The Sun.
London, England, 1841-09-24 00:00:00

RAJA OF SATTARA'S CASE.

Mr. LEWIS said that, in calling the attention of the Court
to the case of the Rajah of Sattara, it was not his inter tion to
enter at any great length upon the subject, in consequence of
the knowledge upon it already possessed by the Court. He
would content himself with proposing a motion which,
from its nature, he was sure would meet with no opposi-
tion. He hoped, however, that when' he abstained from en-
tering upon the merits of the case, no person would suppose
that his opinion of it was altered, or that the injustice of the
deposal of the Raja of Sattara was, in the slightest degree, im-
paired or diminished—( Hear, hlar)—from that circumstance.
If that opinion required confirmation, the documents on the
case, exhibiting as they did the utterly deficient grounds on
which the local Government proceeded, would afford abun-
dance of it.--(Hear, hear.) His opinion, then, remained un-
altered, and his confidence of the injustice done to the Raja
of Sattara was very much increased. Since the question was
last before them the whole of the Raja's case, with the argu-
ments on both sides, was laid before the public. Those argu-
mentshad been considered—.a deep interest had been excited
in the public mind.—(Hear, hear.) Meetings had taken place
on the subject in Scotland, in Ireland, and in the important
provincial districts of England. The resolutions passed at
those meetings expressed the utmost indignation at the course
pursued in this case, and called on Government for immediate
reparation of the injury. He was happy to see such noble and
generous feelings, which would not permit a native Prince of
India, in alliance with them, to be oppressed and crushed, be-
cause he had not himself the power of vindicating the injus-
tice.—( Hear, hear.) There were ether circumstances which
gave him confidence. The administration of the affairs of the
country had devolved upon other hands—he believed upon
more efficient, more able, and more upright hands.--( Hear,
hear.) He was happy to see the rule of ;experimentalists and
jobbers at an end, and that the Government of India was to be
conducted on better and more prudent policy— ( Hear )—ab ovc all
that the unnecessary war now going on in Affghanistan would
be put an end to—a war which was not only attended with
loss of life and great expenditure of the country, hut with loss
of credit to the British Government, and much fiscal embar-
rassment. With respect to India, they had a President of the
Board of Control who would bring much antecedent know-
ledge to the subject on which he was going to legislate—
(Rear, hear)—who, when out of office, appeared at all times
in his place in Parliament when subjects concerning India
were brought before it—who was reputed to be, and no doubt
he was, the framer of the Report of the House of Lords, laid
before it on the 14th of February, 1840, and which contained
such enlightened views of the principles on which the future
Government of India ought to be conducted. Let him briefly
advert to that Report. After some important observations, it
concludes thus, " It is the firm conviction of the Committee
that our Colonial possessions in the four quarters of the globe
can only be maintained in peaceful and willing obedience, by
making strict justice and impartiality the sole guide of every
proceeding by which they can be affected." Strict justice and
impartiality ! If the Nobleman who drew up that Report
would put in practice the principle he had here promulgated—
and he had no reason to doubt that he would not—then in a
few weeks the grievance of the Raja of Sattara must be re-
dressed.—(Cheera. ) Since the last discussion took place, cer-
tain articles appeared in the Times newspaper, pur-
porting to be " Observations on the case of the Raja.
of Sattara." He did not allude to those observa-
tions, partial, ex parte, and incorrect as they were, for
the purpose of refuting them. Were he to do that, he should
have to enter upon a question already published, but he alluded
to them for the purpose of repelling certain insinuations re-
garding himself personally—insinuations as mean and illiberal
as they were false and unfounded. It was clear he was then
the advocate of the Raja of Sattara, and that he thought this
was the proper place to meet these insinuations.—( Hear, hear.)
An anonymous writer in the 'Times—for he would not do that
journal the injustice to suppose that it was the author of those
charges—it would be a libel on its impartiality to make such a
supposition—but an anonymous correspondent expressed him-
self in these words :—" The case of the Raja of Sattara is sup-
ported here by a barrister who has large connections in India,
and by an officer in receipt of a salary from the Raja." The
tint he had no doubt was himself; the officer, he supposed,
was his Hon. Friend near him. It stated that they had re-
ceived iliree lacs and 63,000 rupees for their services. What
was the first insinuation here ? That the case of the Raja of
Sattara had been supported only by the humble indivi-
dual who was addressing them, and the Honourable Pro-
prietor near him. He would appeal to the Court whether
such was the fact? Was not his case supported by
Sir Charles Forbes ? Did he not call upon the Court not to
proceed in the case till the proprietors had a fair opportunity to
consider it? Did he not propose that it should undergo a full,
fair, and impartial investigation ? Did not Mr. Poynder sty-
port that case? Did he not state when he came forward as
the advocate of the Raja of Sattara, that, though unsuited to
enter upon such subjects, yet so strongly did he feel the in-
justice of his case that he was compelled to do so? Did not
Mr. Salomons support that case ? And to
_person dare accuse,
him of coming forward to resist the acts of Uilovernment. Was
it not owing to that Hon. Proprietor, and the effective speech
he made on the occasion, that the papers on the case were re-
luctantly produced in Court.
Mr. MARRIOTT—Not reluctantly.
Mr. Lams—Yes, reluctantly, be w9vl,3µ reat, and witl

