The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-28 00:00:00

IN RE HAYWORTH AND CO.

These bankrupts, iron-founders, came upon the
balance-sheet prepared by Mr. Glover (Bucklersbury)
to pass their last examination; and all parties being per •
fcctly satisfied with the accounts they passed.

WHITECHAPEL COUNTY COURT.
GREGORY V. WELCH.

This was an action brought to recover the sum of
141. Bs. for goods sold and delivered.
Mr. Sidney, the solicitor, of Hatton-garden, said that
his client, the plaintiff; is a licensed victualler, and
sought to recover the amount named, for necessaries
supplied to the defendant, a commercial traveller, and
he contended that if he proved that the charges were
reasonable, and gave evidence of the delivery, he
should be entitled to a verdict for the full amount. The
Learned Gentleman then called Emma Martin, the bar-
maid, who had kept the account against the defendant,
and the waiter, who had attended on him; and they
having given evidence to that effect,
The worthy JUDGE asked if there was any defence?

The defendant's SOLICITOR. said that his answer was
the " Tippling Act," which excluded a person from
suing for more than 20s. worth of spirits, which must
be consumed on the premises of a tavern-keeper at one
time or sitting. In the plaintiff's demand there were
items, " Grog, grog," to the amount of 91. 75.; there-
fore he would submit that that sum must, at all events,
be scratched from the bill.

Mr. SIDNEY replied that his friend was too late to call
into his aid that Act. The defendant should have filed
that plea in court several days ago.
The JUDGE remarked that Mr. Sidney was quite
right, and immediately awarded the plaintiff the whole of
his claim and costs.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
TVESTERN ClRCUlT.—Bristol, August 25.
(Special Jury.)
SCOTT V. FERRIS.--I3ILL STEALING.

The action was in the nature of an issue from the
Court of Chancery, to try whether a warrant of attorney
had been obtained by fraud, and it arose out of bill-steal-
ing transactions.

Mr. COCKBURN, Q.C., stated the case at great length.
The plaintiff, Mr. Scott, was an officer, holding the rank
of lieutenant in a cavalry regiment stationed at Norwich,
and the defendant, Mr. W. T. Ferris, resided at West-
minster, and the action arose out of one of those trans-
actions which had unhappily too often come before
courts of justice, and which were known as bill-steal-
ing transactions. The bills which would come into
question in the course of the inquiry were two bills of
exchange for 500/. each, drawn by a Mr. Moreton, and
accepted by Mr. Scott, and in respect of these it was that
the warrant of attorney was given. The bills in ques-
tion were obtained from Mr. Scott by a most outrageous
fraud on the part of Mr. Moreton, and iii order to entitle
himself to a verdict he (Mr. Cockburn) should have to
connect Mr. Moreton with the defendant, Mr. Ferris,
which he believed he should have no difficulty in doing,
for they had fortunately obtained a clue to the whole,
and should ho enabled to show that it was a most glar-
ing bill-stealing transaction in which all the parties were
engaged. The jury were doubtless aware that there ex-
isted in the metropolis organized gangs of persons who
procured their subsistence by that peculiar mode of
swindling, and who obtained from gentlemen bills under
pretence of discounting them, and which bills, without
ever paying one shilling for them, they appropriated to
their own dishonest purposes, and compelled the acceptors
to pay large sums of money. In the beginning of the
present year Mr. Scott's regiment was stationed at Nor-
wich. He knew nothing whatever of Mr. Moreton till
the month of March, when he received a letter dated on
the 24th from Hatchett's Hotel, Piccadilly, in which
the writer, who signed himself " William Moreton,"
stated that he had confidentially heard that Mr. Scott
was desirous of getting his acceptance discounted,
and he should be happy if such was the case
to accommodate him. Mr. Scott did not reply to
the letter, upon which the writer came down to Nor-
wich and saw him, and some arrangement was made be-
tween them, which could be gathered from a second
letter, dated from the Portland Hotel, Great Portland-
street, in which the writer stated that he had consulted
his friend, who was willing to advance 1,0001. on Mr.
Scott's note of hand at six months, with an agreement
to renew the same upon payment of interest. Other
letters followed, in which Mr. Moreton attempted to
induce Mr. Scott to send up his acceptances for the
amount to town, and promising to pay the cash into
Messrs. Barclay and Co.'s bank, to be transferred to
Mr. Scott's bankers at Norwich. In ono of those letters
the writer said he might as well give his private residence,
which was at 40, Margaret-street, Cavendish-square.
Mr. Scott did not very well like to part with his bills
without the money; but at length, as Mr. Moreton per-
sisted that he could not conveniently come to Norwich,
he determined upon sending his servant up with
them. The servant went to London, saw Mr. More-
ton, delivered to him the two acceptances for 5001.
each, but the jury need scarcely be told that he
returned again to Norwich without having received
a shilling of money. The second scene of the drama
then commenced. Mr. Scott was, of course, anxious
about his bills, and wrote again and again to Mr. More-
ton, and, as it was always an object with the actors in
transactions of this nature to put off the absolute dis-
covery of the fraud to as long a period as possible, he re-
ceived letter after letter giving various excuses for non-
payment, and promising to send it to-morrow. " Oh,
ne'er shall we that morrow see." In one letter the
writer stated that he should immediately send the cash,
for he had made arrangements to do so with a Mr.
Robison whom he (the Learned Counsel) supposed meant
that character of whose vagaries they had so often
heard—Jack Robinson.—(Laughter.) if the attention
of the jury had ever been directed to a transaction of
this kind they would find that as soon as the bills were
secured the swindlers set themselves to work to see how
they could best manage to get money out of the victim. It
did not answer their purpose to go to a court of justice,
because, where the gentleman who had parted with his
bills had the moral courage to defend the suit, their ras-
cality and villany would be exposed, and they would be
compelled to get fresh names, and drive their nefarious
trade upon some other principle, and accordingly a Mr.
Axon came on the scene. This person, of whom Mr.
Scott had before known nothing, wrote, on the 24th of
May, doubtless prompted by some excessive benevo-
lence, stating that it had accidentally come to his know-
ledge
ohnrai
urged
the
et
dh bills,
oe matter.
London,h euofft mightfeearcd.defendant.
o: be recovered,
and
oohrdnnTeedocarhetoot
eenvfl
Hatchett's
vigoroustruate ntedcur
h,
meetingsue
e ttl andthti,e:ledge that Mr. Scott's bills had got into bad hands, hint-
ingd
offeringthat
hisbe yea nnpdarrsoosmbiasbgpt
robbed
dni annocetf i
fol-
lowed from the same writer, who assured Mr. Scott that
mmshHweaeoiathtneesadlluyd,l
re
erbms,
Piccadilly,
forse o the
wmeenrt
went
utohpvee
was brought about in this way. A Mr. Lawrence,
a horse dealer in London, had had offered to him one of
dtheealbeirllsnafomreddisAcrein,t.to AwthNomorwmicrh.
Scott as
w
a sa sa
a c a h
voarlsrey-
officer, was known, and he had heard the story of the
been in
thetherobbery of the bills. Hewa
nitdhwhom
happened
l ear
learnt
hot
efor have
hadm him h
that
habitcommuni-
cation
of
w doingith
Lawrence,business,
bill had been offered to him, and that he had had an offer,
stand
in the technical language of the bill gentry, to ‘
in." He told Abel of this, and, through Lawrence,izoe
the
plaintiff had been enabled to get a clue to thein
which the transaction was conducted. It would seem
that the bill was offered to Lawrence by a namedm
Martin, who was a friend of, and lived with, a man
since dead, named Faulkner, and through Faulkner
he should be able to connect the defendant with the
business. Ho would now tell them who Mr. Ferris,
the bill discounter, who was alleged to have given
4001. in hard cash and his I 0 U for 200/. for the
bills, was. Mr. Ferris was a small carpenter in Charles-
street, Westminster, keeping five or six hands, and some-
times only two or three, and in no considerable way of
business at all. Ho lived in a small house which he let
out to lodgers. A laundress occupied one floor, and other
persons resided in others, and he oeccupied a portion of
the house himself. The Learned Counsel proceeded'at
great lenght to narrate the facts of the case, stating that
Martin and Faulkner lived at a gambling house, at No.
2, Bennett-street, St. James's, and detailing the circum-
stances connected with the interview at Hatchett's Hotel,
and explaining that in an unlucky hour Mr. Scott had
been induced to pay 100/., and give his warrant of at-
torney for 3252, in order to procure a restoration of the
bills. The 100/. was of course gone; but the present suit
sought to upset the warrant of attorney, and he hoped that
the jury would by its verdict show that those gentlemen
who " stand in ' themselves, but take in others, would
not be permitted to do so with impunity.
Mr. T. C. Nelson, of the Portland Hotel, London,
proved that a person calling himself Moreton occasion-
ally came to the coffee-room of the hotel, and had letters
c e imv erds forma himry mfouro
rm,
oo
fr nNinogs4oin,
Athiaerwgaereekt..
directed there for him ; on an average letters were re-
persont
her
house, callingand h a
d himselfthem f Moreton,or a week tookki apartments
saids t re e
ht ,
e Caven-
dish-square,
av
se naa
dish-square, London, deposed that in the month of May
e
a
gentleman of fortune who had been in the army • that he
had a country house at Sydenham, and required' town
apartments, as he had an uncle, from whom he had great
expectancies, coming to London. Witness did not like
his references, and refused to continue him as a lodger.
During the time he was there he did not sleep in the.
house, but called for his letters. He seemed anxious
about letters from Norwich. Mr. Scott's servant came
to him while he was there, and went into the drawing-
room with him.
Lewis Levi, of Tokenbouse yard, sharp and bill broker,
had known Moreton eight or nine months. About
the middle of May ho brought in an acceptance of
Mr. Scott for 5001. for discount. Witness told
him he could not discount it unless he could write to
Mr. Scott to see that it was right. He said he could not
do so.
Cross-examined Has been a wholesale slop- t,

