The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-10 00:00:00

justify such an account to the shareholders. Could not
say how many shares he hail taken up, nor the money
he had paid. The money he paid was his own. He
did not know to what amount he had signed contract-
deeds, still it must be something very eansiderable. He
was present at the meeting, in consequence of expecting
that he would he applied* to to be joint secretary to the
company with Mr. Rayner. He was now glad he did
not get it, as the company had been badly managed.
Sir James Douglas Hamilton Hay examined by Sir
F. THESIGER—He said he became a member of the
managing committee on the Bth of October, on which
day the members of that committee were nominated. He
attended a meeting on the following day, the 9th. Ile
corroborated generally the evidence of the last witness
with respect to the contract with the plaintiff. The
committee considered that the amount agreed upon was
a fair one, and they had paid all expenses up to the
issuing of the first prospectus, and which that sum was
intended to cover. He had not paid up the shares he
took in the company, nor had he been called upon to
defray any part of the 2,000/. or the other expenses of
the company. Most likely he should have been so called
upon if he had not been compelled to withdraw from the
company in consequence of indisposition.
Mr. John Risdale, clerk in the London Joint-stock
Bank Company, examined by Mr. PEARSON, proved that
there was an account kept at that bank by the company.
The deposits received were about 8,0001.
Cross-examined—The date of the last deposit was the
3d of December. 3,5001. was transferred to the western
branch of the bank.
Mr. J. Peppercorn, of the Stock Exchange, proved
that the firm with which he was connected had pur-
chased a considerable number of shares in the company.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. COCKBURN held that the declaration of the plain-
tiffs had not been proved, and raised an objection to the
right of the plaintiffs to dispose of the company before
the contract in question was made. Here was a provi-
sional committee without IN hose consent they had not
the power to dispose of the undertaking. They were
their joint partners. The agreement, besides, was not
binding, as it was not " executory." He held that the
plaintiffs must, therefore, be nonsuited.
Mr. PEACOCK followed on the same side.

The jury accordingly returned a verdict in accordance
with the ruling of the Lord Chief Baron.

road, when they came up with a small van, such as is
generally used by travelling tinkers or dealers. In. this
there was a fire, with a joint of mutton cooking over
it, and underneath the axle tree they discovered the
carcass of a sheep minus the joint that was over
the fire. The constable immediately apprehended the
prisoners.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

PAPANICOLAS V. ABITBOL.
This was an action brought by a gentleman of the
name of Papanicolap, to recover from the defendant, a
sharebroker, 451., being the difference between a sum of
money lent by the latter on 200 Madrid and Valenlia
railway shares, and their market value, on the 30th of
April, in the present year. From the statement of
Counsel for the plaintiff, it appeared that early in this
year the plaintiff was in want of money, and in order to
realise a sum he deposited the shares in question with
the defendant for the advance of 1501., with the under-
standing that the money should be repaid with interesi
on the 30th of April. On that day, about two o'clock,
Mr. Mullins, of the firm of Bush and Muffins, of St.
Mildred's-court, called at the delendant's offices and ten-
dered the money, which was refused on the allegation
that the tender being made after one o'clock, according
to the rules of the Stock Exchange, the shares were for-
feited The defendant retained the shares, and hence the
present action.
Mr. Sergeant Byles conducted the case for the plain-
tiff, Mr. Humphre3s for the defence.
Evidence having been called to prove these facts,
Mr. HUMPUREYS was proceeding to address the jury
on the alleged rule of the Stock Exchange under which
the contract was made, with the object of showing that
the money not being tendered before one o'clock the
shares were forfeited, when
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE decided against such a
defence. There was nothing in the contract itself, or
the evidence, to warrant that supposition ; and as the
issue in the pleadings was raised on this point, unless the
Learned Gentleman had evidence to offer in support of
it, the verdict must go for the plaintiff.
The Learned Gentleman intimated that he was not
prepared to offer any evidence on the point beyond what
was in possession of the Court.
Under his Lordship's direction, a verdict was then
given for the plaintiff for 451.
•