great reluctance too.—(Hear, hear.) Was not, he would ask,
the Raja's case supported by a large body of the Court of
Directors ? Did not Sir George Tucker state that, as far as
the guilt of that Prince was concerned, the onus
probandi rested with the Court ? Had they not
failed in establishing the charges against the Raja,
and did not Sir George propose a certain resolu-
tion to the effect that they ought to give to him (the Raja)
that redress which he (Air. Lewis) sought ? What, then, be-
came of the insinuation that the- Raja's case was only sup-
ported by him (Mr. Lewis) and his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Thompson) ?
The CHAIRMAN said there was no such insinuation made
in that Court.
Mr. LEWIS said, he alluded to the concluding remarks in
the paragraph on this subject in the Times newspaper. He
would venture to say that no case had appeared in that Court
which was supported so strongly, efficiently, and independently
hoth by Proprietors and Directors.
Mr. Martel OTT rose.
Mr. LEWIS protested against any interruption being given
to him. It was due to himself, and much more to the case of
the Raja, that he should act as he was now doing. It was in-
sinuated that he appeared in favour of the Raja influenced by
a large connection of Isis (Mr. Lewis's) with India. If any
person would take the trouble to inquire, he would find that
his ( Mr. L.'s) connexion 'with India was very limited indeed.
But there was a connexion—a strong, a binding, and an en-
dearing connexion, which he had with India—he was born
there—( Hear, hear)—it was the place of his nativity. That
was his connexion with India. Was it possible, he would ask,
that the Court of Directors should profess to do justice to
India, and yet deprive a native Prince in alliance with England
of his throne, plunder him of his property, and consign him to
a dungeon, upon charges which he never heard, and on evi-
dence of which he knew nothing? He (Mr. Lewis) had taken
the trouble to look at the facts of the case, and he found that those
facts confirmed him as to the existence of such a possibility. It
was on that account that he came forward as the supporter of
the cause of the Raja of Sattara, and he trusted he should ever
be found at his post there and elsewhere in support of that
case. What was the third insinuation ? The writer stated
that a sum of money, amounting to three lacs and 63,000
rupees, was squandered by the Raja of .Sattara among
his (the Raja's) agents here.—(Hear, hear.) What,
he would ask, had that to do with the case,
unless it was insinuated that he (Mr. Lewis) had received
some of that money ? To such an insinuation he would say it
was utterly false. Who the anonymous writer of that article
was he neither knew nor cared. He supposed him to be some
hireling scribbler, who was so accustomed to be paid for every-
thing he did, that he could not suppose a man would do any-
thing for which he did not receive pay. But those insinua-
tions, abounding in mis-statements and inaccuracies, came too
late. The subject had been discussed in that Court, and the
puhlic mind had been undeceived. The writing of the article
in question was a low stratagem—a trick resorted to for the
purpose of making an improper impression on the public mind.
But it would not avail those who had recourse to it. It was as
dishonourable to the author of it as it was discreditable to the
case. Though, in themselves, they were too contemptible to
notice, he yet thought it necessary to say thus much,
lest it should affect the Raja's case. ( Hear, hear,
hear.) Mr. Lewis then quoted the opinions of Sir James Car-
nac as to a lenient mode of treatment to be observed towards
the Raja. The communication in which Sir James had given
expression to those opinions was dated 19th June, 1839, and
yet, how had he subsequently acted? Why, in the month of
September following, three months after the date of that do-
cument, he deposed the Raja, and he (Mr. Lewis) asked, was
there, in that time, any intervening necessity for such a pro-
ceeding ? Were any fresh plots discovered? None whatever.
What then was the intervening cause? Why, simply, he
would not submit to sign a document, in which he was called
on to admit Isis own guilt. Was that sufficient to justify Sir
James Carnac in dethroning the Rajd. He called on the Court
of Directors to pause, and consider the facts of the case, the more
so, as he was satisfied that they felt an injustice had been
done. Even now he called on them to retrace their steps.
The motion with which he meant to conclude was, that the I
letter of General Lodwick, dated October 1, 1839, be laid
before the Court of Proprietors.
Captain COGAN seconded the motion, and took occasion to
say that the statements of the Times were, as far as he was
concerned, totally false.
Mr. WEEDING observed, that the attacks which had been
made on Sir Robert Grant would never have been uttered if he
had been living. With respect to the Raja's case, he (Mr.
Weeding) had endeavoured to make himself acquainted with
its details, and he came to the conclusion that the Raja was
guilty. He (Mr. Weeding) thought the treatment received by
the Raja was the treatment due to a Prince. He saw no rea-
son to complain of it, when they were put to 1,2001. expense
for his support. He would now move that the Court do adjourn.
Mr. M. MARTIN said that in the observations made, either
by himself or his friends who supported his views, either
not mean to throw any imputation whatever on the character
of Sir R. Grant.

