The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-16 00:00:00

Cbtrbf Wbition

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock•

TATTERSALL'S-THIS EVENING.

CHESTER CUT.
20 to 1 apt Best Bower
22 to 1 apt Whinstone
22 to 1 apt Sweetmeat
25 to 1 apt The Baron
25 to 1 agst Mermaid—taken
30 to 1 apt Mickey Free
35 to 1 apt Cataract
35 to 1 apt Fitzallan
40 to 1 apt Hope
40 to 1 apt Arthur
40 to 1 apt Inheritress
DERBY.
5 to 1 apt Sting
15 to 1 apt Brocardo
20 to 1 agst lago
30 to 1 agst Malcolm
33 to 1 apt Tibthorpe--taken.

OAKS.
8 to 1 agst Forth's lot
11 to 1 agst Vanish
20 to 1 agst Mendicant

Su o'CLocK.

FEMALE SERVANTS' HOME
SOCIETY.—(THIS DAY).
A public meeting of this Society was held at the Hanover-
square Rooms this day,
Lord ASHLEY took the chair at two o'clock, and called on
the Rev. Mr. Keane to open the proceedings with prayer.
Lord ASHLEY said he thought it would be unnecessary for
him to trespass long on their time, as all of those present
must be aware of the importance of that Institution. From
the report he had read he was deeply impressed that it was of
the greatest importance to the peace, the welfare,
and the honour of every family in the kingdom. In
that he was borne out by a letter from Chel-
tenham, sent him by a gentleman connected with an
institution for the same object, which had existed seven
years in that place, with the very best results. He (Lord Ash-
ley) was aware that young women were exposed to great
dangers in coming up to the metropolis in search of situa-
tions, and were exposed to dangers and difficulties not only
when in that condition, but after they had actually obtained
places, since, from harsh treatment and extreme exactions,
they might in a moment of excitement throw up their situa-
tions and leave themselves friendless in the midst of
society. The police reports gave them too many instances
of the bad results which often issued out of these
casualties. Thei own comfort depended intimately
on the welfare of that class of society. After their wives
and children, their comfort depended on no class so much as
on their domestie servants. Great fraud was used in intro-
ducing bad characters into their families. An individual of
respectable appearance would take a lodging at some hotel,
and there would furnish characters suited to the highest
situations, or merely adapted to the humblest menial ser-
vice. It had been found out that so much as a guinea was
the charge for the most common character, but, for those
ascending to the higher flights, the amount exceeded any-
thing they could imagine, so that vast sums of money were
amassed by these means. At a time when they were review-
ing their whole social system (and for which he thanked God)
he hoped that a larger share of consideration would be given
to that class of society for whose interests the Society existed.
His Lordship, after some more remarks, called en
The Rev. June BROWN, secretary, to read the report of the
Institution. It appears that 2,000 female servants had used
the advantage of the Society's homes, 4,714 had been regis-
tered free, and 1,580 applications had been made to the So-
ciety for servants.
J. PAYNE, Esq., moved that the report read should be
adopted. He shortly remarked 'on the evil effects of the
hasty dismission of servants from situations coming within
his own sphere of observation in corroboration of what
had fallen from the Chairman.
The motion was seconded by the Rev. Mr. DIBDIN.
It was moved by the Rev. Mr. KEANE, and seconded by
the Rev. Mr. PIZEY, that gratitude and praise to God
should be recorded by the meeting for his blessing on the
Society.
The thanks of the meeting were moved to Lord Ashley,
the chairman, by the Rev. S. JONES, which was seconded and
called unanimously.
His LORDSHIP, in replying, referred the supporters of
the Society to the happy effect which had followed his
efforts. Twelve years ago, he said, out of the thousands
of childrenlfrom six to eight-years old, working from twelve
to fifteen hours a dav, not one hundred had hadone hour's in-
struction, but now thirty thousand of them wrought but six
hours a day, and had three hours of good education.—(Hear,
hear.) He would give them his own rule—first, they ought
to consider whether the cause they took up was good,
and if so to stand by it, though alone, till they grew grey-
beaded, and they would have the happiness to hear, if it
were on their death-bed, of the good resulting from their
labours.—The meeting then separated.

