The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-19 00:00:00

FACTORIES BILL.

the Noble Lord the Member for Shropshire (Lord 1
Clive) could support the Bill. Certainly, under such
circumstances, Earl Powis ought to be Chancellor of
the University of Cambridge instead of Prince Albert.
He was anxious also to hear the Hon. Gentleman the
Recorder of Loudon (Mr. Law) state his reasons for
supporting the Bill. But he wished to address himself
also to those who aspired to be leaders of the country
party, though he might mention in passing that the
country did not support them.—(Hear.) Where was
the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn (Lord G. Ben-
tinck) ?—(Hear.) He called upon him to state his rea-
sons. Did the Bentincks come from the " Low countries"
for the purpose of supporting four new bishops ?
Was it for the purpose of creating four " Brummagem
\
mitres," as the successors of land, that his ancestor came
over with William?—(Hear, hear.) But where was the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Shrewsbury (Mr.
Disraeli)?—(Hear, hear.) He was busily engaged ad-
dressing the farmers of Buckinghamshire—he was
riding on John Hampden's saddle through that county;
but he
he
wasw sisancotendtoteknnt
withowf popular
romhimhopwrinhciispe
slusprAtHaoeftr.e the
Bill
Would some friend of his tell him how the creation of

four new bishops was consistent with liberal principles?
He would tell the House and the public why they did
not rise in their places and defend their votes. They
knew that division lists were not much looked

at in the country.—(Hear, hear.) They knew
that they were not printed in country newspapers.
The expense of these new bishops would have to be paid
by the hard-working clergy of the Church, and he there-
fore denounced the measure as unjust and uncalled for.

Let the House remember the objections that were once
raised against putting the Church into commission, ana
bear in mind the manner in which those objections were

Lord J. RUSSELL explained.

Mr. COLLETT continued to think the measure un-
just and objectionable in every respect, and he was de-
termined to resist it in all its stages. The Hon. Gen-
tleman proceeded to read several letters expressive of
tne hostility of the writers to the creation of any new
bishoprics, which excited much laughter.
Mr. WYNNE thought it was not in accordance with
the rules of the House that any Gentleman should
read any doccument without the permission of the
House.

Mr. HUME said that this was done every day by
Members of the Government as well as by other Mem-
bers of the House.

The SPEAKER did not think the Hon. Member was
out of order.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE hoped the Hon. Gentleman the
Member for Winchester would not proceed further with
his amendment, as he could not give it his support, being
bound by the arrangement he had made with the Go-
vernment on Friday last, not to give any further opposi-
tion to the House going into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. B. OSBORNE concurred with the Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Finsbury, that after what took
place on Friday night, he could not support the amend-
ment of the Hon. Baronet the Member for Winchester,
and he hoped the Hon. Member would withdraw it.
Mr. B. ESTCOTT said, that after what had fallen
from the Hon. Member who had just spoken, he would
not press his amendment to a division.
The amendment was then by leave withdrawn.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.

Mr. M. PHILIPS said a deputation of his consti-
tuents had with him waited upon the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government not to allow this Bill to pass in
its present form, and he took that opportunity of
requesting of her Majesty's Government, that when
they came to legislate again upon this sub-
ject, the views and statements would not be
lost sight of. There could be no doubt that Manchester
was greatly in want of spiritual education ; but he did
not think this Bill was calculated to supply the defi-
ciency. He must therefore move a verbal amendment
to the preamble of the Bill, to prevent certain parochial
funds in Manchester being appropriated to the purposes
of this Bill.