Mr. SALomoris could well understand the propriety of the
Hon. Proprietor defending himself from the imputation of
stooping to be the hired advocate of the Raja, but he (Mr.
Salomon!) confessed that beyond that limit he could not go
with his Hon. Friend. He alluded to the observations made
by the Hon. Gentleman 03 the Government. They ought to
avoid all party discussions in their deliberations on the affairs
of India. He thought his Hon. Friend had adopted an ill-
judged mode of expression, in alluding to the conduct of the
late Government. With .respect to Lord Auckland, in re-
viewing the whole of that Noble Lord's conduct, it must
be admitted that the Government of India was very
much improved during his administration. They might
in his (Mr. Salomon's) opinion consider the case of the
Raja of Sattara settled, unless some new facts were brought to
their knowledge. He wished to ask the Chairman, if since
the last discussion on that subject, any inquiry was opened in
India respecting the Raja.
The CHAIRMAN said there was no inquiry opened that he
was aware of. The question of adjournment was then put from
the Chair, and a short discussion, in which Mr. Thompson,
Mr. Lewis, Mr. Weeding, and other Hon. Proprietors took
part, arose.

Mr. THoursoN called on the Court not to let the end of truth
and justice be frustrated by any quibble or subterfuge. As for him-
self he spurned such artifices and would act in opposition to them
as long as he had the honour of a seat in that Court. He had
given public notice of his motion, on the fourth day of the
debate during the last discussion of this subject—he had fur-
nished the Chairman with a copy of the motion, and now he
asked why was not that motion put from the Chair, and an
opportunity allowed him of entering on the question?
The DXPUTY-CHAIRMAN here entered into a long expla-
nation of the rules and forms of the Court, for the purpose of
showing to Mr. Thompson that as the motion of the Chair-
man to which his (Mr. Thompson's) motion was an amend-
ment, was carried, the latter was of course lost. He (the De-
puty-Chairman) then went on to say that it would be better
not to enter into the case of the Raja of Sattara, as notice of a
motion on the subject was given in the House of Commons,
where its merits would be fully discussed. He therefore trusted
that the motion of adjournment would be acceded to.
TtiomrsoN complained that he was deprived of putting
his motion by a point of form. When he was about to bring
the question forward, the Court rose, and rose illegally, as no
motion of adjournment had been made at the time. The im-
pression on his mind was, that he had been ill-used, and he
could not let that opportunity pass without stating that the
form or law which thus frustrated the ends of
justice could not be too soon revised and altered.
He asked, what would any Director think of a Proprietor
making a motion like that of Mr. Weeding, of an adjournment,
while another Hon. Director had a motion to make ? He (Mr.
Thompson) asked only for a fair field. The Hon. Court of
Directors, when even the name of the Raja of Sattara was men-
tioned, had nice regards, cherished for form sake. There was
no charge against him ( Mr. Thompson) of being out of order,
and yet his motion was not to be put. But though he was de-
feated there, he must pay his humble tribute of thanks to the
Press, which had so ably assisted him.—(Hear, hear) He
thought, although some Hon. Director had complained of his
name being omitted in the Reports, the Directors themselves
could not but be perfectly satisfied. He (Mr. Thompson) was,
and the. public were deeply, indebted to that Press. He must
particularly acknowledge the merits of the Asiatic Journal,
whose endeavour in this cause had rendered him such valuable
service. This case was out of their (the Directors') hands.
Justice would yet be done, although they failed to do it.-- -
(Cheers. ) The country was rising upon this subject. It was
only that morning that he had received a letter from a gentle-
man in Ireland, who was well acquainted with the
general feeling ; and he said that the universal conviction
was that the Raja was innocent, and was the victim of a vile
persecution on the part of the governmet.t in India. He (Mr.
Thompson) had not met a solitary individual out of doors who
was not of this opinion.—( Hear. hear.) His honest convic-
tion still was, that the Raja was innocent. He (Mr. Thomp-
son) came not into that Court to defend him as an honest man,
but he would say that was his own conviction at that moment,
and he would say as he had said to his friends, " Tell me not of
what is to be said in his favour, tell me what there is against him."
The press had taken up that question under the solemn con-
viction that the man was innocent, and in that solemn convic-
tion they continued still. He must then take his leave of the
Raja, as far as that Court was concerned. On the question of
order, before that Court rose, he wished to ask when he could
make his motion, as he had prepared one grounded on the con-
duct of the parties behind the bar. He wished to know whe-
ther that was the proper time to make that motion.
The Cita IRMAN—The question of adjournment is not yet
discussed.