, .

-

seller and picture dealer. Am as 'well known by
the name of Lewis as Levi. My children are called
Lewis, because my wife is a Christian woman. Have r
never had my house burnt down, and am not called Guy
Fawkes. I was convicted for conspiracy thirty years
ago,,,and was fined 5,0001. and imprisoned for two years.
Was charged with conspiring to obtain goods by false
pretences.
Thomas Moore, of Newman-street, Oxford-street,
first knew Mr. Moreton ten years ago. He then went
in the name of Norrington. After that I saw him at the
Old Bailey. He was in the dock. After that I lost
sight of him for eighteen calendar months.—(Loud
laughter.) When I saw him again he had changed his
name. First he called himself Montague, and then he
changed it to Moreton. After that he took up the pro-
fession of a gentleman.—(Laughter.)
Mr. COCKBURN—A gentleman at large, I suppose?
Witness—Yes.—(Renewed laughter.)
Examination continued—l knew John Bannister
Faulkner. Remember seeing him also in the dock at
the Old Bailey. In the middle of May Mr. Faulkner
brought me a bill, which he said had been accepted by
Mr. Scott ; it was for 5001.
G. Lappett, servant to Mr. Scott, proved that he took
the letter with the bills to Mr. Moreton, at Margaret-
street. He said he would send an answer by post.
Clerks from the banking-houses of Messrs. Barclay,
London ; and Gurney, Norwich, were called to prove
that no money had been paid in Mr. Scott's credit.
S. Lawrence, horse dealer, of the Commission Stables,
Portman-square, London.—Knew a little of Faulkner.
He died in May. He applied to me to know if I could
get a bill discounted for 500/.—an acceptance of Mr.
Scott. He said
.he understood that I had connexions in
Norwich, and if I could get it done they would take 2501.
for it, as it was got upon " the best." Told him I would
write to Abel about it, and warned him not to take it.
Faulkner lived with Mr. Smart, at No. 2, Bennett-street,
which was a gaming-house. Subsequently saw Abel,
and was asked to find out the parties who had the bills.
Left word at Smart's that I wanted to see him, and went
to Hatchett's to wait for him. He did not
come, and as I was going back to his house
saw him, and spoke to him, and he pointed to
Ferris, who was at the corner of the street, and
said "This is the holder of the bills." Told Ferris that
I understood he held bills for 1,0004, which had been
improperly obtained. He said he advanced 6001. upon
them, but would take 400/. for them. I said, " Non-
sense, you do not look like a 600/. man." Ferris then
said he would give me 50/., and allow me to " stand in,"
if I could got Scott to give him 4001, I said " I will
have nothing to do with bills obtained in that manner,
and I only wish you would give them back." When at
the hotel Ferris said ho had advanced 4004, and would
take that sum to compromise it. Scott said he had been
robbed of the bills; and Ferris said he was sorry, and
would take 4001., the suns he had advanced. During the
conversation Ferris told different stories: first he said
he gave 6001., then 4001., and afterwards 200/. Scott
then said he would not give a farthing.
The witness was cross-examined at great length, with
a view to test his character, and the quaintness of his
replies, and the humorous mode in which the questions
were put, kept the Court in a roar of laughter. Ile
admitted that he had been " unfortunate" three
times, but said he had paid all his Ronny fide credi-
tors 20s. in the pound. First, he had failed through
the failure of his bankers ; afterwards, because the
Belgian Government had behaved shabbily to him in
reference to some horse contracts, and the last time be-
cause of liabilities he had undertaken for others. He
admitted that he had been an insolvent, and remanded
for twelve mouths by Mr. Commissioner Harris, but
said it was done upon an ex parte statement, that he
was let out of prison the next day, and that when
before Mr. Commissioner Pane, that Learned Commis-
sioner told him he left the court with nu stain on his
character. The witness admitted that lie was a Jew,
and that his real name was Lazarus, and ou being re-
minded that he did not take the oath with his hat on, he
said none but ignorant Jews did.—(Laughter.)
John Abel, innkeeper at Norwicn, also deposed that
ho was at the meeting at Hatchett's Hotel. Ferris first
said he had given 6001. for the bills, but afterwards
that he had given 4001. for them. Mr. Scott said ho
did not believe that he had given a farthing for them,
and Ferris then said he paid down 2004 and had to
pay 2001. in a few days. I took Ferris aside
(having agreed with Mr. Scott that I would do so).
I said, "I don't believe you have given anything
for the bills. This young man is a very illiterate,
stupid fellow, as green as grass, and it is a great pity he
should be robbed of 1,0001. I can make him stand 300/.
or 4001., but if Ido you must let me stand in." He said,
" Well, it must not be less than that, for there are three
or four of us in it, and if you have less it will be of no
use." I then told Scott I was satisfied he gave nothing
for the bill and that I would not pay a farthing. Tho
witness was cross-examined, but nothing material was
elicited.

