The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-27 00:00:00

EVEN ING EDITION.

.--- - •-''-''

---
dispute, fr et re this very return, a considerably climi-
-11.15ba Pr auction of every one of our principal manu-
facturere ,ia the year 1839, as compared with the year
.1,&13t And ,et we have at the same time a consider-
ar4
increased export of the same manufactures. Are
tiA(' 4,,) ttio things—a diminished production and aryirel-
-I='. :eased exhort—incompatible with well ether? T.
Cl,r9
appeal, to tic so, but they are not so in the present
att
..
eumetonces of the country ; for they are reconctli A
th/
explained by the one grand cause of bah, name y,
extreme depression of our home trade, arsing from
the extreme distress of our home population. We
have produced a smaller quantity of manufactures,
but oven that smaller quantity was more than
the nation had the means of consuming. Owing
to t o
he high price of food, the oulk of the popula-
tien could not purchase any more of clothing or other
articles than were absolutely necessary ; they must en-
' deavour to fill their bellies, whatever became of their
backs;. and though they have not been able to satisfy
the trants of either, yet they weee better able to post-
pone the demands of the latter than of the former. Our
manufacturers and merchants, then, finding the home
i population unable to consume the usual quantity of
goods, were ce.mpelled to force their goods upon foreign
markets, their warehouses were glutted, their liabilities
were becoming due, and they resorted to the last.
• desperate mode of gaining relief ;
,namely, by seted-
ing theft' goods for the chance of sale to other coun'cries.
There are gentlemen here who are able from per-
sonal knowledge to say whether these geotls have ac-
tuality been sold, or whether they remain on hand.
I am assured by gentlemen who nave lately re-
tained from America, that icenvense quantities of goods
either remain in the hands of the consignees, or have
been forced to sale at a tremendous sacrifice in order
• to raise money. Of course there is little chance
of a tolerable foreign trade this year ; and a striking
feet was stated to me yesterday, proving the bad
' effects of the forced exports of last year ; namely
—that one of tle oacket ships from London to New
York sailed this week laden with coals for want of a
better freight. Thus, it becomes evident that our increased
experts last year were not the effects of prosperity, but
the reverse.. When increased exports are consequent upon
l'hereased, production, and upon a natural demand
kr the. goods, they are an evidence of prosperity,
But vi en increased exports are the mere effects of
distrce a at home, the larger those exports are, the
strait, ger evidence they give of that distress. I have
sh arm diminished production, and that is a first proof
of, climitiebed ability on the part of our population to
consume. Our opponents have shown an increased
lexport of manufactures, and that turns out to be a
second proof of diminished ability on the part of our popu-
latiore to consume. We not only produce less than we
did Lefore, but we are obliged to send abroad even a
larger proportion of that lessened production. Thus the
increased exports which have been triumphantly quoted
to show that the country flourishes under dear bread,
in reality prove a double degree of distress among the
people. They establish t;': fact which it is our main
object here to prove, and which also answers to con-
` moo sense—namely, that dear bread diminishes the
leaver of the nation to consume the necessaries and
• • comforts of life. It destroys their prosperity—it re- '
duces the amouut of their enjoyments—it brings distress
into the manufactory, the warehouse, and the shop,
:and iaunger and nakedness into the cottage. I hardly
need observe, Sir, that the diminished home con-
i , ~tit ptioa of last year is the strongest practical refute-
' tioa of the slily fallacy, that a high price of food is bone-
fleiel to all classes, even to the manufacturers, inasmuch
ae it enables their hest customers, the agriculturists, to
purchase a larger quantity of their goods. If this propo-
sithen were true, the year 18d9 ought to have been one
of *eaddeu and great prosperity to the manufacturers ;
• etee'horne trade ought to hive increased very largely ; it
onight to have been made signally manifest that the
CJ se extracted from their pockets by the high price of
ix eee lcued its way back again, augmented by the cir-
c : ,it ii. had taken. But instead of all this, we find the
; came ecnsumption wofully reduced ; we find that wile-
•, Nee eau have gained by high prices, the hulk of the po-
peiation have been severely pinched by them ; and the
en tnefee'..urers have not merely parted with their money
for dear bread, but their customers in return, instead of
being micro numerous, are fewer. The " bird in the hand'
0 has been let go, but the promised " two in the bush"
i
el heve not been taken. It may surely be hoped
4 that the fallacy thus practically disproved will at
;,f ieug.li he abandoned as a mauvaise plaisanterie
vet:: ill suited to ro serious a question, and that the .
Imeeufacturers will not in future be mocked and insul-
tee as well as plundered. Lct me, in conclusion, offer
a pleun illustration, which may convince even an agri-
ettl'Atrist that increased exports may, under certain cir-
; cm-eget-lees, be a proof not of prosperity but of eel-
, eeecy. Suppose a tanner whose land yields on the
leetrene one hundred quarters of corn, of which he
. sen ks sixty querters to market in order to pay