The jury, without hesitation, returned a verdict 'of
Guilty, and the prisoners were sentenced to ten years'
transportation.
Joke Wo? sfold, aged 31, was indicted for stealing a
pony mare, the property of Mr. D. Reece, of Kingston,
on the 16th of November.
William Jones, a dealer and driver of Welsh ponies,
who had identified the pony, stated that on the day in
question he lent it to a couple of lads, the sons of
neighbours, for a ride. They returned without it,
and he subsequently found the prisoner upon its back. He
immediately endeavoured to take possession of it, when
the prisoner struck him a viola nt blow on the head, which
nearly stunned him. He, however, persevered, and with
the assistance of one of his null, notwithstanding violent
abuse, took possession of the pony. The prisoner was
afterwards seen at Kingston, when he denied that he
was the person accused, but afterwards admitted that he
was, and asserted that he took the pony in a lark.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that instead of
having stolen the pony, it had been lent to him by the
boy who had it at the time.
After a brief consultation, tilt) jury returned a verdict
of Guilty, and the prisoner was sentenced to ten years'
transportation beyond the seas.

GUILDHALL.-CTHIS DAY.)
A middle-aged man, of respectable appearance, of
dark complexion, with bushy black hair and whiskers,
and of rather low stature, was placed at the bar before
Mr. Alderman Sidney, charged with several frauds upon
tavern-keepers and confectioner s in the City.
The prisoner, on appearing be fore the Magistrate, in-
dignantly refused to give his name or address, and
insisted that the complainant could only claim debt
against him, and protested against what he called the
illegal conduct of the inspector, in locking up a respect-
able man like him all night, in company with " bad
characters," in a station-house.

SHERIFFS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.

Sir FREDERICK TIIESIDER replied, and held that the
plaintiff's were the proprietors or projectors of the scheme
until the 9th of October, and that they had a perfect
right to dispose of it in the manner they did.
Mr. Justice EP.LE considered that the promoters of a
railway had an undoubted property in their scheme
until they legally parted with" it., but as consideration
had not been shown on the part of the plaintiffs for
their claim, they must be nonsuited with power to move
to have the verdict entered for them on a new trial.

BUDD V. BIRD.—FALSE IMPRISONMENT.
This was an action to recover damages for false im-
prisonment. The defendant suffered judgment to go by
default.
Mr. CLARKSON, who appeared for the defendant, who
is a widow lady, expressed her regret that she had
wrongly suspected the plaintiff; and she not only exone-
rated her in the fullest manner, but was willing to make
a pecuniary recompense, and himself and his Learned
Friend, Mr. Miller, who appeared for the plaintiff, had
agreed to a verdict being taken for 251.
Mr. MILLER britfly stated the case, from which it ap-
peared that the plaintiff was a female servant to the de-
fendant, who is an old lady, 80 years cf age. In January
last she missed a 101. note, and, suspecting the plaintiff',
gave her into custody, and she was locked up in the
station-house all night. In the morning, however, the
defendant remembered what she had dono with the note,
and the plaintiff was of course discharged. She had been
in most respectable famines, and her character had been
to a certain extent affected; he was, however, glad that
the defendant now so honourably bore testimony to the
honesty and good character of the plaintiff.
A verdict was then returned fur 25/,
POWELL V. TUIT.
The plaintiff in this action is an artist, and the de-
fendant a retired captain of a merchantman. The action
was brought to' ecover the sum of 51., for painting por-
traits of the defendant, his wife, and two children.
On the part of the plaintiff witnesses were called, who
deposed that the defendant had approved of the painting,
and had paid 10s. on account, and said he would pay the
other as soon as he received a sum owing to him ; he,
however, subsequently refused to pay, on the ground that
they were not good likenesses.
Mr. LANE, the defendant's attorney, produced the
painting, which he pronounced to be a wretched daub.
The defendant had got no legs, the lady only one hand,
with three fingers, and appeared to be sitting on the
back of the sofa. Then there were the two children,
poor little horrible-looking objects; the nose of one ap-
peared to be split, the boy's ear stuck out, and looked
like the handle of a jug, and the only arm which was
seen was like a stick stuck into the body, and there was
an attempt to represent him in the act of writing on a
slate. In short, they all looked like a lot of cripples.
To compensate, however, for the deficiencies, the de-
fendant was favoured with a couple of large, staring
eyes, although he was almost blind. He would call an
artist of considerable experience, who would give
his unbiassed opinion as to the merits of the picture.
Mr. Orson was then called, and said there was not
one principle of art in the composition. Everything
was false, and everything looked mutilated and cut up.
There was some animal on the floor, perhaps intended
hr scat, but looked like a baboon without his behind.—
(Laughter.) He considered it to be of little or no value.
In cross-examination he said he had been a student of
the Royal Academy for about seven years. He was a
portrait painter.
Mr. THOMAS, for the plaintiff, said the portraits were
excellent, and everything in keeping. In the defendant
there was even an improvement on nature, for the plain-
tiff had thrown the most amiable smile into the coun-
tenance which any person could desire to have.—
(Laughter.) The children were also cherubs, instead of
horrible-looking little objects, and the likeness was true
to nature, and anybody could see whose children they
were, for they were like both the father and the mother.
—(Laughter.) Then there were copies of the pictures
in the room after Vaedervelde, Stancliffe, &c., and those
alone cut out were worth all the money. It was, as the
showmen say, not art but nature ; the water was real
water; a better slate could not be. Then there was
the glass of grog, the fruit, chairs, table, sofa, every-
thing to make it valuable as a scene of domestic
happiness and conviviality.—(Laughter.) As to want-
ing to see all the hands and the legs, it
was as bad as the gentleman who wished
for a sketch of his house, and refused to pay
because the artist did not show all the four sides.—
(Laughter.) As to the little boy's missing arm, there
could be no doubt, whilst pretending to write, he had
taken an orange, and was hiding it behind him.—
(Laughter.) It was all so true to nature, that taking
the defendant out of the painting altogether, and cutting
it in pieces, it was well worth the money.—(Laughter.)
The Learned UNDER-SHERIFF summed up, and left it
to the jury to say whether there had been an agreed
price, and, if not, what was the value.
The jury gave a verdict for 305., in addition to the
10s. already paid.