Mr. Draper, solicitor, proved that he went with Mr.
Scott to the defendant and offered him 1001. to give up
the bills, which he refused. Saw no clerk there. The
account of the discounts was entered in a book in which
entries of wages were. There was no other entry of
discounts. In another small red book Ferris showed
entries of two or three small amounts of recent date.

Mr. Miller proved the attestation of the warrant of
attorney, and Mr. Baron Alderson's clerk produced the
affidavit of Ferris, in which he stated that ho had in-
structed his clerk, Rogers, to make inquiries as to Mr.
Scott.

Mark Briggs and Charles Field, journeymen carpen-
ters, were called to proye that the defendant kept no
clerk. The first witness said he succeeded his father in
the business, and was considered well to do.

Lewis Levi was called to indentify the letters of
Axon, which were tendered, but objected to by Mr.
Sergeant Jones, and rejected.
Mr. Sergeant JortEs (who was specially retained)
then proceeded to address the jury for the defendant.
He said the case alleged against the defendant was one
of conspiracy and fraud—that he was connected with
Moreton, and obtained the bills by plot and contrivance,
and that they having been so dishonestly obtained, the
warrant of attorney was executed as the fruit of the con-
spiracy and fraud. He should meet the evidence ad-
duced ; he should show the utter groundlessness of the
charge, and then he should ask the jury to declare by
their verdict that the defendant was no party to the
fraud.
C. H. Gregory, chief engineer of the Bristol and
Exeter Railway, deposed to having known and employed
defendant for several years. He appeared to have a
good business, and was an active, money-making man.
James Rogers proved that he was partially engaged as
clerk to Ferris: Was engaged the latter part of March
to make out bills and keep books. Had collected from
3001. to 4001. for his employer between March and the
present time, and had called at various places for sums
amounting to 8901 At the end of May a person called,
giving the name of Moreton. He told Mr. Ferris he had
been referred to„hinaiby Mr. Faulkner, and that he had
a bill for 5001. he wished discounted. Ferris said he had
lento. 1 several it was not convenient.
Moreton e sum to send into the
sums,a andndrregquested Ferris to advance
2 he
might leave the bills, and sent
countryoin
a Ferris
said large
fewsaid
h hea days,a large
d
witness to inquire about Mr. Scott, which he did, and
reported to Mr. Ferris, who then advanced 2001., and
gave his I 0 U for 2001. more. Moreton came a few
days afterwards with another bill for the same amount,
upon which Mr. Ferris advanced in notes and gold 2001.
more.

'rho witness was cross-oxamined, with a view to
show that Ferris a business was not a large one. He
also admitted that he had been a bankrupt, and that
his certificate was refused for fraudulent preference,
and for administering tho funds without as order from
the Court.
By the jury—Never heard Mr. Ferris ask Moreton
how he got the bills.
S. Nurse, publican, of Chales-street, Westminster, was
called to prove that he had known defendant, who was a
respectable man, to cash bills. Had heard a person ask
him to discount a 1001. bill, for which ho asked ten per
cent.
Cross-examined—Have been to races with Mr. Ferris
—to one horse race and a number of foot races; and had
betted with him.

W. Smith, of Princes-street, Brighton, hotel-keeper,
deposed that he had borrowed money of defendant about
two months ago. Had known applications for discounts
made to him by many parties. Was at the meeting
with Lawrence at Hatchett's Hotel. Lawrence met him
in Piccadilly and asked if Ferris would allow him a
liberal discount on the bills. Ferris said he would do
so but that he had given 6001. for them. Lawrence
then pointed out Abel as the person who would arrange
the bills. Abel then caught hold of Ferris, and said,
" Come along old fellow. Scott is inside. Have you any
objection to see him?" Heard all that passed, and nothing
whatever was said by Ferris about standing in. Did
not hear him say he would give Lawrence 501. to allow
him to " stand in." Scott said he had been robbed of
the bills, and Mr. Ferris said he was sorry fur it, and
that if Mr. Scott would give the 4001. he had advanced,
and a guarantee for the 2001. I p U, he would give up
the bills. Abel called Ferris aside, and said ho could
get 3001., if he would let him stand in. Mr. Ferris said,
" What do you mean by that, I only want to get back
my money?" A row then ensued ; all the lot abused
Ferris, and Ferris said that they were all thieves, and
left the house. Knew John Bennett Faulkner, but ;lever
had anything to do with the house he kept. He appeared
to be a respectable man. Introduced him to Mr. Ferris
at about the time of Epsom races. Had seen Mr. Ferris
lend him money. Never knew Moreton connected with
Ferris in any way.
The witness was subjected to a searching cross-exami-
nation by Mr. COCKBURN, as to his habits of life,
He admitted that he had been wandering about a good
deal; that he had been in America looking for employ-
ment, and in France searching after runaway debtors,
receiving a commission for such debts as he got. He had
also, he said, been private secretary to the Charge d'Af-
faires of Naples. He bad once been imprisoned for a
month for beating a man who had attacked him, and
throwing a policeman over some railings. His father
had at one time kept a gaming-house, but he was not a
gamester.
Inspector Shackell, of the detective force of London,
deposed that he had known Ferris for nineteen years,
and had borrowed money of him for some relations. He
was in a good way of business. Witness had frequently
been employed in detecting the bill-stealers of London.
Never knew Ferris waeconnected with any of them. If he
had been it is possible that witness would have known it.
Cross examined—Had borrowed money of Ferris
for Mr. Cauty—not for Captain Canty, but his brother.
He formerly did keep a gambling-housF,. but not lately.
Have not been engaged in compromising bill-stealing
transactions, but have boon employed in negotiate for
the return of bills. Have not done so twenty times.
Know Alves, the bill-stealer. I have gone to him at the
prison, but never introduced Ferris. Alves has called
at my house. I had nothing to do with getting up the
defendant's case. I did write to Norwich to inquire
about Abel. I was asked about him, and said I knew A

nothing bad of him, but wrote to inquire. Have not
threatened tthe plaintiff's witnesses. I am told that I
told La,wrc nce he would be transported if he got into the
box, and I have apoligised for it as a joke, and said I was
in liquor at the time, but I was not tipsy.
Two journeymen carpenters, named Purbrook and
Groome, w !re called to prove that the defendant was in
a fair way if business.
Mr. Thor nas Alley Jones, attorney for Ferris, was also
called to s' sow that when the warrant of attorney was
executed the plaintiff made no complaint against the
defendant.