time met enil other expenses, and keeps forty quarters
fee the support of his family. Suppose that in an un-1
feem:reble year his farm only yields 00 quarters instead
.9r CO.l bat that, owing to increased necessities, he
ecetis 6i quarters of corn to market instead of 60
tv.eeeters---it is evident that this increase of his sales,
svlTich I was- cell his exports, is not a proof of proz.-
peeity, itit, ef urgeet cud ; it takes place in spite of
diecinisbecl production, and it leaves for the consurnp-
t;oe ofilis family, riot 40 quarter#, but only 25 quarters.
)
i Till; is just what has taken piece last
year in England ;
, are have p:oduccd less—we have expo7ted mere ;
wet thius in both ways our own censumptioo, that is,
our well supply of necessaries and comforts, has ben
leierhigod. I am sorry, Sr, to have trespassed upon
you so tone ; hut it seemed to me quite necessary
to show the real beaming of an official document,
which has been, and which might be again, so
greatfy mistaken, which might lead to conclusions
4 at variance with the reel condition of the country,
and which might thus be used to conceal the
pi-ea:cal mischief of the most unjust and op-
preeeve of all monopolies—a monopoly which makes the
1 chief accessary of life scarce and dear—counteracts the
bolety of Providence—limits our foreign trade—forces
nattoue who might be our customers, to become our
1 rivals—toads to reduce our maritime superiority—ex-
4 !yeses our currency to ruinous derangement—diminishes
the predits of capital—presses with the greatest severity
upen the poorest classes—and presents to all other go-
veruntents and nations the pyrnieious example of the
I most commercial nation in the world barring, up the
channel, of trade, and foregoing that invaluable princi-
i pie w i hich s the soul of improvement and the best
i Sal.e.g u 9rd of indusiry—freedom.
1 The CHAIRMAN said lie wished to ask whether they
1 ouelit not vo nave published the able statement Mr.
iB tiutes bed favoured them with. If such was the opi-
I niou of tile Delegates they had better set about it Mime-
-1 (hate:ly, and have a copy delivered to every Member of
Iboth Hoeses of Parliament.—( Hear.)
Mr. Aloanis, of Halifax, thought they ought not to
separate without a vote of thanks to Mr. Baines, for
ithe talent, labour, and peins exhieited in hi; statement.
Tiro Mayer of CARLISLE cordially seconded the mo-
tires, "XLiell was carried with acclamation.
The CHAIRMAN said that Mr. Baines had proved
1 that all our exports of silk, cotton, and wool had di-
! taialehed. He believed Mr. Walker, of Wolver-
hameten, would be able to give a similar statement on
i .
iron, and thus they should have the fact established as
i
to the four great branches of commerce.
Mr. WALKER raid he could only say, generally, that
tlere was a great diminution, but he was not prepared
' to ge into statistics. He believed, also, the demand for
the raw material, but not in the same proportion as the
,lerrand for manufactured goods.
Lord NUGENT thought they should not confine
themselves to circulating Mr. Baines' statement among
Members of Parliament. He thought they could not
i ae better L
o than melee arrangements for its sale at a very
: low price, and also for gratuitous distribution all over
the country, fur it overthrew what he knew was a very
1 general and taking fallacy, being a fact that appeared to
i rest upon returns, to which no answer could be satisfac-
tory but the one Mr. Baines had just given, He knew
the fallacy was extensively circulated, and therefore the
1 mere extensive circulation they gave Mr. Baines' state-
{ went the better.—(Hear, hear.) He begged lav e to '
move that an Executive Committee should be appointed,
to take into consideration the best means for promoting
its immediate and general circulation.—(Cheers.)
The CHAIRMAN said it was unnecessary to ask who
would second the motion, as all appeared to second it,
and it was carried by acclamation.
The CHAIRMAN informed the meeting he had just
hoard that Lord Melbourne had confirmed the appoint-
meet for to-morrow at half-past three, and that the
reiecutive Committee were instructed to prepare the
beads of the discussion with his Lordship.
Mr. SYDNEY SMITH said complaints were macie that
petitions were sent too late in the day to Members of
Parliament for presentation in the evening. He begged
to urgo upon those Delegates who were intrusted with
petitions, to send them as early as possible.
The CHAIRMAN said that if they were put into the
Bands of Members, or sent to the Vote office, that they
would be presented in the evening. He hoped the
Delegates would not forget to canvas the Members of
Parliament.
ilaveral Delegates informed the meeting that with
a deputation, they had waited upon Lord jor-
path, and had reason to believe he would becone a
convert to their views. Also upon Mr. Bethel, and
they hoped, although he had said nothing expressly,
they had done some good by witins upon him. Also
upon Ur; Langdale, Memberf
a.
last year voted against therialen,nhaurtesbwohroouing,tho,rmwehod
pair motion,
them this year he would in favour of it. And
(won Lord Deere, who was
n"
convinced of the
neeoessity for a change in the la,
ien leaving the tneetipg, a Delegate informed us
that the name of Mr. Langdale had been erroneously
given For that of Mr. Wrightson' the Member for
, igorthalierton.]
The CHAIRMAN wished to call the attention of
the
Delegates to a paper on the table, entitled " A Voice
from the Board of Trade," which he recommended tee
their attentive perusal.
The meeting then adjourned.
In the course of the meeting, it was arranged that