Mr. TitomrsoN must take that opportunity, then, of inqui-
ring whether the notice he had had the honour to transmit to
the Chairman was a legal notice, and whether it would be
heard that day if the adjournment was not carried?
The CHAIRMAN said that notice must be given in the event
of the adjournment not being carried (as we understood).
Mr. TitoatesoN said it was a motion regarding a man whom
they had deposed. They said they had given him a pension.
They only gave him a sorry pittance out of the soil of India,
and they only gave him a part of what was his own. They said
that he should be King, but that they should receive the re-
venue. If this was not appropriation he knew not what was.
He was not in order, he understood, in putting the motion at
that time ; but he would read it. That it is the duty of the
Chairman of the Court of Directors, who is permitted to sit
as Chairman of the Court of Proprietors, to observe strictly
and impartially the acknowledged rules of public debate, by the
obligation of which the Chairman is required to put, in their
order, from the Chair all amendments of which he has received
due notice, and to call upon this several movers by name to
sup; ort them. If that was not the form of the House of Lords,
it at all events squared with the form of justice.—(Cheers.)
Mr. SALOMANS said he thought it would be most proer
that at all quarterly Courts all notices of motion should ha
precedence of any other motion.—(Hear, hear.) He thought
it would be consistent with the propriety of that Court, so far
as Hon. Directors were concerned.
Mr. WIGRAM said that which the Hon. Proprietor asked
was the uniform practice of that Court.—(Hear, hear.) If
the Hon. Proprietor made any complaint it must lie, not with
the Court of Directors, but with the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman who had permitted that present motion to take pre-
cedence of his motion.
•
Mr. LEWIS made some observation which we were unable
to catch.
Mr. WIGRAM thought that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lewis)
could not complain of his motion not being put that day,
although it had been advertised. But it had always been the
practice in that Court to give precedence to notices of motion
over other motions. But it was to be clearly understood that
if there was any complaint on that occasion, it rested with the
Proprietors themselves, and not with the Directors behind the
bar. If the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Lewis) had
not given th Hon. Gentleman precedence, they would then
have been discussing his motion.
Mr. LEwts said he was the first who gave notice of a mo-
tion, that the officer might make no mistake in p:acing his Hon.
Friend before him (Mr. Lewis.)
wasl% I
put,
h
Mr. I AeubTei
begged
saided
to tahsakt
a question
b e fore the
of
tquestionbe
Hon.oef
Directors.ae tlrjaol
