The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1841.

THE NEW LORD MAYOR.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—In the columns of your liberal paper I
noticed recently with pleasure the spirited and
praiseworthy manner you spoke of the benevo-
lent character of Mr. Pirie, when called upon to
exercise his public functions as Lord Mayor, and
hope, therefore, you will insert the following
case, which deserves some public notice,
showing at once his capacity as a man
of business, and liberal and generous
disposition as Chief Magistrate, willing to ex-
tend his protection to all classes of traders,
;though they may not legally have a claim to it,
as in the case of aliens, whom the law does not
license to trade as sworn brokers without being
freemen of the city. The following ease will
show the present state of the laws :—A broker
in the wool trade lodged an information through
the city solicitor against another, for allowing a
foreigner to act under his name. The Court of
Aldermen proceeded against the offending party,
who let the action go by default, consequently
incurred the penalty and forfeiture of his license.
The informer thought by these means, paltry
as they were, to get rid of art active competitor,
who,from his industrious and business-like habits,
no doubt excited his jealousy; but the Lord
Mayor, having inquired more fully into all - the
circumstances of toe cases and finding the foreign
gentleman, who has resided upwards of 16 years
in this country, to bear an unimpeachable,
honest character, admitted him at °wee as an
alien broker, having the privilege to appoint
twelve alien brokers to the city, and for which
office I believe as much as 1,0001. had been given
before the Jews were allowed to take up their
freedom. This reflects much credit upon Mr.
Pme, and if he goes on in this liberal and hand-
some manner will justly merit a higher title,
which Providence, under rather extraordinary
and happy auspices, appears to hit've destined
for him.

The brokers' laws form a fit subject of inquiry,
and I am rather surprised the common informers
do not more frequently catch hold of them. But
I cannot see why foreigners who are residents in
the country paying rent and taxes should not be
permitted to take
.up the freedom of the City,
for purposes of trading either as brokers or
Merchants, and what would the Chineoe say to a
principle which the first commercial City in the
world will not recognise, when we are at present
compelling them to adopt it by force of arms.

"Live and let lire"
is a good motto, and let all men of all grades and
nations reap the fruits of their honest labour and
industry.

I am, Mr. Editor, your obedient servant,
A FRIEND TO ALL MANKIND.
City, Dec. 1, 1841.

DEATH of SIR HENRY FREELING.
We regret to learn that Sir H. Freeling, Bart.,
died suddenly on Monday last. He was in town
on Saturday, quite well; but he had been in rather
delicate health for some time previously. Sir
Henry was son of the first Baronet, by his first
wife, the daughter of Christian Carstadt, Esq., of
London. He was born 1789. He married in
1816 the daughter of Robert Lang, Esq., of
Moor Park, Surrey, and succeeded to his father
in 1836. The first Baronet, his father, was Se-
cretary to the General I'ost•ofiice for more than
thirty years. The family seats are Ford and
Uutchings, Sussex. His son, Francis Freeling,
Esq.; born in 1816, is his heir. The deceased was
one of the Commissioners of Customs.
INQUEST ON THE BODY.

Last evening at six o'clock, an inquisition was
taken before Mr. T. Wakley, M.P., Coroner, at
the Victoria Tavern, Hyde Park-square, on view
of the body of Sir G. H. Freeling, Bart., aged
52, one of the Commissioners of her Majesty's
Customs, and eldest son of the late Sir Francis
Freeling, Bart., formerly Deputy Postmaster-
General, whose death occurred under the cir-
cumstances below detailed :—Ophelia Gilling-
ham., housemaid in the service of Mrs. Lang, a
lae,y of independent fortune, No. 7, Hyde Park-
gardens, deposed that the deceased Baronet,
whose residence was in Connaught-place West,
had for the last six weeks been staying on a visit
at her mistress's house. Witness, at the de-
ceased's request, had been in the habit of calling
him every morning. On Tuesday morning last,
about half past seven o'clock, witness, as usual,
proceeded to his sleeping apartment, and having
knocked at the door several times and received no
answer, she opened it, and on entering the room
saw deceased lying on his face on the floor, in his
night dress. She approached him, and on raising
his head found it to be quite cold. She screamed
aloud, and on the housekeeper and footman com-
ing up, a surgeon was sent for, who pronounced
life to have been for some time extinct. Witness
last saw deceased alive on Monday morning,
when he was, to all appearance, well in health.
Mr. Barker, a surgeon, said that the history of the
deceased Baronet's health bad been such as to leave
no doubt that he had died of disease of the heart.
Walter Phillips, butler to Mrs. Lang, stated that
he saw deceased last alive at the tea table, atnine
o'clock on Monday night. He then seemed in
his usual health. On witness going into de-
ceased's bedroom, after he had been found as de-
scribed, he observed that the bed had been laid
in. There was nothing disturbed in the room,
and witness had not the slightest suspicion that
deceased destroyed himself. There being no
other witnesses, Mr. Wakley remarked that the
inquiry had arrived at that stage that it was for
the Jury to consider whether they would have
the body opened or not. After some discussion
the Jury expressed themselves perfectly satisfied
with the evidence that had been adduced, and
returned a verdict :—" That the deceased, Sir
George Henry Frceling, was found dead, and that
the cause of his death was natural."