overcome. The leaders of the popular party were
told by the then Government that the measure
was proposed by them for the benefiting of the
working clergy, and upon that understanding,
and through the aid of these arguments, the
measure was allowed to pass. Had that understanding
been carried out? Did this measure carry it out ? No
such thing; and again he denounced it as an act of in-
justice towards the people, and an act of breach of faith
towards that House.—(Hear, hear.) Suppose the estates
of some of the aristocracy of the country had been put
in commission for the purpose of raising a fund for
relieving the wants of the poor, and when a surplus
fund had been raised by that means, it was pro-
posed to devote them to the support of addi-
tional Lords of the Treasury, what would have been
said of such conduct ? Could it have been denounced in
language too strong or too severe ? And Set that was
just the case here ; and, considering that a majority of
the whole House had never expressed any opinion
upon this Bill, he felt it to be his duty to persevere in
the opposition that had been raised against it.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord might prorogue on Thursday,
but on Thursday he should not pass this Bill.—(Hear.)
He concluded, by moving as an amendment, that the
other orders of the day be now read.
Sir WILLIAM MOLESWORTH seconded the
amendment.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished to allude to a point
which had been touched upon in the course of this de-
bate. The Bishops of London and St. Asaph stated,
before the Commissioners appointed by that House to
inquire into this subject, that it was highly advantageous
to keep up the distinction between the episcopal and
ecclesiastical funds, because the Church wanted provi-
sion for more bishops. He thought that evidence bore upon
the present question, and he hoped the House would not
lose sight of it in deciding this Bill. The Bishop of St.
Asaph's opinion was, that if more bishops were created
they would be enabled to induce the laity to subscribe
towards a charitable fund for increasing the number of
poor working clergy.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME said if the spirit and feeling of the
Bishop of London were to be taken as the spirit and
feeling of the bishops generally, he did fear there was
no hope for improving the poor working clergy of this
country. But if they were to create these new bishops,
or to establish colonial bishops, why did they
' not give St. Andrew's, Edinburgh, and Glasgow
bishops ?—(Hear, hear.) Ile regretted that the Noble
Lord had not come down to the House stating that he
was prepared entirely to withdraw, or at least to post-
pone this question till the next session of Parliament,
because he felt it to be his bounden duty to resist to the
last breath, and he should, therefore, strongly protest
against the continuance of this Bill.—(Bear, hear.)
He implored the Noble Lord for- his own sake to post-
pone the Bill till another session. Then, if they still saw
it necessary to press it, let them bring it. forward in the
beginning of the session, so that the measure would at
least have the benefit of a full consideration. Ile was
anxious that the opinion of the country should be taken
upon this subject; moderation would be the better means
offpreserving his own power, than by an arbitrary exercise
of that power to push a Bill through Parliament against
the opinions and wishes of the people. Of the mass of
the clergy who really attended to the religious wants of
the people, few were adequately paid ' • and yet it was
now proposed to add to the number of luxuriously paid
bishops—to add to those who were now rolling in their
carriages in the midst of a depressed and starving popu-
lation. He did on every ground protest against pro
ceeding with this Bill, because they were now wasting
the time of the House.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposi- 1
tion.) It was wasting the time of the House to prevent
a greater waste. He considered that the introduction of
this Bill was a breach of public faith, and he trusted that
the Bill would be sent to join so many of the Bills which
had been brought in this session.—(Laughter.)
Lord J. B.USSELL could not but think, after hearing
the speech of the Hon. Member who had just sat down,
that the present opposition arose from a misapprehension
of the question. The Hon. Member seemed to represent
that the ecclesiastical measures generally introduced by
her Majesty's Government had for their object the in-
crease of the resources of the hierarchy, while they
depressed those who had more immediately the cure of
souls. But he would remind the Honourable Member
that when this Commission was appointed many
of the higher clergy held pluralities and other
means of emolument, which did not now exist. The
Commission applied its attention to this state of things.
They applied themselves in the first place to the incomes
of the bishops, and it appeared to them that the fact
that the bishops held many amounts for the purpose of
eking out their salaries was a considerable abuse, and
they thought that by reducing the salaries of the better
paid bishops, so as to equalise the emoluments of the
different diocesans, without trenching on other funds, it
appeared to them that by this mode of equalisation the
efficiency of the Church might be greatly increased ;
and in this way the emoluments of the bishopric
of Durham had been reduced from 22,0001. to 8,0001.
Then they thought that the number of deans and canons
might be greatly reduced, and by such means they found
au amount per annum of 134,0001., but owing to the
better management of property, this amount was in-
creased to 300,000/. Now, to what purpose was this
sum to be applied? It was to be devoted to
the augmentation of the cure of souls, as far as
these might be seen necessary, due consideration
being always had to the wants and wishes of
the different districts. How, then, were the expressions
of Hon. Gentlemen justified? Here it appeared that the
Government, by diminishing the superfluous dignities
of the Church, and by abrogating the patronage of the
Crown and of the bishops, had a sum of 300,000/. per
annum, a portion of which they wished now to
devote to the extension of the English bishoprics.
He did not wish to argue again the whole merits of the
question; it was sufficient for him to say that the pre-
sent was to be viewed in the light of one of a series of
measures, and looking to the reforms which had been
already obtained by the abolition of pluralities, the
more effectual provision for the cure of souls, and many
other reforms, he really thought that if a case could
be made out for the establishment of a new bishopric, it
would not be right, to prevent the Church from the exercise
of that power which belonged to all dissentients, whether
civil, ecclesiastical, or political, viz., an extension of the
means of government of such bodies. He thought that
it was an essential part of the plan which he had hinted
at that there should be an increase of the number of
bishops beyond that of Manchester. He was fully per-
suaded of the correctness of that opinion, and
he did not purpose to take one single farthing
from the taxation of the country, or to in•
creaseboipsihnoiop Prelates,ns theahi
la:
wpahoai
flows efftoorhrremtoi
other
tedthdheeprb
ayCr
tthhuoe Houserf
opinionc hot
hf be by givingo fParliament.
Ia
thatnew
commission.the Right
whole bench of bishops were quite satisfied with the
arrangements, that there should be \a creation of new
bishops who should not have seats in the Upper House.
He trusted, therefore, that the House would not refuse
to go into committee this evening on the Bill, especially
as he had given up the sitting of the House on Saturday
on the express condition that the House should go into
committee to-day for the purpose of hearing the objec-
tions of the Hon. Member for Manchester, and those
of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Dorchester,
in opposition to the details of the Bill.
Sir W. MOLES WORTH thought that the whole of
the argument of the Noble Lord might be summed up in
one sentence, viz., " that we have hitherto done some
amount of good, ad it is right,therefortei,that we should
now do a little evil." He did not hnk that such
was an argument fitted to be used in favour of a
measure for the creation of a new bishop. He thought
othat h ite H
oughtouse that toesatanbelicsehaesditytofotrhea
new
wisfbacisthloopn
before the Bill was allowed to pass into law. So far from
be
there clearly
was
such a case having been made out, there had been
twenty speakers on his side of the House upon the Bill,
and of that number seventeen had spoken against the
Bill. No pressing emergency had been brought forward
by the Noble Lord, or by any other speaker, for pushing
this measure forward with so much haste. The Noble Lord
saidfa
new
the commission had recommended the creation
o
sees oefwSt. b iAshsoappbofanMdaßnacnhesteruponthwe umniOolnofortthhe)
thoaght that there might be probably h
e(Sir
somethingasw in that,
and let the Noble Lord bring in a measure to carry that
recommendation, but there certainly could not be any
reason for pressing forward a
Lord had
measure of this nature,
onlyesp a
cialployrtwiohnenofthaegNreoabtleand
Coal said
better was
the subject. He thought that the course
would be to postpone the Bill till next
when a full opportunity would be session,
for the consideration and discussion of the whole given
bear-
ings of the question; and he for one would prome;
when such a measure was brought forward, to give it hit;
best and most attentive consideration.
Mr. TRELAWNY said that he would diviCs uoo;
every stage of the Bill; but he would not be a party to
any factious opposition.
ASSAGES
from the Lords appeared at the bar, and
MessengerslE FROM THE LORDS.
other Members
demLoarnddedj.a severalcßonufesrseEncLeLwiwthitthheCommons.
then retired, and after the lapse of returnedtenmicnountfeesncejust
s
and intimated to the House, that at the re
t
Chancery i
nstead of
held,
Lords tihnefytt
thaar da agreede to
Masterr e c receiven messages from the
two as at want. isi.4.----4

(LEFT SITTING.)

