The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-04 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
BAIL COURT, Feb.
THE QUEEN V. HEALEY AND COOKE.
Lord DENMAN gave judgment in this case this morning.
He said that the arguments in this case had taken place
before himself and his brother Judges on Saturday last, and
instead of minutely examining the voluminous affidavits
laid before them, they had come to the conclusion that they
might dispose of the case by adverting to what had appeared
before them in the full and able discussion of the Learned
Counsel engaged in the case. Mr. Wakley, it appeared, was
one of the coroners for the county of Middlesex, and he
had applied for leave to file a criminal information against
the publishers of a libellous attack upon him while engaged
in the execution of the duties of his office. The attack was
coarse and violent, and being circulated in a particular
journal while the inquiry was being conducted, naturally
produced a strong sensation and general excitement. This
was a serious offence, and the proceeding was one which
induced the coroner, and justly so, to seek the protection of
this Court. Amongst the judicial officers of England the
oflice of coroner was one of the most important, and most
required the protection of the higher Judges, to whom he
was equal in many of his functions. His duty was to carry
on inquiries at all times uncertain, and rendered painful by
the presence of the dead, and more so by the suspi-
cion that might attach to the living. Ilis words were
looked upon with jealousy and with distrust, and
he was without the ordinary means of commanding
respect—holding his tribunal in unaccustomed places, and
surrounded by none of the imposing solemnities of justice.
In this particular case the coroner was entitled to commen-
dation for directing an inquiry into the circumstances at-
ten ling the death. The Learned Counsel in the case, con-
fined himself to the expressions used in the libel, and no
complaint was made or attempted to be proved against the
witnesses; and his language, in referring to the evidence,
went only to aflect the conduct of the coroner, whose pro-
ceedings were then under consideration. The inquisition was
held on the body of Frederic John White, a private in the
7th llussars. Ile was a healthy young man, who had un-
dergone corporal punishment previous to his death. It was
thought that he died of this, and such a supposition, if
proved, could hardly fail to make out a case of misconduct
on the part of the officer, or it might be a verdict of murder
or manslaughter might result. In such a charge the medical
men would, in all probability, have been involved, for some
of them were always present on occasions when punishment
was to be inflicted ; and as the deceased had been some time
in the hospital, it was not impossible that he should have
fallen a victim to unskilful treatment. A post-mortem exa-
mination was made, in which the surgeons employed gave it
as their opinion that the punishment had nothing to do with
the death. The coroner, Mr. Wakley, said that
he did not know what opinion the surgeons
had given, but he did not call for the support
or observations of the surgeons of the regiment, but pro-
ceeded, at the suggestion of the jury, to employ Mr. Day, a
respectable surgeon in the neighbourhood, to examine the
body. This form was required to be executed by the 6th
and 7th William IV., chap. 89—when a majority of the jury
were not satisfied with the cause of death as given by the
medical practitioners and others, in the first instance. Mr.
Day thought the cause of death was not connected with the
punishment, and the coroner proposed some questions, evi-
dently with a view of supporting the opposite theory. He
then ordered an examination of the body. and called in the
services of another medical man, an intimate friend of his
own—his early associate, and one who was under some
obligations to him, and who was named Wilson. The Court
must condemn this course. The coroner had placed himself
in the position of a medical man, and he was opposed in a
certain degree to those engaged during the earlier part of the
proceedings. lie ought to have been careful to select a
medical gentleman of known skill and science for the pur-
pose of making the second examination. The coroner
directed that not only the regimental surgeons should be ex-
cluded but also all other persons whatever, and no reason
was assigned for such a proceeding. Mr. Wakley said
that the jury recommended it, but the Court was of opinion
that he ought to have resisted such a recommendation.
Mr. Day persisted in his first opinion, and swore that he
understood from Mr. Wilson that lie (Mr. Wilson) agreed
with him as to the cause of death, and he also stated that
he was surprised when Mr. Wilson afterwards said on the
inquest that he believed that the flogging might have led to
the death of White. The Learned Counsel explained this
circumstance, and endeavoured to explain his views on it
in a manner favourable to Mr. Wakley, but the evidence was
1 given in such a sense as to support the verdict, which
ascribed the death to the punishment. There had been a
remark made on the Coroner's refusal to put Dr. Warren
upon his oath during the inquest, and it had been said that
such a proceeding gave rise to an opinion that he might
afterwards be called before it as a culprit. The verdict attri-
buted the death to the effect of the punishment inflicted,
and added a condemnation of the law allowing such punish-
ment, and an invocation to the people to petition for its
alteration. That appeared to the Court to be quite foreign
to the duties and functions of the jury; the Coroner ought
to have discouraged the introduction of such topics. It was
incumbent upon him to suppress the expression of opinion
ors such an occasion. The Court found also that Mr. Wakley
took the chair at a public meeting to promote the abolition
of flogging in the army and navy, and introduced into his
speech there sonic very caustic remarks upon the late inquest,
and in censuring the author of the libel to which he alluded,
he stated that he complained that in the House of Commons
he (Mr. Wakley) had spoken contemptuously of him. Al-
though the Court could not be supposed to be aware that
such a proceeding took place in the course of the debate, yet
it knew that these debates, however irregularly, found their
way into the public papers, and into the world. If such a
fact occurred as stated, the Court would discharge this rule
on a principle often acted upon in that Court before in such
cases, when the party accused had not entirely refuted the
charge contained in the libel. An advertisement appeared in
the Lancet, having reference to the presentation of a silver
snuff-box to Mr. Wakley, and the libel averred that Mr.
Wakley was influenced by his zeal in conducting the inquest,
and that he was still further influenced by his wish to prove
that the death was caused by the punishment. The Court
, could not say that such a charge was altogether unreasonable.
1 It gave Mr. Wakley great credit for the sincerity of his opi
nion with regard to military flogging, and also for his justice,
as the principle had been in a great degree adopted by the
; state since that time; but was that feeling to influence his
mind in his duty as coroner, so as to lead to the exclusion of
1 the evidence upon an inquest ? The Court thought it was a
case in which he was not in a position to ask it to give its
sanction to a criminal information against the party who had
commented upon his execution of his duty on that occasion
and therefore the Court was of opinion that the rule ough
to be discharged.

