightest foundation for the claim she
Pet up to be his wife. He would put Lord Huntingtower
into the witness-box, and he would tell them that he was
now a married man, and the jury could now judge of the
extreme gravity of the cause which they had to decide.
Lord Huntingtower would pledge his oath that nothing
like a ceremony of marriage ever took place between
him and the female in question ; and certainly if he was
not speaking the truth his conduct had been such as
would disgrace him for ever in the eyes of the world.
Since his intercourse with Elizabeth Acford had ceased,
he had married the daughter of an honourable baronet
of family and rank nearly equal to his own, by whom he
had issue ; and the jury would consider whether it was
likely he would have dared to take such a step if there
had been any foundation for the assertion of a previous
marriage. The learned sergeant then referred to the
nature of the claim, and said that although he did not
desire to cast any imputation upon the plaintiff, he could
not help calling to the attention of the jury the fact that, in
1849, when the application for relief was first made to
him, and inquiries instituted on the subject, he was dis-
tinctly told that Lord Huntingtower denied in the most
positive terms that the lady in question had any claim
upon him as his wife, and yet, after this, he chose to
take her and her children into his house, and he had no-
body to thank for the expense he had incurred but him-
self. The only effect of this proceeding was to endeavour
to extort money unfairly and improperly from the pocket
of Lord Huntingtower ; and he considered, therefore,
that the plaintiff was disentitled to that consideration
which, otherwise, on the score of humanity, he would
have deserved at their hands. The only question, in the
cause, however, was, whether it had been made out to
the satisfaction of the jury that any marriage ceremony
had been performed in Scotland ; and he submitted to
them that there was not a single tittle of evidence to
make out that fact. He was not prepared to justify the
conduct of Lord Huntingtower up to the time when
he came forward and avowed his shame, and de-
clared to the world that the lady whom he had per-
mitted to use his name for so long was not his wife,
but his concubine. If he had seduced her, he was bound
by every tie of religion and duty to provide for her, but
he was not bound to make her his wife, and there was
nothing whatever in the case to show that he ever had
such an intention. Lord Huntingtower was a man evi-
dently not possessed of very much sense—he had no
doubt said and written very foolish things, but he chal-
lenged the jury to point out any portion of the evidence
which would show anything like an admission en his part
that he had been married to this woman. Was there
any evidence to justify the jury in coming to a conclu-
sion the effect of which would be to bastardise the issue
he had by the lady to whom he was new married, and
which were now acknowledged as legitimate ? With re-
gard to the letters that had been put in, it appeared to
him they were utterly unimportant, and that they rather
tended to negative the fact of a marriage than to support
it, for in no single letter did the defendar ever address the
lady as his wife, and they were all such as would be writ-
ten by a man to a mistress, rather than by a husband to
a wife. The real nature of the connection between these
parties he should show to be this. In 1843 the defen-
dant, who was at that time living at Bath with his mo-
ther, had a quarrel with her, and left her house, and
took a cottage in the neighbourhood, and Elizabeth
Acford, who was a person in a very humble condition
of life, came to live with him as a cook, and an improper
intimacy took place between them for many months be-
fore the journey to Scotland, when the marriage was
represented to have taken place. He should show them
that the only motive the defendant had for going to
Scotland was that he was deeply involved in debt and
difficulties, and had writs out against him in every
county in England, and the lady in question accom-
panied him there as his concubine, but he had never the
slightest intention of making her his wife. He proposed
to put Lord Huntingtower into the box as a witness.
He was fully aware of his position, and that he would
have to admit the misconduct of his youth ; but he would
make the avowal not only from a sense of duty to him-
self in the position in which he was placed by this pro-
ceeding, but he would also do so because he felt it was
due to the lady whom he had made his wife, and by
whom he had children, to state distinctly to the world
that there was no foundation for the claims set up by
this woman to be his wife, and that he had never before
gone through the ceremony of marriage either in Scot-
land, England, or anywhere else.
Lord Huntingtower was then called as a witness. He
said—l am the defendant in this action. I am married,
and there is issue by the marriage. I was married in
September, 1851, to Catherine Camilla Elizabeth Burke,
the daughter of Sir Joseph Burke. I am now thirty-
two years old. In 1843, my mother, Lady Dysart, lived
at Bath, and I took a cottage about two miles from
Bath. I engaged Elizabeth A cford and her sister as my
servants, the former as cook and the latter as parlour-
maid and housemaid. They came to live with me as
my servants in December 1843, and soon afterwards an
improper intercourse took place between me and Eliza-
beth Acford. I left Bath in 1844, and went to the
Bridge-house Hotel, in London. The reason I left that
neighbourhood was because I understood that writs of
execution against me werein the hands of the sheriff of
Somersetshire. I sent for Elizabeth Acford, and she
joined me in London, and we afterwards went together
to a number of places. I assumed the name of
M'Naghten, and she passed as my wife. I think it was
in June, 1844, that I went to Edinburgh. I went there
to get out of the way of the sheriffs officers, and I did
BS:
nbeyd tfhore
debt.advice I
of my
a cottage ea
y solicitor, to avoid
Edinburgh, an
voidbeingimprid
I sent for Elizabeth Acford, and she came to me by the

