The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-29 00:00:00

THE SU N, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING, JUNE 29,. 1870,

LAW AND POLICE.

AN IRISH BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.

A GENTLEMAN KILLED IN THE STREET.—On Monday a
French gentleman named Remont died in the Royal
Free Hospital from the result of injuries he sustained
through being knocked down and run over by a Hansom
cab on Saturday night. The driver of the cab, James
Stanley, was brought up at Bow-street and remanded,
on his own recognizances only, the magistrates thinking
that the evidence shewed he was not to blame.

In the Irish Court of Exchequer, on Monday, the suit
of " Mary St. Lawrence v. Michael Skehan," for alleged
breach of promise of marriage, was heard.
Serjeant Armstrong stated the case for the plaintiff, who
was, he stated, a member of a most respectable family,
and daughter of Mr. St. Lawrence, a gentleman, who
carried on an extensive business in Limerick as a hat
manufacturer. She was of prepossessing appearance, and
was a perfect lady in manner and address. The defendant,
Mr. Michael Skehan, was a native of Ireland, and pos-
sessed of considerable property in the county Clare. He
had been married before, and was between 40 and 50
years of age. In the month of April, 1869, he met Miss
St. Lawrence, and then commenced to pay her marked
attention. No secret was made of their engagement, and
his proposal for her hand was accepted by the lady's
family. The only matter suggested in reference to the
postponement of the marriage ceremony was a desire of
the defendant to have his sons settled. Shortly after
being accepted the defendant appeared to change his
mind. And he (counsel) would prove to the jury that the
defendant's only pretence for the change was that he could
not get married while his unmarried, daughter was
in the house. It would be established in evidence
that no stipulation on this point was made
between the parties. After full and ample time had
passed the lady requested the matter to be brought to a
close, and he (Sergeant Armstrong) thought the best way
in which he could explain the position of affairs was by
reading some of the correspondence which took place
between the plaintiff and defendant. Counsel then read
some letters from which the following are extracts :--

THE LIABILITY OF COMPANIES. —An action has been
brought, in the Court of Queen's Bench, against the
Thames Iron Works Company. A young man, named
Passmore, was killed by the falling of one of the
iron girders over the Metropolitan Railway, while the
train, in which he was seated, was passing. His father,
brought an action against the company, the girder having
been hoisted into position while the train was in motion.
The defence set up by the company was that the negli-
gence was that of the contractor and his men. The ques-
tion was reserved for the Full Court, the damage being
conditionally settled at £lOO.
-

. -
OLD PORT WINE. —An action has been tried in the
Court of Exchequer between two wine merchants, the
matter in dispute being a pipe of port wine, described as
" superior old port," which, instead of improving with
keeping, turned sour. It was contended that such an
accident will occasionally happen, but the jury returned a
verdict for the plaintiff (who bought the wine which
turned sour), damages being £ll5. Leave was reserved to
move for the verdict to be set aside.

OMNIBUS DRIVERS IN TROUBLE. —NO less than thirty
omnibus drivers and conductors were summoned for the
Lord Mayor for stopping in front of the Mansion House,
and looking out for passengers. The proprietors had pre-
viously been warned. Twenty-seven of them were fined
10s. each, and two others 4s. 6d. for infringing the Traffic
Act. The Lord Mayor told them that on another occasion
he would double their fines. The men chiefly belonged
to the General Omnibus Company. Twenty of them
paid their fines, but nine being unable to do so, were

" 20th May, 1869.
" My dear Mary,—l received yours, and I cannot tell
you how delighted I was for the first time. As I said in
my last letter, do not mind what other folks say ' • treat
them with contempt, and let them guess about what is to
come on, and it will be a mystery to them when and where
we will spend the honeymoon. Do not shew the white
feather; dress and walk with better airs than ever you
have done.----I remain yours faithfully,
" MICHAEL SKEHAN."

locked up in default.
CHANGING CLOTHES.—A young man from Gloucester-
shire, named Mansfield, surrendered himself at the
Wellington Barracks, and was charged at Bow-street with
wearing the uniform of a private in the Coldstream
Guards. He had been out drinking with a soldier, who
asked him to change clothes for a joke, to see how he
would look in uniform, and then taking advantage of the
prisoner's intoxicatectstate, went off and deserted. His
dupe was remanded for a week.

