The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-20 00:00:00

IVIERICANAFFJiIRS.

NW YOR, JY 1.
You have seen it announced that Mr. TriKst, atr cL
leri in
one of the offices in Washington, was comrnissi.oned,
in
connexion with General Scott, to proceed to Me>dco, and
negotiate a treaty'of peace with that people. The Go-
vernment journals have stated, that these envoy a-extra-
ordinary, commissioners, or whatever else they may be
termed, were clothed with ample power to effiict the
object of their appointment; and that the ter/ na and
conditions which would be tendered to Mexico wei re of a
character so honourable to bo!h nations, and so biberal,
that they would certainly lead to an adjustment of I,l?esad-
ing difficulties.
The confident manner in which these assertions vvere

made, and the sources from whence they came, tentf.ed
greatly to strengthen the opinion that an early peace
might reasonably bb' anticipated. In this state of thirgs
there were still to be _found men who were sceptical, and
among the number your correspondent.
In the various party journals of the United States it
has been said that Messrs. Scott and Trist are not on
the most friendly terms, but no explanation or details
have been offered. -On the contrary, it has been cau-
tiously avoided by the Union, the President's organ. A
colouring, however, has been given to the subjoct,
according to the feelings or prejudices of the relator. I
have taken more than ordinary trouble to make myself
acquainted with the ,facts, which I will now give you.
My information is derived from a reliable source, and
may be depended upon.
Before I proceed, allow me to inquire who is Mr.
Trist? He was a consul at Havannah. " Thereby bangs
a tale." He was lately a clerk in the state department,
and distinguished himzelf by furnishing Mr. Ingersoll
with the private papers in that department, which led to
the attack in the House of Representatives on the cha-
racter of Mr. Webster, which character Mr. Webster so
nobly and so triumphantly defended.
Be it also remembered that President Polk refused to
ratify an armistice eutered into by General Taylor ; and,
it is said, declared at. the time that he would never agree
to an armistice until .after a treaty of peace had been
ratifit-d. Such, at any Tate, were the silly vapourings of
the palace dependent*. .s Indeed, they are continued to
this day. .
The well informed friends of General Scott believe
that Mr. Tri..t was to Mexico as a spy upon the
public conduct of the General, and it possible to ruin
him. Tti.-1 fdl most torribly the mortifying position
in which he is phced, by being associated in the same
commission with Alr.

The exact sta,te of the question, as between this
country and Mexico, as to the probability of a rpeedy
peace, or even of a negotiation for peace, se-ms very
difficult to define. Tne Administration keep every-
thing dark, but anareng them are some leaky vessels.
From Mexico itself the accounts are vague and often
conflicting.
Nevertheless, it may be set down as sure that Mr.
Trist, who has no higher station in this country than
that already described, has been sent to Mexico to at-
tempt negotiation, and that General Scott has been re-
quired to defer to him even as to military movements.
Previous to Mr. Trist's arrival at the head-quarters he
addressed a sealed letter to the Mexican Government,
under cover to General Scott, with a request that the
General would forward the same, which he declined
doing, but informed Mr. Trist that he held the letter
subject to his order.
At the lest accounts Mr. Trist had reached the head-
quarters of the army at Jalapa, and it was notorious
there that none other than relations of the most formal
civility existed between that gentleman and the Com-
mander-in-Chief. I am not certain, but believe they do
not visit each other. This is accounted for by the fact
that Mr. Trist, of his own authority, but acting doubt-
less under the discretionary power conferred upon him,
but without thinking. it necessary to ask the co-operation
of General Scott, had undertaken to propose or suggest
the expediency of an armistice.
When Mr. Trist communicated his project to the
General, he was promptly informed, that with the
circumstances in which the army is placed, cut on by
supplied-troth amide, ueui -
country, where it must, of necessity, subsist itself, the
question of an armistice was one of purely military
cognisance, and that he could not permit Mr. Trist, or
any other civilian, An meddle with it. So long as he
was commander of the army, and responsible for its
safety, he must decide upon the measure and policy
essential to that safety.
Such is by well-informed men in Washington known
to be the position in 'which the parties stand to each
other; and as it is.quite certain that General Scott will
not give way in a point of this sort, either Mr. Trist or
the General must be superseded. But the latter step in
the present.state of public feeling would be too-violent
a one. . .