THE GUN COTTON EXPLOSION.
The explosion of a gun cotton mill at Faversham has
proved even more disastrous than was at first stated. So
loud was the explosion that the noise was heard within
two miles of Maidstone, a distance of seventeem miles.
The sound resembled thunder heard at a great distance.
The houses within the circumference of a mile were all
more or less affected, as if by the shock of an earth-
quake. As the day was beautifully clear large volumes
of smoke which followed the explosion were seen at a
distance of several miles. One gentleman travelling on
the Dover-road perceived the smoke upwards of ten
miles from Faversham. Mr. Topping, the superinten-
dent of the works, who had entered the premises only a
few seconds before, and who is one of the victims, was a
practical chemist, of considerable ability, from Lon-
don. The escape of Faversham from injury is sur-
prising. Within a distance of thirty yards of the
spot where the explosion occurred, there are premises
containing no fewer than 136 barrels of gunpowder.
These premises were saved by means of high mounds
of earth which separated them from the mill in
which the explosion took place. One of these enormous
mounds is said to have been moved from its place by the
terrible force of the explosion. One boy escaped with
his life under very extraordinary circumstances. He was
dug out of the ruins after being buried in them upwards
of two hours. He lay between two other boys, both of
whom were quite dead. A large piece of timber pre-
vented the ruinous mass from pressing on him, as it had
done on the others, with fatal effect. The entire number
of persons who have suffered is supposed to be thirty-four;
of these, twenty-one have already died. Their funeral,
or rather the interment of the fragments of their bodies
that remained, took place on Saturday, on which occa-
sion the town presented a scene of distress difficult to
describe. Of the twenty-one dead, the remains of ten
only have been identified, owing to the dreadfully
mangled state of their bodies. Of the sixteen still living,
several are not expected to recover. Awfully destruc-
tive of human life as the accident has been, it might,
and but for a providential circumstance would, have
proved more so. It fortunately happened that a consi-
derable number of those usually employed in the works
were at the time the catastrophe occurred engaged in
haymaking. The immediate cause of the accident still
remains, and most probably ever will remain, a mystery.
At the Coroner's inquest, held on Friday last, on the
bodies of the sufferers, nothing that could be relied on
as to the cause of the catastrophe was elicited. Four
witnesses were examined, among them Mr. Hall, one of
the proprietors of the works, but neither of them could
give evidence throwing any light on the cause of the
mischief.
Mr. Hall stated that the house in Faversham was con-
nected with the German inventor of the gun-cotton, and
that they had been manufacturing the article on a much
larger scale than had ever been before thought of in this
country.
Mr. H. Davy said, I reside in Ospringe-road, in the
parish of Faversham, and am superintendent of the gun-
cotton manufactory at the Marsh works. I have been
five weeks in Messrs. Hall's employ, and came down
here expressly to superintend these works, with the
management of which I am acquainted. Mr. Henry
Topping was the resident engineer and chief superin
tendent. On Wednesday morning last I was in the
I stove, a drying room, with Mr. Hall, during tho work
I ing hours. I went in at sin o'clock and remained till
breakfast time, at eight o'clock. I was away about
half an hour and then returned, and remained in the
works and about the building until within a minute
of the accident occurring. I wanted to see Mr. William
Hall, and went to find him, and met him within a half-
minute's walk of the buildings. I had only exchanged
two or three words with him, when I felt a concussion of
the air, which appeared to strike me in the back. I in-
stantly found myself covered with dust, and heard an
explosion Immediately afterwards. It did not appear to
me very loud; it was more of a rumbling noise than an
explosion. The materials of the buildings flew about in
all directions after the explosion. As soon as I con-
sidered it safe to move I ran after Mr. Hall, who had
left me, and we then returned together to the stoves. I
found the premises in ruins. All the labourers who
could be procured were immediately set to work to get
out the workpeople buried in No. 3, and in rendering
assistance generally. Several of the bodies were taken
up :Live, and carried away. It was part of my
duty see that the orders 'of Mr. Topping and
Messrs. Hall were carried into effect. To the best
of my knowledge they always were so. The factory
WAS conducted in such a way, that I always con-
sidered myself, as well as the persons employed
therein, perfectly safe. Mr. William Hall had ordered
the stoves to be kept at a certain degree of heat, No. 3
never to be more than 120, and No. 4, 110. To the
best of my knowledge these orders were always adhered
to. I consider that degree of heat perfectly safe, and
that a much higher degree of heat might be used without
danger. I cannot account in any way for the explosion.
There appeared to be two explosions, or rather a con-
tinuation of one ; the two were so close I could hardly
distinguish them separately. After the accident, Mr.
Hall, individually and by giving directions, used every
exertion to relieve the sufferers and get them from the
ruins. Every precaution was always taken for the
safety of the work-people while employed in the fac-
tories, even though it was considered there was no
danger beyond that ordinarily attending the manufacture
of gunpowder.
CORONER—Did you hear Mr. Topping say, on Satur-
day last, that if the prevailing hot weather continued he
feared some accident would happen ? Witness—l did
not hear him say anything of the kind.
Examination continued—Robert Cheesman was fire-
man, and had charge of the fire during the hour pre-
ceding the explosion. He is seriously injured, and un-
able to attend here to-day. I examined the state of the
thermometer about ten minutes previous to the explo-
sion. The one in No. 4 marked 108 degrees, and the
other, in No. 3, ranged between 119 and 120 degrees.
Even in the event of a larger fire having been made up,
the heat could not have increased to so great a degree in
the interval as to have caused an explosion. The ther-
mometers were always regulated by the heat of the fires,
and not by the state of the atmosphere.
Mr. HINDE, the coroner, finding that neither of the
witnesses could give any evidence immediately bearing
on the cause of the catastrophe, adjourned the inquest
for a month, in the hope that some of the fourteen still
surviving sufferers may be so far recovered as to be
able to lay before the jury more definite information re-
garding the circumstances under which the catastrophe
took place.
The following has been given as a correct list of the
deceased parties whose remains have been identified :
H. Topping, J. Tilley, J. Hammond, A. Wyles, J.
Petty, R. Knowler, E. Irish, Mercy Clark, Sarah Hinds,
G. Ransom. The following are also known to have
been at work in No. 4 stove when the explosion took
place, and are, therefore, returned as dead, though only
fragments of the bodies of any of these have been dis-
covered:—J. Redman, Mary Cheeseman, Anne Stringe,
hmeoruee hb ,e
been
1 mB
oo
ruer no,
lessC 0
spepriiDo,uHsly. Ainmjousr.ed g-
have
sion, and are now lying under medical
H. Irish, Catharine Hall, J. Coppin, J. Rose, G. Mar-
rW.
P
treatment in
Faversham and the neighbourhood :—R. Cheesman, T.
Smith, W. Smith, G. Wraight, J. Vidion, J. Kempsall,
J. Chambers, J. M'Kewen, H. Alliott, T. Stringer, 11.
Sparkes, R. Cullen, J. Deane, W. Rogers, T. -
Woolley,
Mary M'Kewen.
In addition to the numerous deaths caused by the
explosion, another death took place under very peculiar
circumstances. A young man who had been employed
in the neighbourhood having gone to assist in extricating
the sufferers, and digging the dead out of the mass of
ruins, suddenly felt himself taken ill in consequence of
the inhalation of the noxious atmosphere caused by the
explosion. He went and represented to a medical gen-
tleman in Faversham how ill he felt, and the medical
gentleman told him to walk about for an hour or two in
the open air, adding that if he did not feel better then,
he must call on him and he would prescribe some medi,
tine for him. In the course of three hours the unfor-
tunate" man died. An inquest was held on the body,
when the medical gentleman referred to gave it as his
decided opinion that he had died from the effects of in-
haling the noxious air. The jury returned a verdict
accordingly.
m - We h

Mr. TRELAWNY wished to know from the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer whether it was his intention to
allow the present Parliament to separate without intro-
ducing a Bill to compensate properly those persons who
would work twelve hours a day in factories, which they
were prohibited from doing by the enactments of the
Bill that had been passed in the present session.l
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could
hold out no hope to the Hon. Member of the introduction
of such a Bill (luring the present session.
LEEDS FREE GRAMMAR SCHOOL ESTATE
BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
LORDS' AMENDMENTS.

The Lords' Amendments to the following Bills were
considered and agreed to :
Edinburgh and Northern Railway, Saint Andrew's and
Newburgh Harbour Branches and Road Crossings

(Newport Railway Extension).
Glasgow, Airdrie, and Monklands Junction Railway
(Cowlairs Branch).
Leeds Waterworks (No. 2).

Leicester Waterworks. -
London and North Western Railway (Kenilworth to
Berkswell, Branches and Extensions, &c.)
Wolverhampton General Cemetry.
ASSISTANT SURGEONS IN THE NAVY.
Mr. WAKLEY inquired whether it was the intention
of the Admiralty to afford greater facilities to the as-
sistant surgeons on board of ship for the purpose of
study than they possessed at present.
Mr. WARD said the assistant surgeons had as many
facilities for this purpose as the other professional young
men on board ship. The Board of Admiralty were
of the Same opinion, and they did not intend to make any
alteration.
Mr. WAKLEY said he should feel it his duty next
session, when the navy estimates were before the House,
to bring the subject under its attention, and to propose
that greater facilities should be afforded to them for
pursuing their studies alone on board ship.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER BILL.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.