Cross-ex st ained—He did not complain of my bill of
costs, or th %t I had charged him 41. for a stamp although
there was no stamp. The warrant was not stamped,
and I did charge 4/. for a stamp.
Re-examined—l afterwards paid 41. for the stamp and
51. penalty..
Mr. Coe 3t.ntram then replied at great length, contend-
ing that ti le facts as proved before the jury must lead to
the inevib tble conclusion that the defendant Ferris was
cognisant of the fraudulent mode in which the bills had
been obtai nod from Mr. Scott.

The Le samed JUDGE summed up the evidence at great
length, at tel the jury, without leaving the box, returned
a verdict l'c.r the plaintiff.
The case , which occupied the greater part of two days,
excited the greatest interest, and the Court was crowded
throughout.

NORTrIERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, Aug. 25.

CROWN 4 JOURT.—(Before Mr. Justice CIZESSWELL.)
Joseph Cuddy, Edward Murphy, and James O'Brian,
were indi;cl-,ed for having, at Liverpool, conspired toge-
ther with divers other persons to procure and transmit to
Ireland large quantities of arms and other weapons, for
the purpos e of being used for insurrectionary and other
unlawful purposes. A second count charged the pri-
soners with have sent 1,000 pikes to Ireland for the
purpose of` being used as aforesaid.
The p risoners pleaded Not Guilty, and traversed until
next ass ixe

Thomas Lees, If m. Parry, Wm. Healey, Michael
Morris, and James West, were indicted for having on
th© Ist of May, and divers other days, conspired to ex-
cite disc of itent in the minds of her Majesty's subjects
against the laws, to obstruct the execution of the laws,
and to ma lie insurrections, routs, and riots, and that in
pusuanee, of such conspiracy they did assemble together
in large bodies, so as to create terror and alarm in the
minds of: .her Majesty's subjects.
The I?r.soners all pleaded Not Guilty, and declared
their wi sh to be tried these assizes.

James West was arraigned on an inddictment for
drilling at Ashton, and pleaded Not Guilty.
Francis• O'Donnell and Matthew Somers were arraigned
on an indictment for conspiring to transmit arms to
Ireland, st.ad with having done so to be used for insur-
rectional-3/ purposes.
The p risoners pleaded Not Guilty, and traversed to the
next ass iz,3s.

John Flinn. Janes Downey, James Mooney, Owen
Gunn, a ad Edward Birch, were arraigned on an indict-
ment for riotously assembling, with other persons, at
Munches ter, armed with sticks and staves, and assaulting
a constal

They pleaded Not Guilty, and having been in custody
twenty d iys, must be tried. . _

Peter array lif'Douall, the well-known Chartist
leader, vi /Jo was out on bail, was called on to surrender
to an ind ictment for a treasonable conspiracy, but did
not appe. ttr.
It is w aderstood that about thirty prisoners, against
whom bi [ls have been found, were lodged in Kirlidale
gaol. yes Corday.
Wm. . Johnson (or Branagan), the man mentioned in
M'Lane's. case yesterday, was arraigned on the coroner's
inquisitit in, for the murder of the child at Ashton,
but as t he grand jury ignored the bill, no evidence
was add aced against him, and he was consequently ac-
quitted.
Chark:s Gollagher, aged 20, who was charged with the
murder of his wife, on the first night of their marriage,
at Liverpool, was also arraigned on the coroner's inqui•
sition; the grand jury having ignored the bill against
him, and, no evidence being offered, he was acquitted.
James Sandiford, aged 27, was indicted for a felo-
nious ase.ault on Alice Lingard, a child under ten years
of age, t a Manchester, on the 21st of May.
The j cry retired, and were absent about three hours,
but at length found the prisoner Guilty, on which, the
prisoner being called on, said he wished the age of the
child to be inquired into.
His LORDSHIP said there could be no reason to dispute
the evidence of the parents on that point, or the finding
of the jury as to the charge itself. That finding would
but a short time ago have been followed by death, for it
was the -worst case he had ever known, and he felt it was
his duty to sentence the prisoner to be transported for
life. His Lordship then passed that sentence on the pri-
soner.

Thom as Rankin, and twenty-one other Manchester
Chartists, were arraigned on an indictment charging
them wi th conspiring to incite to insurrecitou. Thcy all
pleaded Not Guilty. Many of them traversed, but many
elected to take their trials now, and several, including
Cmddy, O'Donnell, Somers, Murphy, and O'Brian, who
elected in the morning to traverse, now expressed a
wish to withdraw the traverse and be tried now. It is,
however, understood that the Attorney-General will to-
morrow make a formal application to postpone the trials
of those indictments where some of the accused have tra-
versed, on the ground that it would be ineligible to try
some now, and some at a future assize, on the same in-
dictments.

August 26.
CROWN COURT---(Before Mr. Justice CRESWELL.)
Varb>us sentences having been passed,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved to postpone the trial
of such as had not traversed in the case of the Queen v.
Archdeacon, 45, and others, 22 of whom were in custody,
and the greater part of whom had traversed. These
were the Manchester Chartists.

The trial was ordered to be postponed.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then made a like applica-
tion in the case of the Queen v. Healy, and others, being
34 of the Ashton Chartists, and the same order was
made, it being understood that large bail would not be
required.
Mr. Sergeant WiLXINS made a like application in the
case of the Queen v. Birch, and four others, also Man-
chester Chartists, but having no affidavit of not being
ready, his Lordship said he felt bound to try the case.
Peter Murray M‘Douall here surrendered, and
Mr. Sergeant WILK'Ns moved to rescind the order to
estreat the recognizances of himself and bail.
His LORDSHIP assented ; he had not signed the order.
The prisoner was then arraigned on an indictment,
which charged him, in the first count, with a seditious
conspiracy. lie had been committed for making a sedi-
tious speech at a meeting, and now
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS and Mr. rem,ocz submitted
that the prisoner was of right entitled to traverse; and
four cases were mentioned, whero the prisoners had
been committed for felony, and on the bill being thrown
out, a bill for misdemeanour found; on which the judges
held the parties respectively entitled to traverse.
It was answered by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL that
the cases cited did not apply, as the indictments were
for wholly different offences from those for which they
had been committed; whereas, in this case, the recogni-
zances were to answer a charge of sedition.
His LORDSHIP said be must consider the case with re-
ference to the commitment, and he thought the charge
of conspiracy so different from the charge of making a
seditious speech, that he was inclined to allow the pri-
soner to traverse.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then said that he would
enter a nolle prosequi as to the count for conspiracy.
Mr. Sergeant WILEINS said they were taken by sur-
prise by that course, and they were in reality not pre-
pared for the trial, having relied on their right to tra-
verse.