Meantime all accounts from the head-quarters of the
army concur in saying- that General Seott, who reached
Puebla on the 28th, o,May, would hasten his march to
the capital, even though he should not be able, after
garrisoning Jalapa, Puebla, and Perote, to muster more
than 5,000 men.
The proclamation issued by General Scott a short
time since, and addressed to the Mexicans, has pro-
duced much discussion among the American people.
By some it is said to have been prepared in Washington,
and transmitted to the Commander-in-chief. By others
it is contended that it is the act solely of General Scott.
The fact is that it was the ac: of Gen. Scott, in conformity
with the wishes and advice of certain Mexican clergymen,
and probably with their aid, as they were best able to
judge as to the effect of language upon their people. It
is believed, and I coecur in the belief, that it was first
written in Sp finish or Mexican, and then translated into
English. Und.r such circumstances, whatever may be
thought of the policy of the measure. the whole respnn-
sibihry of it with the Commander-in-Chiet. The
President and his Cabinet. in relatioi to it, are therefore
free from all praise or censure.

Having cc.uvied so much space with what I dorm
in-
teresting details respecting Messrs. Scott and Trist, and
the progress of their negotiation, I must refer you to
the newspapers of the day for an account of the recent
movements of the two armies.

It is proper for me to state that Ihkenow the Command-
ing Gmteinmrt:errarslirnihcs
tae ,s
aannt rciatnhhsem itt e d toarticularts of
somewith farhis dDi
segpraeretinm
ee
lin Department
subject, however,
of the is
cautiouslyispreasons therefor. The whole
"how the mighty are fallen.
people, because its promulgation would show
kept from the knowledge
In regard to the authorship of the proclamation, and
the sources from which its sentiments were derived, it
may be well to note the fact, that General Almonte, for-
merly Mexican Minister in the United States, has been
arrested and thrown into prison on a charge of treason-
able correspondence with General Scott.
The President of the United States has been here,
and is now on his tour to the east. He arrived in
this city on Finridaa_yrn,anannedr departed on
creditable,
tatbhlee Monday
following (yesterday). The municipal authorities
ehxipmense. But there was no warmth--no
—eolnao
for-
mality. From the Whig party he had no right to expect
en-
thusiasm.
But from his professedlf friends he doubtless
reception.
Everything—every act—evinced
eictheas best they a regard-
lessny other.
receivedot
hf
a nheact
iffdnai
.idr,
of he t
hheai
rs
own,b een
and
n Duriexpectedng
trustiucesotlast
aj
adjust
two weeks I have critically and labo-
riouslyect was to ascertain, that I could get a sight of the newspapers (indeed all
as I could,
for bread-sttouftt of) published in the several states.
thcaertain, for your information, as cor-
rectlyMy object
go crop
The
prospect of the new crop of grain
eortr.etshuelt of
.my labour has been to
conclusion, that this country will have
conse-
quently,
bring me
as that taus been much enlarged,
a greatly increaied
a full average
year. On this point I entertain
grain sown ; and,
nodoubttheAres witillrb:.
quantity beyond that of the last
spects Indian corn, it will be almost unlimited.
There yet remains to be shipped, especiaßY in the
west, much of bread stuffs. Means of transport to the
Atlantic States are insufficient to meet the demand.
These facililes, however, in every part of the country.
are rapidly increasing. Yet a little while, and railroads
will cover the whole face of the land. The presetnt prices
of grain and flour cannot be supported, unless he is
, and rising.
an increased foreign demand. The next steamer, soon
to arrive, may bring decisive intelligence on that subject.
Several foreign vessels during the last 48 hours have
been taken' up for..Dreat Britain.
These
Money is abui4ant and cheap. Public stocks of
firm, at 6i to 7
p4er cent.
admitted stability in demand
laelliaat
supply,
7
circumstances teat 'to increase coni..lence in the fan-
cies, and may opertite injuriously by promoting specu-
lation. , •
with a moderate demand
upwardne
notesritlei
ndg States
btnai l
tendency,t
demandl es s, Sa i per cent.; Tree-
ansurdstryt
6-0 6 per cent.—Times.
A GENEVE m
SE TRAVELLER.