upon the coroner's inquisition, on which be was charged as
he principal in the manslaughter of Martha Hobbs, by im-
mersing her in cold water, and placing wet cloths upon her
neck and body, and Hope Betts' the aunt of the deceaseu,
was charged as an accessory by being feloniously present
aiding and assisting.
Mr. Payne was instructed for the prosecution ; Mr. Clark-
son and Mr. Ballantine defended Dr. Lovell, and Mr. Bodkin
with Mr. Diener, appeared for the female defendant.

itsn. Witness immediately suspected fraud, and did not
send the goods. The prisoner came again, and repeated
the same request. Witness then jumped over the
counter, and caught the prisoner as he was run-
ning out of the shop. The prisoner then took up a piece
of wood, and struck him several severe blows. Witness,
however, held the prisoner till a constable arrived, into whose
custody he was consigned.
The prisoner in defence said that a gentleman's servant
asked him to order the articles mentioned to be sent, with
change for a sovereign, to the residence of Mr. Parry. Ire
knew nothing further about it.
Mr. BINGIIAM remanded him till Monday next.
SOUTH lir 1?K.
Tuesday William Burfield, night porter at the Catherine
Wheel lan, Borough, surrendered himself, in discharge of his
bail, to answer the charge of stealing a pocket- book, con-
taining 300/. in Bank of England notes, the property of Mr.
Francis Skipper, of Kingston-on-Thames, as detailed in our
police report of Thursday last.
The complainant having described the circumstances at-
tending the loss of his pocket-book, proceeded to narrate,
that when he gave the prisoner into custody they proceeded
from the inn to the station-house at the rear of this court;
that on leaving the inn they turned to the right, up the
Borough, and passed the end of Adam's- place, which is on
the right-hand side of lligh-street (close to where the
pocket-book and its contents were found the same morning).
The parties who went to the station-house were the coin•
plainant, his friend and relative Mr. West, and two police-
men, and the prisoner; Mr. Gunder, the landlord of the
Catherine Wheel, did not accompany them. The prisoner,
and a policeman by his side, walked before complainant and
Mr. West on passing the end of Adam's-place.
Mr. Humphries, at this stage of the investigation, com-
menced a lengthened cross-examinatiots of the complainant
as to his condition in life, his place of residence, and to ac-
count for his time from the period he left the theatre on the
night of Tuesday up to the time, a quarter before five o'clock
the next morning, when he missed the 3001. from the inside
of his left boot. These questions were answered by the com-
plainant, describing himself as of independent circumstances,
that he resided at Colburn-villa, near Kingston; that he
supported his relative, Mr. West, who accompanied him to
various places of amusement in town, and on the night in
question they had called at several public-houses, at which
he had previously purchased "sweep tickets" for the Derby
and other races.
The complainant objected at first to give answers to some
of the questions put to him by Mr. Humphries, particularly
those relating to his places of abode before he went to live at
Kingston ; but the latter gentleman urged the necessity o
his adopting the same line of cross-examination he had taken
when so serious a charge was made against the accused, as it
was necessary to ascertain whether the complainant and his
friend, Mr. West, were persons of credibility, and whose tes-
timony could be relied upon.
Mr. Cormoinnas remarked that he could not clearly see
the necessity for putting such questions • that an alleged
robbery had been recently committed at an inn in the
Borough; that the money was afterwards found not far dis-
tant from the inn, and must have been dropped by some one
or other of the persons on the way to the station-house;
that he thought it quite an absurd notion to suppose the
complainant had dropped the pocket-book; and that it ap-
peared his friend Mr. West was at another part of the room
when the prisoner pulled off the boot belonging to com-
plainant, which contained the money, and from which it
was taken. However, if Mr. Humphries thought it essential
to the defence, he was at liberty to continue the cross-
examination.
In answer to further questions by Mr. Humphries, the
complainant gave a very minute account of his time from
quitting the theatre on the night in question until his ar-
rival in a cab at the Catherine Wheel,from which it appeared
he and his friend had called at the different houses alluded
to, but, although they had partaken of refreshment at some
of them. still they were both perfectly sober when they got
up into the room of the inn where the robbery was alleged to
have been committed.
In reply to Mr. Comm:max, the complainant said he
distinctly felt the pocket-book inside his boot when he un-
buttoned his trousers' straps to let the prisoner pull the
boots off. When the prisoner pulled the left boot off lie im-
mediately left the room, saying, he wanted to lock the yard
gates, leaving the other boot on complainant's leg. Ile had