THE BANKRUPT and INSOLVENT
LAWS.—(THIS DAY.)
A large public meeting of merchants, bankers, and traders
in the City of London, was held, at one o'clock this day, at
the London Tavern, liishopsgate-street, to receive a report
of the proceedings of the
-Committee, appointed on the 27th
of May last, to consider the Small Debts Act and the Act
for the amendment of the Law of Bankruptcy and Insol-
vency, brought into the House of Commons at the close of
last session ; and to detk rmine on the measures to be adopted
with respect thereto.
On the motion of T. BARING, Esq., M.P., It. J. MASTER-
maw, Esq., M.P., was called to the chair, who briefly stated
that he had been requested to preside, as he had the honour
to represent the City of London in Parliament.
The Secretary, Mr. MAYERS, read letters from Lord Ash-
burton and Commissioners Goulburn and Fane, regretting
their inability to attend the meeting, and expressive of their
opinion that the present laws were defective, inasmuch as
they afforded the dishonest debtors the means of preventing
their property from being divided amongst their creditors,
and did not afford them sufficient protection, and suggesting
various remedies. Lord Ashburton stated that it had been
his fate to sit on many Committees respecting these laws
with several great lawyers, who appeared to him much more
occupied with views connected with their profession than
those which had reference to the great material and moral
interests of those over whom these laws were practically des-
tined to operate.
The report, after pointing out the hardships to which
creditors were exposed under existing Acts, proceeded to
point out the remedial measures contained in the
Act introduced into the House of Commons last
session under the auspices of Mr. Hawes and Mr. Masterman.
The object of this Bill is to perfect and extend the Bank-
ruptcy Amendment Act of 1842, the object being to afford
greater facility for bringing insolvent persons into the Court
of Bankruptcy; to obtain additional security against their
property being. dishonestly made away with; and to render
exposure and just punishinent more certain for those whose
improper conduct shall have deserved them. To accomplish
these objects, improvements are proposed in the first steps in
Bankruptcy, relative to the summons of the debtor, and for the
protection of his, or, rather, of his creditor's property, during
the period which now properly elapses between the day of
appearance before the Court upon the summons and the
completion of the Act of Bankruptcy, and the taking
possession of the property by the messenger under the
fiat. The Committee, aware of the extreme im-
portance of providing against the possibility of abuse
of this power, had endeavoured so to frame the
provision as to preclude reasonable complaint on the part of
the honest debtor. The Bill would also empower the Court of
Bankruptcy at any time in its discretion to withdraw or
suspend its protection from bankrupts and insolvents, and to
make the withdrawal of such protection compulsory, when-
ever the bankrupt or insolvent shall fail to satisfy
the Court that his bankruptcy or insolvency shall
have arisen otherwise than from fraud, wilful mis-
conduct, extravagance, or gambling, as well as in all those
cases now punishable as felonies or misdemeanours; thus put-
ting the proof of honesty upon the debtor, not throwing the
proof of fraud upon the creditor; the creditor being, by the
failure of his debtor, the injured party, and the impossibility
of proving fraud being to well known to require expla-
nation. It proposed to give to the assignees, as well as
to individual creditors upon the admission of their claims,
the rights of judgment creditors against the person of
the bankrupt or insolvent, which might be enforced
immediately upon the protection being withdrawn; thus
making the withdrawal of protection a previous step to
punishment at the discretion, not of the Court, but of the
creditor, who then, and then only, may seise his debtor's
person. The Bill provided security also to creditors
against the wasting and loss of the effects of
deceased traders, in default of the appointment of
executors or administrators, and for the distribution thereof
by means of the Court of Bankruptcy after the lapse of a
certain period. It rendered securities by bills of sale, and
mortgages of goods, anti personal chattels and effects, in-
operative against creditors unless filed within '2l days after
execution. The Committee were strongly opposed to the
proposition for uniting the Bankruptcy and Insolvent Courts.
They consider that a very different course should be pursued
in the dealing with the insolvency of' traders and non-traders,
under which latter description they include that numerous
class of persons who, whether traders whose debts are under
!Ca, or non-traders, avail themselves of the protection
granted them by the Court of Bankruptcy by the Acts of
1842 and 1844, as it must be borne in mind that the
object of the creditor in making his debtor bank-
rupt is the distribution of his estate among his
creditors; that of the insolvent petitioner, his own relief and
protection. Previously to the passing of the former of these
Acts, the effects of traders only were administered by the
Couq of Bankruptcy. The Insolvent Dobtors' Court dealt
chiefly
with the other class. 'l'lle effect of these two statutes
is to bring into the Bankruptcy Court a multitude of appli-
cations from persons whose debts are less than 304. '1 hese
cases are nearly all of a petty and trivial nature, involving
ordinarily few or no questions of importance; the effe s of
the debtors being nil, and their ctcreditors being, individually,
for trifling amounts, and without the slightest hope of a divi-
dend. From their number alone
~ou
they occupy a very
large portion of the time of the
bunissioners, and
official assignees ; and, from there no avail-
able assets, they of course contribute nothing
are,
to-
wards the expenses of the Court, which a
wholly borne by the creditors of the bankrupt traders. therefore,
The
petitions of these small debtors for protection might be dis-
posed of quite as efficiently for them in the Insolvent Court,
and the Court of Bankruptcy reserved for bankruptcy cases
alone. The accounts showed but a small balance iii the
hands of the Treasurer.
Tnostas Banns°, Esq., in moving the first resolution,
stated that he could bring no arguments from practical ex-
perience to bear upon the question which they had met to
discuss, for it was well known that bankers and general
merchants had not that every-day experience of the opera-
tion of the bankrupt and insolvent law which was obtained
by those moving in a different sphere of commerce. They
were not certainly free from the disagreeable misfortune of
bad debts, but the application of those bad debt did
not come so frequently before theta as those
engaged in other brandies of trade.—(llear, hear. )
He had stated this because—although lie agreed with the
sentiments contained in the report—he did not wish to•pledge
himself as to the course he should pursue with respect to
hese laws until he had had a further elucidation of their
effect upon the public, and of the sentiments of the Legisla-
ture with respect to them. He was saved from entering at
length into the whole bearings of the question by the very
able
and comprehensive letters which they had heard read
from those whose experience and official position entitled
their opinions to the greatest respect.—(Hear.) Although the
banker and merchant had not so many opportunities of ob-
serving the effect of those laws as the general trader, yet he
was, nevertheless, as deeply interested in the issue, for every-
thin & which rendered one portion of the trade of the country
unsafe must endanger the other post: also.—(Cheers.) So
that that question affected the merclle classes more than
they were inclined to believe. It was a mistaken notion to
believe that creditors had any wish to oppress their debtors,
as justice could he obtained without imposing
unnecessary
hardships.- • - He must say, however, that there swaris
is morbid sensibility created in the minds of
the public, for the hardship which occurred under '