The ALDERMAN proceeded. to hear the evidence
of Mr. Inglis, the confectioner, in St. Paul's Church-
yard, corroborated by a young woman in his service,
that in the course of yesterday the prisoner feasted
sumptuously at his house, upo.n mock turtle-soup and
other minor refreshments, and was afterwards walking
off without payment, saying he l 4 ad no mone3, and must
have credit for his cheer until some other day. This
not being aceeded to, he said boldly that the young
woman who waited on him in the first instance had
agreed to give him credit. Rut Mr. Inglis at length
gave him into custody, and money more than sufficient
to pay being found upon him, the charge of fraud was
eventually taken.

The plaintiffs were accordingly nonsuited.
CONSPIRACY.-THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. JANES
BUTTON AND OTHERS.

This was an indictment at the instance of Mr. Lewis,
an extensive dyer in Oxenden-street, Haymarket,
against the defendants, James Button, George
Button, his son, Thomas Corduroy, and William
Wellesford, for conspiring together to defraud him.
James Button had been in the service of the prosecutor's
father and of the prosecutor himself for upwards of 34
years, and had been promoted from an apprentice to the
situation of foreman of the works, and lived rent-free on
the premises. The other defendants had also been a
long time in his service. Mr. Lewis allowed those
who were employed in his establishment to dye their
clothes and those of their immediate relations, free
of expense. This privilege the defendants had
abused, as they had carried on an extensive busi-
ness on their account for some time with a number of
persons, and for their own profit, and had con-
sequently defrauded the prosecutors of several
thousands of pounds. The goods they d)ed
at the expense of the prosecutor in this
way mostly bore the initials of the defendants,
whose job it was. The defendants had all
pleaded not guilty, but Wellesford had retracted his
plea and pleaded guilty.
Sir F. Thesiaer, with whom were Mr. Clarkson, Mr,
Peacock, and Mr. Ballantine, were for the prosecution;
and Mr. Sergeant Allen for the Buttons. Mr. Char-
'lock was for Wellesford. • Corduroy was undefended by
counsel.

Mr. Bailey, of the Sun Tavern, Ludgate-hill, the pro-
prietor of the Goose and Gridiron, in the same neigh.
bourhood, and Mr. Goodwin Cat.non, of the Punch Ta-
vern, 99, Fleet-street, recognised him as the perpetrator
of similar victimising feats upon themselves.
After hearing a good deal of evidence of the same
character, Mr. Alderman SIDNEY asked the prisoner if
he persisted in refusing to give his name, for if that were
the case he should commit him as a rogue and vagabond.
The prisoner at length stated that his name was John
Simmons.

The ALDERMAN observed that he had on a previous
occasion given the name of Johnson, and that more re-
cently he had figured under the name of John Smith.
The case concluded by the prisoner being committed
for two months.