hurried out of the room before complainant missed the
pocket-book, and he called out to the prisoner to returr,
and mentioned to him when he came back that the pocket-
book and 300/. were gone; that the prisoner declared
lie knew nothing about it, and threw open his coat
and waistcoat, saying he was willing to be searched ;
and when he (complainant) approached him said that he
would not allow him or his friend to overhaul him in case
they should place anything in his pockets, and he said that
he should call his master up for his protection. Tha com-
plainant further said that the prisoner did not undergo any
search while at the Catherine Wheel, that not being carried
into effect until afterwards, when they got to the station-
house ; that previously to leaving the Catherine Wheel, and
when the circumstances attending the loss of the 300/. were
mentioned to the landlord, he exclaimed that he was satisfied
of the honesty of his servant, and also evinced an objection to
have the police called in, on the plea that his other lodgers
ought not to be disturbed.
Mr. Humphries—Was not the prisoner searched in your
presence at the Catherine Wheel before you went to the
station-house ? Complainant—l did not observe he was
searched by either the landlord or the policeman while in
that house. All I saw was the prisoner merely opening his
iacket and waistcoat, and pull his pockets inside out.
Mr. West, the young man referred to, was next examined,
and he confirmed the complainant's account of the transac-
tion in all its essential points. The witness also underwent
a lengthened cross-examination, in the course of which he
said that he was 19 years of age; had been formerly a wine -
merchant's and a linendraper's clerk at Brighton, but that
within the last three months he had been supported by his
cousin, the complainant The witness also proved that the
prisoner did not undergo a search before they arrived at the
station-house.
Cox, foreman at the Phoenix Gas Works, Bankside, stated
that in walking from his house in Fox's-buildings, Kent-
street, at about a quarter to six o'clock on the morning in
question, he picked up a pocket-book, containing a 100/.and
four 50/. Bank of England notes, in High-street, near
Adam's-court; that the pocket-book was lying on the centre
of the pavement; he took it to the gas company, and gave
it to Mr. Munro, the manager, in whose possession it still
remained. (The pocket-book and its contents were here
produced by Mr. Munro, and identified by Cox as the same
he found, and they were also identified by the owner as his
property.)
Inspector Yates proved that the complainant and Mr.
West were perfectly sober; that the prisoner wag searched
mpeitrghthyertehbw,isebaut nothing was found in his possession.
Policeman 101 M, who took the prisoner from the Cathe-
rine Wheel to the station-house, stated, that on going there
he walked on the prisoner's left side, and that his right band
was at liberty; that on the way the prisoner talked of being
thirsty, and expressed a wish to go into a coffee-shop to
have some coffee. Prisoner's right hand was next to Adams-
place.theconfidenceexpressed He added that he was present at the Catherine
prisoner's honesty, and said that he was certain that he had
not taken the pocket-book and its contents.
Wheel when thpehlrianesd_lorldsheelxasptr
the prisoner and he were before the com-
a wish to enterlium a coffee-shop was between Lant-street and
Norfolk-street, considerably nearer the station-house than
;other persons in passing the spot where the
pAI
pocket-bookdaianman's t-
By Mr. CorrniouAst—The prisoner was not searched at
the Catherine Wheel, but the room in which the parties were
at the inn, and also souse places in the yard, were examined
in quest of the pocket-book.
palancdewas afterwards found.
Two other policemen, who were also called in to the Ca-
therine Wheel, were next examined, and their evidence
merely went to show that the prisoner had not been searched
until taken to the station-house.
After a question had been asked by Mr. COTTINGIIAM as
to whether the pocket-book contained any gold or silver, or
other hard substance in it, so that by dropping it on the
pavement a noise would be produced, and the answer by the
complainant
being inanthke
nnnetgeastiavne,dhaenitaavimngernsotraatenddath_atthiet
only contained the b
effectp that he was entirely innocent of the alleged charge.
prisoner, then, in his defence. made a long statement memoranda,—the
the
He denied that he had taken the boot said to have con-
tainedte lock the yard-gates as much pro-
in leaving the room was
in case any
exposed ; that he offered to be searched, and
the pocket-book out of the bedroom ; that his motive
called
his absence; and that he was searched
ner up for his protection advantage
in
master's house b • apoliceman.
minutely
who had entered the Catherine Wheel
The three policemen
were here called forward by the magistrate and questioned
bstnaelkfaoesre leaving his
it did not take place until his arrival at the sta
as to the truth of the prisoner's assertion, and they all denied
it, saying