the Ex cutive Committee should sit every day at Eleven
o'cloe'F and tbr:. general business of the Delegates should
coma: cue° c.',; Two.

TH.E MURDER AT ISLINGTON.-

ADJOURNED INQUEST.

(Continued from our Paper of yesterday.)

ATTENDANCE OF THE PRISONERS.
'The CORONER—How do you know that he had no
money on the Sunday morning ?
'4-itness—Because he went out without his breakfast,
wleirl he never did when he had any money.
The CORONER—And from that circumstance you judge
he had no money ?
Witness—Yes, Sir.
The Cososne—He did not say he had no money?
Witness—No, Sir.
In answer to questions from Gould, the witness stated
that he used frequently to go into the wash-house to wash
himself and clean his shoes, and that she had about six
months ago seen him come home with a black eye or cut
face, And that at that time she thinks he was in the habit
of wearing the black velvet waistcoast produced. He had
it Ott on the Monday, but whether it was an outside waist-
coet or an inside one she cannot say. The hole where the
rsocking was found had always been left open. Witness
knew the time at which Gould returned on the Tuesday
morning, because she had had her night's rest, and did not
go to sleep after he came in, and shortly after she
' saw the morning break. Witness did not ascer.
tain that the bundle which she supposed to be stock-
ings, which she saw on the box on the Monday, were the
stockings which she had washed for Gould before Christ-
mas ; had seen no stockings lying about before the Monday.
The CORONER said that he considered this point relative
to the stockings to be a most important one, and directed
the clerk to be most particular in the manner in which he
took the witness's deposition in relation to it.
The proceedings were then adjourned for as hour, in
order to enable the Jury to get some refreshment. Atthree
o'clock the proceedings recommenced by the examination of
Charles Allen, the husband of the last witness, who
corroborated her testimony as to the events of the Sunday,
Monday, and Tuesday in reference to Gould. In answer
to a question from the Coroner, he said there was nothing
unusual in Gould asking for a towel, as he had done on
the Tuesday morning on his return from the wash-house.
I On the occasion of the conversation between the witness's
wife and Gould relative to the murder, witness said that he
was no man who would take away the life of a fellow-
creature for the value of 5/.
The CORONER—What made you make use of the expres-
sion, of the value of 51. ?
Witness—l had heard during the day that it was about
that sum that Mr. Templeman had collected in his rents.
The CORONER.—From whom did you bear this ?
Witness—l cannot tell ; I was out during the whole
day endeavouring to procure information about the murder,
and conversing with persons many of whom were strangers.
The witness then proceeded to relate the manner of his
bolting Gould in on the night of Tuesday. He had never
bolted him in before.
The CORONER.—What were the circumstances that in-
duced you to act in this manner ?
The witness stated that in the course of the morning he
had been informed by a person named Lynch of the fact
of some one having been found killed. He said,
after hearing that it was a person who usually wore a
cloak, surely it is not old Mr. Templeman ? and on inquiry
he found it was him. He returned borne, and went into
his garden ; this was about half-past one. He continued
there an hour. He then went up to the deceased's cot-
tage, but heard nothing that led to his suspicions. He re-
turned, and went to the cottage of deceased a second time.
Whilst standing against the pales, he observed a
woman coming from the direction of White Con-
duit House, but did not know who she was.
Saw the policeman unlock the gate of the deceased's
garden, and admit her. He has never ascertained who
she was. Asked his wife what sort of a woman Mrs.