On the motion for going into Committee,
Mr. ESCOTT rose. He thanked the Noble Lord for
his courtesy in postponing the debate until to-day. He
called upon those who were opposed to the measure not to
be daunted because they hadbeenbeaten—he called upon
them not to shrink from giving the measure all
opposi-
tion in their power. As yet the members of tl!hee
Govern-
ment had spoken but sparingly on the subject. Theyhad not argued this question at all—whether the fact
there being a surplus of money for church p(rweesrrte;
justified the creation of another bishopric.—
le should like to know from the Noble Lord who repre-
sented) a part of Yorkshire (Lord Morpeth) what were
the sentiments of the people of that county on the
subject. He had not spoken, but he could
tell him that not all the blood of the Howards
could cram four new Bishops down the throats
of the people.—(Hear, hear.) Now, there was the
Honourable Gentleman the Member for Sheffield
(Mr. Ward), he should like to know if Sheffield was
in favour of the Bill ?-1-11r. Ward said that his con-
stituents
11'4
not said one word on the matter.] Then
the
Bon. Gentleman assumed that silence gave consent.
(Mr.
Wr.11.4.—"11.°' 11°9 I have not said a word on the
consent .:-.-
--(Laughter ) Oh ! then " silence did not give
(Hear ) *But no onemore strenuously sup-
ported the appropriation.
a greater advocate of the liberties and of
on what ground he 81
i7l-8. He was at a loss to know
tottered with the weigllterwh* this Bill, when the fabric
But
saw t cia
eh
another
hbeere
Hn
opnl.ace d
Gentlemanu pon it
already.—(Hear.)
—(Laughter)—the Hon. and Member for Dun-
(Mr. Sheil).—(Hear, hear.) wished to know
garvon
Gentleman had
his sentiments.—(Hear.) The
been borne down this session by the encumbrance of his
office as Master of the hint.—Gear, hear.) There
was a time when his time an'd
were devoted to the promotion and protection tot alethe
nts
liberties of the people.—(Hear, hear.) He should like
to know from him if Ireland was in favour of the Bill.
(Hear, hear.) But he saw another Hon. Gentleman
Member of the Governmentthe Right Hon. Member
and laughter, caused by the
for Edinburgh_(
Right Honourable Gentleman sitting forward
and taking off his hat.) He came to the Right
Honourable Gentleman, and he would ask him if
Edinburgh—if Scotland was in favour of the
creation of four new bishops. He had read the able
"bays of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he had
read and heard the speeches he had made in Par-
-lismeat, but he recollected 119 thing in either which would
Justify him in supporting this Bill. He called upon him
to state the grounds on which he supported it.
He would address himself to another member
of the
Government, to ask himeraent, the Attorney-General ; he
whether it was respectful whether it was constitutional,
tful to express the sentiments of
the Sovereign in
wanted an argument iPn.
preamble of this Bill. But if he
Bill, he might refer to theavour of the opposition to the
amd intelligent journal, ofwhich
Chronicle, an able
:ih the Hon. Gentleman,
the Member for Sheffield, was
m emit proprietor. He was
happy to turn from the of the Govern-
ment, who supported the Bill,
Hoe. Baronet, the Member fo'r bporchtheesterßi(thirt
where
J. Graham), who was opposed to it
was the Right Hon. Baronet the Member foriVain wor t
(Sir R., Peel). Why was be not in his place to state
_ his
views and those of his constituents on the Bill? Surely
be would be better doing this than addressing pamphletsi
Lo his constituents, He was at a loss to understan how

WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET, JULY 16. , e have
moderate arrivals to this day's market. At prices
rather exceeding those obtainable last Friday, we have
a retail demand for wheat ; the fineness of the weather
preventing extensive operations. Little passing in
barley, and no change in value. Oats and shelling fully
as well sold. There is an improved demand for beans
Thehad a meeting
at 2s. to 3s. per quarter more money.
Commissioners of the Merchant Seamen's
Fund
on Saturday at the Board of Trade,
Lord Ellenborough in. the chair,

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY _EVENING, JULY 19, 1847.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Winchester, July 17.
'Before Lora Chief Justice WILDE and a Special Jury).

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.-HARVEY V.

me, as their professional friend, the circumstances con-
nected with your recent conduct towards that lady. I
have read your letters and heard the details of the case
with great pain. From a sincere desire to induce you
even yet to act with honour towards Miss Harvey, and
a proper regard to your own character, I make the pre-
sent communication. You have professed a very strong
attachment to Miss Harvey, and in the most urgent
terms requested her to return to Ireland to be your wife.
She has given you credit for sincerity and honour, and
complied with your request. You have done all in your
power to secure her affections, and by inducing her to
give up business and return to Ireland you have placed
her in a most painful position before the world. She
has done nothing to merit this conduct at your hands.
You know her character stands unimpeachable, except
to the extent it will be injured by your treatment of her;
but this you can repair. You have made a solemn en-
gagement with Miss Harvey; you are in a situation to
perform it if you please to do so. You have uncontrolled
power over your own actions and property. I therefore
call upon you as a Christian and a gentleman to fulfil
your engagement by now marrying Miss Harvey. Take
this course even now, and you will act justly towards
Miss Harvey, and while you will save yourself from a
degree of odium which I will not describe, you will have
done what you can to recover your position and the
esteem of your friends. I beg you will carefully con-
sider this important matter, and let me hear from you.
"I am, &c.
" JOHN BATES."
He was at a loss to conceive what rag of a defence his
Learned Friend could make. As soon as the defendant
found the plaintiff was ready to marry him, he packed
up his goods and left the country, for he had several
letters written to him, asking him to marry her, but the
defendant had not condescended to notice them. He
could not conceive treachery, perfidy, or cowardice
equal to this. One would have supposed that the most
hardened villain would at least have some feeling of
compassion for the unfortunate victim whose chance of
happiness he was destroying, and would have taken
some notice of her ; but no, the miserable coward
skulked away from the country to evade the legal con-
sequences of his conduct. Fortunately, however, a writ
reached him at Portsmouth, as he was joining his ship ;
and he (Mr. Cockburn) submitted they would consider
he plaintiff entitled to the largest damages.
The writing to the different letters was proved to be
that of the defendant