e adjournment
t
petition had ust been put into his hands from v
influen-
tial
adjournmentmerchants ofw Laosnedaurirlied, whether ,an dh.beewisr he
hedtoeekenlodswgiief,thneemtioeetiooni?
for
that petition ?
ea;lriheed CHAIRMAN,nem etie e saide uld bi
ef
made
equestion
Proprietor
f apdljeouure7heentcowual
could
Mr. WIGRAM said if the Hon.
Isrtarkecoenivtehehiqsumesottiioonnotfhaednj.ournment,but the Secretary could

Mr. MARTIN begged, then, to give notice, that it was his in-
tention at the next ensuing Quarterly Meeting of the Court of
Proprietors to present a memorial to that Court, signed by. all
the East India mei chants in London, praying that the Last
India Company should take such Steles as they might deem, lie.

EVENING SUN •::/

cessary for obtaining:a redaction of the duties levied in Eng-
land on silks, cotton, and woollen manufactures, prepared by
our ttllow-suljects in British India.
Mr. TWINING felt regret that the course of the debate
shout be interrupted by an adjournment, and he thought it, j was a most unsatisfactory way to terminate it.
Mr. WEEDING said he had moved the motion of an adjourn.. ./1:0•1
ment in consequence of there being two motions on the same
subject before the Court.
Major OLIPHANT said he thought that the Court ought not
to adjourn till every motion on the paper was disposed of.
What matter was it whether there were two motions on the
same ,übject.or not?
After a short explanatory conversation between Mr. Thomp-
son, Mr. Salomons, and Mr. Lewis, the motion for adjourn-
ment was put, and a show of hands taken, but the numbers
being nearly equal, a division was called, and the Court di.. videzi, when there appeared—
' For the motion.
•.. 15
Against it

.............. 12
Majority for the motion
The Court then adjourned.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
(RECEIVED THIS DAY.)
ABINGDON RACES—THURSDAY.
The Foal Stakes of 50 sous. each, h ft.
Mr. I. Day's Executrix
walked over
The Alarcharn Park Stakes of 25 sous. each, with 40 added;
the second saves his stake. Two miles.
Mr. I. Day's Tamburini, 5 yrs (W. Day) l
Mr. Pusey na The Baron, 4 yrs
The Berkshire Stakes of 10 soya. each, h ft, and 15 added ;
the winner to he sold for 80, &c. Heats, Abingdon Course.
Lord G. Bentinck's Australia, 3 yrs... ........ ...( West) 1 1
Capt. Pettat's Caliph, aged
Mr. samwell's The Knight, 5 yrs 2 0
Mr. Pryse's bro to Conlusionee, 4 3rs ............ ....
Mr. Lucas's' Traitress, 3 yrs
The l'usey Horn Stakes bf 5 son. each, and 20 added The
winner to be sold for 206/. Heats, two miles.
Mr. Treen's Benecletta, 3 yrs (Lee) 1
Mr. J Day's fby Nimrod, out of Busk, 4 yrs
Mr. Pryse's Fervid, 3 yrs
Mr. J. Day's Viola, 3 yrs
Mr. Galpin's Blemith, 4 yrs
The Celerity Handicap of 5 sous. each, and 20 added, one,
mile, was won in two heats by Mr. Treen's Benedetta, beating
Jenny Jones, Adrian, and the Knight.