" 6th July. 1869.
"My dear Mary,—l wish to let you know that Delia
will be married on Saturday ; this is strictly private.
I have nothing to say, only it is a good job
Excuse haste, my dear Mary.—Your

'or us.
and

" MICHAEL."

" 23, Clare-street, Limerick,
" 14th Sept., 1869.

A Riccous ORATOR.—A man named Morritz Perper
was charged at Clerkenwell with threatening to shoot
Detective Renners of the A Division. The defendant
made a speech at a meeting of the Land and
Labour League, held at Clerkenwell, in which
he said he had suffered six months' imprisonment, and
that a constable named Remmers had given evidence
against him, also that he had bought a pistol and intended
to shoot him. The detective stated that the prisoner had
often been to Scotland-yard in an excited manner. He
was remanded for a week to ascertain the state of his
mind.

"My dear Michael,—Your note reached Me on yester-
day; I am very jealous with you for not coming down on
Friday ; indeed, it looked rather strange, no matter what
friend may have been with you, you could very easily
spare time to come down if you only wished to do so.
Now, this business of ours is going on a lOng time, and I
think the sooner it is arranged the better it would be for
all parties. Now that the boys are gone, and Delia mar-
ried. I don't see the reason why you should defer it any
longer.—Yours affectionately,
" MARY ST. LAWRENCE."

THE ATHENS AND PIR/EUS RAILWAY UOMPANY.—A
case connected with the Athens and Piraeus Railway
Company has been tried in the Court of Exchequer.
Some interest was felt in the matter, as Mr. Lloyd, who
was one of the victims of the massacre at Marathon,
was managing director of the company. The case
was rather an involved one, but the point at issue was
whether a sum paid on certain bills of exchange had been
paid by the plaintiffs, Messrs. Pickering, at the request
of Mr, Edward Pickering, their brother, who was con-
nected with the company, or at the request of the
late Mr. Lloyd, managing director, and Mr. Hutchinson,
secretary of the company, in their official capacity. The
jury, after hearing arguments on both sides, found for the
plaintiffs, Messrs. Pickering, for £l,BBl, and interest.
THE SCOTCH WILL CASE.—The remarkable will case in
the Scotch Court of Session, has come to a close after a
trial of six days. The action was brought to set aside
the will of the late Mr. William Maxwell Stewart, of
Lochnagar, on the ground that deceased, when he made
the will, was of unsound mind. A sum of about £30,000
was involved in the action. Some curious evidence was
given in the course of the trial in proof of insanity—
one or two of the witnesses taking exception particularly
to Mr. Stewart's conduct on Sundays. The will will
be set aside, the case having resulted in favour of the
pursuers.
THE ESTATE OF THE LATE MARQUIS OF HASTINGS.
in Rolls Chambers the case of Bubb v. Yelverton, being
a suit for the administration of the estate of the late
Marquis of Hastings, came before the chief clerk on a
summons for the production of documents. The order
made in the previous instance was now partly
complied with, but application was made for
a further adjournment until the 25th of July, .
for the production of the remainder. The solicitor to the
estate, in reply to a question by the Chief Clerk, said the
income of the estate was about £6,000 a year, and that
there would be enough to satisfy all the creditors. The
Chief Clerk said the interest for the period of adjourn-
ment applied for would, at 4 per cent., amount to £2O,
but granted the application.
AN ALLEGED " PIRATICAL" GUN MAKER.—Mr. Pryse,
gun and pistol manufacturer, -of Ashton-street, Birming-
ham, was the owner of a patented invention by which
the hammer of a gun or pistol constructed on the central
fire or needle principle, after striking the percussion cap
on the nipple, returned to half-cock, and only re-
quired to be raised to full cock by the hand
prior to a second discharge. Mr. Stanton, who
carried on a similar business at Birmingham,
seeing the value of the invtntion, contrived to arrive at
the same result, though by an entirely different process.
He was thereupon sued by. Mr. Pryse for infringement of
patent. Vice-Chancellor James, befoee whom the case
was heard, was of opinion that, although the defendant's
process appeared to be an improvement upon the plain-
tiff's, it was a colourable imitation ; and he therefore
granted the injunction to restrain as prayed.
A FAMILYLITIGATION.—The Master of the Rolls delivered
his judgment, yesterday, in the case of Barker v. Barker.
The bill was filed on behalf of five sisters, and the chief
object was to obtain a declaration that they were entitled
to a charge on freehold estate and cotton mill situated
in Yorkshire, under the provisions of the will of their
father. The defendants were the brothers of the plain-
tiffs, and they contended that, according to the terms of
the will, the latter had no claim to the property in question.
The testator left £2,000 to each of his daughters, which
legacies were to be paid out of his estate. He appointed
one of his sons and a daughter his executors, and they con-
veyed the property to a third party, the four sisters con-
senting to the conveyance. The question for the court
was whether, under the circumstances, the property as
conveyed was liable to the legacies of the daughters of
the testator. His lordship regretted that he could not
give the plaintiffs any relief. Their bill must be dis-
missed.