Jarvis was. He then went up to deceased's cottage, and
ascertained that a person named Jarvis lived next cottage
to deceased ;he then returned to his own garden. From
the inquiries he made he was induced to suspect Gould
knew something about it.
The Coaossen—Can you name any person who said
anything to you that induced you to believe that Gould
was concerned in the transaction?
Witness—Not a single one.
The CCRONEk—Cannot you state any circumstance that
induced you to suspect Gould ?
Witness—His staying out so late on the night before.
The witness then stated the circumstances of the appre-
hension of Gould.
In answer to questions from the Jury, the witness stated
that Gould must have heard him bolt him in, and that
Gould could have got out of the window if he liked.
Gould went regularly to the wash-house every morning,
for a cleaner man never entered a house.
Gould asked if he might have the evidence given at
Hatton-gardeci by the witness read, as it was perfectly
different front the evidence he had now given.
The CORONER.—In the event of your being sent for
trial, the witness will be examined in Court, and the depo-
sition he has now given, as well as his evidence at Hatton-
garden, will be laid before the Judge, and you will be
entitled to have copies of both depositions hetere your trial.
Gould—Thank you, Sir.
1 Thomas Plympey_la the landlord of the Rainbow, in
Liverpool rJad. Knows Richard Goulrl ;he was at wit-
ness's house during the whole of the afternoon of Mon-
\
diLy, the 16th. Left at twenty minutes before twelve.
There were a Mr. and Mrs. King, a Mr. John Sheppard.
:slid a man who worked for King, with Gould on the right
in question at witness's, and no one else. Gould came to
his house again on Tuesday afternoon, and a man present
said it was a bad job about the murder, to which Gould
(tide some reply, which witness did not hear. He remained
until about 7 o'clock.
Gould—Do you know who that person was?
witr:€ss—Yes, it was a person named Richardson. Wit-
ness did not see any weapon or stick in the possession of
Gould cr soy of the party on Monday. King paid for the
beer on that occasion. Gould said that the first person who
told him of the murder was a sawyer named Melton ; the
witness said that Melton was at his house on the Tuesday.
John l'izey is a shoemaker, living at Islington. Knows
Gould. Was at the Rainbow on Monday week, and saw
Gould there playing at skittles in the evening. They left
together at a quarter before 12, with the rest of the party.
Cannot tell which way Gould went, or if he had any
companion. At about 11 o'clock witness went out to get
semc tobacco, and Gould asked him to buy a candle,
which he did ; Gould gave him the money for it. Gould
put the rushlight which witness got for him into his jacket
pocket. He did not see Gould again until after he was in
custody. Witness did not see any stick or weapon in 1
Gould's possession, nor did he see any projection from his
pocket as though he had any heavy weapon concealed.
John Richard inbson, of No. 7, Dorset-street, Spital-
fields, print-coleurer—Knows Richard Gould, but not by
that name. Knows him by the name of Arthur Nicholson.
' Eie (witness) teen related the circumstances attending
Gould's visit to 7, Dorset-street, on the night of
Friday the 13th of March, for the purpose of asking
" Join " for a screw and a " earkey," and his expressing
his intention of serving nut an old man in a lone cottage.
The evidence of this witness has already been given at
considerable length in our Hatton Garden report.
The CORONER—Cannot von recollect the words he used?
Witness—No I can't; he said he should serve ont or
rob the old gentleman on the Saturday, but I can-
not recollect the exact words he made use of.
Ile did not tell Jam what had passed between him and
Gould; he did not cell any person until he went to the 1
station-house. Gould was very serisus when he was talk-