BEDFORD RACES—THURSDAY.
The Bedfordshire Stakes of 10 sons. each, h ft, and 50 added.
Heats, two miles.
Mr. Moth's Benjamin, 4 yrs
Mr. Stirling's Pocket Aper, 3 yrs
The first was a dead heat.

BECCLES RACES.—WEDNESEAY.
The Gentlemens' Purse of 501. Winner to be sold for 250/.
Heats, two miles.
Mr. A bel's 2Eolian, 3 yr 5....•
Mr. smith's Daniel, aged
Mr. Gould's Cavalho, aged 3 dr
Handicap of 5 FOVS. each, and 15 added. Once round and a
distance.

Mr. Abel's JEolian, 3 yrs (Etherington) 1 2 1
Mr. Jolly's Vete-el, aged
Mr. Cubite4 Ratcatcher's Daughter, 3 yrs 2 3 dr

OSWESTRY RACES.—WEDNESDAY.
The Oswestry Stakes of 5 sovs. each, with 30 added. Mile
and half.
Mr. Hornby's Champagne, 4 yrs..
Mr. Bowers's Lady Grove, 4 yrs
The Gold Cup of 1001. Two miles and a quarter.
Mr. Saunders' Kitty Cockle, aged (Cartwright) 1
Wr. Walters's King Cole, aged
Mr. Barrow's Chztharina, aged, and Mr. Jones's Portrait,
3 yrs, were not placed.
The Town Plate of 501. Mile and half, heats.
Mr. Jones's Portrait, 3 yrs (Stagg) 0 1 1
Mr. Walters's Chantilly, 5 yrs 1 2 2
Mr. S nith's The Maid, 4 yrs
Mr. Thompson's br f, by The Mole, 3 yrs 3 0 dr
Frederick, 4 yrs, and Talebearer, aged, not placed.
Hand cap of 5 sous. each, h ft, and 30 added. Mile and a

half heats.
Mr. Ifornby's Champagne, 4 yrs (Cartwright) 1 1
Sir C. Cockerill's Lady Liverpoul, 4 yrs
Mr. Saunders' Kitty Cockle, aged
The Yeomanry Cavalry Cup of 50 soya. and a sweepstakes of
2 sots each for the second, mile and a half heats, was won in
two heats by Mr. T. Platt's Phenomenon, 5 yrs (owner) beat..
ing fcur others.

BRECONSHIRE RACES.—TUESDAY.
The Breconshire Stakes of I 0 sovs., h ft, and 3 only if declared,
with 20 added. Two miles.
Mr. Morris' Fat Jack, aged 1
Mr. Jones' Henley, 4 yrs
Mr. \revers' Little Tommy, 5 yrs
Mr. It. Davies' Merry Lass 4
The. Risk Stakes of 5 sovs. each, 2 ft, and 15 added. Heats,
twice round and a dis. .
Mr. Trotter's Nell, 3 yrs 1 1
•
Mr. Gough's Pilot, aged
Mr. \revers' Mazeppa, 4 yrs
The Ladies' Plate of 501. Heats.
Mr. Evans' Fat Jack, aged
Mr. Vevers' Little Tommy, 5 yrs...
Mr. uapel's cby Duport, 4 yrs ....
I,,,x's Forty-two, 6 yrs
Thu Pony Race was won by Mr. Jones' Rory O'More.
WEDNESDAY.
The Members' Plate of 50/. Two miles, heats.
Mr. Junes' Henley, 4 yrs .. 1 1
Mr. Trotter's Nell, 5 yrs
Mr. Brewer's Jerry
dis.
The County Stakes, with a Cup added, were won by Mr.
Jenkin's lionddu ; and the Hurdle Race, by Mr. Morgan's
Tallman.