FRACAS AT BUCKINGHAM
PALACE.
(From a Correspondent of the Post.)
On Tuesday last a long investigation took place at
the Board of Green Cloth, before the Lord Steward of
her Majesty's Household, when nearly twenty persons
of the Royal establishment were examined, touching an
affray between Mr. Norton, the Deputy Comptroller of
her Majesty's Household, and Mr. Francatelli, chief
cook of the Royal kitchen.
It is well known that broils, jealousies, and ill-feeling,
to a great extent, have been existing in the Royal es-
tablishment ever since the appointments (at the instance
of his Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex) of the Hon.
Charles Augustus Murray to the office of Comptrollen
of her Majesty's Household. That gentleman, imme-
diately on entering office, caused many old and valuable
servants of the Royal Household to be pensioned, or sent
to the rightabout, in o:der to make way for a large num-
ber of French servants, who now fill some of the prin-
cipal offices in the Royal establishment.
Mr. Norton, by his judicious management, has done
much towards allaying the ill-feeling among the ser-
vants, which this injudicious change naturally created,
and, by his straightforward, manly conduct, has gained
the respect of those over whom he has had control.
Francatelli, on the contrary, has kept his department in
continual broils, which have been the came of many dis-
missals and numerous complaints to the Lord Stewart.
On Monday last Francatelli took an opportunity of in-
sulting Mr. Norton in the presence of all the Pages and
(:bout forty others, when high words ensued, which ended
in a policeman being sent for to take Francatelli into
custody, but he managed to make his escape before the
officer arrived. The result of the investigation was the
suspension of Francatelli until the matter shall be laid
before her Majesty and his Royal Highness l'rince Al.
bert, when there is no doubt such measures will be
adopted as may prevent a recurrence of such disgrace-
' ful proceedings.

GREAT NORTH OF ENGLAND RAILWAY.
Traffic returns for tho week ending Nov. 29, 1841 :
Passengers £757 3 7
Merchandizo

£1,321 15 4
Darlington, Dec. 1. D. O'BRIEN, Secretary.

,_..___—_----„----
ARUNDEL.—The liabilities of the Arundel
banking house of llopkins and Drewitt are supposed to
exceed 100,0001. The greatest consternation prevailed
in this town and neighbourhood immediately that the
event became known ; and a partial run on the bank of
Henty and Co. was the consequence. During the day a
well attended meeting, convened by the Mayor, was held
at the Town Hall, at which a resolution was unanimously
passed of perfect confidence in the banks of Henty and
Co., at this town and other places, and of the intention
of those present to continue taking the notes of the firm
as heretofore. It is consolatory to add that the above
stoppage is said to be owing to a disagreement between
the partners of the bank, arising out of a complaint by
the junior partner (who is not an acting one)
that the
senior had engaged in a transaction which had not come
legitimately within the business of the bank. The firm
has caused a notice to be posted to the following affect :
" Messrs. Hopkins and Drewitt earnestly request that
their creditors will meet them to-morrow (Wednesday),
at two o'clock, at the Norfolk Arms,"—from which it is
inferred that Messrs. Hopkins and Drewitt are in a situa-
tion to communicate a tolerably favourable account of the
state of their affairs ; indeed, the general impression
seems to be that the estate will pay well, if not in full.
The inconvenience, however, which it will occasion, and
the effect which it is producing upon business, are very
considerable.—Brighton Gazette.
Much anxiety has been felt by the public in
general, but more especially be the citizens of London,
as to the completion of the Wellington Statue, the com-
mission for which was in the hands of the late Sir
Francis Chantroy. Various idle reports have been in
circulation • those, however, most conversant with the
position of affairs in the deceased artist's atelier seem
perfectly easy on the point, feeling confident that this
noble work will be satisfactorily '.completed under the
hands of Mr. Weeks, who has, in fact, for a long time
tpast, had the entire execution of the models which have
proceeded from the studio of Sir Francis, his own health
having,- for a very considerable period, precluded him
from any interference.