R

,EPRESEISTAZION or Ross-SHIRE.—As we were pre-
p .ng to go to press, we received the address which ap•
pears in another column, from Mr. Mackenzie, .of
Applecross, intimating his intention of retiring from the
expeoW4 contest,-;-Invegeos JQ'ATMi

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
1
ARCHES' COURT, July 19.
:"LE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE PROMOTED BY FARNALL v.
CRAIG, CLERK.
This was a cause of office promoted by Mr. George
itooke Parnell, of Burley Park, in the county of South-
ampton, against the Rev. John Kershaw Craig, a clerk
in holy orders of the United Church of England and
Ireland, and minister of the new church of St. John
the Baptist, at Burley, in the said county, touching his
soul's health, and the lawful correction and reformation
of his manners and excesses, and more especially for
haring been guilty of the crime of adultery, fornication,
or incontinence. Although the pleadings and evidence
have extended to very unusual length, yet the substance
of the case lies in a very narrow compass.
A libel was given in on behalf of the promoter, which
after the usual formal articles went on to charge the
Rev. Gentleman, being a married man, with entering the
bedroom of his female servants in the years 1844 and
1845, and remaining with them frequently for several
hours. That on or about the 3d of June, 1844, he com-
mitted mitt,ed adultery with a woman who had been one of
his servants, in Ridley Wood, near to his residence.
That in December, 1844, and January, 1845, he fre-
quently in the kitchen of his house sat before the fire
between two of the servants; and that on some of such
occasions one of them laid her head upon his lap, and
also sat upon his knee. That on a Sunday, shortly
before Christmas, 1844, two or three young girls, who
were his parishioners, and among them one Ann Smith,
went to drink tea in the kitchen of his house, and that
after tea his wife played to them in the drawing-room
upon the organ, and with him sang or chanted part of
the service of the church. That the girls having had
their supper in the kitchen, Mr. Craig being in the
kitchen pulled back the chair whereon Ann Smith was
sitting, and putting his hands round her kissed or
attempted to kiss her; and that with one of his hands
he tickled the knees of Jane Shelley, saying that ho did
so to see if she was jealous, or to that effect. The libel
then referred to the proceedings which had taken place
before a commission of inquiry instituted by the Lord
Bishop of Winchester, under the Church Discipline
Act, and concluded by praying that Mr. Craig might
be duly and canonically corrected and punished according
to the exigency of the law, and also be condemned in the
costs.

In answer to this libel a plea was given in by Mr.
Craig, setting forth that since his residence at Burley
he had faithfully and diligently discharged his duty
thereat as minister, had acquired the geod-will, and had
conducted himself to the entire satisfaction of the great
majority of the inhabitants of the district committed to
his care, among whom he was held in high esteem and
regard, as well for the manner in which he performed
his public ministrations as for his attention to the
schools, and also to the poor and sick of the district,and
such esteem and regard continued undiminished up to
the present moment. That Mr. Craig and his wife, who
had been married 14 years, and had issue of their mar-
riage four children, had always lived and cohabited to-
gether, and still did so on terms of great and uninter-
rupted affection. That Mr. Farnall, the promoter of
the suit, had entertained and manifested in various ways
a feeling of great personal enmity and ill-willltowards
Mr. Craig, and that all the charges made against him
had been wickedly and maliciously brought against him
by Mr. Farnall, and were utterly false and unfounded.
That he had never been guilty of any act of adultery,
fornication, or incontinence, and had never taken
any indecent, improper, or unbecoming liberty or
familarity with any woman whatever. That the charge
of adultery in Ridley Wood was falsely and foully
pleaded. That the only person examined on that charge
before the commission deposed to the offence being com-
mitted on the evening of the 3d of June, 1844, at the
hour of seven o'clock. That the weed consisted of full
grown beech trees, without underwood of any sort, had
a public road leading from Ridley Wood directly
through it, and was crossed by paths in various direc-
tions ; that it was the play place of children in the
neighbourhood ; was much frequented by such and
others, especially on summer evenings, and was exposed
throughout to public observation. That on the 3d of
June, 1844, Jane Shelley was at home with her parents,
from between five and six o'clock in the evening until
she went to bed, and that during no part of such even-
ing was she at all in the company of Mr. Craig, either
in Ridley Wood or elsewhere. That he did not enter
the bedroom of his female servants, neither did he ever
sit between them at the kitchen fire, nor did any one of
them lay her head upon his lap. That the
charge relating to Ann Smith, contained in part
a perversion of the truth, and in part an
averment of what was absolutely false. That what
really then and there occurred was as follows : namely,
that Ann Smith having, with her father and brother,
recently become an attendant at the church, was
asked by Mrs. Craig to come to their house to drink tea
with the servants, which she accordingly did, on the
19th of October; that, between tea and supper, four
young girls, including, Ann Smith, had gone up stairs,
into the parlour, and assisted, or been present at the
singing of some hymns whilst Mrs. Craig played upon
the organ, and just as those four girls were preparing
to leave the house after supper Mr. Craig had some con-
versation with Ann Smith relative to purchasing a couple
of prayer-books, which she requested him to do for her;
but neither on this nor on any other occasion did he
either kiss or attempt to kiss Ann Smith or tickle the
knees of Jane Shelley. That Mr. Farnall, previous to
the institution of the suit, had been repeatedly told and
assured by Ann Smith, that neither on that nor on
any other occasion had she been treated with or had
ever witnessed any impropriety whatever on the part
of Mr. Craig.