ing
to him.
Henry Wright, the potman at the Duchess of Kett in
the Dover-road, testified to the fact of Gould's coming to
him on the 13th or 13th of March, and calling for a half
pint of porter, when he throw down a penny, and
said it was all the money he had, on which occa-
sion, in the course of conversation, Gould said
that he had been very ill, had got better, but was now get-
ting worse for want of money. lie said he had been stop-
ping w ith Mr. Jarvis. He then went on to say that he knew
an old man who had offered 251. for a cottage ; that
some female had heard him say no ; that he had seen him
flash a 501. note, and that there were more in doors, and
that it would be like a gift to him, for he should
know where to put his hand upon it, that he should
like to have some one along with him just to keep him
quiet, but he could do it because he knew wiiere the money
was. Witness does not recollect making any remark in
consequence of what Gould had said. He did not see
Gould again until he saw him in custody. Gould said
he bad appointed a person to meet him at the Duchess of
Kent the next day. Witness knows that person, but does
not know his name. The last time he saw him he was on
Londou-bridge with Gould ; that was about three weeks
since. The person alluded to lived, witness thinks, in
the neighbourhood of Walworth, and is about twenty-five
years of age. Gould said that this person had been out
of work as long as himself.
Mr. WAKLEY then addressed Gould as follows :—There
are three or four more witnesses to be examined against
you, who arc not here at present. There are certain wit-
nesses who testify as to the money paid to Mr. Templeman.
There is a man named James Rogers, who deposes to a
certain conversation which he says he had with you relative
to a screw; and a person named Ellis, whose testimony
appears to me to be useless, and Bradshaw, the Sergeant
of Police, who makes some general statements, It is ins-
possible this inquiry can be concluded to-night, and when
you have retired, after having heard what I have said with
regard
a tt to
the the witnesses to be examined, you will be able
to make up your mind as to whether you would like to be
have to state
tethat you should be here
ask the witnesses any
to the Jury
materially
sitting. You best know if what they
concerns you, and if it is important
in
con
..seyn
questions
to hear,
ot hr otsoe
makest statements, ma
neyn tast,a t andente n
t ot
hay© consequence of what they may say. You
will probably
mind, and before you thisleaver
which to make up your
determination, and I will take place, lot me know your
statement
accordingly. When
you return you may make any you may think fit
to the Jury, in consequence of what has transpired to-day,
but you are not obliged to make any statement, unless you
think proper to do so.
Gould was then removed in custody, and Mrs. Jarvis
was brought into the Court, care being taken that no
Ceetnuiio having betweenthem.
mrs. n
Jarvisat naccommodated with a
Nebaciur,
rne passed
he
nFrancis Caprani, the watchman at the Sadler'a Wells
Theatre, repeated the testimony he had already given at
s
Hetton Garden, as to Mrs. Jarvis and Mr. Templeman
being in conversation at the house of the former on the
afternoon of Monday. Mr. Templeman bad paid wit:
ness 7s. which he owed him for work, in six shillings
and two sixpences. He took the money from a little box
on the table, and said he had been to Somer's Town to
receive his rents. Witness saw money in the box-...
half-crowns, shillings, and sixpences. Witness
had been taken up on suspicion of being the
murderer, but was discharged by the Magistrates
passed between Mr.
without a stain on hTiestncphaierrnacatle u
tr.
and airs.
njoat hear
rvis,f what
orir.
Templeman was very hoarse, so that what he said could
not be heard except by persoas close to him.
Richard Bradshaw, police sergeant, N 20—saw Mrs.