Tis case arose out of the hydropathic system of cure, and
it appeared to excite a good deal of interest. The grand
jury ignored the bill that was presented to them, but it was
necessary to dispose of the coroner's inquisition.
Mr. Justice CnEsswEnt. (addressing Mr. Payne) said he
had looked over the depositions, and he should be glad to
know whether there was any further evidence as to the
cause of death than that which was given before the
coroner's jury, and upon which the grand jury had ignored
the bill.

Mr. PAYNE said he believed not, but he did not feel himself
justified in withdrawing the case from the consideration of
the jury.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL said he might proceed, but he
suggested that it would be advisable to call the medical
gentleman to speak as to the cause of death, in the first
instance.

Mr. PAYNE. then addressed the jury, and briefly described
the nature of the charge against the defendants. He said
there was no intention to impute any want of kindness or pro-
per attention to Dr. Lovell, but it was suggested that, being
an ardent admirer of the hydropathic system, he had rashly
applied it to the deceased, and so caused her death, and he
apprehended that if he should make out this fact to the satis-
faction of the jury, it would amount to the crime of man-
slaughter.
Mr. Jacob Asbury, the surgeon who made a post mortem
examination of the deceased, was examined. He said he ob-
served the appearance of the cutaneous disease called scales
tetanus, or leprosy. There was inflammation of the pia mater,
and the vessels of the brain were very much congested, and
those appearances accounted for the death of the deceased.
Ile considered the application of wet cloths and cold to the
surface of the body would be calculated to produce the ap-
pearances that he observed, but he would not undertake to
say that they might not bd produced by other and natural
causes.

By Mr. Justice CAESSWELL—There was a natural tendency
in the human system to transfer disease from the skin to the
internal parts of the body, and that might have been the case
in the present instance, entirely independent of the applica-
tion of the wet cloths.

Mr. PAYNE said he would not carry the evidence any
further.

Mr. Justice CRESSWELL, addressing the jury, said it was
the law that no person could be found guilty of a crime un-
less he was proved to have committed it. In this case a
scientific man, who was the only witness that could be called,
told them he could not prove it, and therefore it was their
duty to acquit the F.Ccused parties.
The jury accordingly returned a verdict of Not Guilty,
and the Court ordered the defendants to be at once dis-
charged.

iles Phillips, 59, waterman, was charged with the man-
slaughter of Sarah Phillips.
Mr. Bodkin prosecuted.
It appeared that the parties were man and wife, and, ac-
cording to the testimony of witnesses residing in the same
house with them, the prisoner was in the constant habit of
ill-using the unfortunate deceased. On the day named in
the indictment the prisoner was heard to threaten his wife
with violence, and she shortly afterwards complained that
he had kicked her. She went to the house of a neighbour,
where she was taken very ill, and died soon afterwards ; and
upon a post mortem examination it was found she had re-
ceived a severe injury upon the stomach, apparently the
effect of a blow or kick, and which was no doubt the cause
of her death.

The prisoner was convicted, but the jury recommended
him to mercy on account of his age.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE sentenced him to be kept to hard
labour for nine calendar months.