steam-boat, and we lived together in the cottage for
about three or five weeks. It was my object to have a
residence openly situated, so that I could see every one
who approached, as I was afraid of the sheriff's officers,
and the outer gates were locked, and I always kept the
keys. Elizabeth Acford was not called by my name
while we lived at this cottage. I don't know that she
was called by any name, certainly not by that of Mrs.
Tollemache. She accompanied me once or twice for a
walk on a Sunday, which was the only day I could go
out without fear of arrest. I never introduced her to any
one in Scotland as my wife, and I swear I was never
married to her in Scotland or anywhere else. All the
time she was with me I was in considerable difficulties,
and I believe that, by the letters I wrote to her, I was
the first to put it into her head to set up the claim to be
Lady Huntingtower.
Cross-examined—l was born in 1820, and in 1842 I
was a bankrupt. In 1844 I was insolvent. At the
time I went to Scotland the Commissioners of Taxes had
a claim against me, from which I was not released by
my bankruptcy. I had also incurred a debt to Israel
Alexander and other persons between my bankruptcy
and my insolvency. I believe that the Crown can issue
writs out of England into Scotland or Ireland. I can-
not say, without looking at my accounts whether
any other persons had obtained judgments against
me. Before I went to Scotland, Elizabeth Acford had
gone down to her friends in Devonshire. This was after
we had lived together in the way I have described. I
don't recollect if I wrote to her to join me in Scotland, but
very probably I did. Before we went to Scotland she
went by my name, and she did the same afterwards. I
went by the name of Tollemache in Scotland, but I don't
know what name she went by. My man servant knew
that we were not married. She used to take her meals
at the same table with me, and the servants called her
" ma'am." I have spoken of her as Mrs. Tollemoche,
but never as my wife. The reason was, that she was not
my wife. I could never have obtained any respectable
apartments if she had not passed as my wife. The rea-
son I left Scotland was because I was informed that at
the suit of the Crown a sheriff's officer wasjustified in
breaking an outer door, and the moment I heard it I
bolted, and spent all one miserable day on. the side of
Holyroed Hill, and then started' for England. I remem-
ber burning letters on several occasions, and it is very
probable that on some occasions Elizabeth Acford cried.
On the day the scuffle took place in Kennington-lane, I
went to see her, and observed her in the act of putting
two letters in her pocket; and as I recognised the hand-
writing of the address, and knew from whom they came,
I insisted upon having them, and took the letters away
from her by force. Ido not know that I hurt her when
I did so. The letters I took from her are in court. I
wanteol afterwards to go into her room to see if there was
anything there belonging to me, and she prevented me
from doing so. Up to the time of this occurrence I al-
lowed he a sovereign a week, but since then I have not
giv-n her any money. The statement with regard to the
thousand pounds is virtually true, but what I really said
was that if she had a thousand pounds she would no
doubt be able to annoy me a great deal; I mean in the
way she is doing to-day. I also said to her at the
same time, that although I was myself without
means, my family would assist me in repudiating the
claim she was setting up solely to extort money. There
is no doubt that all she wants is money. I have not
given her any since she has set up the claim to be my
wife. I have offered to take the children and bring them
up, and I am ready to make an allowance to her as
Elizabeth Acford, but not as my wife. I never told the
witness Alfyatt that she was my wife. lam not in the
habit of talking to my servants. lam sure I never said
to her that if I married again I might be committed for
bigamy. She must be mistaken.
Mr. Bramwell—Did you never say to her that, as
your father was a Scotch peer, it would make the cere-
mony in Scotland more binding ?—Lord Huntingtower
—I never said anything of the sort. It is a lie.
Cross-examination continued—l have no recollection
of saying that if the lady had her rights she would have
a title too.