MARLBRCY-STREET.---(THIS DAY.)
William Ruddle, a respectably-dressed young man,
was charged with entering the service of Edward Har-
rison, Esq., by means of a false character.
Mr. Harrison, residing at No. 9, Berkeley-street,
Berkeley-square, said the prisoner applied to him on
Saturday, the 28th of November last, for a situation as
footman, and complainant having made the usual in-
quiries, was referred for the prisoner's charac-
ter to George Foley, Esq., Trowbridge, Wiltshire,
and complainant wrote by the next post for his charac-
ter. On the Wednesday following he received an
answer from a person representing himself to be George
Foley, and stating that Mr. Huddle had been in his
service three years, and that he was a respectable
honest and industrious young man, and that he knew
nothing to the contrary. In consequence complainant
took the young man into his service on Friday last. On
the following day in. complainant's absence, the prisoner
applied to complainant's sister, who lives in the same
house, and borrowed half-a-crown from her, stating that
he wanted that to bay shoes with to wait at dinner.
This circumstance excited suspicion, and complainant
wrote to the clergyman of Trowbridge to as-
certain from him whether there was such a
person as Mr. Foley. Complainant then handed in a
letter which he had received, in answer to that, from the
Rev. Mr. Hastings., the clergyman of the district. It
stated that no gentleman of rank and fortune, with that
name, resided in the locality, but that there was a per-
son in a humble sphere of life, but of a most respectable
character, named Foley, who lived in Trowbridge ; that
he had called on him, and ascertained that he knew a
young man called William Huddle, a respectable person,
but said that he had never written a character for him,
nor did he think his son George would do so,
but he promised to send his son to the cler-
gyman ; that the said George Foley, a banker's clerk
in Trowbridge, had called on him, and confessed that he
had written a character for Huddle, and that it was en-
tirely false. The complainant stated that the prisoner,
during the time that he was in his service, borrowed
from the cook all the money that Ehe had got.
John Pickford said he kept the Old Parr's Head
public-house, Aldersgate-street, City, and that the pri-
soner had resided there in his house ten or fourteen
days about two months ago, and had subscribed himself
as William Huddle, Esq. ; that it was so written on his
cards, and stated that he had been in the wine and spirit
trade. He stayed at his house till witness asked him for
the amount of his bill, and then decamped without pay-
ing it. The witness produced a letter from the prisoner
to the person who had introduced him to witness, stating
that he (the prisoner) had got married a fortnight ago.
The prisoner declared his story to be true, and denied
that he had imposed on the complainant.
Inspector Whall said he had the strongest suspicion
that he bad seen the prisoner in custody before, and
bagged lie might be remanded till some constables from
the different divisions could see him.
Mr. H ARDWICK said the complainant had bettor bring
grime witnesses from Trowbridge against this day week,
and remanded the prisoner till that time.

A great deal of evidence was adduced on the part of
the prosecution, which showed that the Buttons parti-
cularly had carried on considerable business in the way
pointed out.
The case fur the prosecution had not concluded when
we went to press. The case, owing to the number of
witnesses, will most likely be adjourned until to-morrow.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(THIS DAY.)

Richard Bragge was indicted for a riot and assault on
the 17th of November last, under the following circum-
stances :