In reply to this statement a responsive allegation
was brought in by Mr. Farnall, pleading that Mr. Craig
had been and was in the habit of n',hlj
alituisi.raLlOnS In an irregular rieeLiee,„:llw„hit,healid
to therein read the lessons, and had on many
Sundays omitted to read the Ten Commandments
and the prayers immediately connected therewith. That,
partly owing to such irregularities, the church, which
was capable of containing about 2SO persons, was during
the year 1845 seldom attended on the mornings of Sun-
day by more than six or eight person, and in the even-
ings by more than tv.'enty persons, exclusive of children,
many of the inhabitants haring attended, since the com-
mencement of 1845, a Dissenting chapel, built in 1841.
That in or about the year 1840 several of the subscri-
bers to the parochial school discontinued their subscrip-
tions in consequence of the inattention of Mr. Craig, and
that the school had d'creased from about sixty boys and
girls to about eight girls and two boys, while in 1845 a
school in connexion with the Dissenting chapel was
opened, and was attended by about forty-six boys and
girls. That Mr. Farnall had not manifested in various
ways a feeling of great personal enmity and to-
wards Mr. Craig; that the charges had not been wick-
edly and maliciously brought against him; but that Mr.
Farnall had exhibited the articles at the instance and re-
quest of the Lord Bishop of Winchester. That Ridley
Wood consisted of oak as well as beech trees; that there
was a great abundance of fern, which on the 3d of June
was upwards of three feet in height; that the only road
through it was a forest track, and that it was not fre-
quented by children.
A further allegation was given in on behalf of Mr.
Craig, denying that the was
had been admitted to the
minister's desk, or had read the lessons therefrom since
the end of 1842 or beginning of 1843, when the practice,
which had not been in use more than a few Sundays,
had been discontinued. That the reading of the lessons
by the clerk from his own desk in the morning, but never
in the evening service, had been continued in considera-
tion of Mr. Craig having been long subject to a spitting
of blood and of the fatigue occasioned by the walk of
twelve miles every Sunday. That it was untrue that
Mr. Craig had omitted to read the Ten Commandments
and the prayers connected therewith on many Sundays;
that
it was only done on one occasion, and that in 1842,
in consequence of Mr. Craig's alarm a, nd anxiety about
a son, six years of age, who on the preceding day
had met with a serious accident. That the averaenum
her of the congregation at the church of Burley through-
out the year 1845 was eighty in the morning
and 130 in
the evening, about one-third of whom might be children.
That except those of the families of Mr. Farnall and Mr.
Hill no pew or sitting in the church was given up in,
or for long prior to, 1845. That a meeting-house for
Dissenters with a school attached to it had existed in the
district of Burley for the last half century. That the
persons who withdrew their support from the Burley
schools in 1840 were only five in number. That the
school suffered a temporary depression in 1845, in con-
sequence of the master and mistress having left on ob-
taining higher appointments ; and that it now contained
nearly as many children as at any former period, any
diminution which it might have sustained being solely
eaused by the exertions of Mr. Farnall, his family and
friends, to impair its efficiency, and to sustain the Dis-
senters' school in opposition to it.
After publication the evidence,
some of the witnesses exceptive
side pleas to
brought in by the respective parties.