MURDER AND SUICIDE AT pEN-

- -
XINGTON:
The neighbourhood of Pennington was thrown into
state of great excitement, on Mond* iri Corlsevittchee. of
a poor woman,
rittitt Bitty Thompson, having suffo-
cated her infant child, and afterwards committed suicide.
The Most intense interest was manifested as to the cause
of this melancholy occurrence, which was attributed by
some to a feeling of recklessness, arising from the ex-
treme destitution of deceased, who was reported to have
been a woman of sober and industrious habits. She oc-
cupied a cellar in Smithy-street, where she endeavoured
by weaving and occasionally washing, to support herself
and four illegitimate children. The father of the eldest
(a boy about twelve years of age) being dead, and the
father of the other three (a man named William Wood)
having seoreely contributed anything towards their sup-
port, deceased was reduced to circumstances of great
distress ; and her earnings were found altogether ina-
dequate to supply the family with the necessaries of life.
During the past week she was reduced to a state of
extreme destitution ; and having applied to Wood for
some assistance, he sent her word that he would neither
come to see her nor send her any help. In about
two hours afterwards she was found hanging from a
rafter in the ceiling of her cellar, and her infant daugh-
ter (usually called Elizabeth Wood), suffocated in a mug
of water. On Wednesday an inquest was held on view
of the bodies, before Mr. W. S. Rutter, at the Royal
Oak, Pennington, when the following evidence was
tticen :—Elizabeth Marsden stated as follows : I live in
Smithy-street, next door to the cellar occupied by the
deceased, who was a single woman. The infant was
about eight months old. Deceased had three other chil-
dren, all of whom are now living. The eldest is a boy
about twelve years of age. His father is dead. William
Wood, who lives in West Legh, is the reputed father of
the other three children. She was sometimes employed
at washing, and sometimes at weaving ; when at the lat-
ter she was not able to earn more than 2s. 9d. a week, and
to obtain so much it was necessary that she should work
day and night. She was occasionally employed at Mr.
Jackson's. She paid one shilling a week for her cellar.
I last saw her alive on Sunday night. She came to
our house to buy some onions and a little pepper.
I was in her house about nine o'clock on Sunday night,
and saw them eating their suppers. Perhaps she had
no dinner, for she had very little provisions on Saturday.
On Monday morning I understood she had sent one of
the children to the father for money. About eleven
o'clock she came to my house, and my mother-in-law
asked her if she had got anything from him. She said,
" No." My mother-in-law advised her to go to him
again. I saw no more of her until I saw her hanging.
She belonged to Hindley, which is in the Wigan union.
She told ine that she had been at the Board of Guar-
dians once, seeking assistance, and they threatened to
take her children from her and send her to Kirkdale,
if ever she applied again. This was about two months
ago. All the money she had ever received from Wood
amounted only to 525. About sixteen or seventeen weeks
ago she had 4s. from him, which she gave for her rent
when she got it. On Saturday night week she had
half-a-crown, and bought some coals and pota-
toes for the ensuing week. She earned Bd. in a house
where she had been washing; and she got 3d. from
me. On Thursday night she borrowed 6d., with which
she bought 3d. worth of coals, and 3d. worth of jannock
bread. On Saturday night she came in to pay me the
6d., but I would not take it from her, although I am
very poor myself. This was all the money she had to
support herself and three children for the last week. She
was a very hard-working clean woman, and remarkably
so according to her situation in life. She had seldom
more to live on, as far as I could learn, than 2s. 6d. a
week. James Smith, of Chowbent, is the landlord of
the cellar, and he sent bailiffs there twice for the rent ;
but, seeing her destitute condition, they could not find it
in their hearts to sell the few articles of furniture she
possessed.—[A gentleman present stated that, on one ac-
casion, the bailiff was so much touched with her destitute
condition, that he gave her half-a-crown.] The deceased
had three children by Wood, the eldest of whom is a boy,
seven years of age, and the next a girl, about eighteen
months old, and the child that was drawned, who was
eight months old. _ _ _

Alice Heap deposed as follows :—I live in Smithy
street, and was present when the cellar-door was broken
open. I went in, and saw the child in the mug, with its
head in the water, and its feet up. One of its hands
was on the edge of the mug, and its head and shoulders
were quite covered with the water. I ran out with it
into Ellen Boydell's back yard, but it was quite dead,
and appeared to have been so for some time. I believe
the child was put into the mug by deceased. It was a
fine child ; but, as it could not walk, it could not have
got to the mug itself. The mug was about a quarter of
a yard from the feet of the deceased. I have heard the
neighbours say that she was very badly off; but I never
spoke to her myself.
Edward Thompson, the eldest son of the deceased, a very
fine boy, about twelve years of age, was then examined.
He said he sometimes worked in Mr. Jackson's garden, bat
had not done anything for many weeks. His mother
washed for one woman, who gave ber a shilling a week,
and she earned 2s. 9d. a cut by weaving. She could
weave a cut in the week, but she did not do so regularly.
She had no assistance from the town. She applied once
for assistance since her mother died, but got nothing.
The Board threatened to put her into prison if she ap-
plied again. He heard her say so, and she cried very
much at the time. She had told several of the neighbours
the same thing. The deceased and her children had
sometimes oatmeal porridge twice a day, and sometimes
nothing at all, [Here the child burst into tears and be-
came so affected as scarcely to have the power of utter-
ance.] On Sunday morning they had meal porridge fur
breakfast, and potatoes without anything else for din-
ner, and- some potatoes stewed in water with an onion
for supper. The porridge was always thin, and they
hardly ever had more than a basin full amongst them all.
As the inquiry was likely to occupy a considerable
time, and appeared likely to be of great importance, par-
ticularly on account of what had been stated in reference
to the Board of Guardians, Mr. Rutter considered it ad-
visable to adjourn the inquest till next day. Manchester
Guardian of Wednesday.