the old system of imprisonment for debt, and it was
right that such feelings should be generated, in order that
distress might be alleviated ; but that law must be had, and
operate injuriously upon the whole community, which gave
an undue advantage to the debtor, and did not protect the
honest creditor from injury and fraud.—(Hear.) . The Le-
gislature, In his opinion, had been rather precipitate with
respect to these laws, and the mercantile interests had not
been sufficiently consulted with respect to their operation. He
then instanced the case of New York, in which the law, which
was similar to our own, was abolished about 20 years ago, but
three or four years after an attempt was made to renew it, as
it was found that the new enactments did not give the credi-
tor sufficient control over the property of the debtor; thus
showing, that in every commercial country it was highly in-
cumbent that the creditor as well as the debtor should be
protected. He had a perfect reliance in the opinions of those
hy whom the report was prepared, and a knowledge
of his Honourable Friend the Chairman, and his
Honourable Friend the Member for Lambeth (Mr.
Hawes), who had taken charge of the Bill, and he was
perfectly convinced of the uecesssity of commercial Temtak-
mg the matter into their own hands, and with the aid of the
learned profession, devising remedies for the existing laws.
He, therefore, begged to move that this meeting approve of
the report, that it be printed and circulated, and that the com-
mittee be empowered to take such measures as may be ex-
pedient to give practical effect to its recommendation, and
also to raise subscriptions to defray the expenses incident
thereon."
Sir GEORGE LARPENT seconded the motion. He
said there was a general opinion amongst the mercantile
classes that these laws required alteration, and that they
were willing to lend all their aid to further that object.—
(Hear, hear.) It was very easy to be benevolent with other
people's means, and to obtain a character for philantrophy
for relieving the imprisoned debtor, whilst the unfortunate
creditor might be suffering in obscurity. He admitted that
a different mode of legislation was necessary before the pre-
sent laws were passed, but the great and main object was not to
give
.an unfair advantage to either party,but to obtain an equal
distribution of the property of the debtor amongst his credit-
ors, and to compel them to give a guarantee for the payment
of a portion of their future proceeds to their creditors before
obtaining their final discharge. No little consideration was
given to creditors who might perhaps suffer from the altera-
tion of tariffs, which might reduce the value of articles in
which they had wisely speculated. They ought to give every
party the facility of coming forward and to devote as much of his
assets as possible to the benefit of his creditors, and protect him
from the operation of vindictive or malicious feelings. These
laws should take especial care that the honest debtor was
dealt justly with, and that the dishonest debtor should be
punished.—(Hear, hear.) The language of the Learned
Commissioners of Bankruptcy was even stronger than the
language they had used.
Mr. MITCHELL, M.P., expressed his entire concurrence in
the opinions which had just been expressed by the previous
speakers. He would state an instance within his own ex-
perience. He had in one case been offered a composition of
2s. in the pound, which he had refused, because he thought
no honest man ought to offer so small a composition. He had
caused the individual to be made a bankrupt, but the
result was, that instead of obtaining any assets, he had had
to pay 301. towards the expenses. He thought the law of
debtor and creditor had not been sufficiently felt, and he
conceived that the measure of Lord Brougham had been
a crude, imperfect measure, worthy of its author. In his
opinion the commercial greatness of this country was owing to
the good faith which was observed in its trading transactions.
He had seen something of the trade of France, and the con-
sequence of the bad faith observed in that country led to a
great restriction of the dealing there. He thought that
every one who became insolvent was bound to show how he
became so, and in all cases of fraud that it power of punish-
ment should be placed in the hands of an impartial tribunal,
and he should therefore with great pleasure propose the fol-
lowing resolution :—" That the laws affecting the relations of
debtor and creditor are of vital importance to the well-being
of the mercantile community, and deserve the serious atten-
tion of the Legislature. That the present laws relating to
bankruptcy and insolvency in this country are unsatisfactory
and injurious, neither protecting the estate of the really un-
fortunate debtor from wasteful costs and unnecessary delays
nor affording prompt and efficient means of coercing the
Feckless or fraudulent trader, whereby a most mischievous
influence is exercised over the commercial character of this
country."
Mr. B. lIAWEs, M.F., rose with great pleasure to second
the resolution as proposed by his Hon. Friend, the Member
for Bridport. When Lord Campbell, about ten years ago,
brought his Bill into Parliament to abolish arrest on mesne