Jarvis at her door on Tuesday, chopping wood ; she had I
just come home. He asked her if she knew the old man
who was dead, and she said, " Yes, I saw him last night,
and he told me he was very tired, and was going to bed
early." She added, the old man had money. She said,
" Yes, this cottage," meaning her own, " was his ; he had
sold it for 15/., and was going to buy it. back." The wit-
ness then proceeded to detail the movements of Mrs. Jar-
vis, during the afternoon of Tuesday, in nearly the same
terms as he had related them at the Police Court in

Hatton-garden. Witness saw her husband come home
about six o'clock, and heard her say to him, " The old
man la dead, they have killed him ;" he said, " I know it—
I have heard of it—l feel sick." She said, " Let us ge

and have a look at him ;" he said " No," and they went
into their cottage together. The witness then proceeded
to relate his conversation with Mrs. Jarvis, relative to the
murder, and to her visit to her sister on the morning of

Tuesday to borrow a screw. The witness then corrobo-
rated the evidence of Sergeant King as to the finding of
the money in the stocking, and stated what occurred on
the Wednesday morning, while searching the cottage oc-
cupied by Jarvis, where he found, in the sieeping-room by
the back door, the bag produced, which did not appear to
be concealed ;it was marked with blood and dirt. Mrs.
Jarvis was then in custody, by Inspector Miller's direction.
The CORONER (to Mrs. Jarvis)—Does you husband
know where you were on Monday night ?
Mrs. Jarvis—Yes, Sir, the whole of the night ; I should
wish him to be here.
The CORONER—Has he made any statement as to how
she was occupied on Monday evening ?
Inspector Miller—Yes, Sir; to me he has.
The Coroner then directed that he should be sent for.
Inspector Miller—He also ,found the shirt produced,
spotted with blood on the sleeves.
The CORONER-Were these things produced at Hatton.
garden as affecting Jarvis, or his wife?
Inspector Miller—As affecting all the prisoners, as being
found in Jarvis's cottage.
The CORONER—Has Jarvis made any statement relating
to them ?

Inspector Miller—He says he never saw the bag before
in his life.

The CORONER—Did he state that at Hatton-garden?
Inspector Miller—No, Sir, he has since stated so to me.
Mrs. Jarvis—My little boy had his band scratched by
the cat on Sunday, and I took up something to wipe the
blood off, it may have been the shirt ; but I believe the
spots to be iron-mould, to tell the truth.
The Coroner's Clerk thought the two small spots on the
sleeves were iron-moulds.

The witness then said, in answer to the Coroner, that
Jarvis had been detained in custody from the Wedesday to
the Tuesday, but no further evidence was produced
against: him than the shirt and bag. Nothing else was
found in Jarvis's cottage to induce an idea that they knew
of the murder.