"17th September, 1869.
"My Dear Mary,—l received yours, and am sorry to
tell you that I am laid up with a very bad cold ; and I
can assure you that the tone of your letter gave me great
pain, for you want me to do what I have no notion of
doing—that is, as long as my daughter is with me. lam
doing what I can to get her married, and I am more
anxious than you are. You must have a poor opinion of
me when you say lam bantering with you. .You cannot
say that. You said to me that you should be mistress of
your house if you got married. I can assure you I will
lose no time in trying to do so. So you are aware such
things cannot be done in a hurry.—My dear Mary, your
fond, " MICHAEL."

" 23, Clare-street, Limerick, 23rd October.
" Dear Michael,—l received your letter on Saturday,
and, indeed, I must say it was almost time for you to
write. lam very much surprised that you did not come
to see me during your stay in town, according to promise.
At the time you proposed for me I was led to un-
derstand that our marriage would take place in the
course of a few months after. That was in April last ;
but then you seemed anxious to have the boys gone be-
fore you came to any arrangement about it. The boys
are now gone nearly three months, and, as that was the
only obstacle which appeared to.be in the way, I don't
see why we should defer the matter any longer. You
never said a word to me about Norah until after the boys
had left ; and I don't think you should let her or any other
person dictate to you. lam placed in a very unpleasant
position, particularly since the races. I have to request
that you will make up your mind, and let me know what
you really intend doing ; it is now six months on hand,
and I don't wish to have my name any longer before the
public.—Yours sincerely,

" MARY ST. LAWRENCE."

" sth November, 1869.
"My dear Mary—l received yours, and I have nothing
to say only what 1 said over and over, and I do not see
for the life of me what anyone has to say to you on my
account. I can assure you I will never bring in anyone
as mistress over Norah as long as she is with me, let it
be short or low,. It is no use for me to tell you that lam
doing my best to try and get her married, but I never
will sacrifice my child to gratify the wishes of others.—
Yours faithfully, " MICHAEL &MAN."