He had, he said, na.ePicrrel on behalf of Mr. Farnall.
letters from the Bish3loenpetiat
to the admission of certain
Winchester to Mr. Craig,
except on principle.
the counsel for Mr.
Craig intended to make use of thTly had yet to learn.
They only showed how very little Craig in 1846
merited the good opinion which his rdiocesan entertained
who, h been ad
of him is 1836 or 1839, The defendant
or-
dained by the Bishop of Winchester,
rci)aerulchinugrcha
favourable opinion of him at that time, wheni
ti
at Barley was ready for consecration, i
mentary letter offered the incumbency to Mr.cuCrug'igi-,
expressing his regret that the value of the living would'
not exceed 100/. per annum. Mr. Craig accepted
the offer, and was regularly inducted into the church.
It was due to Mr. Farnall, the promoter of this suit, to
state that without his exertions and liberality the church
would not have been built; and to do Mr. Craig justice,
he had no sooner been appointed than it appeared that
he took active measures to carry into effect that necessary
appendage to a district church, the building of schools.
From some cause, however, those schools had
subse-
quently greatly declined. Mr. Craig had been put for-
ward " a person entitled to the highest esteem for the
general discharge of his ministerial duties. It appeared,
fia"e'ier, that Some persons had withdrawn from the
church, and, accordine• to the evidence of the parish
clerk, he some sometimes read the lessons ; but it was
said that that only took place when Mr. Craig laboured
under indisposition,
,nd suffered from spitting of blood.
The best evidence that point would have been the
testimony of a medial
but,, it rested principally
the statement of the clerk!' on
oe (Dr. Haggard) was not
there to inculpate Mr. Craig n
onnthat point, nor would
it be necessary to say more
oTeursual, more es
was extremely irregular and ve the matter except that it
ally as the clerk was not a verb unusual, peci-
had been represented as a good preacheirT: it appeared
Craig
that he was in the habit of referring in theut 11-
to the quarrel between him and Mr. Farnall, althoughgoe oflae did
not mention that gentleman's name, and
congregation had discountenanced it by their witlide*
• —vial.
La 1346 Mr, Craig wrote a letter to Min lingua who

had formerly been in his service, in which, with refe-
rence to these proceedings, he employed terms in speak-
ing both of Mr. Farnall and the Bishop of Winchester,
ho
eehdh
ihs oLwo
rldi tsthl p hfoer
mwearsl
ye
ennt ittelretda
itnoe
dt hoef ghoi
mo d.
opinionwh ieh
showed
They must have proceeded either from a very perverted
mind, or have been the offspring of a wicked heart. That
letter was addressed to a person who was to
,come for-
ward and give unbiassed evidence in the cause. The
testimony of three clergymen had been adduced in fa-
vour of Slr. Craig, but they had not been on close
terms of intimacy with him of late years. Mr. Farnall
was charged with being actuated by malicious motives;
it was too trite to say that motives had nothing to do
with the case. There were rumours floating about in
1844 regarding the character of Mr. Craig, which reach-
ing the ears of Mr. Farnall, or of any other individual,
could not fail to arouse his attention, and lead to the
adoption of measures to bring the matter to a public dis-
cussion. He,(Dr. Haggard) knew not how Mr. Craig
could justify the highly offensive expressions which
he had used regarding his diocesan. The commis-
sioners before whom the preliminary inquiry was held
had unanimously reported that there was ground for
further proceedings; the Bishop therefore had a duty to
discharge, and that he had fearlessly done, but in the
kindest way. It was clear from the evidence that the
female servants of Mr. Craig were all young. He (Dr.
Haggard) would consider the direct charges against Mr.