His LORDSHIP said he would postpone the case till
Monday, but it would require a very strong affidavit to
induce him not to take it then, and he advised them to
be prepared to try then.
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS then proposed that the pri-
soner should bo let out of custody on the same bail.
This was opposed by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, on the
ground that he had already had to move to estreat the
recgnizances to force the prisoner to surrender.
His LORDSHIP retired, and on his returning said that,
under the extraordinary circumstances, he had thought
it right to consult Mr. Justice Erle, and he agreed with
him, that the prisoner should be detained in custody till
his trial on Monday.
He was detained in custody accordingly.
CIVIL COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice ERLE.)
FURRELL V. HARRISON.

This was an action for work and labour, for wages,
by which the plaintiff sought to recover 431. 10s.
The defendant pleaded never indebted; secondly, that
the claim arose out of an employment as mate on board
the Cora, and that the defendant was entitled to deduct
the residue of wages otherwise due for wilful loss by the
plaintiff of part of the ship's stores, to wit, the anchor
and cable, alleged to be worth more than the sum of
431. 10s. To the latter plea the plaintiff replied, denying
the loss to be by his default, and whether it was or was
not was really the question between the parties.
The case having been heard,
The jury almost immediately found for the plaintiff,
debt 431. 10s., the full amount.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
TRIAL OF ROBERT CROWE.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of Saturday.)
Mr. PARRY rose to address the jury on the part of the
prisoner. He trusted they would not deal harshly with the
young man in the dock, as, like most Irishmen, he was a
person of warm imagination and warm feelings, and if he had
uttered the words imputed to him, he had done so under
great excitement, occasioned by the extraordinary events
which were passing around him. No doubt, in writing the
address which had been put in evidence, the prisoner thought
he was doing something very grand and patriotic, that would
immortalize him. Perhaps he would have published that
wild rhapsody, but no publisher would ever dream of
doing so, except, indeed, the Attorney-General.—( Laughter.)
He (Mr. Parry) did not believe that a Republican feeling
existed in any niche or corner of this country, nor could he
believe that even the lowest order of Irish, such as were re-
presented to have attended the meeting in question, would
have applauded the expression " To hell with the Queen."
It was nothing but a cunningly devised statement which
had been concocted by a policeman who attended meet-
ing after meeting, until he at last got something important
to report to his inspector. He contended that the best tes-
timony had not been given on the part of the Crown
to substantiate the heinous crime of sedition,
because instead of having a policeman in plain clothes, they
ought to have had the evidence of a short-hand writer or a
reporter, who were men of education, and from their position
in life were beyond the slightest suspicion. The jury
should
remember that the question before them was, not the vindi-
cation of the majesty of the law—because it had. been amply
vindicated, and could be for the future, by the impartial ad-
ministration of justice, if the occasion should arise—but the
question was whether the evidence was of such a character
. as to warrant the jury in depending
upon it The Policeman
which was not a large
Brothers received only 16s. Bd. a week,
sum for a young man 23 years of age, was sent, the first
week after entering the police, to report speeches at Chartist

meetings. He asked the iury to pause before they gave credit
to his evidence. The Learned C< )unsel having referred to
other passages in the report,..alludet Ito the celebrated case of
Algernon Sidney, to show the dal iger of judging from dis-
jointed sentences. He was accused of saying "there
is no God," but the first part of the sentence which
was quoted from the Bible had been omitted by the
reporter, and it ought to have run thus—" The fool
bath said in his heart that there is no God." The omission
had, therefore, entirely altered the context. Was it, then,
said Mr. Parry, a wonder that the prisoner and other Irish-
men should be dissatisfied with the manner in which their
country was ruled, when popular agitators for years had
promulgated what were called the wrongs of Ireland. if
they were to read the speeches of every statesman, from the
reign of George the Third until the present time, including
the present Prime Minister, they' would find that they con-
sidered Ireland had been ill treated, and that the existing
institutions were not adapted to t hat country. Having made
those observations, he would couctrtde by quoting the observa-
tion of Mr. Brougham on the trial of Queen Caroline, that
he was not called upon to answer a case which had not been
sufficiently made out.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied to the speech of the
Learned Counsel.

➢ir. Baron PLATT having carefully summed up the whole
evidence,

The jury then retired, and vrere absent more than two
hours, when they returned a verdict of Guilty, bet at the
same time expressed their opini an that it would be better in
such cases to have the evidence of two witnesses.
The Learned JUDGE remarkefi that it was no doubt more
advisable, but at the same time such a course was not always
practicable.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE,.
MANSION-BOUSE.
On Saturday John Hathaway, master of the Lalla
Roolth iron steamboat, plying between London-bridge
and Kew, appeared before the Lord Mayor, upon an in-
formation charging him with having obstructed the na-
vigation of the river at hew-Bridge.
Mr. Martin, from the City. Solicitor's office, attended
for the prosecution, and: the company's secretary and
solicitor appeared for the defer ce.
An attempt was made to get rid of the charge by
stating that as the impediment was said to have been
caused at Kew, the magistrate in that district ought to
have been applied to.
The LORD MAYOR said the objection would not hold,
as the information was drawn under the Navigation
Act, which gave the Lord Mayor jurisdiction as far as
Staines.

Mr. Martin said there was a towing-path along the
Thames, which was constantly used by barges, and the
obstruction of which he complained interfered with this
long established right, a violation of which could not be
tolerated, even though the pub.,lic convenifince might have
been, to a certain extent, in the opinion of the pro-
prietors, increased by the course pursued by the de-
fendant.