COURT 01% COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 3.
The Court was engaged all the day in trying common jury
cases of no public interest whatever.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice CRESWELL and Mr. Justice WicafTmax.)
Francislieres, who had been remanded from the last
session, was placed at the bar on a charge of stealing two
brooches and two rings, of the value of 4001., from Mr. John
Linnet, a jeweller.
Mr. Clarkson was retained for the prosecution, and Mr.
Ballantvne defended the prisoner.
Mr. Linnet stated that on the 7th of January, 1845, the
prisoner called upon him, and stated that he was engaged at
Buckingham Palace as a worker in hair at two guineas a day,
and had therefore the opportunity of introducing goods to
the notice of her Majesty and Prince Albert. He at that
time said that he came for a cane for the Prince, and also a
stick which his Royal Highness desired to present to the
Emperor of Russia. He took them both away, and two or
three days afterwards returned the stick, but paid for the
cane the sum of 311. 10s. At that time the prisoner said that
he was desired to obtain two brooches and two diamond rings
of the value of 4001., which he took away with him. The
stick was paid fur on the day the jewellery was taken away.
Oa cross-examination, Mr. Linnet said, that since the
transaction he had become a bankrupt, and that he had not
any books to show when it took place. He could not say
exactly on what day the stick was paid for. He believqi
that it was the same day, but it might be two or three days
before the jewellery was obtained. He had certainly received
a ietter from the prisoner, stating that from necessity he had
been compelled to pawn the brooches and the rings, but that
he hoped some day to pay for them. The prisoner first be-
came known to him by employing him to set some articles
made of hair in gold. When he took the rings away he
brought back the stick, and said that as the Prince then de-
sired to present the stick to the Emperor of Russia, it was to
have a long gold ferule put to it. Ile had not been
able to obtain the money for the brooches, as Sir Henry
Wheatley, who kept the Privy Purse, gave all the cheques,
and had gone when he went to the Palace. Witness saw nor
heard nothing more of the prisoner until some time after-
wards, when he sent him a letter expressing his sorrow for
having been compelled to pledge the jewellery, but necessity
had driven him to it. lie had applied to Mr. Attenborough
for the recovery of the property. He believed that the pri-
soner had shortlyafterwards gone abroad, and had only lately
returned. The price of one brooch was 1401., and of the other,
1951. The rings were diamond rings.
John Reardon, assistant to Mr. Lawton, said that the pri-
soner came to their- shop and offered to pledge the two
brooches. Ile asked for 2001. upon them, which witness re-
fused to give, but would have allowed 1501. if both were left.
The prisoner ultimately took 701., upon one of them, and a
few days after returned and pledged the other.
Mr. Lawton, a pawnbroker in Oxford-street, stated that
the prisoner had pledged two brooches and two rings
with him.

tion-house.
The MAGISTRATE could not help animadverting on the
neglect of the policeman in omitting so important a circum-
stance as the minute examination of the person of a man
charged with committing such a robbery, on the very spot
where it was stated it had occurred.
The prisoner, in continuation, spoke of an altercation
complainant and his friend had with a cabman about the
fare in the inn-yard before they got up stairs, and concluded
by a solemn declaration of his innocence, declaring that he
had never seen the complainant's pocket-book nor its con-
tents until he saw them that day in court.
Mr. Humphries considered that the accused had given a
complete answer to the charge ; that he could not have
been the person who dropped the pocket-book, as he walked
in front of the complainant, his friend Mr. West, and the
policeman, on the way to the station-house.
Mr. COTTINGRAM recapitulated all the circumstances at-
tending the case, and, in the course of his lengthened ob-
servations, remarked that, although it appeared that the
complainant and his friend had not given a very satisfactory
account of their present way of life, still that he could not
believe they had concocted the statements they made in
order to bring such a charge against the accused. That,
under all the circumstances be should send the case before
another tribunal for investigation, and, in committing the
prisoner for trial, should acccept of bail himself in 2001., and
two sureties of 1001. each, to appear at the next sessions.
tTahkee
ul!.1 agi
but h
s t rtatee added,
prisoner t h that
mightt e
b e
brought depositionsup again
Monday.

