The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-20 00:00:00

His estimate of the consumption of coal was at one and a
half tons per head. The witness was here examined at
sonic length on the details of his table of the coal con-
sumed in the several parishes which skirted the
line, with the object of showing that he had over-esti-
mated the tonnage of coal that would pass along it. The pre-
sent consumption of coal at Dumfries was mostly English Coal,
but if the line were formed he did not think English coal
would be then used. The difference in price, he thought,
would be so great as to drive the English coal out of the
market. The present price of Scotch coal was
16s. 6d., and English 18s. 6d., but the railway
would make a much greater difference in price. He
did not think English coal would be reduced in proportion.
Were a line formed from Dumfries to Canobie, the coil of
the latter would equally drive out the English coal. Ile did
not say that 30,000 tons of lime would pass along the line
on an average of six miles; he said 13,000. The way he
had calculated the coal and lime traffic was, by taking sta-
tions at intervals along the line, and t hen taking the popula-
tion surrounding them which would require supplies. He would
supply in a table all the details thatarenecessary to illustrate
the amount of traffic he considered would betaken by the line.
To Mr. Sergeant Murtrav—He had on a forther occasion
reported that iron was on the route of the Slamannan Rail-
way, but though that line had been in existence for several
years, no iron had yet been found. It had recently amal-
gamated with two other lines, because it had Idled as
a mineral line. lie was mistaken by appearances in re-
porting on the Slaniannan line, but in regard to the
present line he had made a greater examination, and did nut
think he had made any mistake. He had not, however, cal-
culated on iron going along the line. He had not examined
into the plumbago and sulphuret of antimony; he only spoke
of coal and lime. He could not say that coal might be laid
down in Dumfries from Marvport for 10s.
The Committee then adjourned till eleven o'clock on
Monday.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
VICE CHANCERY COURT, July 13.
BLAKE V. LORD WALLESCOURT.

In this case two petitions have beeen presented; one
by the two daughters of Lord:Wallescourt, that .they
may be removed from the custody of their father, and
allowed to live with ther mother, and the other by Lady
Wallescourt that she may have the custody of her infant
son. The proceedings are instituted under Serjeant
Talfourd's Act, and the grounds stated by the affidavits
on the side of the petitioners are cruel and immortal
conduct on the part of Lord Wallescourt, and that he
is not a proper person to have the management of his
children. The statements made relative to Lord `Val
lescourt's conduct are denied by the affidavits on his
side, in which he is stated to be a very religious man,
and very careful in the education of his children. The
arguments in the case are not yet concluded.
RAILWAY DEPOSITS.—The following sums of money
deposits on behalf of the undermentioned railway com-
panies, were ordered to be paid out of court :—The
Huntingdon Branch of the Midland Junction Railway
(v.ithdrassn) 36,2301. ; the Reading, Guildford, and
Reigate (passed) 57,860/. ; the Liverpool and Preston,
and the Manchester and Southport (rejected) 120,0001.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT—Oakhum, JO!, 17.
The people of the town of Oakhain were this morning
awakened from their usually dull routine by the clamour of
bell ringing, and the clatter of the little cortege of javelinmen
in attendance upon the High Sheriff of Rutlaudshire, Mr.
John Gibson, of Wing Uppingham, who awaited the arrival
of Mr. Justice Patteson. His Lordship arrived at half-past
10 o'clock, and shortly after proceeded to the Castle.
His LORDSHIP adverted to the light state of the calendar,
which exhibited two cases only, one of which was for cutting
and wounding, and the other for setting fire to a lock-up
house at Oakham ; there was not, however, evidence to go
to the grand jury, whereupon the indictment was abandoned.
On the Nisi Prius side there was no entry for trial whatever.
The only case indeed expected to be tried at these assizes is
that of the " Syston and Peterborough Railway Company v.
Lord Harborough," a case arising out of long standing dis-
putes between Lord Harborough and• the Syston and Peter-
borough Railway Company, and which have already formed
the groundwork of two trials at °Ahem. On the present
occasion the venue was laid for Rutlandshire ; it has, how-
ever, on account of the leading couniel on the Midland
Circuit being detained at Northampton in a tithe case, been
transferred to Nottingham.
On the Crown side Frederick Lea stood indicted for cutting
and wounding with a scythe with intent to do grievous bodily :
harm.