Richard Humphries, assietunt collector at the City
Toll-house, which is about 150 yards from Kew-bridge,
stated that on Saturday, the 119 th instant, his attention
was called to the Leila Rookh steamer, which was
partly under the right arch of the bridge, at nearly high
water, and remained there else ut half an hour. During
that time four barges had to pass close to the towing-
path; but, in consequence of the position in which the
Lalla Rookh lay, they were 'obliged to shoot through
the second instead of the first arch of the bridge.
For the defence it was stated that, in the first place,
no obstruction at all had taken place, and, in the Se-
cond, that the steamers had an undoubted right to land
their passengers at the spot which the Lalla Rookh was
accused of having occupied.
Mr. Layton, coal and corn-merchant, a tenant of Kew-
bridge-wharf, was called for the defence, but he did not
deny the fact that the position of the steamer prevented
the barges from passing through the first arch. lie
stated that barges had been lying in the river close to
his wharf for two or three days.
Mr. Martin submitted, that in the attempt to get over
the information it had been proved by the wharfowner
that he had himself committed an offence.
The LORD MAYOR said it was evident that two wrongs
could not make one right, and convicted the defendant.
The secretary to the company said the tradespeople
and residents of Kew felt greatly the want of the ac-
commodation which the wharf afforded for the steamboat
passengers.
The LORD MAYOR said, he had no doubt of the dis-
position of the Navigation Committee to give every rea •
sonable accommodation to the people of Kew, hut it was
his business to prevent any obstruction to the navigation.
As he did not at all consider the case an aggravated one,
he should limit the penalty to 51.
Notice was then given of appeal.
GUILDHALL.
On Saturday Mr. George Martin, the keeper of the
City Greenyard, was summoned before Alderman Fern-
comb, by Robert Hedges, for unlawfully detaining a
horse, of the value of 121., the said horse having been
taken to his yard on Wednesday morning.
Mr. J. Duncombe, solicitor, of Red Lion•square, said
that he appeared on behalf of the Licensed Hackney Car-
riage Protection Society to make a complaint against
Mr. Martin, the keeper of the City Greenyard, for what
he considered a monstrous imposition. The facts of the
case were simply these:—On Wednesday morning, be-
tween one and two o'clock, a cab was called to convoy a
gentleman from Union-court, opposite St. Andrew's
Church. The driver happened to leave for a few
minutes, when the police took the horse and cab to the
Greenyard; and, on the complainant applying for their
restoration, a demand of 13s. was made, although they
had only been in the custody of the defendant from
about two o'clock in the morning until half-past eight.
Mr. Hedges refused to comply with such a demand, and
tendered what he considered a fair remuneration,
namely, 4s. 6d., which was refused, and the horse and
cab were still in the custody of the defendant. For the
information of the worthy Alderman he would mention,
that in the county the subject of greenyard fees was
brought before the magistrates at Bow-street some
short time back, and, after a proper investigation, they
came to the conclusion that the county sum of Bs. was
exorbitant, and accordingly reduced the amount to
the sum of 4s. 6d. Therefore, under those circum-
stances, he did not see why such an imposition (for
ho could hardly call it less) should be allowed to exist
in the City. The charges were extortionate when it
was taken into consideration that a gentleman could
leave his brougham and horse at any livery-stables,
where the horse would be fed, the carriage cleaned, and
got ready to go out the next morning, for the small
sum of 3s. 6d. Here was a vast difference. There was
another point which he wished to remark upon, and that
was, why the horse and cab were taken at all to the
Greenyard, as no charge had been made against the
driver, who arrived at Mr. Martin's premises before
they were taken in; no summons had been taken out,
and in fact no proceeding whatever against the com-
plainant's driver, and yet ho,(Mr. Hedges) was required
to pay the enormous charge for a few hours' accommoda-
tion. The subject had often been mentioned before, and
a communication made to Mr. D. W. Harvey, the Com-
missioner of Police, who considered it an imposition, and
afterwards a memorial was forwarded and sent to the
Court of Aldermen, but unfortunately (although it was
presented some months back) no notice had been taken of
it, at least so far as he was aware of. He was sureswhen he
referred to the different items, the alderman would agree
with him that they were too heavy. If the horse and
cab remained only for a short time the charge would be
ls. 3d. per wheel, ls. for entrance into the yard, and 3s.
for the horse. He contended that either the horse and
cab ought to have been taken to some livery-stable, or a
reasonable charge made for their accommodation by the
defendant.
Mr. Martin said that he had only made the charges
sanctioned by the Court of Alderman, and produced his
book to verify his assertion.
Alderman FARNCOMB having looked at it, said that it
was a case in which he had no jurisdiction, and therefore
could go no further into it. The only course he could
advise the complainant to adopt was to pay the fees, and
afterwards memorialise the Court of Aldermen on the
excessive charges referred to.
Mr. Duncoinbe thanked the Alderman for his sugges-
gestion, and all the parties then left the court.
The amount of the fees appeared to have been regu-
lated by a committee of the Court of Common Council,
and ratified at a full meeting of the Court.
William MARLBOROGH-STREET.
Drinkwater, thUe
conductor of one of the
Bayswater omnibuses, was summoned before Mr. Hard-
wick for misbehaviour to a passenger. The case arose
out of the practice, principally confined to the Bays-
water omnibuses, of taking what they call short passen-
ger fares to and from Charing-cross, and charging half-
fare one day, and then changing the place for dividing
the fares to the Quadrant, perhaps the next day: By
this system the Bayswater omnibus conductors contrive
to trick a number of persons into the payment of the
whole fare instead of the half-fare, which the passengers
expected to pay when they got into the omnibus, and
which they had before paid. This sort of trick acts ;with
pecular hardship in the case of poor persons, who may
be able to spare 3d. for a ride, but who would walk if
they knew they would be charged 6d.
The complainant, Mr. Watts, proved that he got into
the defendant's omnibus in Fleet-street, and he was put
down at the Quadrant. He gave the conductor 3d., the fare
he had been accustomed to pay for the same distance by the
same class of omnibuses scores of times. The conductorde•
nsauded 6d.; the demand was resisted,:and the complainant
tendered his name and address. The defendant would
not receive it, was rough in his conduct, abusive in lan-
guage, and, laying hold of the complainant's arm, de-
clared his determination of finally detaining him until he
paid his demand of 6d. The complainant told the con-
ductor to summon him in the proper way if he thought
he had ground for so doing, and the conductor, finding
that he could not obtain his demand, released the com-
plainant, and went off. The complainant admitted that
6d. was the fare the whole distance, that 3d. to Charing-
cross was on the omnibus on a placard; but he rested
his resistance to the payment of the whole fare on the
ground of having paid the half-fare for the same distance
almost daily for months, and that this was the usual
charge of the Bayswater omnibuses.
The defendant, through his solictor, pleaded that he
had a right to demand 6d., that being his legal fare.
Mr. Ilaanwseis said, he must not look at the indivi-
dnal case, but at the public question involved in it. If
omnibus proprietors chose to adopt the system of divid-
-1 ing or reducing their legal fares, and if they varied their
distance and charges from time to time, they must ex-
pect to have differences with their passengers and re-
sistance to their demands. In those cases where parties
who had been accustomed to pay one fare chose to resist
a demand for another fare, it could not be tolerated that
the conductor should endeavour to obtain his demand
by menace, or rude or insulting conduct. Where an
address was tendered, the conductor must take it, un-
less indeed there was clear ground for believing the ad-
dress to be fictitious, and ho must pursue his remedy
according to the mode prescribed by law. But certainly
y
conductor must violent hands
ands on a passenger,
ca o lle ct a mob about and
apply
abusive language, in
order to accomplish his object.
The solicitor said, the name and address, in ordinary
cases, might not be correct.