Serjeant Armstrong continued to say that the plaint
and defendant were to have been married on the 26th o,
April, and the action was brought on the 2d of May in
the present year. The defendant then ,wrote to say that
he would marry the plaintiff and settle the action. She
accepted the offer, but in consequence of a statement
made by the defendant, in reference to two gentlemen of
his acquaintance, the match was finally broken off.
Mary St. Lawrence, the plaintiff, was examined—l
reside with my father in the city of Limerick. My father
has retired from business. I first knew Mr. Skehan when
he came from Australia some years ago. He first began
to pay me attentions in March, 1869, when I was staying
on a visit with Mrs. Hare, at Kilaloe. I believe Mr.
Skehan has five sons and eight daughters. On the 30th
of March he asked me to marry him, but there was
no suggestion that the marriage would depend on
any of his daughters ; he only alluded to his two
sons, Michael and Peter ; the sons went to Australia
some time in July ; it was in Limerick I accepted him ;
I told him at Killaloe I would take a month to consider
—to commit my friends ; that was on'the 30th of March ;
he said he would only give me a fortnight ; I consulted
with my friends, and he came to me in about three weeks
from the 30th of March ; it was then finally arranged ; he
told me when he proposed that his income was
about £6OO a year ; he said he would make a settle-
ment on me; when he came the second time he said he had
only £4OO a year; he came to Dublin soon after, and I
corresponded with him ; I wrote to him on the 14th of
September a letter complaining of his not coming to see
me ; in another letter I wrote to him telling him it was
reported in Limerick that the marriage was not coming
off ; some time after, at the time of the Limerick races,
he said, "If I don't marry you I shall have no one else ;
but my daughter does not wish me to marry." I never
saw him after that. On the 4th November I wrote to
him telling him of the talk of the people of Limerick. I
told the °defendant that I had received a proposal
from another gentleman from Cork. I knew he had
twelve or fourteen children. How often did you see Mr.
Skehan after the engagement? I could not say ; I have
certainly seen him six times ; I was always willing to
marry him if he made a settlement. How much did you
expect ? I suppose about a £lOO a year. When you said
in your letter—" If you don't hurry I'll go into a con-
vent," were you serious ? I don't know (laughter) ;it was in
November I first consulted my attorney, Mr. Molloy.
Mr. Heron then opened the case for the defendant. He
said it was true the defendant had gone to Australia some
thirty or thirty-five years ago, and that when he came
back he purchased a small property in the county Clare,
but it was heavily mortgaged. This was not an action of
the ordinary love-making nature between parties of the
same age or position. The defendant would tell the jury
that Miss St. Lawrence was fully apprised of his intention
not to get married to her until his daughter, Norah,
should be settled. The reason so many of this kind
of actions were successful was because a great many
women have at some period of their lives behaved badly
towards men, and fancy it is a cheap way of having re-
venge by putting their hands into a fellow man's pocket
to make him pay damages as reparation to her sex; The
defendant was in no hurry to get married, and he (Mr.
Heron) believed that the plaintiff herself had postponed
the ceremony from disinclination to marry the defendant.
He submitted that Skehan, forced into a corner
as he was, was willing all through to marry the plaintiff,
and if the court would but adjourn he was quite willing
to do so still. (Laughter). Damages in such a case as
this could only be given for the loss of the man ; but she
had not lost the man, for he was was still willing to marry
her. He did not think that from the 26th of April to the
2nd of May was a reasonable time to elapse for the com-
pletion of the promise, and he would ask the jury
to say this lady had a very happy escape from mar-
rying this aged widower with twelve children.
Mr. Michael Skehan, the defendant, was then called
and examined. He deposed that he had twelve children,
and that all he derived from his property was £3OO a year.
From the very first he was sincere in his intention to marry
the plaintiff.
I suppose you were head and ears in love.

INTERRUPTING A TELEGRAPH MESSENGER. —At the Chel-
tenham Police-court, Thomas Tibbles, a lad about 18
years old, was summoned, on the information of the head-
postmaster, for assaulting Thomas Lawrence Lox,_
telegraph boy employed at the General Post Office. The
lad Cox said that he was a telegraph boy at the Post
Office, and on the 16th of May he was taking a message
to Lansdown Parade on a bicycle. He saw the defendant,
who pushed him off the bicycle, put a child on it, and
went away with it. He asked the defendant for it, but
he refused to give it him, and said he would punch his
head if he did not get away. He was delayed twenty
minutes in delivering the message. The defendant denied
that he pushed the boy off the bicycle, but said that,
seeing it at the door, he merely put a child on the bicycle
and went off with it. Mr. Harford said they wished it
to be understood that her Majesty's messengers—for really
the telegraph boys were so—were not to be interfered with
in the discharge of their important duties ; and to mark
their sense of the defendant's conduct, they would fine
him £l, with 7s. 6d. expensa3, or twenty-one days impri-
sonment.
THE WAY TO CHECK WIFE BEATING. —Wm. Harper, a car-
man, living in Little Pulteney-street, ._'was brought before
Mr. Tyrwhitt, at Marlborough-street Police Court, yester-
day, by Jeffrey, one of the warrant officers, charged with
assaulting his wife.—The complainant said that about
seven o'clock the previous morning, while in bed, the pri-
soner, without any words haying passed between them,
struck her a violent blow in the mouth, loosening her
teeth.—ln reply to Mr. Tyrwhitt, the complainant said
the prisoner had assaulted her before, and she had
had him before at that court. She • had four little
children to keep, and the prisoner did not do anything
towards their support. He had made use of dreadful
oaths and threats towards her, to the effect that he would
rip her up, throw her out of the window, and that he
would kill her, and a few days ago he threw some cold
water over the baby, which was ill with the measles. Mr.
Tyrwhitt said when it was known that a man did nothing
for his family a magistrate's course was clear. The pri-
soner would be committed for three months with hard
labour, and at the end of that time he would have to find
bail for another three months.
A DISGRACE TO THE ARMY. —Henry Longley, a stalwart
young fellow, who is a private,in the Grenadier Guards,
was charged at the Westminster Police-court, yesterday,
with violently assaulting Pitt Tarleton, an inspector of
the T division of police, in the execution of his duty. Mr.
Tarleton, whose face bore frightful marks of a cut with a
soldier's belt, said at 20 minutes to 12 last night he
came out of his own house smoking a pipe, and saw the
prisoner and a woman conducting themselves in a very
disgraceful manner. Witness expostulated, when the
prisoner, belt in hand, attacked him, striking him
first in the eye ; his hat fell off, and before
he could recover it, prisoner inflicted another
frightful wound on his head and then ran away, but in
doing so he picked up a brick and struck the inspector on
the shoulder with it. Prisoner said he did not know the
complainant was an inspector; the blow on the eye was
done with the fist and not the belt. Mr. Arnold said he
intended to commit the prisoner, but he was remanded
for the attendance of the surgeon.
A RESPECTABLE BOY.-Alfred Collins, aged 14 years, of
6, Church-terrace, Cubitt-town, errand boy, was brought
before Mr. Lushington, yesterday, at the Thames Police-
court, charged with stealing a watch, the property of
Mr. George Till, tailor and draper, carrying on business
at No. 5, York-terrace, Commercial-road, near the rail-
way bridge, Stepney. The prisoner was recommended to
Mr. yin, a few days ago, as an honest boy. The parents
were respectable. The boy was only in Mr. Till's
employ twenty-four hours, when he absconded, taking
with him a silver watch. The watch was pawned by a
' woman, who received it from her son. Her son received
it from the prisoner. The mother of the boy said she
' had always found her son a good, honest boy, and was
quite surprised when she heard of this robbery. The
prisoner pleaded guilty. Mr. Lushington said the boy
• obtained a good situation in the house of a respectable
, tradesman, and immediately commenced robbing him.
Whatever the boy might be at home he was a very dis-
I honest boy out of doors. He sent him to prison for two
months. -