Mr. Roberts appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Wing
for the prisoner.
The facts of the case were as follows :—The prisoner, who
was addicted to drink, was, on the 23d of May last, in a state
of drunkenness and high excitement, and whilst under their
influence, and affected • by family disturbances, rushed into
the street i-rmed with a scythe blade, and the prosecutor, in
attempting to capture him, received a wound in the face
three or four inches long, and also had a piece of one of his
ears cut off.

constable who apprehended the prisoner, Joseph Cliff.
the father of the prosecutor, and the prosecutor, deposed to
the facts of the case, and another witness deposed that pri•
sorter would have cut his and prosecutor's head off, if he could
have done so.

Mr. WING addressed the jury in extenuation, and called
witnesses, who deposed to the good character prisoner had
borne during twenty years.
The jury, after some consideration, returned a verdict of
Guilty.—Sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
This being the last and only case, the assizes terminated,
and his Lordship proceeded on to meet Mr. Justice Coleridge
at Lincoln, where the commission was opened on Saturday.

NORFOLK ClRCUl7l—Huntingdon, July 17.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
Richard Hayes was charged with feloniously cutting and
stabbing William Monk.
Mr. Tozer was counsel for the prosecution; Mr. Prender
gast appeared for the defence.
It appears that the prisoner is a respectable carpenter, re-
siding in a village not far from the banks of the Ouse, which,
as all who have travelled the fens in winter know, is fre-
quently flooded, carrying away timber and even stacks in
its overcharged bosom. On one of these occasions, in the
winter of 1845, the prosecutor, William Monk, found and
captured a prize in the shape of some timber, which he in
vain sought to find an owner for. At length, deeming that
he might do as he pleased with it, he confided it to the pri-
soner for the purpose of being made into a box. The pri-
soner kept the wood for nearly three months without exe-
cuting his job, and, when questioned about it, intimated,
first, that he " might get into a bother about it, as he did
not know who the owner was," and eventually flatly refused
to make the box or give up the " raw material." This, of
course, irritated the prosecutor, who, on the day named in
the indictment, met the prisoner at a public-house, and
demanded his property. The prisoner, who was intoxi-
cated, evaded the demand, and on the prosecutor intimating
his intention of going home with him, that he might get
" a proper understanding" with.hitn, he cautioned him "not
to come near him, or on his premises, else he would do him
an injury." The prosecutor, however, followed the drunken
man up to the threshold of his door, and the prisoner, having
entered it, presently came out with a knife in his hand,
swearing he would " stick it into the -----'s belly." His
wife rushed between him and the prosecutor, and a struggle
ensued, in which the prisoner thrust his hand over her
shoulder, and inflicted a cut on the left cheek of the prose-
cutor' from which, though slight, the blood flowed rapidly.
As the prosecutor did not quit the premises, the prisoner
then went back, vowing he would fetch his loaded pistols
and shoot him; but he either had none or could not find
them, for he returned in a second or so with the knife as be-
&re, and then a passer-by, who- had been attracted by the
noise, prudently withdrew the prosecutor, and so put an end
to the matter.
At the close of the case for the prosecution,
His LonDstue intimated to the Learned Counsel for the
prosecutor, that as he (Mr. Baron Alderson) thought the fe-
lonious part of the charge was not made out, he had better at
once submit to a verdict for an assault, as the case must conic
to that eventually. It was very clear that the prisoner was
drunk when the wound was -given, and that being so, he
could scarcely be said to have been actuated by any such in-
tent as was contemplated by the statute.
The jury, therefore, under. his Lordship's direction, found
the prisoner guilty of an assault only, and he was thereupon
sentenced to pay a fine of 405., and to find surety to keep the
peace for two years, and furthermore admonished to abstain