THE BRAZILIAN TREATY.—As doubts exist
r tssec,
manufactures,
the
following
e nt er as to the period of expiry of the Treaty with Brazil,
when it is expected that higher duties will be laid on
Btraidt iesh o e
mer-
chant here,. from Lord Canning, that that Treaty cannot
letter,i e
addressedsting to
to al I
ai n the
expire before November, 1844:—" Foreign-office, Nov.
24, 1841.—Sir,—I am directed by the Earl of Aberdeen
to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3d inst.,
requesting to be informed of the views of her Majesty's
Government as to .the time at which the Treaty
between Great Britain and Brazil is to terminate; and
I am to acquaint you that Lord Aberdeen has repeated
to the Brazilian Minister at this Court, that which was
stated to him by Lord Palmerston upon this subject,
namely, that her Majesty's Government entertain no
doubt that the meaning. of the 28th article of the Treaty it
of 1827 is, that the notice of the termination of that
Treaty cannot be given before the 10th of November,
1542, and, consequently, as the Treaty is not to termi-
nate before the end of two years from the date of such
notice, her Majesty's Government maintain that the 10th
of November, 1844, is the earliest day om which the
Treaty can expire.—l am, Sir, your most obedient humble
ervant, CANNING."—G/asgete Herald.
SINGULAR INSTANCE op LONGEVITY.—
Died at Valencia, on the 18th of November, in his 106th
year, Mr. John Murphy, commonly called " Paul
Jones." He had been taken prisoner by that remarkable
man, commanding a French squadron off the coast of
Kerry. When he sent a boat ashore at Valentia for a
supply of water the people seized on the boat and crew, and
young Murphy being on board his vessel at the time, as
pilot, Paul Jones carried. him off, and he was compelled to
serve for two years in a French frigate, during which time
he accumulated a good sum of prize-money. He lived on
potatoes and milk, and, notwithstanding his wealth,
never increased his comforts. He was a remarkably
strong man, and, till within the last two years, hale and
robust, and walked and rode. He voted at the election
of 1834.

LORD MORPETH.—On the arrival of Lord
Morpeth by the last packet at Halifax, an address was
presented to him in the name and by the friends
of Irishmen in that city. This address was pre-
sented by the Honourable M. Tobin, accompanied
by several other gentlemen, and was ac'inowledged
in warm terms by his Lordship who, in reply, said—
" You have accurately reminded me that nearly the
last sounds which met my ears on the shores of the Old
World, were the expressions of good will and approval
uttered in the ancient capital of Ireland, at the termina-
tion of my official connection with that country ; you
may judge how it must touch the inmost feelings of my
heart, to find these accents echoed by Irishmen, and the
friends of Irishmen, on the first ground I tread upon the
other side of the Atlantic."—Montreal Courier.
An accident has this week happened to Prince
Nicholas Esterhazy, who is at present on a v;sit to the
Earl of Jersey, at Middleton-park, Oxon. On Tuesday
last, Mr. Drake's hounds met at Middleton toll-bar, near
that nobleman's residence, when his Highness, while
enjoying that fine old English sport, met with an unfor-
tunate accident, which caused the death of a very valu-
able horse he was riding ; but we are happy to say that
our informant states that the Prince escaped without
injury.—Aylesbury .News.
THE NEW TORY MAGISTRATES.---We are
happy to learn that the Council are about to take up this
matter.
specialtl meetinga of the Corporation is ap-
pointed y, at eleven o'clock, " to
to A
beled on
consider the letter addressed by Secretary Sir James
Graham to the Mayor, announcing the appointment of
six additional Magistrates for this city." Should they
decide on making any representation to the Home Se-
cretary on the subject, it may not be amiss to direct his
attention to the fact that the plan he is adopting of no-
minating Magistrates without inquiring into the senti-
ments of the inhabitants in regard to them, is actually
worse than that which is obtained under the old regime.
—Worcester ( hronicle.
THE ARMY,—We understand that none of the
general officers commanding districts in Ireland will be
removed until spring. It is said that Sir Wm. Napier is
to succeed Sir James Douglas as Governor of Guernsey.
Colonel Napier is spoken of as the successor of Colonel,
now General D'Aguilar, as Assistant Adjutant. General
There is a rumour
Frederick Stovin, is
for Ireland. Sir Thomas Wiltshire isof tAloia
jreopr-laGc
ceneSrairl
itlnhVaitlthliteahme latenl newly
wr aßir3rr,
Brevet)
cv (re peoar ot
emadt oGtceedhnat oetrhatalh,me
s. rank of
to have the command of a district in Ireland.—Dublin
Mail.

WEEKS, THE GREENWICH PENSIONER.—
Miss Anne Weeks, the aunt of Weeks, the insane Green-
wich pensioner, who left him 120,000/., formerly resided
in the city of Gloucester, occasionally removing to Chel-
tenham, and other places in the neighbourhood. She
was herself a person of great eccentricity, as well as of
very penurious habits. The will is, however, disputed,
an a plentiful harvest of litigation seems likely to accrue.

STRIKE OF THE MASONS.