Craig, not in order of time, but according to their de-
gree of magnitude. There was a discrepancy as to the
date when Mr. Craig was alleged to have kissed, or
attempted to kiss Ann Smith; but he was willing to fix
it as occurring on the 19th of October, 1844. He con-
tended that the result of the evidence indisputably proved
that he actually kissed her. She had herself deposed to
it, and was so disgusted with his conduct that she im-
mediately ceased to attend the church. The fact of
tickling Jane Shelley's knees was equally well esta-
blished. The story was consistent with other parts of
the case proved against Mr. Craig, and was fully entitled
to credit. It manifested a depravity of feeling and
thought in the propensities and habits of Mr. Craig such
as justly to bring him within the censure of the law. As
soon as the rev. gentleman was aware that Mr. Farnall
had been informed of that act of indecency towards Ann
Smith, he went to the house of her mother, and subse-
quently wrote her a letter, which must be taken as con-
clusive against him, as showing that he was desirous of
getting her to his house, he (Dr. Haggard) would not
say for the purpose of tampering with her, but convers-
ing with her respecting the charge, which he knew must
mainly depend upon her testimony. He could not tell
what would have occurred had that young person
gone to Mr. Craig's house, but another who had made
charges against him had been induced to sign her name
to a document, stating that he had not conducted him-
self improperly. Archer's evidence proved beyond a
doubt that the defendant had gone into his servants'
bedroom, and on one occasion into the bed where two
of them were lying, although it did not appear that cri-
minal intercourse had taken place. The charge of com-
mitting adultery in Ridley Wood on the Ist of June
rested upon the testimony of William White, a carter,
in the employ of Mr. Farnall, who deposed to having wit-
nessed it, while in a tree, about ten yards off, getting
some dead wood. The description given by the wit-
nesses of the character of Ridley Wood showed that
there was nothing improbable in White's statement.
Evidence had been adduced by Mr. Craig with a view
to prove an alibi with regard both to himself and Jane
Shelley, the person with whom he was said to have com-
mitted the adultery. The principal witnesses were
Charles Young and his son, who swore at the time when
the act was said to have taken place they were delivering
coal at Mr. Craig's house, and that he was present
while they were so engaged. It was not a desirable posi-
tion for Mr. Craig on a fine summer's evening, without
any assignable reason, to be mixing himself up with the
dust and dirt of unloading coals. There were, however,
discrepancies between the statements of the father and the
son, and their evidence was not such as would justify the
Court in coming to the conclusion that White had deposed
falsely and corruptly with regard to that particular trans-
action. It was said that Shlley was engaged in help •
ing her sister to make some wedding dresses for a young
lady in the neighbourhood who was to be married on the
following Tuesday, but the marriage did not take place
until the Thursday, and it turned out that that was the
day first fixed upon. Shelley had been examined, but
her evidence was not to be relied upon. She had before
the transaction took place lived in the service of Mr.
Craig, and had been dismissed for rudeness to Mrs.
Craig, over whom she was represented to have domi-
neered. On one examination she had denied that she
was discharged for that rudeness, and then, on the fol-
lowing day, expressed a wish to retract it, and admitted
that it was true. Mr. Craig, however, had taken so
much interest in her that when the schoolmistress at
Burley left in consequence of obtaining a better appoint-
ment, Mr. Craig gave her the vacant situation. The
adultery was first alleged to have been committed on the
3d of June, and an alibi had been set up for Shelley on
that day; but it was impossible to give credence to the
witnesses who deposed to it. They were at variance
with each other on several points. It was not necessary,
however, to plead with precision the exact day. That
principle was clearly laid clown in Phillips on Evidence.
Upon the whole, he submitted that the charges against
Mr. Craig were fully proved; that he must be found
guilty and condemned in the costs.
Dr. JENNEn followed on the same side.
Dr. ADDA3IS appeared on behalf of Mr. Craig, and
said that he certainly took a very different view of this
ease from that taken by the counsel for the prosecution.
A case of greater oppression and iniquity, and one more
unsupported by evidence, never came before the Court.
It was indisputably proved that the case had arisen en-
tirely through the malice of the nominal promoter, a
prson of the naigip . r urn
Nalrell;7l3,l 4,AirlisserterhaCT made himselfPrespon-
sible for the costs. It was not necessary to go particu-
larly into the character of Mr. Craig, especially as a great
deal of diligence had been used to exclude many docu-
ments from the cause to which, if the Bishop of Win-
chester had been the prosecutor, he should have expected
Um to direct his counsel to offer no formal objection. It
was not to be supposed that his Lordship had invited
Hr. Craig to become the minister of Burley church with.