process, he had done him the honour to consult him on its
details, and to place his name on the back of the Bill, and he
could assure the meeting that it was never intended to de•
prive the crediior of the power of punishing a fraudulent
debtor. Let it not be said that this was any attempt
to return to the old system of imprisonment for debt,
for it was nothing of the kind. But their object
was to remedy a great and acknowledged evil.
and that was to render the confidence between
the several members of a trading community as certain as
possible, for on what, in fact, was that confidence based ?
Why on this fact—that wherever credit was given, it was
only, in truth, the transfer of capital from the hands of the
proprietor to the hands of another for the advantage of both
parties ; and were this confidence then broken down, there
would be a great impediment imposed upon that interchange
of commodities which was the very vitality of trade. At
the close of the last session, a Bill had been brought into
the House of Commons, with the consent of the Minister, not
with any view to carry it into a law, but with the intention
to circulate it through the country, and obtain the opinion of
mercantile men in different parts of the country, and he
might say that in all the numerous communications which
they had received they had met with no objection from
practical men of any moment whatever. They had found
the most ready co-operation, and among other individuals
they had obtained the approbation of the Learned Solicitor-
General whose high legal authority was so well known, and
whose present high position gave additional weight to that
authority, and though he could not commit that high func-
tionary to any part of the Bill, but still he might say that
that gentleman had expressed his approval of the several
provisions of the Bill. Now the object was to obtain the
sanction of the Legislature and obtain a permanent Act, and
having these grounds to stand upon, he (Mr. Hawes) felt
assured that if the Hon. Chairman and himself were
empowered to carry the Bill into the House of Commons they
would experience little, if any, opposition in that assembly.
One of the chief objects of this Bill was to throw the onus
probandi upon the party who ought always to have borne it
—the debtor who failed to fulfil his engagements. It was
well known that, as at present constituted, there was the ut-
most difficulty of reaching a case of fraud. There might be
matter for suspicion nay, almost a certainty—that the
deepest villany had been committed, and yet there was no
means whatever of arriving at the truth. For his own part,
he would be one of the last. individuals in the world to visit
any man's misfortune with harshness, but he did feel that it
had become necessary to take some active steps for the
amendment of the bankruptcy and insolvency laws, and he
should, therefore, readily second the resolution which had
just been submitted to the meeting.
The resolution was carried unanimously.
Mr. ELLlOTT, in proposing the third resolution, after some
observations respecting the necessity of supportin& the good
faith of the trading community, asserted his opinion that,
without an efficient bankruptcy law, the middle classes of
the community must be destroyed. He had looked deeply
into the matter, and it was his decided opinion that the
injury imposed upon the solvent portion of the population by
those who failed in their engagements was equal to the
whole taxation of the country. Indeed, he was sure that
this loss was not less than 50,0007., and if they failed to carry
out this object, out of either carelessness or a false considera-
tion for the feelings of the debtor, they would only have to
carry their philanthrophy another step further, and legalise
the circulation of forgedbills of exchange. With these impres-
sions he would gladly propose the resolution to the meeting :
" That this meeting accept the provisions of the Bill intro-
duced into Parliament last session by Mr. Masterman, M.P.,
and Mr. Hawes, M.P., as an important amendment of the
present law, which it is desirable to obtain at once; but this
meeting is aware of the necessity of further legislative provi-
sions affecting credit and its protection ; and is of opinion
that a Government Commission, composed of practical and
exi.erioiced merchants and traders, to inquire into their pre-
suit eo..dition and effects, would be attended with the most
beneficial results."
Mr. Gltoceci; briefly seconded the resolution, which was
i►nniediately carried without any dissent.
Mr. IlAYwAito, in stating that the business of the meetirb,
was drawing to a close, expressed his complete concurrence
in the proceedings of the Committee. With great pleasure,
therefore, he would propose "the thanks of the meeting to the
gentleman who had so ably presided over them on the present
occasion, :aid that John Masterman, Esq., and B. Hawes,
Esq., M.P., be requested to introduce the Bill to the Legis-
lature, and take charge of it in the Howse of Commons."
Mr. NICHOLSON seconded the resolution, which was unani-
mously adopted.
Mr. MASTERMAN returned thanks; and, after several sub-
scriptions had been handed in, towards defraying the necessary
expense!, the meeting separated.