LONDON and _NORTH-WESTERN
RAILWAY COMPANY.—(THIS DAY.)
A special general meeting of the proprietors of the
London and North-Western Railway was held this after.
noon, at the Euston-square station, for the purpose of
considering the expediency of leasing the Shropshire
Union Railways and Canal, of purchasing the Dunsta-
ble Railway, and of leasing the Scottish Central Rail-
way, in conjunction with the Caledonian and Lancaster
and Carlisle Railway Companies. Mr. George Carr
Glyn, chairman of the board of directors, in the chair.
The CHAIRMAN said he was glad the meeting gave
him an opportunity of explaining and removing the
doubts which seemed to prevail in reference to the amal-
gamating which had been going on in the county. It
was well known that he had always been an advocate
for sound management and the due and proper observ-
ance of the rights of territory. Hitherto the tributaries
and branches of the railway system had originated with
private companies; but when their Acts were obtained
their tributaries and branches had been invariably
handed over, on lease and purchase, to the larger com-
pany whose districts they intersected. It was for the
purpose of carrying out that principle that the present
meeting had been called together. A good deal of mis-
apprehension prevailed upon the subject of the
liabilities of this company, for at the present
liable so far g
moment they were practicably not liable for one
single guarantee whatever---he meant not practicably
was ttle
uaasratnheteein
toteretshte ofN othrteh UnioncompanycNovmaspcaonyn-,
cerned. The only guarantee the company was liable
for
Lose
line was held jointly with the Manchester and
naeds Company ;• but, in point of fact, there was no
the caFrviren.j.mar,•,; per -
rjent.,
the guai-anieed interest—the guarantee of 5 per cent. to
the Coventry and Nuneaton Company, which, if the line
could be transferred to a private individual, would not be
considered an unprofitable speculation; the guarantee
to the London and Birmingham Canal Company, the
traffic of which also returned more than the amount
guaranteed, and the guarantees to the Bedford and
Buckinghamshire lines, which would prove of great ad-
vantage to their own line, because it opened
up a communication, he might say, from Norwich
in the East, to Oxford in the West. Those
were all the guarantees they were liable for at
present, but, as he said before, in point of fact, they were
not liable at all, because the lines themselves would all
return considerably more than the money guaranteed to
them. The liabilities he proposed they should enter
into now were based upon precisely the same principle.
The first was a guarantee of half the premium of their
own dividend and half the surplus profits
to the proprietors of the Shropshire Union,
Railway and Canal, an extensive range of
line from Wolverhampton and Birmingham to Shrews-
bury and Wales. The capital of the company was con-
siderable ; it amounted to four millions six hundred
pounds, but the returns of the existing traffic were equally
great, and ultimately there could be no doubt it would
more than compensate theni for the guarantee. The
second was for the purchase of a small line to
Dunstable, at the actual expense which had
already been incurred, and the third was for
a guarantee of 7 per cent. to the Scottish
Central Railway, but that guarantee was a joint one,
in conjunction with the Caledonian and Lancaster and
Carlisle Company, and they would only be liable for so
much of the guarantee as would be equal to the through
traffic that would flow upon their own immediate lines.
He concluded by moving a resolution affirming the
agreement for the lease of the Shropshire Union lines.
Mr. ENTWISLE, M.P., said, while he admitted to a
certain extent the force of the principle with
which the Honourable Chairman set out, he could
not conceal from himself that the Hon. Chairman had
omitted from his category of liabilities the loans to the
Holyhead Company, and the position they occupied in
: reference to the Manchester and Birmingham Company.
Had these liabilities been mentioned, the amount would
have been considerably augmented ; and, under those
cireumstances, he objected to the liabilities it was pro-
posed they should row enter into, p,-rtieularly the gua-
rantee to the Scottish Centrql Cunipa,,y.
Mr. CASSON urged the directors in future to forward
to each proprietor the terms upon which it was proposed
to lease lines.
The CELAIRKAN replied that the estimate he made at

The defendant was the proprietor of a beer-shop,
called the Prince of Wales, in Hyde-place, Hoxton, ad-
jacent to which was a piece of unfenced ground, belong-
ing to a lady named Price. This the defendant con-
verted into a skittle-ground, Mrs. Price, from some
cause or other, taking no steps to prevent the occupa-
tion. Some time after her death, her son brought an
jectment, and possession having been taken in the usual
form by the sheriff, the ground was given to a person
named Warford, the prosecutor in the present indict-
ment. Upon possession being taken by Warford, the
defendant, followed by a mob of about 200 persons, en-
tered the ground and attempted to dispossess him, during
which the utmost disorder and rioting prevailed, and the
prosecutor was knocked down. The mob was supplied
with several gallons of beer by the defendant, who cheered
them on.
M r. O'Brien addressed the jury for the defendant.
The jury at once returned a verdict of Guilty, and
The ASSISTANT JUDGE said they could not allow this
country to be made subject so a species of lynch law, like
that attempted by the defendant, and he should, therefore,
order him to pay a fine of 101. to the Queen, and to enter
into his own rccognizances in the sum of 401., and to
find one surety in 201. to keep the peace for the next
twelve months. _