out being well acquainted with his character; but a
letter written by his Lordship to Mr. Craig in 1839,
inviting him to accept the living, placed the matter
beyond all doubt, and in March of that year he was duly
put in possession of that piece of preferment. Ile had
not, however, been very long in the parish before, by
some means. which were not very apparent, he provoked
the hostility of Mr. Farnall. It was perfectly
ludicrous, in the face of the evidence, to suggest
that Mr. Farnall had not been accused by the bitterest
malice in the whole proceeding. Mr. Edwards, a wit-
ness to whom Mr. Farnall could not object, inasmuch as
he was produced to prove the absence of malice, showed
that all that Mr. Farnall wanted was to see the gown of
Mr. Craig stripped off his shoulders. That there was
any cause for Mr. Farnall's hostility to Mr. Craig at
that time, arising from irregularity in the performance of
his duties, was negatived by the evidence of Mr. Ed-
wards. Early in 1840 a resolution was passed by the
committee of the school, nearly all of whom were rela-
tives of Mr. Farnall, disapproving of Mr. Craig's ma-
nagement of it, and a copy of it was sent to him, under
seal, through the master. Notwithstanding Mr. Far-
nail's anxiety to depose Mr. Craig, that gentleman
would have maintained his ground, but for some such
proceedings as these now instituted against him. There
was a document dated 1843, proving that Mr. Craig
made every endeavour to promote a better feeling be-
tween Mr. Farnall and himself. Not only, however,
had Mr. Craig's conduct been arraigned with regard to
several young women, but he had been charge with
irregularity in the discharge of his official duties during
the whole time that he had been in the parish. It
might have been expected that the latter charges would
be supported by something like credible evidence. Those
charges, it must be remembered, had been brought for-
ward before a breath of calumny had been whispered
against Mr. Craig. The person called to prove the non-
attendance at the church, and the numbers frequenting
the Dissenting chapel was a labourer, and had married
one of Mr. Farnall's servants. Some of the witnesses
had ur e sba,
et
attendance
broughtmattertheytafest hrawe
seating chapel was built in 1841, but tl e pleadedridthenactethsheoDwiesd-
that it was only rebuilt in that year—its first erection
took place half a century ago, and the Dissenters never
had a school-room before 1845—prior to which they
hadtaughtm r. Craig'sb theeen in chhchildrenasraseetreivrni
ewa:crobetut cottage.
ear rumoursperson
against
it
sh who
getwe.haoflohataedls
before Christmas, 1844. Up to that period his characterenrtly
had been irreproachable, and yet he was now represented
by by White as going about Ringwood dressed like
with one of his female servants on each arm. How wasw'
it that no other person had been adduced to substantia
that charge? In December, 1844, a very wicked person,
not a witness in the cause, left the service of Mr. Craig,
and went to reside, not in the same cottage, but under
the same roof as Mr. and Mrs. White, and in January,
1845, she was introduced to Mr. Farnall, when she made
certain revelations to him of the alleged misconduct
of Mr. Craig. It appeared that on the 16th of
January, in that year, Mr. Farnall communicated
with the Bishop, and on the 17th he had directed
proceedings to be taken. It was impossible not
to suppose that there had been a previous communica-
tion. Every effort had been made by Mr. Craig, to ob-
tain a copy of the letter written to the Bishop with a
view of ascertaining the charges contained in it, but with-
out effect. Those attempts had been uniformly defeated
and he (Dr. Addare must say that it was a matter of
hardship: beyond s)
expression to Mr. Craig. There was
another letter on the eoth of January, and on the 4th of
February, 1845, aform-al application was made for a
simary
com-
mission. That
was vengeance, and if that
course were followed
pthe Church Discipline Act
would prove a great nuisance.
towards T he
hisf charge
em aal
eg a
si against
rs
rt
all,nltrs. Craig of indecent conduct
was attempted to be supported by a witness unworthy
of credit; while there was the
testimony of the other
servants that they had never observed
anything of the
kind. It was said that the servants of Mr. Craig were
comulr.
could
only afford
enteringto phayis low
all young, but that arose from
Thehis limited
m
statea hes to
sb ed had either means,ents
not been given
Craig low
to Arr. Farnall before the 4th of February,
fur-
nished to him, he did not believe one word of.' oiteriejefew
it would have constituted the principal charge in the first
instance. Between the 16th of January and the formal
application for the issue of the commission, Mrs. Craig,
unknown to her husband, had written to the Bishop,
begging him, if possible, to put a stop to these proceedings,
and in his reply, his Lordship, after stating that it
was advisable on Mr. Craig's account that the
investi-
gation should take place, added that no one would re-
joice more than himself in Mr. Craig's vindication.
Certainly, no one could suppose after that letter that
there would be any obstacle on the part of the Bishop