Mr. Bramwell—l believe you had a very strong feel-
ing for this lady ?—Yes, I certainly had.
Mr. Bramwell---Why did you give her up ?—Lord
Huntingtower—ls this question relevant ? Am I obliged
to answer it ?

Mr. Bramwell—Was it at your mother, Lady Dysart's
request, that you gave her up ?—Lord luntingtower
I gave her up for several reasons. I consider that our
connection really terminated in January, 1848.
Cross-examination continued—l am now in the receipt
of an allowance from my family. It is not given to me
upon the condition that I have no further connection
with this woman. The allowance may be stopped at any
moment.

The plaintiff is a chemist and druggist at Birmingham,
and the defendant a tavern-keeper, at Birmingham. The
action was for damages for criminal conversation with
plaintiff's wife. The plaintiff married a Miss Harris,
the daughter of a broker, after cohabiting with him
three years, and on the 24th of December last plaintiff
left home to see his relations in Leicestershire. Miss
Fanny Harris, a sister of the plaintiff's wife, resided
with her as a companion ; and on the Christmas-day she
and an elder sister were taking tea, when the defendant
came in and asked for some cigars, and Mrs. Dowell
asked him into the parlour, introducing him as Mr.
Edwards, and he stayed tea with them. A Mr. Price
also looked in, and cards were introduced and continued
till four in the morning. During the evening some
familiarities were observed between the defendant
and Mrs. Dowell by her sister, Miss Harris. At half-
past 4, on the party rising to separate, Mrs. Dowell
showed Mr. Price and the defendant to the door, and her
two sisters went to bed ; but half an hour transpiring, and.
she not following, Miss Fanny Harris, who was nearly
undressed, crept down stairs about half way, when hear-
ing a kind of suppressed struggling in the parlour, she
went further down until she could see into the apart-
ment. From this place she peeped cautiously, and dis-
tinctly saw an act committed, which left no doubt of the
criminal nature of the interview. After waiting four or
five minutes, she called out, "Oh, Mr. Edwards, what-
ever are you doing, and Mr. Dowell so far away from
home ?" Defendant replied, "Go on ; Mrs. Dowell is
going to bed directly." Plaintiff's wife shortly after-
wards went to bed with her sisters, but before doing so
showed the defendant to Mr. Dowell's room, where he
slept all night, and breakfasted the next morning with
them. Miss Harris, with a view of preserving peace, did
not mention the Circumstance to the plaintiff when he
came home ; but on the following Thursday the defend.
ant's wife ealled at the plaintiff's shop and complained of
him Keeping her husband out so late on the night in
question, when the whole affair came out.
Evidence was given to show that the plaintiff had
been living with his wife up to the time of the com-
mencement of the assizes, and that he also kept one
Lizzy Lloyd.
Miss Fanny Harris detailed the events of Christmas
night. They all breakfasted with defendant on the
following morning. Made no allusion to what had
Occurred the night before, but merely said she hoped he
had spent a pleasant night.
Mr. Macaulay (defendant's counsel)—Can you tell me,
Miss Fanny, why you did not stop what you saw going
on in the parlour ?
Witness—How could I stop it ?
His Lordship—To be sure you could have stopped it.
If you had been a modest woman you would have
rushed into the room and stopped it, or else gone into
bhe street and shouted " Murder." (A laugh.) His
lordship remarked upon the discreditable conduct of the
several parties, and the jury found a verdict for the,
plaintiff—Damages, One Farthing.

SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.

CUSTOM-HOUSE-MARCH 26.

E(NTERED INWARDS.—The City of Boulogne, from Bou-
logne ; Ane Catharina, Norden ; Sweelingen, Amsterdam ;
Nidilvi, Dram ; Seine, Boulogne ; Margaretha, Seville ;
Catharina Elizabeth, Cuxhaven ; Laurence, Mauritius ;
Familien, Skien ; Penelope, do. ; Echo, Lauvrig ; Twee
Zusters, Worcum ; Sophia Margaret, Galatz ; Isabella,
Figueira ; Cygnet, Berbice ; Soho, Havre ; Panther, Os-
tend ; Flecha, Ghent ; Eclipse, Marans ; Graf von Bulow,
Alexandria ; Esperance, Lokken ; Enmore, Odessa; Nelson,
Charente.