JamesellolfaktVheortdolwi-attsikienrdsicitnedthfeoremapslsoayumitienngt
Brolwiwnn,loans
of the
trustees of the Commercial-road turnpikes.
The facts of this case have been so rerently reports._
in The Sun, and the general feeling of the inhabitants 1
in the neighbourhood of the Commercial-road on the
+h. t„11.. ,L-krnantiPd alone that line so
fully understood, that it will suffice to state the indict-
ment in the present case rested upon an alleged assault
committed on the toll-taker at the bar at America-street.
The prisoner having pleaded Guilty,
Mr. WYLDE, who appeared for the prosecution, said,
as the prisoner bad pleaded guilty, and thus afforded an
example, which was all his clients sought, he should not
press for anything beyond a nominal penalty.
The defendant was then fined Is., and discharged
with a caution.
A number of indictments against individuals, most of
whom were either Italian or French, for keeping dis-
orderly houses at the West-end, were heard, and the par-
ties allowed to stand out upon their own recognizances,
on consideration of their abating the nuisances.

October, and
pounds of beef at Epsom on the 29th oZ
SURREY SESSIONS.—(THIS DAY.)
sentenced 'lhnßart,
t o threeaged 38,was
months'
labour, in Brixton gaol. mn dpi
rcit,eodn form
en
ts ewa ling
hard
Maria Reed, aged 25, and Joseph Smith, aged 40, were
indicted for stealing, on the 29th of October, four silver
spoons, and one German silver one, at West Horsley,
the property of Henry Whitbourn. The prisoners made
a long rambling defence, but the jury gave little credence
to it, and found them guilty, and they were sentenced to
six months' imprisonment, with hard labour.
Ann Elliott, aged 40, was indicted for stealing a silver
spoon at Croydon, on the 31st of October. It appeared
that the prisoner had presented the spoon to pledge,
when she was stopped by the pawnbroker and handed
over to the police. After some days the owner of the
spoon was discovered; he identified it, and the prisoner
was committed.

The prisoner, on being called on for her defence, ad-
mitted that she had taken it but not with any felonious
intent.

Mr. Beck, the owner of the spoon, at whose house the
prisoner was employed as a charwoman, gave her an cx-
cellt.W; character for honesty, and
The jury brought in a verdict of Not guilty.
Benedict Robert Illohun, aged 24, was indicted for
-tealing a sheep, the property of Mr. king, of Bramley,
on the 11th; of Novemb:.T. The chief witness against
the prisoner was one of the rural police, who going
along the road near Bramley, satin the skin and entrails
of a sheep lying near one of the fields in the occupation
of the prosecutor. Mr. King immediately-.iduntified the
skin, and accompanied th cou,aable to at.certain what had
iron done with the carcase. On reaching the spot where
the skin had been lying, they perceived the wheel-tracks
of a small cart, and the foot-marks of a pony or don-
key, which they followed for four or five miles, on the

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, DECEMBER- 10, 1,,;6.