Mr. Attenborough, another pawnbroker, said that he had
been engaged to negotiate for the return of the property to
the assignees of Mr. Linnet, and gave them the information
of the place where the property was deposited.
The Hon. Miss Ker, Maid of honour to the Queen,
stated that the prisoner at the bar had certainly been at the
palace, but had never had an interview with her Majesty,
although he had manufactured some articles in hair for her.
She thought thst it was very unlikely that any one would
have seen her Majesty whilst witness attended upon the
Queen without her being acquainted with the fact.
The llon. Colonel Anson said that at the time this offence
was committed Sir 11. Wheatley was holder of the Privy
Purse to her Majesty, and that he himself was Private Secre-
tary to Prince Albert. Witness succeeded to the office of
holder of the Privy Purse on the Ist of January in the pre-
sent year. He was quite satisfied that the Prince had never
desired that any stick should be bought for the purpose of
being presented to the Emperor of Russia, nor did he believe
that any cane had been purchased for his Royal Highness.
The Mince never drew cheques, but all the accounts were
settled by witness. The prisoner had certainly on one occa-
' sion been paid 121. fur a dog's head worked in hair, but that
he had never been engaged continually at the palace.
Mr. BALLANTYNE addressed the jury at considerable length
on behalf of the prisoner, insisting 'chiefly that there was no
reliance to be placed on the testimony of Mr. Linnett, as
he had produced no books, and that his recollection did not
precisely serve him as to the date when the stick was paid
fur. Then, as to the circumstance of the pawning, it was
shown that the jewellery was pledged some days after it was
taken away, and this proved that there was no fraudulent
intention whatever on the part of the prisoner
when he obtained the articles. This was also
evident from the fact that they were recovered
through the voluntary communications of the prisoner.
If he had had any fraudulent intention he would never have
either forwarded the duplicates, or returned to this country.
It was evident that he had been induced to pledge the pro-
perty by distress; and, even if he had pawned it for the pur-
riosaeiof raising money to go abroad, he was clearly entitled
regular Nay the
je„opieleteci'itir"aiof the legal offence, unless he obtained the
purpose. of pledging, instead of using it
Severwalasyvietnfestuselsve'esie called to character.
Wtoarrstax in sun • in the
Mr. Justice
point which the ju had , It-lung up, said that the
property
consider was, whether the pri-
soner had obtained this
to his own use at the time teettywith a view of applying it
tookc it? There did not appear,
so far as he could see, a tittle evidence to show that he
peri
et ha
eeor
had any commission whatever from the palace, or that he
tatiortishter Majesty or
Prince
ceev_eitrl
blei ar ct.l, at
onyj
usitnittlyervhiieswr,e
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty Mr. Linnett.
• e sentence was
deferral.
James Price, a letter-carrier, pleaded guilty to having
stolen eighteenpence out of a letter. Sentence upon bias
also was deferred,
Dr. Charles Henry Lovell surrendered to take his trial

On Monday next, a banquet is to be given by
some of the principal residents of Westminster to Alder-
man Johnson, the well-beloved and hospitable Chief Ma-
gistrate, at Willis's Rooms; the Hon. W. Talbot in the
chair.

Thomas Smith Badger, Esq., 8.A., of Trinity-
hail,), was
Cambridge, and of 3, Essex-court, Temple (eldest son of
Mr. Badger, attorney, Rotherham, and one of her Majesty's
coroners for the county of York
the degree of Barrister-at-law by the Hon. Society of the
on Friday called to
Middle Temple.
kVOOLIVIC IT, 'FEB. 2.—The Centaur steam-frigate,
in charge of Captain Ramsey, with the officers and crew of
the Terrible stea
Sunday last, with provisions for the west coast of Scotland.
When in the Princess Channel, a part connected with the
eccentric motion of one of the en ines, became impaired, and
,
she had to proceed with her sailsg set and the other engine, '
and under these circumstances, when she passed the North
Foreland, was able to make seven knots per hour, the wind
being favourable. It was intended to make for Plymouth
before touching, to repair the defect. The Birkenhead steam-
frigate arrived at Woolwich yesterday, to have some defects
made good, and is expected to proceed to Deptford to convey
meal and rice to Ireland. Captain Becher, recently ap-
pointed to command the Mastiff surveying-vessel, visited
Woolwich Dockyard yesterday, and assumed the command
of the Mastiff.
DESERTION OF A SOLDIER WHILST ON GUARD.—
George Cooper, aged 19 years, was brought before the county
magistrates at Rochester, on Monday, charged with deserting
from the 18th Regiment, which he joined seven months ago.
The prisoner, it appeared, was placed on guard at the Gun
Wharf, Chatham, on Saturday night, when shortly before
midnight he effected his escape by scaling the garden-fence,
taking with I i u his fr3lock, bayonet, and ammunition, but
leaving his side belt in the sentry-box. Having thus made
his escape, be proceeded towards Canterbury, and on arriving
at Rainham, about four miles distant from Canterbury Bar-
racks, he was stopped by one of the rural police, named Fury,
in whose custody he was brought •up. The musket the
prisoner took with hint was loaded, and the bayonet was
afterwards found in tlip military burial-ground.

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 4, 1847.