JOHNSTONE.
Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Phinn were counsel for the
plaintiff, and Mr. SergeantKinglake and Mr. C. Saunders
for the defendant.
The Ceclaration stated that the plaintiff, in August,
1845, was unmarried, and living in America, and that in
consideration that she would leave America and return
to Ireland for the purpose of marrying the defendant, he
(the defendant) would marry her; that the plaintiff re-
turned to Ireland, and the defendant had notice thereof,
and was required to marry her, but he refused to do so,
and that by reason of her leaving Canada she lost her
business of a milliner and dress-maker. The defendant
pleaded that he did not promise; that the plaintiff did not
arrive in Ireland within reasonable time after making the
promise; that he had not due notice that she had arrived;
that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to marry the
defendant; that he had not due notice that the plaintiff
was ready to marry him; that a reasonable time had not
elapsed when he was required to marry; and that the
plaintiff absolved him from the promise.
Mr. COCKBURN, in stating the case to the jury, said
the plaintiff complained of the defendant, and brought
this action to recover compensation in damages for the
breach, on his part, of one of the most important and
solemn engagements that any individual could enter
into. It had been said with truth that this was
one of a class of cases which might differ in the
most extreme degree; which might be of the most
aggravated character, and embrace circumstances of great
mitigation, which might seriously tend to diminish the
wrong of which the party complained, and the redress
to which the party was entitled. He felt that he was
justified in stating that this case was one of the most
aggravated nature. In ,the whole course of his expe-
rience he had never heard of a case of so aggravated a
character, and when be had stated the facts he was sure
they would sanction his statement. The plaintiff was a
young lady about thirty years of age, the daughter of a
highly respectable farmer residing in the north of
Ireland. The defendant was a surgeon in the navy, at
the present moment serving on board her Majesty's ship
Spartan, now on foreign service ; he was also a native
of Ireland. So far back as 1839 the mother of Miss
Harvey was taken ill of a fever, of which she died. The
defendant was residing in the neighbourhood. He was
connected by marriage with the plaintiff, and from that
circumstance: an acquaintance existed between them.
The defendant conceived a passion and attachment for
Miss Harvey, who was the eldest of the daughters, and
paid his addresses to her. This went on till 1841. He
then manifested some falling off in his attentions, and
paid them to another young woman, but in 1842 he re-
newed his attentions, and a correspondence took place;
and it was necessary to remind the jury, that the imagina-
tion of parties in the sister kingdom was more warm
than was to be found in persons living in this country.
The Learned Counsel then read an immense number of
letters written by the defendant to the plaintiff, of which
we have only room for some extracts:—
" All I want now to complete my happiness is my own
sweet Jeannie. 0 1 but I seriously feel the wantof my Jeannie,
when I see others enjoying the sweets of their better halves.
0 Jeannie, it was my chief desire, even long before the
bathing season set in, to have the pleasure of your society
here a few weeks, or some such place. I had a dream con-
cerning you last night. Miserable Tommy !
" The last links are broken which bound me to thee (No,no!)
And the words thou bast spoken have rendered me free,
That bright glance misleading, on others may shine (No!),
Those eyes smiled unheeding when tears burst from mine ;
If my love was deemed boldness, that error is o'er,
I have witnessed thy coldness, and prize thee no more.
Oh I have not loved lightly, I'll think on thee yet (Yes,yes !),
And pray for thee nightly till life's sun hath set. (True, true,
[true, I hope.)
"Tommy, being thus overwhelmed with grief and sorrow
that Jeauie has thus estranged herself from him, she speaks
to Tommy as follow :
" When thy bosom heaves the sigh,
When the tear o'erflows thine eye,
May sweet hope afford relief,
Cheer thy heart and calm thy grief.'
"How can it be cheered when absent from Jeanie?"
"Oh, my Jeannie, I did not see you this morning, and I
dread the cause of your non-appearance. Oh, Jennie, have
you so little confidence in your own Tommy? Oh that we
were united, that there might be an end to your doubts and
fears. Oh, my Jeannie, do not doubt the sincerity of my
affection, for indeed and truth I prize my beloved Jeannie
above all the world. Oh do not doubt my love. Oh, it is
only too great, it is sinful—it is stronger than death.
" TOMMY TO HIS BEST BELOVED JEANNIE.

A witness said that the plaintiff's father was a re
spectable farmer, though he took a little whisky. The
plaintiff herself keeps a grocer's and baker's shop. She
lived with her father before she went to Canada. Every
one in Ireland had his own way of making love.
Miss Lilly Harvey—l am the sister of the plaintiff.
The defendant visited at our house when my mother
was ill in 1839. He paid particular attention to my
sister. The defendant lived with his mother. The de-
fendant and my sister corresponded frequently during
the first twelve months. The correspondence was then
broken off, and he paid attention to another lady. He
called again on us in another twelve months, and then he
got a very cold reception. We were going to meeting,
and the defendant walked by my sister's side, and the in-
timacy was then renewed. He was received as my
sister's suitor. I knew his friends objected. I had a
brother settled in Toronto, in America. My sister and
myself went out there, and my sister took lessons as a
milliner, and then commenced business there. It pros-
pered very much, and we were doing well. She received
letters from the defendant. At last she sold off all her
things at a very great lq.ss, and we sailed for Ireland on
the 28th of July. I arrived in Ireland on the 9th of
December. The defendant never came to see my sister
after her arrival. She was very much distressed in her
mind in consequence of the defendant's conduct. She
and I have now set up in business as grocers and bakers.
My sister is about thirty, and the defendant about
forty-six.
Cross-examined—lt seems that the defendant was
very fickle. It was merely to break off the correspon-
dence with the defendant that my sister vvent to Ame-
rica, because she did not think that it would come to a
marriage. His mamma interfered, and did not approve
of the match. My sister was very fond of the defen-
dant. I went nut to accompany my sister. I have seen
"lovely Tommy" intoxicated. I read the defendant's
letters, and thought they were very pleasing. Of course
they caused a smile. When my sitter understood from
the defendant's letters that all obstacles were removed
she did not hesitate to leave America. I could not
swear to my sister's writing. I have always lived with
my sister, and seen her write. I do not believe this
letter to be in her writing. I knew Mr. Murphy at
Toronto. He was a carpenter. He used to help me
to wash the tea-things. Of course I should have pre-
ferred staying there. What is in the letter is very true,
but I cannot swear it is in my sister's writing. Upon
my oath I can't form a belief as to the writing. lam
not certain of my own age, but I understand I am
about 22. I think I can recollect my sister telling me
that she had written to the defendant to say she would
not leave America. About a month after we returned
to Ireland my sister received a letter from the defen-
dant, which had been sent to Toronto, telling her not to
come.
Re-examined—Mr. Murphy paid me attention. A
letter from the defendant, of the 18th of August, 1845,
stated, that as the plaintiff had said she would not come,
he had written to tell her not to come.
Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE submitted that the declara-
tion did not set out a proper consideration. The decla-
ration alleged that the plaintiff was sole and unmarried,
and resided at Toronto, and that in consideration of her
leaving and coming to Ireland for the purpose of marry-
ing him, he promised to marry her; but there was
no allegation that the plaintiff had entered into the
contract.
Mr. COCKBURN applied to amend the declaration.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said he would allow an amend
ment, giving the defendant leave to move the Court for
a nonsuit, if the Court should be of opinion that the de-
claration was bad, and that he ought not to have allowed
it to be awarded.
Mr. Sergeant KINGLAIE then addressed the jury for
the defendant. He regretted very much that this Irish
cause had not been tried on the other side of the water.
They had been treated with letters which, to an English-
man, were the most ridiculous that any man having
lucid intervals ever wrote, for he declared that if a com-
mission of lunacy had been taken out against the defen-
dant, he believed those letters would have been sufficient
to have induced a jury to pronounce him insane. In-
stead of this being a case of the aggravated character
described by his friend, it was one only of pounds, shil-
lings, and pence. The Learned Sergeant then com-
mented upon the letters, and contended that it was clear
the defendant had written to the plaintiff desiring her
not to come, as his friends would not give their consent.
He then urged that he apprehended they would give a
verdict for the defendant; but if not, they would give
the very smallest damages.
Chief Justice WILDE, in summing up, said, that in
his opinion the plaintiff was entitled to their verdict,
and the question would be the amount of damages they
should give.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Da-
mages, 4001.
Solicitors for the plaintiff, Messrs. Bevan and Good-
eve ; for the defendant, Messrs. Sutton, Prudence,
and Co.