QUEEN'S BENCII.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.)
BREACH OF PROMISE.—MARY ELIZABETH SMITH V. WASHING-
TON LORD FERRER&
The- cross-examination of Mrs. Smith by the Arrort-
NEY-GENERAL (continued from our Afternoon Edition)—
Amongst the articles mentioned as presents, there was a
pink silk bonnet, sent on the '29th of June, 1844. That was
after the time I was made aware that the other articles had
not been paid for. All the bills bad been paid at that
time. My daughter did not say where the bon •
net came from. I understood that it was sent
by Lord Ferrers, from London. My daughter did
not tell me about it until the bill came in on the following
Christmas. I went to Ashby and paid for it. Probably 1
did make some inquiry about it, as 1 did not imagine it could
be owing for. It was when the bonnet came that my daughter
told me it was a present from Lord Fellers.
To the Cotner—She told me before the bonnet tame that
she expected a bonnet from Lord Ferrers from London.
To the Arromixv-GENBRAL—My daughter knew she had
done wrong. She did not explain to me particularly about
it. 1 showed her the bill, and said, " How is this ?" and
she made no reply. She did not say she had ordered the
bonnet when I showed her the bill. She did deny having
ordered it, or that it. must be a mistake. She was conscious
she had done wrong, and said very little about it.
Did she deny having ordered it?—She did. When the
bill came I learned that the bonnet came from Ashby. When
the bill came I went wth Mr. Hammel, the attorney, to Ashby.
My daughter and I went to Miss Wyman's. This was about
January, 1845; I said to Miss Wyman, "You have sent me
e bill ti,r a bonnet that I knew nothing of." Miss Wyman
said Miss Smith had ordered it for herself; my
daughter instantly denied she had ordered it; she
said it must be a mistake, or " Yoa must be mis-
taken in the person. " Miss Wyman robably
said, " Miss Smith, if you would say that, you would say
anything." I do not remember my daughter saying, if she
stood there for hours she would deny it. I do not remember
Miss Wyman saying, 1, bliss Smith, I wonder you are
01
not afraid of Lein',' struck dead." She may have said it. I
believe I did not say in tile presence of Alias Nrvinan' that
" if my datirliter would own to the bonnet I would forgive
her." I said, " dear, if you ordered the bonnet, say so."
She looked at me, but never said a word, and we walked out
of the shop. About this time I said my daughter had re-
ceived a bonnet from a noble individual, and that there was
a note in the box. Miss Smith opened the box. I saw the
note, but I do not know where it is now. It was a note pur-
eortlllf‘ to be florin Mr. Dcworeux Shirley. That note was
handed to Mr. Hammel, the attorney.
The ATTORNEY. GENERAL asked fur this letter, as it was
produced on Saturday, but it could not be found for a consider-
able time, and a good deal of confusion followed. Having been
at length produced, it was handed to the witness, but she said
it was not the one that came in the box.
Did your daughter explain how that note came in the
box ?—She did ; she said that E ar e
l F rrers told her he would
send her a bonnet from London ; but he had found it incon-
venient to do so, but wished her to purchase one at Ashby,
and she did so, as she had told her papa and mamhmat that
she was to have one from London ; but t a s
refused to do so unless Mr. Devereux Shirley
would write a note stating that it had come from London. I
believed then that it bad come from London. Mr. Shirley
gave Miss Smith the note to enclose in the box; this is what
my daughter told me, :and that she got the note at Ashby