Aver
Oxfordshire Witney Bank Witney-Williams,age Am:unt
Clinch, and Co
Pease's Old Bank, llull, the Hull Old Bank and
Beverley Bank, Huff--Pease and Co
Penzance Bank, Penzance-Batten and Co
Peterborough Bank and Oundle Bank, Peter-
borough-Messrs. Yorke
Peterborough Bank, Peterborough-Simpson,
White, and Simpson
Pcalbrokeshire Bank, Ilaverfordwesi-J. and
W. Walters
Penzance Union Bank, Falmouth Bank, and
Truro Bank, Penzance-Rickets, Enthoven,
and Co
Reading Bank, Reading-4imonds and Co
Reading Bank, Reading-Stepliens,Blandy, and
Co
Richmond Bank, Richmond-Stapleton and Co
Ringwood and Poole Bank, and Town and
County of Poole Bank, Ringwood-Ledgard
and Sons
Rochdale Bank, Rochdale-Clement, Royds,
and Co
Rochester, Chatham, and Strood Bank, Roches-
ter-Day and Nicholson
Romsey and Hampshire Bank,
.Romsey-Foot-
ner and Son
Royston Bank, Royston-Fordham and Sons
Rugby Bank, Rughy-Butlin and Son
Rye Bank, Rye-Curteis, Pomfret, and Co
Reigate and Darking Bank, and Reigate, Croy-
don, and Darking Bank, Reigate-Nash and
Co . ,
Ross (Ad Bank, Herefordshire, Ross-Pritchard
and Allaw ay
Saffron Walden and North Essex Batik, Saffron
Walden-Messrs. Gibson
Salop Bank, Shrewsbury-Burton, Lloyd, and
C
Scary rough Old Bank, Scarborough-Woodall
ana Co
Shrewsbury and Marked, Drayton Bank, Shrews-
bury-Adams, Adams, and Co
Shrewsbury Old Bank, and Shrewsbury and
Ludlow Bank, -Shrewsbury-Rocke, Eytons,'
and Co
Sittingbourne and Milton Bank, Sittingbourne
-Valiance and Son
Southampton Town and County Bank, South-
ampton-Maddiron and Son
Southwell Bank, Suuthwell-Wylde and Co
St. Alban's Bank, St. Alban's--LJ. S. Story
Salisbury Bank, Salisbury-Messrs. Brodie
Shaftesbury Bank, Shaftesbury- Brodie and
King
Southampton and Hampshire Bank, Southamp-
ton-Atherly and Fall
Stone Bank, Stone-W. Moore
Stourbridge Banc, Stourbridge - Rufford,
Wragg, and Co
Stafford Old Bank, Stafford-Stevenson and Co
Stamford and Rutland Bank, Stamford-Eaton,
Cayley, and Co. .
Stourbridge Old Bank, Stourbridge-Bate and
Robins
Shrewsbury and Welshpool Bank, Shrewsbury
-Beck, Downward, and Co. 25,799
St. Alban's and Hens Bank, St. Alban's-Gib-
son and Stuart 2,313
Taunton Bank, Taunton-Messrs. Badcock 28,305
Tavistock Bank, Tavistock-Gill, Rundle, and
Co
Thornbury Bank, Thornbu6--Rolph, Yates, and
Parslow
Tiverton and Devonshire Bank, Tiverton-Duns-
ford and Barns
Thrapston and Kettering Bank, Northampton-
shire, Thrapston-Yorke and Eland 11,513
Tring Bank and Cheshara Bank, Tring-But-
cher and Son
Towcester Old Bank, Towcester-J. and S
Percival
Union Bank, Cornwall, Helston-Vivian and
Co
1r,778
Uxbridge Old Bank, Uxbridge-Hull, Smith,
and Co.
Wallingford Bank, Wallingford-e-Wells and Co 10,577
Warwick and Warwickshire. Bank, Warwick--
Kelynge, Greenway, and Co. -
Wellington Somerset Bank, Wellington-Fox,
Brothers
West Riding. Bank, Wakefield, and Pontefract
Bank, Wakefield-Leathatn, Tew, and Co.
Whitby Old Bank, Whitby-Simpson, Chap-
man, and Co 13,776
Winchester, Alresford, and Alton Bank, Win-
chester-Bulpett and Co.
Winchester and Hampshire Bank, Winchester
-Wickham and Co
Weymouth Old Bank and Dorchester Bank,
Weymouth-Elliott and Pearse
Wirkesworth and Ashbourne Derbyshire Bank,
Wirkesworth-Arliwright.and Co 37,736
Wisbech and Lincolnshire Bank, Wisbech-
Gurney and Co.
Wivelisconcbe Bank, Wiveliscumbe-P. and W
Hancock
Wolverhampton Bank, Wolverhampton-Good-
riche and liolyoake.
Worcester Bank, Worcetter-,-Farley, Lavender,
and Co. • 13,758
Worcester Old Bank andTewkesbUry Old Bank,
Worcester-Berwick, Lechrnere, and Co 88,257
Worcestershire Bank, Kidderminster-Farley
and Turner
Whitby Bank, Whitby-Frankland and Wil-
kinson
Walsall Old Bank, Walsall-Charles Foster and
Sons
Warminster and Wiltshire Bank, Warminster-
Everett and Co.
Wrexham Bank, Wrexham-J. and S. Kenrick 2,170
Wolverhampton Bank, Wolverhampton-
Messrs. Fryer
Yarmouth and Suffolk Bank, and Halesworth
and Suffolk Bank, Yarmouth-Gurney,
Birkbeck, and Co.
Yarmouth, Norfolk, and Siiffolk Bank, Great