1 1
4 2
2 dr

3 dr

LIVERPOOL RACES—THURSDAY.
The Orrnskirk Purse of 501., added to a Handicap of 10 sovs.
each. One mile.
Sir R. W. Bulkeley's Cerito, 3 yrs... (Stagg) 1
Mr. Vansittart's Galaor, 3 yrs • 2
Mr. WhitwOrth's Lady Mary, 3 yrs; Mr. Mostyn's Myrtle,
3 yrs; Mr. Goodman's Sister to Glencoe, 3 yrs; Lord Eglin-
ton's Assagai, 3 yrs ; and Mr. Thompson's b f by Musquito,
3 yrs. were not placed.
The Wilton Stakes of 30 sovs. each, 20 ft, and 50 added. T. Y. C.
Lord Eglinton's Aruspex, 2 yrs (Oates) 1
Mr. o,borne's Gipsy Queen, 2 yrs
Mr. Jaques' Playfellow, 2 yrs.
Lord st2nley's Lady of the Lune, 2 yrs
Mr. Ogden's Brother to Harpurley, 3 yrs 5
The Steward's Cup, added to a Subscription of 20 sovs. each.
Two miles and a half.
Mr. Bell's The Squire, 3 yrs (Bunby) I
Mr. Nl'reford's 'Warden, 4 yrs
Mr. M2ostyn's Prince Caradoc, 3 yrs
Mr. Graydon's Roscius, 5 yrs
Mr. Goodman's Orelia. 5 yrs 4
Plate of 501. Heats, one round
Mr. Graydon's Cl•nker, 5 yrs
Mr. Heywood's Mr. Whippy, 3 yrs 5 1 2
Mr. Vansittart's Smollett, 6 yrs
Lord Eglinton's Asmgai, 3 yrs 6 3 dr.
Lord Stanley's Nightshade, 3 yrs 3 dr.
Mr. Taylor's Margaret, 5 yrs

LINCOLN RACES—Wznwasnay.
The Brovrnlow Stakes of 5 sous. each, with 25 added; second
saves his stake. Mile heats.
Mr. Key's Image, 3 yrs (Frost) 1 1
Mr. Denham's f. by Pantaloon, out of Souvenir, 3 yrs. 0 2
Mr. Brookes' Moonbeam, 3 yrs
The Blankney Stakes of 20 sovs. each, lOft. and 30 added.
Half a mile.

Mr. Brooks' Idolatry .... ....•••• (Marson) 1
Mr. Owsley's Happy-go-lucky
Iler Majesty's Plate of 100 guineas. Two •nlile beats. 2
Duke of Cleveland's Sampson, 5 yrs (Lye) 1 1
Mr. Heseltine's The Shadow, 5 yrs
2 dr
Mr. Curtis' Progress, 3 yrs
3 dr
The Hunters' Stakes of 5 soya. each, two miles, were won,
in two heats, by Mr. Clarke's b mby Confederate, 4 yrs (Mr.
Swan), beating Sam Wexler, Aggravator, and two
others.

LEDBURY RACES.—WEDNESDAY.
The first race was won by Mr. Barnes' bg, the Hunters'
Stake., by Mr. Williams b m, and the Hurdle Race, by Mr.
Hooper's Postboy.