Albion .. ... £ s. d. £ s. d.
...• • • 3/. 10s. 500 0 0 5
Alliance Brit. end For. 71.115. tid.bs. 100 0 0 11 0 0 90
0 o 25%
Ditto Marine ... .... 61. p.c.& bs. 100 0 0 25 0 0 55
Anchor •.. . • . 6 per cent. 5 0 0 1 0 0 -
Atlas
Argus Life ...... ..... 41. per cent. 100 8 0 16 0 0
British Commercial .. 7s. 6d. 50 0 0 5a 0 7
Clericl.Med.& Gen. Life ipr et. & bs. 100 0 0 10 0 0 2034
41. 100 0 0 10 0 0 121
Crown ............., 14s. 50 0 0 b 0 0 171
Eagle .
Equity and Law...... 434 per cent. 100 0 0 5 0 0 5%
European Life...... ... 15s. 20 0 0 All paid. 20
Genera 1............. - 5 0 0
Globe 6l. per cent. Stock. II 5%150
(guardian ............ 5/. per cent 100 0 0 45 '1!) 0 61%
Imperial Fire......... 121. per cent. 500 0 0 50 0 0 310
Imperial Life
Indemnity Marine.... le. sh. & l.s. 100 0 0 20 0 0 58
Law Fire 2s & 2s. bs. 100 0 0 210 0 4 4
Law Life..... ........ - 100 0010 0 0 50
Legal and General Life - 50 0 0 20 0 5%
London Fire
London ship. lO3. & bs. 25 0 0 12 10 0 28%
Marine......... •.. . . 15s.per share 100 0 0 IS 0 0 22
Med.lnvlid& Gen. Life 41 s. per et. 50 0 0 2 0 0 3
Minerva
Monarch -.-•- • . - - 5 0 0 1. 0 0 2Cs.
Natio.tal Loan Fund 5l. per cent. 20 0 0 210 0 2%
Palladium Life.
Pelican ............
- - - 45
- - - 173
Professional Life 5l. per cent. 6 5 0 010 0 %
Pr.vlcteut Lite
Rock Life,. . - - ss. 53 0 010 0 8%
Royal Exchange ....• • 61. p.c Z. & bs. Stock. all 236
, I
Sun Eire
• • 61. 10s. -
Ditto Life ... .. 11. 6s. - If ---
United Kingom ....5%
Un'versal Life .
Ve mr.a Life - ~.. • • 5/. per cent. - 412 6 b%
BRIDGES.
Dividend Amount
Name of Company, per of Paid. Price.
Annum. Share.
X s. d. £ s. d.
Hungerford -
____ _ 12
Southm ark . . - 100 0 0 - -
Ditto New 0f734 p.c. 70s. per cent. 50 0 0 - 16
Waterloo .. , ....... • - 100 0 0 -3%
Ditto Old Ann, 0181. 2/. Bs. Od. - 60 0 0 26
Ditto Nw ditto of 7/. 2/. ?s. Od. - 40 0 0 12%
Vauxhall.. .. ..Av. 2!. 70 10 3 - 21

WATER-WORKS.
Dividend Amount
Name of Company. i pe; of Paid. Price.
Annum. Share.
£ s. d. £ s. d.
East London
Grand Junction .... • • , 4L per cnt. 50 0 0 69
Kent—. • • . • • • • • • • • • I 41. per cal:. 100 0 0 8434
Lambeth • • .. • . • • • •
New River Company 21.10'. tO
Southwark &Vauxhall , Si. per cnt. 100 0 0 90
% est Middlesex • . • • •. 61.05. pr cnt. 110

ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING.—The Pauline, for
Rouen ; City of Boulogne, Boulogne ; Albion, do. ; Diana,
Melbourne ; Alerte, Hamburgh ; Dieu le Protege, Havre ;
Panther, Ostend ; Soho, Havre ; E'e:.nor, San Francisco ;
Flecha, Ghent ; Attwood, Prince Edward's Island, Mira-
michi, and Pictou ; La Bonne Mere, Barcelona.
CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH CARGO.—The Southampton,
for New York ; Gezina, Lubeck ; Harpley, Port Pb ilip ;
Caroline, Cherbourg Princesßoyal, third clearance,
Miramichi, St. John's, New Brunswick ; Louvre and
Petty, Rio Janeiro ; Samuel Barnet, Rouen ; Pauline,
do. ; Esperance, do. ; Ladybird, Geelong, Melbourne, and
Port Philip ; Bush, Antigua ; Virginia, Adelaide ; Eu,
Melbourne and Geelong ; Nile, Cape of Good Rope •
Happet, Port Philip ; Diana, Amsterdam ; Lord John
Russell, Harlingen • Albion, Boulogne ; City of Rotterdam,
Dunkirk ; Baron Osy, Antwerp ; Earl of Auckland, Rot-
terdam ; Sea Witch, Shanghai ; Batavier, Rotterdam.

LIVERPOOL, March 26.—The Liverpool, Kearney, ar-
rived from New York, experienced a hurricane on 10th
March, in lat. 49 N., long. 20 W., from S.E. to N.E.,
which lasted twenty hours.—The Antilla, arrived from
New York, was struck by a heavy ma on the sth inst., in
lat. 45, long. 37, which stove in bulwarks, rails, stanchions,
&c.—The James Wright, arrived to-day from New Orleans,
on the 10th inst., in lat. 48 N., long. 28 W., experienced a
heavy gale from the S.E., shipped a quantity of water in
the second cabin and on deck, and had jib split.
SKAGEN, March 16.—The Flora, of Fanoe, from Hartle-
pool to Randers, was in contact with a brig off the Skaw,
14th March ; lost her bowsprit, had her bows stove, and
consequently went on shore on the Skaw Reef, and lies
with water above her deck ; crew saved.
BRIDLINGTON, March 24.—The Robert and Betsy, from.
Hartlepool to Lynn, which was run ashore to the north-
ward of this place yesterday, has been hove off, after
lightening, and broughtinto the harbour.

ST. MICHAEL'S, 31-arch 8.- -The Cassandra was lost in a
gale near Terceira, Feb. 18.

VESSELS SPOKEN WITH.

The Constellation, Liverpool to New York, Ist March,
lat. 42 N., long. 58 W.

The Sailas, -Newport to Sierra Leone, 9th March, lat.
10 W.
The Rosins, standing S.S.W., 25th Feb., lat. 40 long.
59 W.

SIR ROBERT PEEL.—Mr. Miall, in his "Parliamentary
Notes," thus remarks on the appearance of Sir Robert
Peel as an opponent of the Jewish Disabilities Bill :
Fashionably dressed—we might almost say rakishly—
handsome and well moustashed, with- a good voice, a
self-possession, derived from the consciousness of his
father's , fame, and an earnest elocution, he said many
things worth hearing—but •ne could not but feel how
odd it was that the religion of the country should be
committed to such an advocate.

DEATH FROM STARVATION.—On the morning of Fri-
day last, a poor woman, in the last stage of destitution,
nearly naked, and without shoes and stockings, was found
in the stable belonging to an unoccupied house on Fea-
therstone-common, near the railway station. She had
slept on some loose straw, and had nothing but a stone
for her pillow. She said her name was Tinker, and it
has since transpired that she has until recently been in
tolerable circumstances. The poor creature was almost
starved, and only lived about three hours after being
found. A coroner's inquest has since been held on view
of the body, and a verdict given in accordance with the
evidence.—Doncaster Gazette.
SKILFUL DRIVING BY A LADY.—Last week Miss
Needham, of Rotherham was driving on the Wickersley-
road, near the Broom toll bar, accompanied by a little
boy, four years old, when her horse took fright and gal-
loped to Rotherham at full speed, never stopping till he
reached the top of Bridge-gate. Throughout his mad
career, supposed to have been at the rate of thirty miles
an hour, Miss Needham maintained her self-possession,
and managed to guide him so as to avoid all the vehicles
and other obstructions of the road, furnishing a remark-
able instance of female courage and dexterity.---Sheffield
Independent. _ _