(Laug:

ter) ? No answer. I was engaged to the plaintiffin
May, '69. lam not engaged to any other lady. I
don't know of any little rich widow. Since the engage-
ment Mrs. St. Laurence borrowed money from me on
every occasion that I went to her house ;• keep a wag-
gonette, brcause I am unable to walk any considerable
distance.
His Lordship having charged the jury, the latter, after
about an hour's consideration, returned a verdict for the
plaintiff, with £lOO damages.

THE FATAL MARCH.—A memorial has been signed
by the vicar, magistrates, and other inhabitants of
kingston-on-Thames, in which the memorialists pray
that the-churchwardens will take such steps as will ensure
the holding of an inquest on the body of, the soldier be-
longing to the 9th Regiment of Infantry, who died at the
Militia Barracks, Kingston, after a day's march. Mr.
Carter, the coroner, stated on Saturday that, if called
upon by the churchwardens, he would hold an inquest.
AMUSING INNOVATION IN A SHEFFIELD CHAPEL.
—ln one of the chapels at the West End of Sheffield on
Sunday night the officiating minister announced the
result of a special collection which had been made in the
morning. The sum realised was a very respectable one,
and perhaps several of the members of the congregation
were a little surprised, but one youngster in the gallery
expressed his astonishment and admiration by utterance
of a long low whistle. Notwithstanding the seriousness
of the preceding discourse, many of the hearers had their
gravity thoroughly upset by this unexpected and involun-
tary demonstration.

GENERAL BANKS ON CUBA.

The special correspondent of the New York Herald gives
the following description of General Banks's great speech
on the Cuban question. Writing from Washington on
June 14th, he says :