James Deer, policeman, 269 N, apprehended Mrs.
Jarvis on Wednesday, the 18th instant, in the morning.
In consequence of information he had received, that she
was in the habit of being often with Gould, and that they
had been seen together on the day before. He had no
other grounds of suspicion. He asked her if she knew
Gould, and she said she knew no such a person, but knew
a person named Richard, that formerly lived at the Barns-
bury Castle, and she said she saw him last on Sunday,
when her husband was at home, but on recollection she
said she had met him in the Liverpool-road about eight
o'clock on Monday morning, but did not know what had
become of him after that. He then took her to the sta-
tion-house. _

John Jarvis, the husband of Mrs. Jarvis, was then called
in and sworn, and in answer to the Coroner stated that his
wife was at home during the whole of Monday night.
He left home at a quarter after five on Tuesday morning,
and she was then at home. They went to bed about half- '
past eight on Monday night. He got home from his work
at about ten minutes after six. Gould did not come to his house
on the Monday evening whilst he was at home. He does not
believe his wife could have left the house during the night
without his knowing it. Does not believe she has ever
done so. Mr. Down first told him of the murder. Does
not know to whom the bag belongs ; never saw it until he
saw it at the station-house. Himself and his wife went to
bed at the same time on the Monday night.
Mrs. Jarvis said her :mother could explain everything
relating to the bag.
The CORONER-Were the cases gone into separately at
Hatton Garden?
Inspector Miller—No, Sir.
The CORONER—It is with regard to the bag that you
wish your mother to be called ?
Mrs. Jarvis—Yes, Sir.
It was stated by one of the persons in attendance that
Mre. Jarvis's mother had left to go home some time since.
The CORONER—You can state, if you please, what your
mother would have said about the bag.
:sirs. Jarvis—The hag was her property ; she bad
taken my little boy to Kensall-green, and had left the bag
at my house on the day of the Queen's marriage. She
had brought a loaf in it.
The CORONER— Was it in the same state then as it is
row ?

Mrs. Jarvis—lt was not dirty, Sir, as I used it to keep
tire wind from coming in at the back door, until the door
should be caulked.
The CORONER—But what of the marks of blood ?
Mrs. Jarvis—l do not believe that the marks are blood-
marks. I think they are merely clay stains.
The CORONER suggested that if any point of import-
ance turned upon the bag, it ought to be placed in the
hands of a chemist, for the purpose of having it ascer-
tained if they were blood stains or not.
Mrs. J,rvis was then asked if she wished to make any
statement, to which she replied in the negative, and she
was removed in custody.
The Coner,Ra then stated that be bad received a mes-
sage from Gould, eta ing that ha had no desire to appear
1 bntore the Jury any more this evening, and that he had no
1 statement to make ; but that, if the inquest was adjourned
to Monday, he should then be desirous of attending.
In adjourning the inquest to half-past nine oii Monday,
Mr. \VAKLEY observed that the prisoners were to be
brought up at Hatton-garden en Tuesday, and that,
although the -Al.gistrates could not proceed one step with-
out the presence of the prisoners, yet the Coroner's In-
I quest could go through the whol.; of their proceedings, if
thee so chose, without the presence of the prisoners ; how-
-1 ever, they would be brought up again on Monday, when
the proceedings of the inquest would, in all probability, be
1 closed, so as to enable the magistrates to close their pro-
; cecdings on Tuesday. The inquest was then adjourned
to half-past nine on Monday. The room was crowded
to excess during the whole of the proceedings; the stair-
case arid the passages were so thronged that ingress or
egress was utterly impossible, and the house was sur-
I rounded by a crowd which frequently became so noisy a 3
1 to call for the interference of the police, it being some-
; times impossible to hear the evidence in consequence of
the noise outside. The interest in the neighbourhood is
rather increased in intensity than otherwise. The pro-
; ceedings did not terminate until half-past eight o'clock,
and at the time our reporter left, the:tavern and all the ap-
proaches to it v.ere thronged by people, anxious to get a
glimpse even of the van in which the prisoners were con-
veyed back to the place of their confinement.