" Come, rest in this bosom, my own stricken deer,
Tho' thy friends have fled from thee thy home is still here
Here still is the smile that no cloud can o'ercast,
And my heart and my hand all thy own to the last (true).
Oh, what was love made for if 'tis not the same
Thro' joy and thro' torments, thro' glory and shame.
I know not, I ask not, if guilt's in that heart (oh, no !)
I but know that I love thee, whatever thou art (I do most
truly).
Thou hest call'd me thy angel in moments of bliss,
And thy angel I'll be 'mid the horrors of this.
Through the furnace unshrinking thy steps to pursue,
And shield thee and serve thee, or perish there too.
" Oh, my beloved Jeannie; how can I part from my be-
loved Jeannie—my love—my love—my love—my love and
delight.
"It is, my beloved, quite plain that my heart yearns to be
with my heart's delight. Oh beloved, beloved Jeannie,
what will become of your own Tommy? Alas, poor Tommy;
his heart will certainly break. Oh, Jeannie, do not stay
long away if you go, my love—my dove—my beloved.
"Thursday, 7 afternoon.—Saw my only beloved Jeannie.
Did ever any creature love as I do? surely not. Oh, my
Jeannie, I fear we must be separated. I believe there is
Irirerrfere7=it 'I beeek tlaiw sole...pro Ise I have .1.1/2
I'll keep it, though the world may frown and many will
upbraid.
" I shall be faithful unto death. The Lord has seen that
we idolised and worshipped each other, and neglected him;
therefore it seems to be his will that we should be parted.
How often does God snatch away the darling of our heart
when we set oar affections too much on the object of our
love. If it had been the Lord's will that we should have
, how Jeannie would have
as! it seems it is not to be,
sba
hte
oelnne
leas
soli
in her
hr byohlevt
rhn ehtoieusseo.f
Tommy.
,113 eudtl wok, k
Miss Harvey's father having married again, and as she
perceived there would be a difficulty in procuring the
consent of the defendant's friends
mightto tebsetambliasthch,theamnd.
having a brother residing at ToinroendttooingoCtaoncadaan,asdhae,
and
Still the defendant
*—Beloved,
the strong hope that you
althoughB44 you are now in
tsherheleryesaissaitniel sister, considering setitdsee, rtiibn7egt
then
thatdjeutne
June,
~n, theyl
continued to keep up the correspondence, and the follow-
ing August 25—Dreamed of having my
distance makes no change in your
are some of the extracts from his letters :
e Jeannie
eaf:
lay'
nrSi
stillldeipei st t: anb2nemst
mine.,y land,lBar i
nt s ;
Tommy's affections. Oh come, come, and you will see
that you will not be disappointed ; come and console
your broken-hearted Tommy. 1 dreamed you had been
home ; I met you and implanted a long kiss on your
sweet ruby lips ; neither did
my Jeannie refuse me. I
am aware, beloved, you have experienced the danger of
the sea, but I have the confidence you would undergo
twice as much clangr for the sake of your Tommy ; and
again, speaking of your faithfulness to your Tommy, call
to my mind how you refused entering into plays at Mrs.
Sproule's less you should be obliged to kiss any one but
your Tommy. Saturday, September 28-1 was at our
poor mother's tomb to-day renewing your.dear initials
with a nail. September 24—1 dreamed I saw our late
.mreßloved, I am sacrificing all
appeared
d,•
tshe b
el oi
no kaepde
rbseptitrearti
othan
aonehdv, eboreollmd seaanawni
ndhfeabrne. t
aa
et
oSbtohe er
place for my Jeannie's sake.
heart. Beloved, let me know if you are perfectly willing
t
me often. Do not consider
the postage expense. Come to me, come to me, and you
—chAeehk's when he spied the
tea things in a drawer which Jeannie was wont to handle
beloved, how the
Beloved,t
fort
ho e
ycometo
young
uynohguro
your
please
ladies
own
wsi
et e
nos t
rry e o 0 oofwun
Irr
this i r
oTt
write
Tommy.
t 0
stehaarlal breanmdionwe.n
your Tommy
1.301,m
m 183,4,45.
so adroitly in company with her Tommy. The Lord in
mercy pardon our sin in thus idolizing each other. My
mamma knows of my sending you this, and has no ob-
jection to my writing to you. Many a sigh has escaped
from my bosom since you left. One day I was sighing
deeply; she said, `if we had known you had loved her
so dearly it was a hardship to let her go. Beloved, I
think they had the idea that it was you that was after
me, and that I did not care so much about you. I write
on all the covers of newspapers, and also mostly on
their blank margins.
May 27, 1845.—My dearly be-
loved Jeannie—shall I say,. my spouse. Now, beloved,
a gleam of hope arises in my hitherto disconsolate
bosom; praise be to the Lord that if there be sorrow in
the night joy cometh in the morning. Certainly, sell off
what goods you have on hand. Now, you have nothing
to fear on your arrival;
we will have our union consum-
mated as speedily as possible after your arrival. You
will very dearly have bought your Tommy when you
get him."
On the 31st of May, 1845, the defendant wrote the
lk upon a newspaper,
fol-
lowing letter to Miss Harvey in milk upon
legible:—
which when held to the fire became
" Beloved,—My friends' order is nowe send for her
"1
f
you cannot live without her. Now,
beloved,
no, I loved, I cannot
possibly live without you and be happy-
ou shall not be
have you now. Beloved, come to
.me,, y
l it will be done as
disappointed; no delay on your arrivt
al, it
my friends will
soon as possible, let nothing prevebna y
piness any longer,
not stand in the way of your
pia, it verily shall
therefore, do not fear disap.pointme
on your arrival.
not he—you shall most certainly be mine_ .
17th of April, you pro-
Beloved, in your last letter of the .
mised to come home if I thought it ri htyou should lose
beloved, keep good
the rent of the house, via., 35/. Now,
Tommy does not
your promise, and come home, your
ome
home and be
hesitate one moment to say to y
ou
ehe loss of my Jean?
his; what signifies the loss of 35/. to t
on your arrival,
There will be no obstacle in the way
take your Tommy's word for that.
Do h
not fear, Lillyer destitute for
will be provided for, we will not see
want of a home; she will have a share of ours till we see
what can be done for her. Now, beloved,
come to your
Tommy if you have any regard for his happiness, and
may the Lord put it into your heart to come; God bless
you and send you safe; you alone have your poor
Tommy's heart; now, be sure to come, make no delay,
you shall assuredly be mine. Anything that you have
that you think will pay carriage and be useful
Gods,
bring with you—such as feather-beds. Now, ins
name, do not disappoint our own Tommy. Adieu!"
Upon the receipt of the newspaper, stating that his
friends consented to the union, Miss Harvey packed up
her all, left Canada, and arrived in Ireland on the 9th of
September, and on the following* day Miss Harvey's bro-
ther wrote to the defendant and asked him to visit her;
but, the man who had been writing these letters, who
had induced this young woman to give up everything to
quit her quiet home, to cross the sea, and to return to
Ireland upon the sacred promise that he would make her
his wife, never after this took the slightest notice of her.
Mr. Bates, a friend of the plaintiff's family, ou the 25th
of September, 1845, wrote the following letter to the de-
fendant.—
" Sir,—The relatives of bliss Harvey have laid befere

OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Worcester, July 16.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justrice COLERIDGE.)
Thomas Bill was indicted for burglary.
Mr. Sergeant Allen and Mr. Selfe conducted the pro-
secution ; and Mr. lluddlestone the defence.
On the night of the 23d of February last the offices
of Messrs. Oldker, Woodward, and Ball, attorneys, at
Pershore, in this county, were broken open, the. private
drawers of Mr. Ball ransacked, and a quantity of trin-
kets and jewellery and thirty railway shares abstracted.
Till the 19th of March no clue whatever was discovered
as to the perpetrators of the robbery. On that day Mr.
Ball received an envelope enclosing the railway scrip,
with the words " You robbers," written on one of the
scrip ; and " You rogues and robbers," on the inside of
the envelope. Mr. Ball at once recognised the writing
as that of the prisoner, To make sure that he was not
mistaken he showed it to one of the clerks, without
saying anything of the circumstances under which he
received it ; the clerk, too, at once pronounced it to
be the writing of the prisoner. It was shown
in the same manner to
.three or four other
persons, who all unhesitatingly declared it to be
the prisoner's writing. The prisoner was a leather-
cutter and currier, in a respectable way of business,
at Upton-on-Severn, and had formerly been a client of
the prosecutors, and in that capacity had been frequently
in Mr. Ball's private room at the office, and knew where
he kept his money and valuable securities; and, in short,
had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with all the
internal arrangements of the office. The prosecutors
subsequently brought an action against him, and levied
an execution upon him. For some irregularity con-
nected with the mode of making the levy, the defendant
brought an action against the sheriff, and recovered 1871.
damages and costs. In consequence of these circum-
stances, the defendant had ceased fur some time to em-
ploy the prosecutors as his advisers. Suspicion having
been fixed upon him, a search warrant was obtained, and
he was taken into custody. No part of the lost property
was found. On the constable asking him for his keys
he produced a bunch of six. These were common keys,
and opened his own drawers, and ho produced them
without any attempt at concealment, but there was this
remarkable circumstance connected with them :—Of the
drawers that were ransacked several had been broken.
One was opened without violence, as with a key, and
another was forced open with the bolt halfway down.
Not one of the prisoner's keys would open the drawers
that had been broken. One would open quite easily the
one that had been opened, and another would force the
bolt of the other lock just so far only as it was found to
have been forced. It further appeared that the address
onthe envelope was in a different hand from the writing
inside and on the scrip, and that the letter was posted in
S
Worcester on the Bth of March, and it was proved
that the prisoner and his son, who is an apprentteet to a
surgeon, were together in Worcester on that day, and
that the address on the envelope was in the handwriting
of the son.

Mr. HUDDLESTONE, having addressed the jury for the.
prisoner, contended that the case was scarcely one of
suspicion, and called witnesses to character.
His LORDSHIP summed up strongly in support of a
conviction, but

The jury, without many minutes' hesitation, returned
a verdict of Not Guilty.
Hercules Lovell Blewitt was indicted for the murder
of his wife, at Dudley, on the 9th of June last.
Mr. lluddlextone and Mr. Hill appeared for the pro-
secution, and Mr. 11. Cooke for the prisoner.
It appearedtbat the prisoner, who was a travelling
tinker, had 4ved for some time on very bad terms with
his wife,, constantly abusing and ill-treating her, and
cohabiting with another woman. On the day in ques-
tion he was more than usually disposed to ill-treat her.
He had abused her repeatedly in the course of the day,
and struck her, and she was so much in dread of him
that she ran Out of the lodgings which they had iu Wol-