"It is very refreshing to hear once in a very long while
a speech from the heart—one of those spontaneous, unela-
borated pieces of eloquence which a real orator, under the
inspiration of the moment, gives free vent to. It is very
seldom we get such luxuries here. Senators and members
have got so much in the habit of reading somniferous es-
says that it has come to be a sacred rule now almost never
to attempt a speech, unless of the most ordinary kind,
without the most extravagant destruction of foolscap in
advance, and, altogether, the most exhaustive prepara-
tion. The result is that generally one is most profoundly
overcome by learning and sleep combined in the effort to
follow debates in the Senate or House. But now and
then these drowsy spells are broken ; something comes up
that sets the fullest preparation at defiance and we get a
speech, a real one, such as rouses people and makes them
recall the days of Clay and Webster, and Henry and
Burke, and Cicero and Demosthenes. Grant's message
yesterday on Cuba furnished such an occasion to-day,
and General Banks delivered a speech which, though it
may not read in print like a finished piece of oratory, was
certainly in delivery the most effective thing I have
heard here •in over three years. It is not
the habit of General Banks to write out his
speeches in advance, but he generally studies up his
subject beforehand and trusts to luck or inspiration for
the rest. No doubt he had thus fortified himself to sup-
port his report on Cuba, but the message of Grant; of
Fish, or Cushing, as the case may be, intervened and
operated to modify his entire plan. The result was that
when he spoke to-day before a full, excited, and sympa-
thising gallery he found himself obliged to treat of the
President's message more than of his own report. He
found himself thrown upon his own native strength of in-
tellect and fertility of resources, and, discarding all pre-
conceived plans of argument, he launched into a strong
impromptu address, which made up in•fire and vigour
what it may have lacked in study and preparation. I
have never seen the members themselves, as
well as the spectators in the galleries, so thoroughly
worked up. Several times the excitement and en-
thusiasm found freedom in applause, clapping of
hands and stamping of feet, and murmurs of approbation
from members themselves. This is a rare compliment in
these days, but it was richly deserved by Banks. His ad-
dress throughout was a very thinly concealed criticism of
President Grant's message. It overflowed with sar-
castic references to the authorship of the document, the
singular similarity in thought and expression with
diplomatic notes of the Spanish Minister, and the
pusillanimity of our foreign policy. It referred to Caleb
Cushing, not by name, but so plainly that everybody on
the floor and many in the galleries knew who was meant.
When the orator allowed to escape some bitter, deeply
cutting words about a lawyer who might be in
the employ of Spain, and Grant and Isabella at
the same time it sent a shot, not an occasional
one, at President Grant and Congress both.
When it declared the administration was not to

blame, because the national Legislature had taught
it was dangerous to have a policy ; but for the American
lawyer who could send such a document as the message of
yesterday to Congress nothing but everlasting disgrace
could follow him. It shewed up the barbarities and
outrages committed by Spain in Cuba, the insults to the
American flag, the impunity with which our citizens were
murdered there, and the protection enjoyed at the same
time by the subjects of Great Britain, and then it declared
that the cowardly policy of our Government was the
cause. In words of stirring impert it threw forth the
noble idea that to be safe as a nation we must be brave as
a nation ; we must be ' firm and just ; only cowardly,
pusillanimous people were imposed upon and abused. It
shattered to atoms the pretence that the Cubans
were not belligerents because they held no
towns and had no seat of Government, and brought
down a hearty laugh by remarking that man made
the town, but God made the country, and that no seat of
government was needed or could be fixed by a people car-
rying on a struggle for independence, if, in dealing with
international objections, it was equally fortunate, demon-
strating that should we proclaim neutrality we would only
be following in a juster and more discreet manner the
example of Spain herself and all the nations of Europe.
When, at its conclusion, General Banks related an alleged
remark of Minister Roberts, to the effect that he (Banks)
was actuated in his advocacy of Cuba by. improper mo-
tives, and when Banks declared that a Minister who could
say that deserved to be drummed out of the country, he
had his listeners at a pitch of sympathy and enthusiasm
that was quite remarkable. Cheering, which Speaker
Blame made little effort to suppress, greeted General Banks
when he took his seat, and members of both sides of the
House crowded about him to offer their congratulations.
After thus congratulating General Banks the members
scattered over the hall and went into the cloak-looms to
discuss the merits of the speech. Judge Orth, who fol-
lowed as the representative of the minority of the com-
mittee, advocated the bill of Senator Morton, which
simply provides for a strict enforcement of the neutrality
laws. He laboured under great disadvantage, coming
upon the heels of an effort like that of Banks. The mem-
bers did not listen. Many of them went out of the hall
and others were standing here and there, in corners, dis-
cussing the points of Banks's speech. The audience in
the galleries left, not seeming to wish to have the good
effect of the speech to which they had listened disturbed.
Orth was followed by Farnworth, who made a rambling
attempt to sustain the minority report. Governor Swann,
of Maryland, .who represents the democrats on the Foreign
Affairs Committee, read an elaborate written speeeh in
favour of Banks' report. Mr. Ambler, of Ohio, made a short
speech in favour of the minority, after which the House
took a recess until half-past seven."