from Mr. Shirley; but in fact the dote was not put into the
box until it came into the house. Nu doubt my daughter
put the note :into the box merely to deceive me and her
papa. She told me all this at the inn, after I
went to pay for the bonnet. I cannot say if
the bonnet is paid for ; but I believe it is.
I went to Miss Wyman's shortly alter this, and I may have
said that I did not pass the door without saying how sorry
I was that this had occurred • I won't swear that I did not
ask Miss Wyman's to say nothing about this story until the
trial was over ; but I said some words to that effect. Pro-
bably I might have said that I wished the Misses Wyman
to understand how it was. I might have said to them that
Lord Ferrers was to have sent my daughter a bonnet from
London, but that he had not done so, but had desired her to
order one at the shop, and that Mr. Shirley had told
my daughter to order it. lam not sure of this, but I might
have said it. I don't recollect saying to the Miss Wymans
that my daughter was at her grandfather's, and that her
father would not have her in the house. I am certain I did
not say that. I believe the paper now handed me to be in
my daughter's handwriting. The witness was handed a third
paper, which she said was not very like her daughter's hand-
writing. She was handed a fourth, which she said was her
daughter's writing. Shegave thesame answer to a sth and 6th.
She then continued :—There were two handkerchiefs sent in
letters. I saw the beginr.iug of one of these letters; it be-
gan with "Dearest Washington." This letter was posted at
Tamworth, as my daughter told me that. it was the Earl's
particular wish that letters for him should not be posted at
Appleby. The envelope now handed me contained the two
handkerchiefs in question. There was a letter written by
Mr. Smith after the letter of Lord Ferrers of the 24th
of June. I put that letter in the office at Ashby
myself. When I was at Sias Court, there was
a letter posted respecting the bills. This was before Mr.
Smith's letter. My daughter told me that Lord Ferrers
was visiting at the Deans. of Bangor and it was at a hotel
at Bangor we were to meet him We stopped at Stafford,
and as lie did not meet us there, as my daughter said it was
likely lie would, we returned back, for I said I would not
follow him. After we returned, my daughter wrote a letter
from Sias Court to Lord Ferrers, which I read. I posted that
letter at Tamworth. The letters my daughter got from
the Earl she told me had been put into her hand
by a man named Atkins and another named James.
I have spoken in the course of examinatioh of a Miss Neville.
1 do not recollect having shown her any of the letters pro-
duced in Court. I might have visited Mr. Neville in January,
1845, but Ido not recollect the precise date. The letters of
Lord Ferrers were then talked about. I believe that Miss
Neville then remarked that the writing was very like Miss
Smith's, but I do not remember having said that the family
had often been surprised at the similarity between
the writing of my daughter and the letters of Lord
Ferrers. I do not remember having said that
the reason of the similarity arose from Miss Smith
when young, having had some writing of Lord Ferrers in
her possession which she had tried to imitate. Before sbe
went to school I believe Lord Ferrers sent her a great
number of scraps, and pieces of poetry, but they were de-
stroyed afterwards. I saw the pieces of writing myself. 1
do not recollect having ever said that Lord Ferrers had had
my daughter's handwriting, and tried to imitate it. I might
have said when at Miss Neville's that the similarity arose
between the two handwritings from Miss Smith having
when young letters of Lord Ferrara' in her possession, and
that she tried to imitate the writing, but I do not recollect it.
I will not swear I never said so, but I have norecollection ofit.
I was much excited at the time, as Mr. Green, the attorney,
said we were all to be put in Warwick gaol. We were ac-
cused of being forgers, and I was too excited to think of a
trivial conversation. I say again, Ido not recollect the con-
versation. I am a truthful woman, andwish to speak nothing
but what lam sure of. The familiy noticed in some cases
a little similarity, but were not surprised at it. I
might have remarked it to Mr. Smith, but do
' not recollect it. We noticed some slight similarity
in the letters, but not in the style of writing; still
we were satisfied the letters were of his Lordship's
writing. I would much rather believe that Lord Ferrers
had imitated my daughter's writing, than that my daughter
had imitated that of Lord Ferrers. We certainly were sur-
prised at the similar} between the hand-writings, but the
only explanation we could give was that I have already given.
To Mr. Justice WicarritAx—The correspondence did not
begin till 1844. I believe my daughter never wrote to Lord
Ferrers while he was abroad. I cannot explain why it is
that the letters of Lord Ferrers were similar to those of my
daughters, seeing that my daughter had not written to him
at that time.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that perhaps this
would be the proper time to make an application,which was to
allow their witnessesto inspect the lettersprior to their being
put into the box, so that they might the better give their
evidence on the subject. The witnesses on the side of the
plaintiff had had every opportunity of detecting the writing
before being called ; and it was but right the witnesses on
the other side should have the same opportunity.
Mr. /41ONTAGU CHAMBERS objected to the application, as
unusual. He could not acquiesce. He was willing that the
witnesses, when put into the box, should have the letters
placed in their hands, and be allowed to say yes or no, as to
their belief regarding the hand writing.
At the suggestion of his Lordship, it was arranged that
Counsel on each side should consult as to the course to be
taken in this respect. His Lordship, however, thought the
best course would ba that the letters should be submitted
beforehand to such wit- nesses as were to be called. That
whatever parties were permitted to inspect the letters, should
be put into the box and examined.
Re-examined—Mr. Neville is an attorney at Tamworth.
' There were only some slight resemblances in the characters
of the writing, but the style and composition bore no re-
semblance whatever. The first time I believe that my