(Mr. thnowicK said this was a contingency which
persons in the situation of the defendant must put up
with. He could not-pass over the untrdutt —etre de-
fendant, as proved in evidence, and he would therefore
inflict a fine of IN. and costs.
The money Iv- -id

y was pain.
A summons against the complainant, for non-payment
of the fare, which had been taken out after the summons
for misconduct had been served!on the defendant, was
called on. Tho complainant said he did not intend to
dispute the point. He would pay the demand and costs.
TV E ST MIA STEIL
Mr. T. Mitchell, of Great Peter-street, Westminster,
was summoned for neglecting to move and discontinue a.
nuisance, caused by warehousing a large quantity of
bones, and boiling fat.
The prosecution was at the instance of the Paving
Committee of St. John's, Westminster, and their soli-
citor and clerk, Mr. Walmesley, stated that it was in'
stituted with a view to the preservation of the public
health. Sonic of the defendant's neighbours having
complained of the offensive smell arising from the
warehousing of bones, and melting of kitchen stuff,
notice was given to the defendant to abate the nuisance
within three days. lie, however, still continued to
exercise the trade so as to be offensive to his neigh"
bours, and the present proceedings were adopted. TWO
respectable tradesmen complained of the offensive smells,
and stated that three medical men had said that those
smells were detrimental to health. One declared that
his tenants in the neighbourhood had threatened to leave
their tenements unless the nuisance was abated, and the
i
other stated that his family had for a long time suffer"
from sickness, imputable to the impurity of the sir, n$
terially caused by the defendant's operations. It was
also shown that there was a mass of bones and fat on
his premises.

The defendant declared that the magistrate bed n°
jurisdiction, and therefore did not enter into any de-
fence.

Mr. BunnELL, however, fined him 20s. per dsl fat
five days' continuance after notice.
The defendant, who gave notice of appeal, wssheld
to bail in his own recognizance for threatening the In'
Spector of Nuisances.

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE

OF FRIDAY.
DIVIDENDS.
At the Court, Basinghall-street.
T. R. Withers, Rumridge, Southampton, merchant,
Sept. 19, at eleven—R. B. Webb, Bury St. Edmund ''
Suffolk, draper, Sept. 19, at half-past one.
NOTICES OF CERTIFICATES.
At the Court, Basinghall-street. tle
J. B. Rush, Mylnc-street, Claremont-square, ellt A,l
dealer, Sept. 15, at one—J. Haddock, Bury St. Edmund Suffolk, pawnbroker, Sept. 19, at half-past twelve—C. Ter):
Shoe-lane, quill-merchant, Sept. 18, at one-0. Kelly,
non-street, and Dowgate-dock, Upper Thames-street, coal
and provision merchant, Sept. 19, at one.
In the Country. at
R. Penwarden, Launceston, Cornwall, saddler, Sept. 2,,
,
eleven, at the Court, Exeter—H. Hollis, Liverpool, te;
dealer, Sept. 18, at eleven, at the Court, Liverpool.

At the Court of Review, Sept. 15.
W. 11. Hyde, Newcastle. under-Lyme and Hanley Staf-
fordshire, printer and newspaper proprietor—J. B. '5f!13,,,:
Brentwood, Essex, innkeeper—T. S. Jukes, Great Wincr
ter-street, City, tailor—R. Burr, Bentinck-street, Blanchester'
„ square, upholsterer—j. Harrison, Nottingham, stove brat,„
manufacturer—G. S. Naish and T. I. Glennie, Farringn°,
street, general ironmongers—J. C. Wetton, Crown-r°o.,
Mile-end-road, flour factor—E. Townsend, Hungerford-n) 14.
ket, and Grosvenor-street, West, Pimlico fishmonger ---v„.
Yeates, Monmouth, draper—G. W. Dean, High-stree,:
r,OO-,
Southwark, jeweller and watchmaker—J. Notting, e,
Dorsetahire, currier and cordwainer—J. Bevan, Bridesto%
Devonshire, tanner—D. Symons, Trowbridge, Wiltseh!„l,,,
general dealer—J. Vowles, Compton Bishop, Somersetehhe,„
teazle dealer—C. Radenhurst, Birmingham, eating 105 j,
keeper--T. Blenkarn, Chancery-lane, law bookseller--
Beale, Cadoxton, Glarnorgaushire, grocer.
DISSOLVE.
W. HendersonPARTNERSHIPS and W. Dickson—T. A. Corlett and
0/.
Stevens, accountants—S. C. Everett and H. Everett,
wall, Poplar, coopers—,T. Cordingley, W. Smith, and J. `l°,li
dingley, Manchester, joiners and builders (as far as region,
J. Cordingley)—C. Merryday and H. Merryday, Malvern
wells, Worcestershire, painters, plumbers and glazier°
Hall, and W. R. hall, Liverpool merchants—R. Woods
J. Osman, Little Distaff-lane, Manchester warehouseman,s
li. G. Hill and T. Mills, St. Martin's-lane, Charingl°,.i,
woollen drapers—C. J. Newstead and H. C. Wilkinson, i°f
attorneys and solicitors—J. Hyde, jun., and J. Wbee.,er,
•rs
Abingdon, Berkshire, linendrapers, silk mercers, and 13°531),
and haberdashers—J. Hartley and W. Foster, Lincoln, in's,
lers, bone crushers, and cake and general
merchante
Black, J. Phillips, and T. Tomkinson, Monte Video t,
Buenos Ayres, merchants—T. Hyde and W. H. Leete,
ford, woollen drapers and clothiers--J. Bentley, and 01
Bentley, Wairington, Lancashire ironmongers—E. WraYtosh
T. Soy-land, Kingston-upon-Hull, drapers—W. Mac kin 1.,
and R. O'Dwyer, Liverpool, merchants—R. 11. Rodbard,t,
Whitchurch, I. White, and J. F. Cox, Nailsea, Soinerse,
•
shire, coal miners (as far as regards L. Whitchurch)-1/2' _„d
King and M. King, Southampton, common brewers it
maltsters—F. Sabel, E. Sabel, and N. Cohen, Broadstreet'.
buildings Great Tower-street, and West-street, 'West SralL
field, merchants (as far as regards N. Cohen).
INSOLVENT PETITIONERS.
John llayard, Glasbury, Radnorshire, farmer.
Daniel Murgatroyd, Rochdale, joiner.
Pender Luke Stooke, Hereford, out of business.
Hon' Lacey, Wormelow, Nottingham, victualler.
Henry Ainsworth Bradshaw, Salop, veterinary surgeon.
Daniel Yardley, sen., Bridgnorth, Shropshire, cooper.
Joseph Roper, Nottingham, schoolmaster.
David Widdow son, Nottingham, bookkeeper.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
of
J. Auld, Bonnyhead, farmer, to meet within the house
J. Kirkwood, Denny, grocer, Aug. 31 and Sept. 28, at one •
P. Dalgairns, Dundee, merchant, to meet within the Royal
Hotel, Dundee, Sept. 1 and Sept. 22, at one.
J. APOlymont, Glasgow, wright and coal agent, to meet
within the Black Bull Inn, Glasgow, August 28 and Sep-
tember 16, at two.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
LIVERPOOL, AUG. 26.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—There has been no change in tb°
general tone of our market, still keeping rather dull. TII°
salsa are—Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junctions
31/. Shares, 8% dis.—East Lancashire, 614 Preference, „Pi
—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Fifths, 17f,t dis.—Ditto,
Preference, 54i p.—Ditto, Halves (late Liverpool and Bar);;;
14 dis.—London and North-Western 116—Ditto.
Quarters, IA p.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln-V.%
101. Preference, 10—Midland Stock, 942—Ditto,
Halves, 7'31 dis.—North Staffordshire, 3/. 18s. 9d. a'e,
Shrewsbury and Chester (late N. W. M.), 101. Prefero
12/. 16s. 3d.—South-Eastern and Dover, 26--Ditto,clur,
Thirds, 7,4—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N. P*
chase), IA p.— Great Southern and Western, 19 dis.
BIRMINGHAM, Aga. 26.
STOCK ExcnANGE.—There was no lack of buyers t °
at the buying quotations, but the sellers not being willing 5,
do business, unless at a slight advance, we have no troh,
5a ct.tilosns. sto report
dis._ beyondEasternc
eun Shrewsburyties,l4zT
and Birmingham
feeling 1(. ate
market was better.