DOCKS.
Dividend Amount
Name of Company. per of Paid. Price.
Annum. Share.
Commercial .. £ s. d. £ s. d.
........ 41. pr cent. Stock.
East and West India.. 6541. pr cent. Stock.
East C0untry........., 20s. per sli. 100 0 0
London ... • .•• • • • 5l. pr cent. Stock. 128
Ditto 80nd5........ 41. per cent.
St. Katharine ........ 4 per cent. Stock.
Sluthampton ........ 1/. per cent. 50 0 0 50 0 0
Victoria .. •• ........ - 2 0 0

CANALS.
I •
W, Dividena
mes of . ,Dividend ....,...,_ Names of ~_ _,_,...
Companies. M per ''''''-- Companies. . .1---. `Price.
.. Annum.
. Annum. .
- _
X . X
Ashtnet. Oldh v. 8 7,.. p. ct. 140 Macclesfield. loi 21. 10s. 50
Barnsley.. • • 160 ; Neatk •• —• • lOC 16/.
lirknk&Abrg 150 51. ,32% Oxford.. •• • • 10( 13,. 132
Birmingham 40 4i. 105 k Peak Forest. 70 Si. 18a. 71.
Cove atry.. • • 1001 251. Regent's .... Ks 11_ Os. 163¢
Derby ••• •• 100' 6/. 63 Rochdale.... g 5 21. 42
Ell4rure&Chs 69,`2% p. et. 353¢ Smrset Coal 150
GrandJunctn 100'31. pr. ct. 68 Do.LkFdSt 12
Do., 6 pr. Ct. 10 6L ix. et. Stfrrd &Worc 140 281. 405
Grand Surrey 100; 2/. 103. Shrewsbury.. 125
Grand Union 100 11.10 s. 24 Stourbridge.. 145 201. 290
Kennt& Avn 39 Ss. Od. 7 Severn and?
2/. Os. 24
Lancaster . 100 Wye Rail. t 2...
Leeds& Livrp 100 251. 5.50 Warwick&l 41. 40
Leicester.... 100; 51. 66 Birming. 5 10e
Leicatr&Nth 83! 41. . 44% Warwick& ) , 28
Loughboregh 1421 701. b.lO Naomi.. i .06 3'.
Monmouthsh 1001 Worcstr &
is Si.
Mntgmerysh 100; —.—
Birming.l
MeltnMwbry 100 -- Wilts & Brks —10 s. Od. 7

GAS-LIGHT AND COKE COMPANIES.
Dividend Amount
Name of Company. per of Paid. Price.
Annum. Share.
--__-- ..--__
£ s. d. 4 s. d.
British •• •-•• •• •• •• ••
Ditto Provincial.... 11. Bs. 20 0 0 20 0 0 23
Brighton •• •• •• •• •• .. a 20 0 0 20 0 0 16
City of London .. •• •• 6s. 100 0 0 150 0 0 125
Continental (3d Cap.)... 41. 75 0 0 43 10 0 67U
Equitable.. •• .• •• •• •• 501. 50 0 0 50 0 0 27
Great Centray.... •• • 10 pe.r cent. 10 0 0 10 0 0 144
Imperial .. •• ........ 31.4: Donna. 50 0 0 50 0 0 8314
Independent .......•• 61. 40 0 0 40 0 0 46
London .... •• •... •• _. 50 0 0 50 0 0
Do., Peri. Preference Q. per cent. 25 0 0 25 0 0 24%
p,wanix
........, .... 341. pe.
r cent., 50 0 0 49 0 0 26%
51 Rstcliff •• •• • .... •• . 100 0 0 90 0 0
United General •• •• •• 1/. 50 0 0 50 0 0 19%
Westmin.sterChartered 51. tier cent. I 50 0
51. per cent. '5O 0 0 10 0 0 7%
50 0 0 39
Ditto. New • • • • • • • •