daughter wrote to Lord Ferrers was when she sent him a
note after he had got his hand hurt. Regarding the scraps
and notes sent to my daughter when she was young, I am
not aware that my daughter answered them, though she might
have done so. The letter to which I hare referred was posted
at Derby, and was shortly after his Lordship returned from
abroad. When the eharge of forgery was made, we then de-
termined to commence the action, to vindicate our characters,
as we were sure the letters were written by Lord Ferrers.
The Learned Counsel then read another extract, to the
effect that the defendant wrote to the plaintiff to prepare her
trousseau ; and that he did not like the plaintiff's cousin.
The re-examination was then resumed—When Earl
Ferrers returned from abroad he did not resume his position
as pupil, but he renewed his attentions, after an absence of
two years. I believed him sincere in his attachment.
This witness was not allowed to go down until four o'clock.
John Lees was the next witness—He said I am a farmer

and have been a long time a neighbour of Mr. Smith. I have
been in the habit of posting- letters for him. I posted one in
the latter end of February, 1844, which Mrs. Smith gave me ;
that letter was addressed to Earl Ferrars, Chartly Castle.
Upon another occasion I posted a letter at Tamworth, I saw
a white handkerchief put into that letter, this was in March,
1844. There is a road near Mr. Smith's house which is
sunk below the level of the ground ; you might go along
this road without being observed.
Arrommy-GENERAL—That is if nobody was there to see
them. Just so.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Holdgate-1. live near Liverpool. I was on a visit to
Mr. Smith in June, 1844. He showed me a letter he had
written to Lord Ferrers, and his Lordship's answer. Mr.
Smith's letter was to the effect that he gave his consent to
Lord Ferrer's marrying his daughter.
Eleanor Holdgate-1 am wife of the last witness. I was
with him at Mr. Smith's, on a visit, in June, 1844. I
saw Miss Smith write a letter, but I did not read it.
She put it in an envelope and gave it me to post at Coventry,
but I had not time, and I posted it at Leamington. I went
with Mrs. and Miss Smith to Ashby. Mrs. Smith posted a
letter on that occasion, but I did not see it.
Ann Smith, sister of the plaintiff, a very pretty-looking
young lady, was the next vi ness. She said I often saw
-Lord Tamworth at church in the spring of 1843 ; on one occa-
sion I was going along a walk, epposite my father's drawing-
room: window, and 1 saw Lord Ferrers leaning against the
chimney-piece. There was nobody in the room then. I saw my
sister go into the room, and then I left. Upon another
occasion, on the 9th of December, I went into the drawing-
room, and Lord Ferrers was there playing on the piano. I
went out again and met my sister, she had some cake and
wine. She did not give me any, but brought them to Lord
Ferrers.---(Laughter.) I was told I should be whipped if 1
went there again.— (Laughter.) I knew Joseph Atkins. I
saw him near the honse when they had gone to Harrowgate.
Cross-examined—l was thirteen years old last November.
I did not lose sight of him. I always kept my eyes upon
him while at church.—(Laughter). He went away, and was
absent some time. It was my mama who said I was not to
go into the drawing-room. She did not say why, but I
guessed.—(Laughter.) She did not tell me Lord Ferrers
was there, but I found out. I left my little sister in one of
the gardens, and in passing the window I peeped in at the
corner.—(Laughter.): When I saw my sister come into the
room I ran away.
Re-examined—When at church Lord Ferrers used to look
at my sister.—(Laughter.)
Susan Hopley, servant in Mr. Smith's family—ln Septem-
ber, 1843, Miss Smith asked me to put a letter in the post for
her, which I eid at Hugely.
Cross-examined—Mrs.aSmith asked Irne,: about 12months
after, if I could get some of Lord Ferres's hand-writing?
Ile came to me, and wanted eitger me or my husband to get
the writing. I didn't do so, but my husband bad, and
couldn't get it, and then I wrote to Mrs. Smith.
Re-examined.—l don't think I heard of the action when