,
At it iiietink tlf Delegates from the different trades
Of the, metropoliS; held at !Le Craven's Head, Drury-
lant, Noiit3iiibef 04, for the jtitpme of assisting the
Masons in their strike at end ffe* 1-1 e .14 of Parliament,
Woolwich Dockyard, and Nelson's A,fonineut,
Mr. BUTLER, carpenter, in the Chair.
After hearing the letter read of Thomas Hickey to
the Editor of the Mornintj Advertiser, stating his acci-
dent at the new. Houses of Parliament, and his treatment
and subsequent discharge by George Allen, the foreman
of Grissell and Peto ; and the replies by It. J. Wardle,
G. Allen, and John Baker thereto, and also the statement
of Patrick Wheelan, it was unanimously resolved, " That
two of this Meeting, not masons, be appointed to investi-
gate the correctness or incorrectness of the statement
made by Thomas Hickey on the one side, and Messrs.
Wardle, Allen, and Baker, on the other; *and that T. J.
Dunning, bookbinder, and J. Baker, plasterer, be ap.
pointed for that purpose."
The undersigned being thus appointed, lost no time in
making the necessary inquiries.
The allegations of Messrs. Wardle, Allen, and Baker,
contradicting the statement of T. Hickey, they place in

order, numbering each.
IL J. Wardle states:-
1. " That Thos. Hickey met with his accident on the
25th of February, instead of the 13th, as alleged by him.
2. '• That he did not complain to him (IL J. Wardle)
of Allen's conduct.

3. " That he returned to his work, March 29, after an
absence of five weeks, and not of 14, as he stated.
4. .` That in no instance have the foremen on the works
made use of the language stated by T. Hickey, in his
presence, upon men being discharged."'
Gee. Allen states:-
5. " That the circumstances and language imputed to
him by T. Hickey, as to the cause of his dismissal as ma-
son's labourer, from the new Houses of Parliament, is ab-
solutely false.
6. " That he firmly declares he is not in the habit of
discharging men without good and sufficient reason.
7. " He begs to append the statement of Patrick
Whcelan, the individual alluded to in his previous state-
ment, in confirmation of that statement.

John Baker states :-
8. " That he is one of the foremen of masons at the
new houses of Parliament, and that he perfectly recol-
lects Thomas Hickey returning to his work, and the fact
of his working six weeks after his said return.
9. " That he (John Baker) considers George Allen
perfectly justified in discharging the said Thomas Hickey."
The above statements are given in the form of affida-
vits, intending them to be such but the Magistrate re-
fused, on account of some le7al objection, to sign them.
Whetner-the objection of the Magistrate was made before
or after the parties had taken the oath, the deponents, of
course, have not informed the public.
1. With respect to the date of the accident, the under-
signed, after carefully inquiring at the Westminster Hos-
pital, and elsewhere, have no doubt that it happened on
the 25th of February, and that, consequently, T. Hickey
is mistaken in believing it to have happened on the 13th.
This; however, as all parties are agreed as to its having
happened, and as to its serious nature, is a matter of
slight importance.
2. The statement of T. Hickey is as follows :—" I then
went to the pay-clerk, and told him of the usage I had
received from Allen." Here, also, appears to have been
an error, for it was to the time-keeper, and not to the
pay-clerk, to whom the complaint was made. This error,
which relates only to the person to whom the complaint
was made, and not the treatment complained of, is thus
explained. There are two persons to whom all employed
on those works had to apply previous to being paid—the
time-keeper and the pay-clerk ; having first to go to the
time-keeper for their " time," as it is called, and then to
the pay-clerk, who paid them for the time which had
thus been previously given. It appears that T. Hickey
wanted to be paid for two hours of the morning on which
he was discharged, which Allen refused to allow the
time-keeper to give ; Hickey, therefore, could not go
to the pay clerk for these two hours, for he had not got
" his time " for them, a circumstance which Allen must
well have known, and consequently must have perceived
the error, and remembered its cause immediately. The
undersigned, therefore, in confirming the statement of
Wardle that no complaint was made to him cannot ac-
quit him of gross partiality in his omitting to correct the
error, after he had pointed it out, thus made by T.
Hickey ; for the undersigned are convinced that both
Wardle, Allen, and Baker, well knew to whom the com-
plaint was made, and are convinced, therefore, that the
pointing out of this error without correcting it, was
only for the purpose of leading the public to believe that
the circumstances complained of had not taken place.
The undersigned give the following shortened account
of the matter in Hickey's words to them. After the
first ebullition of anger, when Allen said "he did not
want any d—d Irish cripples there," he (Hickey) stopped
about ten minutes to see if he would forgive him (relent),
but he (Allen) came back, and told him "If he did not go
he would put his boots in his backside ;" he then went to
the time-keeper for his money, who told him it was "all
nonsense," and went to Allen, but returned to him (from
Allen) and told him that it was " all up" with him.
Allen went off (away) for about a quarter of an hour,
during which time Hickey waited near the office to be
paid or to " get his time" for the two hours in question.
When Allen came back he (Hickey) asked him how
long he was to wait for his money ? Allen told him if
he did not go about his business he would give him in
charge of a policeman. This took place on Thursday,
May 6, 1841.
3. The 3d by Wardle, the pay clerk, and the Bth by
Baker, the deputy foreman, are the same, each impugn-
ing Hickey's correctness as to the time he was, in the
employ of Grissell and Peto, after the accident ; they
asserting the period to have been six weeks, while he
five and a half days. The undersigned, when they as-
certained from the Secretary of the Westminster Hospi-
tal the date Hickey left that hospital, March 30, in-
quired (whether he had been afterwards an out-patient,
and, if so, for how long ?—for the undersigned did not
know then he :had left the hospital without leave ; the
Secretary replied that he could not give that informa-
tion, nor did he believe such information could be readily
obtained; but, said he, " if the inquiry is made with
reference to the statements in the papers ' (alluding to
Wardle's, Allen's, and Baker's statements) " it is certain
that, in the case of a broken leg, the bones could
not knit together, so that the limb could be used, in the
short time, for such a process, from Feb. 25 to March 30,
less than six weeks that he wasin the hospital." If this
be correct, of which medical men can best decide, it
must have been physically impossible that Hickey could
have returned to work on the 29th of March, as stated
by Wardle, the pay-clerk, and Baker, the deputy fore-
man, which, on oath, they "so perfectly well remem-
ber." The undersigned, upon questioning Hickey on
this point, elicited from him that a few days before he
left the hospital he inquired whether he could not be al-
lowed to leave, when the surgeon told him that he would
not allow him even to leave his bed for a fortnight. He,
however, did leave, without the consent of the surgeon,
on the 30th, in a " cab," but soon found that the
" Doctor" was right, and, after a few days, applied for
medicine at the hospital, when he was told, that as he
had left contrary to orders, they could do no more
for him. He further stated, that he was able to do no-