their last meeting of their future prospects included the
liabilities alluded to by the Honourable Member for
South Lancashire, and the details of those liabilities and
future prospects, which he could not make public,
were open to the proprietors. With regard to
the suggestion of the second Honourable Proprietor, he
could only state that it would involve the sending out of
upwards of 10,000 circulars, and the directors, '.without
the authority of the shareholders could not take upon
themselves the trouble and expense of such a proceeding.
The resolution was then put and carried unanimously,
as were also resolutions approving of the other two
agreements.
The CHAIRMAN then rose to explain the course
he had takes in reference, to the Birmingham and
Oxford line. There were two distinct charges
preferred against him; one was, that in some way or
other he had interfered detrimentally to the settlement
of the negotiations for purchasing the line when it was
supposed to be disposed of; the second was, that he had
neglected making overtures of peace till the last hour—
in fact, that he waited till a cabal had been got up in
Lancashire upon the subject. Now, every one knew
that he was an advocate of peace, and to show that he
had long been so he need only allude to what occurred
last year. A negotiation was then opened for peace,
and Mr. Brunel and Mr. Carter met as the accredited
agents of the two companies, and arranged the terms, but
the Great Western, at the last moment, refused to
agree to them.] Still he was opposed to warfare be-
tween the two companies, he considered it detrimental
to the interests of the public and the shareholders, and
only calculated to benefit the lawyers. Entertaining
these views, therefore, and knowing Mr. Russell per-
sonally, he again made overtures to bring about peace,
believing that where there was a will there was
a way, and the result was, that Mr. Russell de-
manded that he should consent to the ex-,
tension of the broad gauge frem Fenny Compton
to Wolverhampton, but he particularly and unequivo-
cally refused to give such consent. Subsequently, Mr.
Saunders and Mr. Swift were appointed to negotiate as
the accredited agents of the two parties, and Mr.
Saunders, at the first meeting, again demanded that the
broad gauge should be conceded to the Great Western
Company, but Mr. Swift refused to agree to it. At a
subsequent meeting Mr. Swift proposed that the gauge
question should be left open, to be fought in the next
session; and now the negotiation seemed to be draw-
ing to a favourable close. A few hours afterwaras, how-
ever, another meeting took place, and now Mr. Sanders
proposed that the gauge question should be referred to
the counsel of the Great Western Company, but Mr.
Swift refused to agree to it, but proposed that it should
be referred to the counsel of either company, or to the
newly constituted railway board. Mr. Saunders refused
both proposals, and the negotiation went off. Now, how
had he interfered to perpetuate the warfare that bud
been going on? But he need not dwell further on that
point, because he ihad received a letter front
Mr. Russell since the meeting of Feiday, in which
he withdrew the first charge. With regard to the
second charge, he would mention that the memorial
from the north did not reach his bands till
the Wednesday previous to the Great Western
meeting, and he wrote the letter which :had been
so much commented upon in the hope of again laying
the foundation for peace. Had be felt inclined to take
advantage of the cabal, he would have communicated
with the directors of the Birmingham and Oxford
line rather than the Great 'Western Company. He was
perfectly justified in proposing a joint lease, because it
was pretty notorious that the wants of the public were
iecreasing to such a degree that they required another
line. Now, would it not have been better that the
Birmingham and Oxford and the Buckingham
lines should have been used to take off the
surplus traffic, rather than they should be put to the ex-
pense of laying down double rails? Viewed in that
light, he Alas quite convinced Parliament would have
sanctioned a joint lease, and he warned the Great Wes-
tern Company not to carry their principle of
competition too far. The only points opened to
the applicability of such a principle were to be found
in their own district. Still he was for peace, and he yet
hoped that ere long it would be come to.
Mr. CASSILN, who made the second charge against Mr.
Glyn, said that at all events the chairman must admit
that his letter was ill-timed.
Mr. ELLis MoGLEY, of Liverpool, explained the course
which he had taken upon the subject, and declared that
the question of the Birmingham and Oxford purchases
was not settled yet. Like their Honourable Chairman,
he was
to
rpe
the powers of an unwholesomeacebutiftheGreat Westernw deter-
minedemeerepeti
test j
Lien, why let them.
A vote of thanks was then passed to the Chairman,
and the meeting broke up.

LLYNVI VALLEY RAILWAY.—In pursuance of the
usual notice, the first general half-yearly meeting of this
company, was held to-day at the London Tavern—W.
Matthews, Esq., in the chair—to receive the report of the
directors, and to decide upon the adoption of an ex-
tension of their line by a short branch to Augh Taine.
The meeting was but thinly attended, but the report was
adopted; and it was decided that an application should
be made to Parliament for the branch. Thanks were
voted to the chairman and directors, and the meeting
separated.

FATAL RAILWAY ACCIDENT.—An old soldier,
who had recently received his discharge, was killed o
the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway on Wednesday
evening. He was a passenger in one of the fourth-class
carriages by the train which leaves Edinburgh at five
o'clock, and it appears that when the train had ap-
proached within five or six miles of Linlithgow, he at-
tempted to enter into the adjoining vehicle, but having
missed his footing, he fell on the rails, and all the It-
rnaining carriages passed over him. The train, which
at the time was proceeding at full Speer,, it seems was
not stopped to take up the body, it being known that a
luggage train was not far in the rear. On the arrival of
the latter at the spot, the corpse was found dreadfully
mangled.—Scotsman.

THE COAL TRADE.—The attention of the Govern-
ment having been called to the circumstance of French
vessels clearing out from ports in this country with coals,
ostensibly for France, w hich, in fact, were destined for
Algeria, whereby her Majesty's revenue had been
defrauded of the export duties, the Commissioners
of the Customs have been commanded to instruct
their officers to take bonds, on the shipment of
coals in French vessels, for the due landing of
the coals in France. The collectors at the various
ports will therefore take care that when coals are ship-
ped in French vessels, or in vessels belonging to any
foreign country with which treaties of reciprocity have
been concluded, bond be given in double the amount of
duty payable on the coals, and that the said bond be ex-
ecuted by a responsible British resident, unless the par-
ties shall be disposed to deposit the amount of duty pay-
able on the exportation of the coals, to be returned on
production of a certificate of the same having been duly
landed at the place for which they may have been en-
tered.