verhampton• street, Dudley, and would not come back to
tea till he promised her solemnly that he would not
again quarra with her. She then went into the house.
They remained quiet for half-an-hour or so. He was
then heard to beat her, and the first person who came in,
and who had been attracted by her cries, found her lying
in a coal-hole under the stairs, with the prisoner stand-
ing over her, and trying to pour the contents of a kettle
of boiling water on her, she crying out that she was
scalded, and imploring him not to injure her more, and
trying to turn the spout of the kettle from her. He,
however, succeeded in scalding her to such an extent
that she died in a few days.
The surgeon who attended her said that she was in
very bad health before, but that the scalds were so se-
vere that they would have killed her had she been in the
soundest health.
Mr. COOKE having addressed the jury for the prisoner,
His LORDSHIP summed up, and the jury having re-
turned a verdict of Manslaughter, the prisoner was sen-
tenced to be transported for 20 years.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—York, July 16.
THE MIRFIELD MURDERS.
It was fixed to-day that the trial of this case should
take place the first thing next Monday morning. There
were two persons committed on the charge, Michael
M'Cabe and Patrick Reid. But the bill has been found
against Reid only, M'Cabe having been admitted as
Queen's evidence against his accomplice.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice WroirraiA.N.)
George Bradshaw, a young man of respectable ap-
peat ance, was charged with having, on the 19th of April
last, near Sheffield, assaulted Emma Copley, with in-
tent to commit a rape.
Mr. Overend and Mr. Pickering were for the prose•
cution, Mr. Sergeant Wilkins for the defence.
Prosecutrix is 14 years of age, and in the service of
John Wilkinson, of Grimesthorpe. On the night in
question she was returning from Attercliffe, when she
met with the prisoner, who walked with her a short
distance, and then attempted to commit the crime im-
puted to him.
The jury were out for above an hour in deliberation.
Verdict—Guilty of a common assault.
Sentence—To be imprisoned, with hard labour, for
twelve calendar months.
Emily Naylor was indicted for the manslaughter of
IlenritAta Earnshaw, at Almondbury.
Mr. Overend and Mr. Pearce conducted the case for
the prosecution; Mr. Wasney was for the defence.
On the 26th of February last, the prisoner and the de-
ceased, who worked together in a factory, were leaving
their employment, when an altercation took place be-
tween them, during which the prisoner struck Earnshaw
a violent blow, which knocked her down, and whilst she
was on the ground kicked her several times on different
parts of her body. The deceased got up, proceeded
home, and complained of being ill. She, however, went
to the factory next morning, and worked till five o'clock
in the afternoon, when she became so seriously indis-
posed, that she was obliged to return home, where she
was put to bed. She lingered for two or three weeks,
when she died. A post mortem examination was made
upon her body, and then,it was found that death had been
caused by an abscess under one of her breasts, which
had been caused by a severe kick or blow.
When the case for the prosecution had concluded,
The Learned JUDGE thought there was no evidence
that a kick had been given on the breast of the deceased,
although she had been kicked on different parts of the
body.—Acquitted.
IN THE MAGISTRATES' ROOM.— (Before Mr.
MURPHY.)
James Corney, Thomas Tristan, and John Robinson
were charged with having, on the 16th of May last, at
Huddersfield, together with other persons, riotously
assembled together, and assaulted George Dickinson,
Reuben Megson, and Samuel Sharpe.
Mr. Hardy and Mr. Pashley appeared for the pro-
secution ; .elr. Smith defended the prisoners.
On the night of Sunday, the 16th of May, Dickinson
was going up the street with some friends, when he met
a large crowd of persons, by two or three of whom he
was very severely assaulted. Dickinson made his escape,
and the parties then created a disturbance amongst
themselv!s, and upon Megson and Sharpe, two watch-
men, attempting to take the offenders into custody, they
were also assaulted in a brutal manner, Megson having
been thrown down and severely wounded on the head.
All the defendants were identified as having taken part
in these proceedings.
The jury found all the prisoners Guilty.
Corney, six months' imprisonment ; Tristan and
Robinson, three months'.
There was no cause of any public interest tried on the
Civil Side to-day.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
CHARGE or EXTENSIVE EMBEZZLEMENT.—A young
man of fashionable appearance, named Brilliant Ho
Thompson, was brou:ht before the Lord Mayor on Satur-
day, in custody of John Forrester, the officer, charged
with having embezzled considerable sums of money, the
property of Messrs. Nathaniel Johnson and Sons, of
Mark-lane, wine merchants.
Mr. Humphreys appeared for the prosecution, and a
gentleman of the bar attended for the prisoner.
Mr. Humphreys stated that the evidence he had to
bring forward comprehended a great variety of deficien-
cies in the accounts of the prisoner, who had been in the
employment of the prosecutors between six and seven
years. The firm having some cause to disapprove of the
manner in which the prisoner's books were regulated,
expressed their dissatisfaction to him, and on Saturday,
the 13th of June, 1846, directed him to attend on the
following Monday to give the necessary explanations.
Instead, however, of punctually observing the engage-
ment, he absconded, and on the very day he disappeared,
he received upon the account of his employer the sum of
501. Messrs. Nathaniel Johnson and Co., it was neces-
sary to state, kept an account with Messrs. H. and J.
Johnson, of Bush-lane, and it was from the latter firm
the prisoner received the amount first mentioned. It
was the duty of the prisoner upon receiving any money
for his employers to enter the amount in his books, and
in the absence of any of the principals of the firm from
town to town, to apply, if money should be required for
the transaction of business, to Messrs. H. and J. Jenson,
of Bush-lane, for the necessary sum, and advantage had
been taken of the power thus given, to cause deficiencies
of no slight magnitude.
Mr. Judd said—l reside at No. 6, Mark-lane, and
carry on business there under the name of Nathaniel
Johnson and Sons, wine merchants. On the 13th of
June the prisoner was in my service, and had been so
during the six preceding years. It was his duty to re-
ceive monies on my account and to account for all so
received in the cash-book. For the purpose of business,
I had a letter of credit upon H. and J. Johnson. of No.
15, Bush-lane, to whom, when I was out of town, it was
occasionally the duty of the prisoner to apply. It was
also his duty occasionally to write a cheque from my
house to enable Messrs. IL and J. Johnson to send a
counter cheque.—(Here a cheque for 501. and a letter
were handed to witness.) This cheque, signed W. H.
Thompson, and dated 13th June, and this letter, without
a date, are in the handwriting of the prisoner. The
cheque is upon the banking-house of Smith, Payne, and
Smiths, but it was never entered in our books. I told
the prisoner to meet me in our counting-house at ten
o'clock on Monday, as I was not satisfied with the way
in which he made up his books. He did not meet me
according to appointment. I knew he was in the city on
the day appointed, but I have not seen him since until
now.

In his cross-examination, the witness said he could
not tell the exact time at which the prisoner became
superior clerk in the establishment, but the prisoner had
the total charge of the business of the house after the
death of Mr. Miller, who had been principally employed.
When witness was in London, the prisoner certainly was
not empowered to sign cheques.
The Learned Counsel for the prisoner then proceeded
to put questions to the witness relative to the kind of
confidence reposed in clerks in wine houses, connected
with those secrets of trade which commercial men are
not compellable to disclose, but the Lord Mayor objected
to such a course.
The witness admitted that he reposed confidence in
the prisoner. Ile had, he said, received 40/. from John
Forrester, the officer, who apprehended the prisoner, on
the general account of the prisoner.
The coum•el for the prisoner put. several questions to
the witness with the view of obtaining an answer to the
effect that the 401. handed over to him by John For-
rester was upon the account of the particular cheque for
501. drawn by the prisoner upon the house of H. and J.
Johnson, of Bush-lane.
The witness replied that he received the 40/. on ac-
count of the defalcations of the prisoner (as our reporter
understood the evidence.)
The witness, [in hie re-examination, stated that the
prisoner had no authority whatever to draw the cheque
for the 501., and that the letter address to Messrs. M.
and J. Bush, representing that there was occasion for
that money to pay duties on certain wines, contained a
misrepresentation altogether.
The counsel for the prisoner submitted that it ap-
peared that the prisoner had acted upon a general order,
and that such being the case, no embezzlement had been
made out.
would Mr. Humphreys
see as clear umphrel•r aas
s was satisfied
of embezzlement
that the Lord Mayor
embezzlement in the facts
stated as could be exhibited.
The LORD MAYOR—The case distinctly amounts to
this—that the prisoner has not accounted for the 50.1
Mr. Humphreys--There is a greet deal said about a
doubt as to the embezzlement of this sum of 501. There
are several other cases which I shall call upon a future
day ; in the meantime, I shall ask Mr. Judd the amount
of the prisoner's defalcations ?
Mr. Judd—They are certainly hard upon 1,000/.
Mr. Humphreys —You say that John Forrester brought
you 401. upun account of his defalcations ; would you
not be very glad if he had brought you 4001.: Mr.
Judd—Most certainly ; very glad indeed.
Mr. T. E. Cawing, clerk to Messrs. H. and J. John•
son, said he was in the service of his present employers
on the 13th of June, 1846, on which day he received
the cheque signed W. 11. Thompson, and the letter with
the same signature. By virtue of that cheque and that
letter he gave the hearer a cheque for 50/. upon the
house of Messrs. Payne and Smith, to the best of his re-
collection. The cheque WE S returned in due course by
the bankers.
Mr. Judd, in answer to other questions, said the pri-
soner had a commission upon sales, and a certain sum
annually as clerk, and witness had heard from him that
he was in partnership with another firm.
By the consent of both sides it was then determined
that the prisoner should be remanded till the 10th
August.