thing for five weeks after he left the hospital. If
this be correct, which, as it is against himself, there cane
be no reason to disbelieve, it is again impossible, and
utterly so, if we allow competent medical know-
ledge to the surgeon of the hospital, for Hickey to resume
his employment on the 29th of March.
The undersigned do not notice the error of making
Hickey to be at work on the 29th, when he did not leave
the hospital until the 30th, for that might be entirely
verbal. In pursuing this part of the inquiry they felt
the injustice of calling upon Hickey to prove a negative.
All inquiries they hare made, both of those in the house
where he lodged, and of all besides, have confirmed their
belief that his statement is correct. The landlady of the
house where Hickey resided when he left the hospital
is positive as to his not being at work for four weeks out
of the five. She has no doubt as to the whole, but can
swear to four weeks' inability to perform work. The
undersigned inquire of Messrs. Baker and Wardle how
they knew Hickey was in the employment of their mas-
ters from the 29th of March to the 6th of May. Is it
by consulting their books for that period, or is it only
from the assumption that he must have been employed
Grissell and Peto immediately after he left the hos-
pital, of which period the undersigned know due in-
quiries were made by that firm at the hospital? If it be
from consulting their books, the undersigned publicly
challenge them to produce those books. Nothing can
be, more easy than their production and if Ilickey
were really on the works for the'period they were ready
to swear to, nothing is more certain than that his
name must be found on the books for the whole of that
time.

If, however, it be cnly from the mere assumption, the
undersigned beg to suggest to them that an oath is no
trifling matter, and to recommend, for their own sakes,
that the next time they tender an oath, or take an oath,
to take care that they really do " perfectly well recol-
lect" the circumstances to which they are about to swear.
4. R. J. Wardle denies that the foremen on the works
have in any instance made use of the language stated by
T. Hickey in his presence upon men being discharged.—
Does Mr. Wardle really intend this to implicate the
statement of T. Hickey? if so, he ought to have specially
named not the " foremen on the works," but George
Allen. Hickey has brought no charges against the
" foremen on the works," but only against George Al-
len. It has already been admitted that no complaint was
made to him, the pay-clerk, and that, therefore, the lan-
guage described might not have been used in his pre-
sence. But does he mean to say because it was not used
in his presence that it was not used at all? The un-
dersigned beg to inform him that if it really be true
that Allen never made use of the language described " in
his presence," that they have seen very ma persons
lately employed on the works, before whom and t w
the same individual most freely indulged init.
5. The undersigned come now to the extraordinary
declaration made or tendered upon oath by George
Allen, denying the circumstance and the language al-
leged to have been used in the dismissal of T. Hickey.
The undersigned read over the statement of T. Hickey
in his presence, and closely questioned him as to the
circumstances stated, and the language used, when he
reiterated every particular. Before doing so, the under-
signed requested him to relate what really did take place
on the occasion, when they found the same things related
by him
with minute particulars of detail, which it would
have been impossible for him to suggest, if his statement
had not been true. In opposition to Allen's denial,
therefore, they confidently place T. Hickey's reiteration.
It is impossible not to be struck with the manner in
which this charge from the first has been met by Allen.
e ' First, he evaded all knowledge of it, affecting
iing,
of to beve
believe
it to refer to the case Whelan,
while it is impossible that ' he could for a mo-
ment have imagined it to relate to him. Nor
is it possible he could have forgotton it ; his two
friends,
Wardle and Baker, who so "perfectly well re-
collect" all about it, render this supposition I
impos-
sible. If, then, be could not h forgotten it, and could
an a so

not for a moment have supposed the masons alluded to
Patrick Whoelso—for this supposition is unutterably
absurd—what couikl have prompted the evasion—an eva-
sion .now, since the publication of Wheelan's statement,
so gross and palpable ? The undersigned are compelled
to reply—a guilty. knowledge of the whole transaction,
and a wish to prevent all knowledge of it going to the
public. The follcasing are the testimonies of those who
faqir and heard the whole transaction :
" I remember Thomas Hickey being discharged. I
was close to Allen and him at the time he was dis-
charged ; and heaoi Allen make use of language simi-
lar to that which is mentioned in Hickey's letter. I saw
T. Hickey the new day after he was discharged, and he
told me he had got employment in the firm of Mr. Cubitt.
" THOMAS REID, Mason.