YORK, AUG. 25. Os
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The business transacted to-datrcis,
as follows:—Great Northern, 71. 95.—North British, Is'lo,
1/. 18s.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (Extension',
2, 11.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, Aug. 26.
,„ 91 STOCK EXCHANGE.--The sales are—Great Northei-'
dis.—Lancaster and Carlisle, Thirds, dis.—Newcastle 0
tisb,
Carlisle, 106%2—Ditto, Scrip (red), 4 p.—North Pr
Thirds, V. 9s. 6d.

STOCK EXCHANGE. GLASGOW
The sales are—Caledonian,
28s.—Ditto, Preference, 545. 6cl.—Calsclonian and
bartonshire, 405.—Edinburgh and Glasgow, Halves, Iu hod
Glasgow General Terminus, B,43—Glasgow, Duinfriesbittm
Carlisle, 53/4—Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr, 60
Halves, No 1,6 A—Midland, 91—North British, 4;.; ed.
41s.—Ditto, Quarters, 4—Ditto, New Quarters (Scrip),

"
[ADVERTISEMENT,] —DIA.RARCEA OR BOWEL COQ
.o
PLAINTS CURED BY HOLLOWAY'S PILLS.—At this :pot,
sots of the year disordered Bowels are most prerti`'e,
caused, in many instances, by eating too freely of je,,ot
tables or fruit. Let those suffering from this con:lfus •
try Holloway's Pills, which are of so strengthilini/I:0,of
nature, that they quickly restore the impaired t°'-fife
the stomach, and permanently renovate the digested
organs. Bile and diseased liver may be infallibly 11,706 t
by their use, therefore residents in the East and
cif.
Indies cannot have recourse to a more effectual rerue be
As a family medicine it is unequalled, and it tall All
safely used by both sexes at any age.—Sold 11.0,
Druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establish
244, Strand, London.

51RT115. Air°‘
On the 27th inst., at Duncan-terrace, Islington,
Joseph Tacker, of a daughter. of
On the 21st inst., at Aldenhara-lodge, Herts, the wife
the Rev. John Mason, of a daughter.
On the 24th inst., Mrs. John Ansted of the Grove, Cl P
ham-road, of a son. ,
On the 24th inst,, at .the Rectory, Harbledown, neirCs11
terbury, the wife of the Rev. A. Lyall, of a son. 0f till
On the 24th inst.. at the Rectory, Blaisdon, the !nu,
Rev. It• R. Ilurle, of a daughter.
W°°°'
At March, on the 18th inst., the wife of J. H. 'l*
ward, Esq., solicitor, of a son and heir. T.
On the 24th inst., in Devonshire-place, the lady °I.
H. Dickson, Esq., of a daughter.

„,, n,
On the 24th inst., at Boldre Church
AfelgRIED. the
, near LvrailV-fde°
Rev. A. Eden, 8.A., eldest son of the Hon,
and lies'. w' Alice
and Anna Maria Dowager Baroness Grey de Ruthyn, t° al
Julia, daughter of T. A. Whitney,s M I°°' 61,
q. ,0 f er
of Wexford, Ireland...i., maw',
On the 24th inst., at Thrybergh, the Rev. C. ” ",,b,- r 0 wayt, vicar of Chelmarsh, Shropshire, to Eliza, daub-te
rvrell,
J. Hardy, Esq., of Thrybergh-park, Yorkshire.
On the 24th inst., at St. Giles's Church, Cainteriirk-
Edward Luscornbe, eldest son of T. Scarlett, Esq'',°4sainuel
villa, Norwood, to Mary Anne, eldest daughter 0, -
Mayhew, Esq., of Camberwell, Surrey. Job°
On the 24th inst., at the parish church of Clap-, As Jane,Hyde, jun., Esq., of Abingdon, Berks, to Marge'rejoion''
eldest daughter of the late Andrew Morton, Esq., °`
terrace, Wandsworth-road, Surrey.
____.-----

On the 3d inst., Henry, etleEstson of Robert W. St" job°
Esq., her Majesty's Consul-General at Algiers. lOnel
MAt Boulogne.sur-er, on the 17th inst., Lie"-
J C°
ames Young, late of the Bengal Artillery.
if of
On the 24th inst., at Kensington, Lady Miles, 5c- e
Colonel Sir Edward Miles, C. 8.R.1.5. ph tiel,
On the 24th inst., at Long Cross Parsonage. er on-
Humphrey Hall, Esq., late of the Hermitage, Walten--
the-Hill, Surrey, aged 86. i; Carr,
On the 24th inst., at Dover, Ann, the wife of WiLa—
Esq., of Slaley-cottage,lßlackheath-park. •rA a J.
On the 24th inst., aged 2:3, Caroline Sophia, the "'I—
Scholefield, Esq., of Edgbaston, Birmingham. de 18,
On the 24th inst., at Forest-hill, near Windsor, aged
George Francis, fourth son of W. F. Riley, Esq. , had
On the 24th inst., at 10, Leicester-square, where La
resided 35 years, Mr. Simons, aged 61.
On the 23d inst., at Portland-place, R. Jennings. Esq.,
Un the 23d inst., at Hamilton-place, New-road, J. •Nclue
Esq., ofe Stock Exchan Wallasey 67.
On the 18th inst., at Rectory, near LiVerr 181;
Mary Stewart, second daughter of the Rev. Dr. Byrth, age"

London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOU-N(l4
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, itl°'
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the count" -
Kiddie/sox, Monday, August 28, 1848.

house °f
,t one. ,
le

to meet
nd Sep.