GAOL-FREAKING.—On Wednesday night, a prisoner
named Mackenzie made his escape from Elgin gaol in a
very bold manner. The door of his cell was left open,
by the doctor's orders, the prisoner having been ill and
vomiting blood. Taking advantage, the prisoner forced
the lock of the passage door with one of the iron hooks
of his hammock, and having taken some fire from the
stove, broke open a small door leading to the garret.
There the prisoner set fire to the roof, and burned a hole
through which he clambered, and, fixing another hook
of the hammock to the water pipe, swung himself on to
the enclosing wall, thus escaping unobserved. He has
not yet been retaken. He wade his escape some time
ago from Forres gaol, and also from Gray's Hospital, to
which he had been removed from gaol, suffering under
the same complaint.

DISTRESSING ACClDENTS.—Yesterday the follow-
ing accidents occurred, one of which, it is feared, will end
in loss of life :—The first case was that of James Allen,
aged thirty years, a labourer. He was engaged on the
roof of Messrs. olls and Co.'s floorcloth manufactory,
in Kennington-lane, Lambeth, when he slipped and fell
about fifty-four feet, to the basement of the building,
where he received the most fearful injuries. He was
conveyed to Guy's Hospital, where he was found to have
sustained a fracture of the right arm; extensive ir7 r•
the chest, fractures of several ribs, and other

illiPpengtto. a lehiala namenameu alurtthr-.
nine years, residing at No. 2, Fair-street, .Horsi) .
She was walking along a passage, when she stumbled
over a trapdoor, and fell heavily to the floor, and when
raised up, was found to have received a compound frac-
ture of the left thigh. She was taken to Guy's Hospital,
and is progressing favourably. A third accident took
place to a young woman named Jane Hopkins, of No.
21, Flask-court, Tooley-street, Southwark. She had
been to take her husband's tea, and while crossing the
carriage way in High-street, Borough, she was knocked
down by a cart, the off wheel of which passed over her
legs. She was carried to Guy's Hospital.
SUSPECTED SUICIDE FROM DRUNKENNESS.—Last
vening an inquest was held by Mr. W. Carter, at the
Welsh Trooper, Bankside, Southwark, on the body of
Margaret Donaghue, aged 66 years, lately residing at
No. 11, Pigeon-court, Ray-street, Clerkenwell, who, it
was alleged, had committed suicide by jumping off Black-
friars-bridge. The deceased obtained a scanty liveli-
hood by selling fruit, but for some time past had been
leading a life of drunkenness, pawning and selling every-
thing she possessed. On Satureay morning last she was
seen by her daughter drinking at the White Swan
public-house, in Ray-street, which place she left quite
intoxicated, and nothing more was seen of her until 5( ven
o'clock on Sunday morning last, when a man named
Nevitt, whilst standing on the pier at Biackfriars-bridge,
saw the body of a female floating down the river. He
rowed after it, and conveyed the body ashore, but all
efforts to restore life were unavailing. Several duplicates
were found in her pocket, which ultimately led to her
identity. There being no evidence to prove how the de-
ceased came into the water, the jury returned a verdict
of " Found drowned."

CHILD MURDER.—Yesterday Mr. Mills resumed, at
the Bull and Mouth, Ebury-street, Bloomsbury, an in-
quest adjourned from the 25th ult. ou the body of a male
infant murdered under the following circumstance :—lt
appeared that a bar-maid, named Clitalotte Cooper, ivho
was then cnceink, was married in June to James Mit-
chell, who resided at No. 13, Gilbert-street, St. Giles's.
On the 22d ult. she was seizes: with the pains of labour,
and on the following day gave birth to the infant, which
was subsequently found buried in the soil of the water •
closet. Mr. Bennett, parochial surgeon, proved that the
child had had a separate existence from its mother, and
that it died from having been suffocated in the water-
closet a few minutes alter its birth. In conscquence of
the non-attendance of the midwife, who had been sum-
moned, the inquest was a third time adjourned, a war-
rant having been issued for the mother's arrest, and also
for the arrest of the midwife. The latter was issued at
the request of the jury.