ROWING MATCH.
THE GREAT SCULLESS' WAGER BETWEEN COOMBES AND
LETT.—This highly interesting wager, which has for some
time engrossed the attention of aquatic patrons, yesterday ter-
minated in favour of Coombes, after 'one of the most deter-
mined struggles ever seen on the Thames. The combatants,
although young, are both considered very scientific 'cullers, and
were pitted against each other about six weeks ago, when alter
a series of fouling, which lasted for miles! Lett was declared
the winner ; but it was a general opinion that had this been a
wager without fouling that victory would have been on the
other side. This feeling induced the backers of Coombe!, to
give another challenge for what is termed a clear right-away
wager ; but as an objection was set up to this by the of her party,.
it was finally arranged that for the first mile there should be
no fou:ing, but that for the next and remainder of the distance
it should be in every respect a waterman's wager (one in whirl'
fouling is allowed). Lett, who' hails at eambeth, was the
favoui ite at 5 and 6 to 4; and on the part of Tam Cmni re'
who Iles at Vauxhall-bridge, there were plenty of takers.
with
distance was, as usual, from Westminster to Putney,
wee..
tide ; and at a quarter to four the men made their appearance..
They were scull and scull for a quarter of a mile,wben
drew slightly ahead. PrOin the Penitentiary to the mill an that
the Rod House it was most dashing work. Lett
triedeedTh. sp
man could to overhaul his opponent, but in vain.the victory.
was tint rate, but superior power gave Coombe's
bt lengths,
He gr.tdually improved his aclvantage,and won hyeivgrai of the .
amidst long and loud cheering. There were •e "
:dub boats out.

•
MALTA.
The Cyclops steam frigate, Captain H. T. Austin, GB.,
left Malta on the 13th, and arrived at Genoa on the 16th inst.
By her we have received the following naval intelligence from
Malta :
, " MALTA, SEPT. 13.—" The Acheron steamer, Lieut. Ken-
nedy, Commander, arrived at the Dardanelles on the 2d from
Malta, on her way to Constantinople, for the purpose of
conveN lug Lord and Lady Ponsonby to Trieste or Malta. The
Carysi,.rt, Captain H. B. Martin, C. 8., having been still
wind-bound at the Dardanelles at the above date, received
A'Lniral Sir J.
orders of recall, and she arrived here on the 10th instant.
to the latter.
and gill proceed to England this afternoon or to-nuirrow
etdh
he
elrlet hv first.,eserd i
wn
ilth6
morning. The Britannia, 120, it is expett;,
will
sail fir England shortlyieo
in
eafltle::,e, tchaen, a assr,ribv
udti the
Powerful from . r,oruei,,iiirl
returned
drhaehtnisefreerneharis:
flag
the Stsorr.boli. The Oriental,- '
via Afar eilles
31st, ult., arr.::
11, A. M., and awaits 'the mails coming broifna no
IdATahatle.yiee°srLia,:ilicieaoalnitßlieinigemelecra'
iileu:stlt.t.ofaci
hilimta.:ll:eil,
say at
by the Prometheus, by the non-appearance of which
it is ,opposed the mPA o
ls were not despatched from yesterday,
the 6th; in that case she will arrive here to-morrowm London till
~ No further intelligence from Turkey or Egypt
morning.
last French steamer, but to-morrow the nexto Egypt since the
cant is duo." one from the La-

MYSTERIOUS MURDER.--information was
yesterday received at the various police-stations of the metro-
polis, that on the morning of Tuesday a most horrid and mys-
terious murder was committed on the person of Mrs. Jane
Robinson, the wife of Mr. George Robiuton, a farmer, re-
siding near the Tunnel Inn, about six r.oiles from Whitby,
Yorkshire, and a short distance from). the Whitby and
Pickering Railway. Na trace or clue 'has as yet been obtained
tothe discovery of the murderer or murderers. The horrid
deed is supposed to have been perpetrated between the hours of
ten and twelve o'clock in the forenoon; and a reward of 1001.
is offeTed to any person, not being the actual murderer, who
uouvu on of theeoffend
will 4tve such iormation as
may lead to the apprehension and
At Baltimore, ounuay, the thermometer
stood at 100 in the shade. The hearts of several frigid old
n. Sunday,
bachelors, and an equal number of old maids, are said to have
melted on the occasion,