Yarmouth-Sir E. K. Lacon„ Bart., and Co 11,515
Yeovil Old Bank, Yeovil-E. and J. Batten ... 8,775
York Bank. York-Sw,ann. Clough, and Co-- 45,884
JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
Bank of Westmoreland, Kendal
Barnsley Banking Company, Barnsley
Bradford Banking Company, Bradford 48,185
Bilston District Banking Company, Wolver-
hampton ' 8,977
Bank of Whitehaven, Whitehaven
Bradford Commercial Banking Company, Brad-
ford .... 19,450
Burton, Uttuxeter, and Staffordshire Union
Banking Company, Burton-upon-Trent
Chesterfield and North Derbyshire Banking
Company, Chesterfield
Cumberland Union Banking Company, Work-
ington
Cheltenham and Gloucestershire Banking Com-
pany, Cheltenham
Coventry and Warwickshire Banking Company,
Coventry
Coventry Union Banking Company, Coventry 14,502
County of Gloucester Banking Company, Chel-
tenham
Carlisle and Cumberland Banking Company
Carlisle
Carlisle City and District Bank,-Carlisle 19,271
Dudley and West Bromwich Banking Company,
Dudley
Derby and Derbyshire Banking Company, Derby 18,875
Darlington District joint-Stock 'Banking Com-
pany, Darlington
East of England Bank, Norwich
Gloucestershire Banking Company, Gloucester 155,236
Halifax Joint-Stock Bank, Halifax 17,939
Huddersfield Banking Company, Huddersfield 36,127
Hull Banking Company, Hull
Halifax Commercial Banking Company, Halifax 14,241
Halifax and Huddersfield Union Banking Com-
pany, Halifax
Helston Banking Company, Helston 1,463
Herefordshire Banking Company, Hereford 21,613
Knaresborough and Claro Banking Company,
Knaresborough 26,486
Kingsbridge Joint-Stock Bank, Kingsbridge 3,848
Lancaster Banking Company, Lancaster 6O 167
Leeds Banking Company, Leeds
Leicestershire Banking Company,` Leicester 81,825
Lincoln and Lindsey Banking Company, Lincoln 52,624
Leamington Priors and Warwickshire Banking
Company, Leamington Priors
Leeds and. West Riding Banking Company,
Leeds
Leeds Commercial Banking Company, Leeds
Ludlow and Tenbury Bank, Ludlow
Moore and Robinson's Nottinghamshire Bank-
ing Company, Nottingham
Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Banking
Company, Nottingham
Newcastle, Shields, and Sunderland Union Joint-a-
Stock Banking Company, Newca5t1e..........,, ,78,880
National Provincial Bank of England, Birming-
ham, Head-office, 112, Bishopsgate-street,
London ............................... . ............. 428,029
North Wilts Banking Company,o Mpealnkysh, 60477
Northamptonshire Union Bank, Northampton.. 87,119
Northamptonshire Banking em
North-
ampton
........
North and South Wales Bank, Liverp001.......
Pares's Leicestershire Banking Company, Lei-
cester
60,221
Saddleworth Banking. Company, Saddleworth 2,575
Sheffield Banking Company, Sheffield 36,748
Stamford, Spalding, and Boston Banking Com-
pany, Stamford ,
Stuckey's Banking Company, Bristol Somerset-
52,633
shire Bank, and Somersetshire Bank, Lang-
port
350,437
Shropshire Banking Company, Shiffnall
Stourbridge and Kidderminster Banking Com
pany, Stourbridge
Sheffield and Hallamshira Banking Company,
Sheffield
23738
Sheffield and Rotherham Joint-Stock Banking
Company, Sheffield 50,742
Swaledale and Wensleydale Banking Company,
Richmond ....
Stockton and Durham County Banking Com-
pany, 5t0ckt0n.,,,..,
Storey and Thomas's Banking Company,
Shaftesbury
Sheffield and Retferd Bank, Sheffield ..
Suffolk Banking Company, Ipswich
Wolverhampton and Staffordshire Banking Com-
pany, Wolverhampton • 34,654
Wakefield and Barnsley Union Bank, Wakefield 14,000
Whitehaven Joint Stock Banking Company,
Whitehaven
Warwick and Leamington Banking Company,
Leamington
West of England awl South Wales District
Bank,Bristol.

10,8-17

46,154
11,117

11,284

12,728

4,554
37,919

42.740
6,301

15,953
12,634
23,241

46,04

24,598

9,044

38,40 S

17,720
13,929
3,063
21,640

9,370

6,706
7,637

15,531
13,564

12,493

8,920

12,996

10,433

4,962

6,215

6,864

12,373

10,844

12,183

1,311
10,285

28,428

29,662

23,107
54,382

8,915
645