DEATH OF MR. H. STEBBING.—We regret to an-
nounce the death of Mr. Henry Stebbing, the celebrated
trainer, of Hambledon, which took place on Sunday
last, 20th instant, only nine days after that of his wife.
Mr. Stebbing, who suffered, we believe, from disease of
the heart and liver, has left an only daughter, about ten
years of age. His loss will be severely felt by the gen-
tlemen for whom he trained, who have not yet, we un-
derstand, completed their arrangements for the future.
The deceased and his wife were much respected in the
neighbourhood of Hambledon, especially by the poor.
Mr. Stebbing, in addition to the training, kept a large
establishment, and was the proprietor of Flatcatcher,
and a great number of brood mares. By his death
the following nominations are void :-1853: Pickatree
for the Derby ; Askham Lass 'and Lady Yernon for the
Oaks ; Prince. George, Gammon, Ptolemy, and colt by
Muley Moloch out of Lady Harriet, for the Great North
and South of England Biennial Stakes ; filly by Assault
out of Newton Lass, for the Lancashire Oaks at Liver-
pool ; King David for the Liverpool St. Leger, and c by
Muley Moloch out of Disagreeable for the Robin Hood
Stakes at Nottingham. 1854—Gammon, Prince George,
Ptolemy, and the colts b 1 Muley Moloch out of New-
ton Lass and Lady Harriet, for the Derby ; Gammon,
Ptolemy, Prince George, and the Lady Harriet and
Newton Lass colts for the Great Yorkshire ; Gammon,
Ptolemy, Prince George, and the Lady Harriet colt for
the Doncaster St. Leger; besides some for 1855.
Wait AMONG THE TRIBES co. AFRICA.—By the brig
Favourite, Capt. White, we have dates from Bathurst,
West Coast of Africa, to the 3d of Feb. A religious war
was raging among the different tribes, the difficulty
being about drinking—the Mirabous being the Maine
liquor law and Mahomedan party ; and those going for
the fire-water of the whites and heathens are the Man-
degoes, Serawollows, and the King of Combo. The
King of Combo attacked the town of Savagee, cotaining
some 4,000 inhabitants, on the 23d Dec., and was re-
pulsed by the Mirabous, with the loss of 17 men, the
latter losing but one. His Excellency the Governor of
Bathurst would take the matter in hand, and a settle-
ment of the difficulties might be expected. Owing to
these difficulties trade was much interrupted.
[ADVERTISEMENT.] The Earl of Aldborough and
Holloway's Pills.—An astounding cure by this miracu-
lous medicine after every other means had failed.—See
extract from his lordship's letter, dated " Villa Me •
Leghorn, Feb. 21, 1845. To Professor Holloway. Messina
I beg to acquaint you that your pills have effected a curelr
of a disorder in my liver and stomach which all the most
eminent of the faculty at home and all over the continent
had not been able to effect—nay, not even the waters of
Carlsbad or Marienbad. (Signed)
ALDBOROIIGH."—
These wonderful pills will cure any disorder of the liver
or stomach.—Sold (also Holloway's ointment) at Pro-
fessor Holloway's establishment, 244, Strand, London,
and by all medicine vendoivi throughont the world.

LIST OF SCOTWISEi COMPANIES' PRICES.
:Dividend Amount
Name of Company. ' per of Paid. Price.
.A nnurn. Share.
-- ----
X s. d. X s. d.
Bank of Scotland ...... V.. par cent. 11.11, 0 u luu u e 1921 0
British Linen Comp.... 81.. per cent. 100 0 0 100 0 0 211/10
Caledonian Bank •• ... Wi:, per cent. 10 0 0 210 03 . IBs.
City efGlasgow Bank 51. per cent. 10 0 0 to u 0 ;0112s
Clydesdale Bank-- —6/. per cent. 20 0 0 10 0 0 12 12s
Commercial Bank .. 71. percent. 500 0 0 100 0 0 1821 0
Eastern Bank.. •• 61. percent. 25 u 0 10 0 0 101 9s
Eithb symaggow 11....• 31- percent. 6 0 0 5 0 0 41. 9s
Exchange Bnk of Scot.. 100 0 0 31 5 0 9s. Od
National Bank ...... 6% percent. 50 0 0 10 0 0 161 2s
Northot Scotlandßank 5/..percent. 20 0 0 210 OM. igs
Royalßank of Scotland Si. percent. 100 0 0 100 0 0 1.15110
Union Bank of Scot. .. 8/..per cent. 100 0 0 50 0 0 921 58
Western Bank .. •• •• •• 71. per cent. 50 0 0 50 0 0 72/ 10s
Alliance Fire and Lre.. 8% 1. pr cent. 10 0 0 10 0 0 21112 s
British Guarantee .... 41. per cent. 10 0 0 1 0 0 1/. 7,
Caledonian Fire Incur. 101- per cent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 261. Od
City of Glasgow Life.. 61. per cent. 25 0 0 2 0 0 41. 133
Colonial Life ......... 51. per cent. 50 0 0 1 0 0 4i. 7s
Edinburgh Life Incur. 6/. percent. 100 0 0 15 0 0 21/10s
0 0
Eng. & Scot, Law Life 5/..per cent. 50 0 0 217 6 :q, 7s
Life Assoc. of Scotland 6/. per cent. 10 0. 0 110 0 3/. 17s
National Fire and Life 61. percent. 10 0 0 1 0 0 1/. 13'
North British Instil'. ••51. per cent. 200 0. 2 0 0 35/
ScOttishUnionlnsrac. 7%1. pr cent. 20 0 0 1 n 0 .Os
10s
........Si. per cent. AO 0 0 7 " 0 0 , 12/ 11- 13,
Standard Life
United Dep. Assurance 51. per cent 10 0 0 i 1 0 0 20s. Od
' * .Ex Dividend.
---