from drink for the future, which he faithfully promised he
would do.
Ann Peacock, aged 20, was indicted for setting tire to a
dwelling-house, called the Huntingdon Union Workhouse,
William GeninLe and others then being in the same.
Mr. Worlledge, for the prosecution, proved that the pri-
soner had been punished at least 20 times in the union for
violence and insubordination to the powers that ber and that
on the 17th of May last she took occasion of her being or-
dered to clean out a bed-room to set fire to one of the beds.
Fortunately the cry of " Fire " was soon raised, for on the
authorities bursting into the apartment, four beds were dis-
covered in flames, while the prisoner was quietly watching
the progress of the devouring element, which bad evidently
been created bt• the agency of live coals, some of which were
strewn about the floor. When taxed with the commission of
this offence, the prisoner quietly said, " Oh, I told you I
would do it, when you stopped my dinner yesterday," a
statement which did not receive either confirmation or refu-
tation during the progress of the case.
It being at last, though with some difficulty, ascertained
that a sufficient firing of the timber had been effected to pro-
duce a red heat, and so to bring the case within, the law,
The prisoner was found Guilty, and sentence of death re-
corded, accompanied by an intimation that it would be com-
muted to a short term of transportation.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.— Worcester, July 18.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice MituLE
Richard Darnel, otherwise Henry
surgeon,
Lee Paget, aged 3.)
2, and
r
describedi.} ~F.Y. Lin theee
conductedcalendar
t
as a
wasindictedp forri.
id
bigamy.
prosecution;the an
soner was defended by Mr. Godson, '
Q•C ~ with whom was
Mr. Iluddlestone.
From the opening and the evidence it appeared that the
prosecutor, Mr. George 11 luckarsie, a dentist, residing in
King-street, Bloomsbury,, in London, was introduced to the
prisoner in 1833. The prisoner, who was then about 21
years of age, and a surgeon, paid his attentions to Miss Geor•
giana, the daughter of the prosecutor, in whose housa he
was stopping, and ultimately, after a courtship of two years,
was married to her, with her father's consent, at St. Pancras
Church, in London, in the month of July, 1835. Immediately
on his marriage he went to reside in Sidinouth•;street,
Regent's-square, where he practised as a surgeon. After
living with his wife there for six months he got into difficul-
ties, and being arrested, was placed in the Fleet Prison, when
his wife returned to reside in her father's house. From
the Fleet he took the benefit of the Act, and, his father-in-
law having paid all the fees, he returned to the house of the
latter, and lived there till November, 1837, when he left for
the country, whither his wife followed him. They lived
together at Newtown, in Montgomeryshire, where his wife,
taking with her a gold watch, several trinkets, and a stock
of wearing apparel, joined him, but she soon returned to her
father with literally nothing left but what she wore. After
1838, when a deed of separation, which, though alluded to,
was not produced in evidence, was entered into between the
prisoner and his wife, she had never lived with him. On the
29th of June, 1830, a letter was received by Mrs. Durnell
from a Mr. Edsprds, a surgeon of Walsall, in whose service
the prisoner then was, enclosing a letter to her from her hus-
band, in which, using the kindest and mast affectionate lan-
guage, he begged of her to return to him. In Mr. Edwards's
letter be requested her to give an early answer that matters
might be settled which depended on her determination. She,
however, declined acceding to the wishes of her husband,
sending him as an answer to his note the deed of separation.
The prisoner seems then to have wandered about, having al-
tered his name to that of Henry Lee Paget, and to have
practised as a physician. On the 3d of March, 1844, he
was married at Bath to Miss Alice Lovell, and they went
to live at Bengeworth, which is about a mile from that
town. When he had been residing there for about ten months
he was apprehended and committed for trial on the charge of
bigamy.
Mr. GODSON then addressed the jury for the prisoner.
The Learned JuDGE summed up, and