"24, Tufton-street, Westminster."
" I remember Thomas Hickey being discharged. I
was close to the place where Allen discharged him ; was
ware that Hickey had had his leg broken. I heard
Aif,sn swearing at Hickey, and make use of language
similar. to that which is stated in Hickey's letter. The
last
wolms I heard was Allen's telling him to be off the
works altc,,
o:ether.

" THOMAS CHARNOCK, Mason.
" New Cross, Kent."
stances does this man deny ? Does
liLcz
But what circuit,. 9 No ; then of co
mess and inabilizirtsey of
he cannot
he deny the accident
ey.
deny the subsequent wei, dmit that he discharged
H
reasonable
false, Ile is now compelled to is for ? If all alleged
What did he discharge him to state the
r
false, what could be more easy tha, and what more im-
and proper grounds of his diaelittme,
"s he discharmcues otfh thetedve
perative for his own vindication NV,
for not doing work enough ? If so, &II a
been discharged for his weakness in cotiFiegts%., 4o a full
accident, for he was not, nor is he now able i' , t ,
day's; work. Was he discharged for being if**.
Allen has not pretended that he was insolent. \Val h..
dishonest ? certainly not ; for they who could so reaay
notice the discrepancies explained above, would eagerly
have made known every particular. If then, he were
neither insolent nor dishonest, he could only have been
discharged for not doing work enough. A valid reason
certainly, if the man had been !asp but a most cruel pro-
cedure, when the man was weak, through injuries re-
ceived in the servicesof his employers. Was this the
" good and sufficient cause," which he " firmly "
swears to, for the discharge of Thomas Hickey ?
6. Allen also states on oath that he is not in the habit of
discharging men without good and sufficient cause. This
is no reply to the statement of Hickey. Hickey does
not accuse Allen of being in the habit of discharging
men without cause ; he makes a specific charge of his
being discharged himself without cause an with cir-
cumstances of peculiar cruelty ; and it can be no reply
to this charge for Allen to say, that he is not in the
habit of discharging men without cause. If all the dr,
cumstances and the language imputed be false, thii state-
ment is superfluous ; if true, it is no reply to them. The
masons certainly accused Allen of being in the habit of dis-
charging men without sufficient reason, and offered to
prove their charge before any fair arbitration. On which
occasion Grissell and Peto publicly announced that they
would not allow any agent of their's " further to com-
municate with the men, because they had fully satisfied
their minds on the subject;" that is, as the undersigned
supposed, that the charges against Allen were false ;
which reason, if true, was sufficient at least for them.
They have now destroyed this reason. It now appears,
that so far from " being satisfied," except of the truth
of the charges, the moment a wrong date is mentioned,
or an error in naming the different departments of their
establishment is committed, which may serve as a peg
on which to hang a general denial, they are again in the
field by their agents, eager not to let such an oppor-
tunity pass without taking advantage of it; clinging
with convulsive tenacity to the hope, that these mistakes,
which make not the slightest difference to the main
charges, may implicate the whole.
7. As the letter of Patrick Wheelan has nothing to do
with T. Hickey-, the undersigned do not feel called upon
to make any remark upon it, further than to state that
they are glad to find, if true, there appears to be one in-
stance in which Grissell and Peto behaved well to those
injured in their employ. They can only say that it con-
trasts well with their treatment of T. Hickey ; for while
his friends of his own class collected what their scanty
means would allow for him, while in the hospital, Messrs.
Grissell and Peto rendered him no assistance whatever.

The undersigned, with regret, are compelled to state,
that it appears to have been quite an unusual thing for
Grissell and Peto to render any assistance to those in-
jured in their employ. We give two instances, out of
many that might be adduced :
Thomas Wade fell with the dam when it gave way
during the summer, and was most severely injured.
Messrs. Grissell and Peto sent to him, while in the hos-
pital, to say that neither he nor his family should want
for anything. They however gave him nothing, but
stopped his time up to the very half hour of the accident.
He got 11. from the box kept on the works to receive
charitable donations ; but this he did not receive until
after he had recovered and been at work some time, and
then not until dissatisfaction had been expressed by the
men to Allen at his not having given him a portion of
the money from the donation-box. He was supported
while in the hospital by a voluntary subscription among
the men, amounting to 61. 3s.
Watson Ellis, by an accident last winter had his arm
broken, by which he was unable to work 14 weeks. HQ
received nothing from Messrs. Grissell and Peto—no-