MISCELLANEOUS.
Dividend Amo-------------------unt
Name of Company. per of Paid. Price,
Annum. Share.
Assam Tea . £ s. d. £ s. d.
. .• ......
kuctien Mart •• .. .... 50 0020 0 0 10%2/. ss. 40 0 0 35
Australian Avricultarl 11. 100 0035 0 0 104
Australian Trust .. • • 61. per
10 Cent.
Australian Royal Mail 0
020 0 5
35 0 0 25
knglo-Mexican Mint.. 11. 10s. 10 0 0 10 0 0 23%
British American Land 15s. R 8 10 0 66
Canada •••••..• • •• •• 61. per cent. 100 0 0 32 10 0
Do. 5 per cent Bonds 51. per cent. 10'
Ditto, 6pr ct. Bonds 61. per cent. —7%
11 %
City Navigation Bonds 3i per cent. 97
Electric Telegraph (A) 25 0020 0 0 22M Ditto .... ••• • .• 03) 25 0 0 710 0 11M
Equitable Reversienry 51 pr. cent. 100 0 0 100 0 0 120
Ditto New ...... 50 0010 0 0
Gen. Revers. & Invest. sp. c.& bs, 21 100 0 0 100 0 0 102%
Gea.SteamNavigation 10 p. ct. 15 0 0 14 0 0 30%
Hudson's Bay.. .• .. •• Stock. 220
Hungerfosdi .. .... •• • N. 10s. 100 0 0 100 0 0 47
London Institution ... 78 15 0 London Reversionary Si. per cent. 15 00150 0 14
Russell Institution.... 12 10 0
Price's Patent Cand. Co. 101. percent. 20 0 0 17 10 0 26
Reversionary Int. Soc. 4%1. pr cent. 100 0 0 100 0 0 Royal Mail Steam..., 41. p. share. 100 0 0 60 0 0 South Australian ....• 51. por share. 25 0 0 25 0 0 53%
Trust and Loan Comp.
et Ironer Canada 2:•
20 0 0 3 0 0

NEW STAMP DUTIES ACT ON PATENTS.—An Act of
Parliament has lately received the royal assent, and is
now in force, to substitute stamp (tidies for fees on pas-
sing letters patent for inventions, and to provide for the
purchase for the public use of certain indexes of specifi-
cations. All letters patent for inventions to be granted
under the Patent Law Amendment Act are made sub-
ject to avoidance on non-payment of stamp duties ex-
pressed in the schedule of the present act. The indexes
of specifications prepared by Mr. Woodcroft may be
purchased for a sum not exceeding 1,0001. for the public
use. The new stamp duties are am follows :—On peti-
tions for grant of letters patent, 51. ; on certificate of
record of notice to proceed, 51. ; on warrant of law
officer for letters patent, 51. ; on specification, 51. ;
on letters patent, or a duplicate thereof, before the expi-
ration of the third year, 50/. ; on letters patent before
the expiration of the seventh year, 1001. ; on certificate
of record of notice of objection, 2/. ; on certificate of
every search and inspection, is.; on certificate of entry
of assignment or licence, 55.; on certificate of assignment
or licence, ss. ' • on application for disclaimer, 51. ; ci
caveat against discla;xmer, 21.; and on office copies of
documents, for every ninety words, 2d.