this application was made.
John Page, labourer, and Chelsea pensioner.—
I know Lord Ferrers and Miss Smith by sight..
I was in a field at the back of Mr. Smirn's
house in July or August, 1843, and I saw Lord Ferrers and
Miss Smith in the field. They were walking side by side,
and might be two or three yards apart.—(Laughter.) I was
not near enough to see that they were talking.
Cross-examined by the ATTORIEY-GENERAL-It is about
two years ago since I did anything as a bailiff's follower.
Re-examined—l saw them a second time in the field.
They were then four or five yards apart.—(Laughter.)
Couwr—This distance between them appears to have in-
creased.—(Laughter.)
Here Mr. CHAMBERS applied to the Court to adjourn, as
Mrs. Perry, who was ill, could not attend until to-morrow.
Mrs. Iloldgate was recalled with a view to ask he to whom
the letters were directed, which she had posted for Mrs.
Smith, but the question was not pressed.
The Court then adjourned at half-past fire.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.

(THIS DAY.)

Sub-Committee No. 1.
LEICESTER AND BEDFORD.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. John Stapleton was called to prove that his property
was not correctly shown on the plans and sections.
Mr. COATES admitted the allegation.

Several other allegations were sustained, after which
Mr. BURKE proceeded with the petition of the Leicester
and Swanington Railway Company.
Tha first allegation was that there was no fixed point of
junction shown on the plan where the proposed line was to
oin the Leicester and Swannington Railway.
. _ _

Several witnes es were called on both sides, and the Com-
mittee decided that no fixed point had been shown. Standing
orders in this instance not complied with.