thing out of the box.
Mr. Baker appears not to be content with " perfectly
well recollecting" upon oath the return of Hickey to his
work, upon which the undersigned have before remarked,
but he volunteers an affidavit to the truth of an opinion
He swears, or was ready to swear, that in his opinion
George Allevyas justified
,in discharging T. Hickey !'
The undersigned no doubt but that here, at least,
he might safely be believed; but they would remind him
that an affidavit is not the way to prove the truth of an
opinion. The truth of an opinion can only be proved
by substantial reasons, which reasons must be supported
by facts. It would have been to the purpose if he had
stated the reasons and facts which supported his opinion;
but for him to make oath to its truth implies most surely
that he knew his reasons and his facts would not bear
investigation, and that therefore he substituted his oath
in their stead, giving the singular, and withal ludicrous
instance of a man making his testimony valueless by the
very act of swearing to its truth.
From the whole, it appears that T. Hickey has made
two mistakes, first, in believing the accident to have
happened on the 13th of February, while it happened on
the 25th ; and second, in confounding the time-keeper
with the pay-clerk ; a fact which invalidates nothing in
his statement concerning Allen, and, in the position of
one discharged instanter from the works, very easily
made. In all the rest the undersigned believe him to
have been perfectly correct. It appears to the under-
signed that the statements tendered upon oath by War-
dle and Baker were, by implicating the correctness of
dates, and by pointing out the mistake above referred
to, intended to throw a doubt over the whole statement
of Hickey ; a statement which, in the opinion of the un-
dersigned, these deponents were unable to disbelieve ;
which inability also appears to have been shared in by
the exuberantly grateful Patrick Wheelan. Wardle
swears concerning himself to what did not hap-
pen in his presence—and here he is careful
not to mention his friend George Allen—and to
dates. Baker to dates and to the truth of an opinion !
But neither hint their disbelief of Allen's language,
or his cruelty, as specifically detailed by Hickey. Patrick
Wheelan, thorgh overflowing with gratitude, does not
even mention Allen, nor hint, directly or indirectly, the
existence of such a person. Although he is brought
forward by Allen himself, expressly to confirm his pre-
vious statement that he t obtained his place to " tally
bricks," because he " recommended his application to
Messrs. Grissell and Peto for a lighter berth." It is not
always fair to argue from omissions ; but here, where
the wanting testimony is so necessary, and is what
would so instantly suggest itself, the undersigned can-
not but consider its omission as evidence that
the cruelty and language of the man was so no-
torious that it became a thing of which it was
impossible, even for his friends, to express their
dis-
belief. The undersigned, in giving the result of their
investigation, beg to say that they have endeavoured
most seditiously to discover the truth. They also have
endeavoured to express their opinions with calmness.
They now leave it to the public to judge how far Allen
has been successful in clearing himself from the
charges of cruelty and swearing, and how far Mr.
Wardle, the pay-clerk, and Mr. Baker, the deputy fore-
man, have been successful in defending their friend George
Allen. THOS. JOSEPH DUNNING, Bookbinder.
JOIIN BAKER, Plasterer.

LONDON MECHANICS' INSTITU-

oßfillthieil3SuEbescßribers to
eeptvielnlng.ing in the theatre of
the Institution, Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane,
IDval
Quarterly
A hT held
IIdI l OFalast
e
this T he T
Institutioni °N
General—
for the purpose of receiving the Report of the Secretary
for the first quarter.
Dr. TURNABOUT took the Chair, and called on the Se-
cretary to report, which commenced by expressing the
sorrow of the Committee in having the painful duty to
announce the lamented death of Dr.Birkbeck,the late Pres-
ident of the Institution. The Report then set forth the ac-
counts of the Institution, recapitulating the various dona-
tions recently made to the Institution.' The Secretary con-
cluded by reading two letters, one from Miss Birkbeck,
and the other from Dr. Birkbeck himself, written but a
few hours before his death. The letter from Miss Birk-
beck was to announce the death of her lamented father,
which took place yesterday morning at six o'clock. It
appeared that the lamented Doctor had called Miss Birk-
beck to-his bedside late en Tuesday evening, and dictated
to her the note alluded to. It expressed his wish to
have been present at the forthcoming anniversary
of the Institution, stating that he had read the programme,
and that he felt confident of its success. This was in
allusion to the concert which ,was to have taken place
this evening.—Mr. Spickett, at the conclusion of
.the
Report, rose and said, that lie felt they would be guilty
°f an ill-reeling, and a want of proper respect to their
late revered President, if they proceeded to the con-
sideration of the Report then. He therefore
next Mondayresubmitted,
that they should defer its consideration till
fortnight.—The Chairman, in
he was sure they were too muchntat
feel-
ings of regret to be in a position to consider the Report.
—The motion was agreed to, and the thanks of the
meeting having been voted to
the Chairman, the meet-
binsgorb the motion, saided in their
was
meet-
ing adjourned. The theatre extremely full.

We have great satisfaction in stating that his
Grace the Duke of Buceleuch is to be the Lord Lieute-
nant of Roxburghshire, in the place of the Marquis of
Lothian, deceased. The loyal subjects of her Majesty
in both divisions of Great Britain will unanimously ac-
claim the appointment as the best that could hare been
made. It is understood that the Lord-President will be
the Lord Lieutenant and Custos Rotulorum of the West
Riding of the county of York, in the place of the Earl of
Harwood, deceased.--Post.