The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-21 00:00:00

THE MN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING,_ JANUARY 21, 1848.

Average Amount.
Pease's Old Bank, hull, the Hull Old Bank and
Beverley Bank, Hull—Pease and Co 44,613 I
Penzance Bank, Penzance—Batten and Co 10,898
Peterborough Bank and Oundle Bank, Peter-
borough—A(loms. Yorke
Peterborough Bank, Peterborough—Simpson,
White, and Simpson 10,185
Pembrokeshire Bank, Ha,verfordwest—J. and
W. Walters
Penzance ' Union Bank, Falmouth Bank, and
Truro Bank, Penzance—Rickets, Enthoven
and Co
Reading Bank, Reading—Simonas and Co 20,698
Reading Bank, Reading—Stephens,Blandy, and
Co 20,689
Richmond Bank,:Richmond—Stapleton and C 0... 2.118
Ringwood and Poole Bank, and Town and
County of Poole Bank, Ringwood—Ledgard
and Sons ............................................. 6,203
Rochdale Bank, Rochdale—Clement, Royds,
and Co................................................. 3,295
Rochester, Chatham, and Strood Bank, Roches-
ter—Day and Nicholson 7,781
Royston Bank, Royston—Fordham and Sons... 12,253
Rugby Bank, Rugby—Butlin and Son 12,839
Rye Bank, Rye—Curteis, Pomfret, and Co 14,902
Reigate and Darking Bank, and Reigate, Croy-
don, and Darking Bank, Reigate—Nash and
•. 8,145
Co
Ross Old Bank, Herefordshire, Ross—Pritchard
and Allaway
Saffron Walden and North Essex Bank, Saffron
Walden—Messrs. Gibson
Salop Bank, Shrewsbury—Burton, Lloyd, and
Co 10,909
Scarborough Old Bank, Scarborough—Woodall
and Co

Shrewsbury and MarketDrayton Bank, Shrews-
bury-Adams, Adams, and Co
Shrewsbury Old Bank, and Shrewsbury and
Ludlow Bank, Shrewsbury-Rocke, Eytons,
and Co • .. 24,212
Sittingbourne and Milton Bank, Sittingbourne
-Valiance and Son 2,950
Southampton Town and County Bank, South-
ampton-Maddicon and Son
Southwell Bank, Suuthwell-Wylde and Co.
St. Albau's Bank, St. Alban's-J. S. Story 933
Salisbury Bank, Salisbury-Messrs. Brodie
Shaftesbury Bank, Shaftesbury- Brodie and
King
Southampton and Hampshire Bank, Southamp-
-2,676
ton-Atherly and Fall
5,722
Stone Bank, Stone-W. Moore
Stourbridge Bank, Stourbridge -Rufford,
13,703
Wragg, and Co
Stafford Old Bank, Stafford-Stevenson and Co 13,613
Stamford and Rutland Bank, Stamford-Eaton,
Cayley, and Co. .„ 28,387
Stourbridge Old Bank, Stourbridge-Bate and
-Robins
Shrewsbury and Welshpool Bank, Shrewsbury
-Beck, Downward, and Co.
St. Alban's and Ilerts Bank, St. Alban's-Gib-
son and Stuart
Taunton Bank, Taunton-Messrs. Badcock 18,847
Tavistock Bank, Tavistock-Gill, Rundle, and
Co
Thornbury Bank, Thornbury-Rolph, Yates, and
Parslow
Tiverton and Devonshire Bank, Tiverton-Duns-
ford and Barne 7,190
Thrapston and Kettering Bank, Northampton-
shire, Thrapston-Yorke and Eland 9,699
Tring Bank and Chesliam Bank, Tring-But-
che,r and Son
Towcester Old Bank, Toweester-J. and S.
Percival
Union Bank, Cornwall, Helston-Vivian and
Co 8,932
Uxbridge Old Bank, Uxbridge-Hull, Smith,
and Co 16,896
Wallingford Bank, Wallingford-Wells and Co 5,610
Warwick and Warwickshire Bank, Warwick-
Kelynge, Greenway, mid Co.
Wellington Somerset Bank, Wellington-Fox,
Brothers
West Riding. Bank, Wakefield, and Pontefract
Bank, Wa.:efield-Leatham, Tew, and C 0.... 36,310
Whitby 011 Bank, Whitby-Simpson, Chap-
man, and Co 13,533
Winchester, Alresford, and Alton Bank, Win-
chester- Bulpett and Co.
Winchester and Hampshire Bank, Winchester
-Wickham and Co
Weymouth Old Bank and Dorchester Bank,
Weymouth-Elliott and Pearse
Wirkesworth and Ashhourne Derbyshire Bank,
Wirkesworth-Arkwright and Co. . 29,725
Wisbech and Lincolnshire Bank, Wisbech-
Gurney and Co.
Wiveliscombe Bank, Wiveliscombe-P. and W
Hancock
Wolverhampton Bank, Wolverhampton-Good-
ricke and llolyoake.
Worcester Bank, Worcester-Farley, Lavender,
and Co. 8,316
Worcester Old Bank and Tewkesbury Old Bank,
Worcester-Berwick, Lechmere, and Co 63,213
Worcestershire Bank, Kidderminster-Farley
and Turner
Walsall Oki Bank, Walsall-Charles Foster and
Sons
• Warminster and Wiltshire Bank, Warminster-
Everett and Co.
Wrexham Bank, Wrexham-J. and S. Kcnriek 1,735
%Vol verbal!) p ton Bank, Wel verham p ton-
Messrs. Fryer
Yarmouth and Suffolk Bank, and Halesworth
and Suffolk Bank, Yarmouth-Gurney,
BirkbeA, and Co 51,295
Yarmouth, Norlblk, and Suffolk Bank, Great
Yarmouth-Sir E. K. Lacer:, Bart., and Co 12,975
Yeovil Old Bank, Yeovil-E. and J. Batten
York Bank. York-Swann. Clotzli. and Co 39,041

JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
Bank of Westmoreland, Kendal
Barnsley Banking Company, Barnsley
Bradford Banking Company, Bradford
Bilston District Banking Company, Wolver-
hampton
Bank of Whitehaven, Whitehaven
Bradford Commercial Banking Company, Brad-

7,670
6,030
36,517

8,984
25,600

ford
Burton, Uttoxeter, and Staffordshire Union
Banking Company, Burton-upon-Trent
Chesterfield and North Derbyshire Banking
Company, Chesterfield ..
Cumberland Union Banking Company, Work-

11,523

54,036

ington ..
Cheltenham and Gloucestershire Banking Com-
pany, Cheltenham
Coventry and Warwickshire Banking Company,
Coventry
Coventry Union Banking Company, Coventry..
County of Gloucester Banking Company, Chel-

tenham
Carlisle and Cumberland Banking Company

6,637

26,600

9,047

19,424
11,553

85,170

21,580
14,969

Carlisle
Carlisle City and District Bank, Carlisle
Dudley and Wept Bromwich Banking Company,
Dudley
Derby and Derbyshire Banking Company, Derby
Darlington District Joint-Stock Banking Com-
pany, Darlington 13,978
East of England Bank, Norwich
Gloucestershire Banking Company, Gloucester 118,775
Halifax Joint-Stock Bank, Halifax 12,691
Huddersfield Banking Company, Huddersfield 29,969
Hull Banking Company, Hull . 26,973
Halifax and Huddersfield Union Banking Com-
pany, Halifax 24,329
Helston Banking Company, Helston 1,640
Herefordshire Banking Company, Hereford 13,545
Knaresborough and Claro Banking Company,
Knaresborough 24,651
Kingsbridge Joint-Stock Bank, Kingsbridge 2,990
Lancaster Banking Company, Lancaster 47,458
Leeds Banking Company, Leeds
Leicestershire Banking Company, Leicester
Lincoln and Lindsey Banking Company, Lincoln 47,659
Leamington Priors and Warwickshire Banking
Company, Leamington Priors
Ludlow and Tenbury Bank, Ludlow 7,970
Moore and Robinson's Nottinghamshire Bank-
ing Company, Nottingham 21,752
Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Banking
Company, Nottingham
Newcastle, Shields, and Sunderland Union Joint-
Stock Banking Company, Newcastle 30,992
Nallonal Provincial Bank of England, Birming-
ham, Head-office, 112, Bishopsgate-street,
London
North Wilt:. Banking Company, Melksharu 39,130
Northamptonshire Union Bank, Northampton 65,560
Northamptonshire Banking Company, North-
ampton
North and South Wales Bank, Liverpool
Pares's Leicestershire Banking Company, Lei-
cester
caster
Saddleworth Banking Company, Saddleworth 1,755
Sheffield Banking Company, Sheffield 34,387
Stamford,:)tuSic_c. Spalding, and Boston Banking Com-
. MY, Stamford.
a.k.tiitn:gll
g.c..co. Ippana..)n:.:l3:
.:iiis.
iti.:f1n..1.ak5.i.j0.i.n.m...g.e.e..05..ern....t: - 42,506
s hpr oc:rprtesYh'Bi.s::n..iikall. , and Somersetshire Lank, Lang-
Stourbridge and Kidderminster Banking Corn
S hPeaffineYl d' Satnor bl
Ir.ii '''''''''''''''''' Banking Company, 49,420
Sheffield ....,
Sheffield and Roth.Crha Joint-Stock Banking
i
Swe'a°lenadPalaellYaall'N"vr.e''''ni,:l4o.•ie...n.a. .................... 49,426
Richmond ........ . ........ . . ' i'king Company,
Storey and ThOmas's Banking... .r.,
Shaftesbury .•. ................... 'QmPanY,
Sheffield and Retfertl Bank, Sheffield ............. •
lArroal tieyr,hlavinopi
vteoinlad.iindrStotinifl:o.r.
... 5.h..i.7.
......
Walceiield and Barnsley Union Bank, Wakefield
Whitehaven Joillt,•Stock Banking Company. 0
Wlaitehaven .. ....,
Waro,iek and L,;-,,liii;_gton Banking Company,
Leamington
West of linglata: 20, '1 SouLTI Wzlies District
Bank. Bristol .
Wilts and Dorset Banking Company, Salisbury 45,205
West 'tiding Union Banking Company, Hud -
2:3,580
. ..................
‘‘lfv-dw..llo,eir:tch' elriltitsi
eu:hpirircul hreela.itlyi d Ellesmere
2,011
and County Banking Company,
‘ioreester... 3,625
Company,aßnaatikei(n,eo:.,:o.t.r, k
..
YyYtoonr;kik,,,Ctltii;ntr-,i4,un
County Ban,:ing Company, York 89,040
P-T1::,4 NjStl,l;lutaerg'yiisici.ri
1C,81.4.
BB4pic 1-4.43t9Ur7L0. 9
Stamps and

34,894
17,705

19,898
25,573

10,201
862

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Jun. 20.
(Sittings in Banco.)
lIES.ELTINI3 V. SIGGEUS.

This was an action brought to recover a sum of
money as loss sustained by the plaintiff in conse-
quence of the defendant not giving up, within a
reasonable time, a certain quantity of Spanish bonds,
which he had sold to the plaintiff.
The case was tried before the Lord Chief Baron at
Guildhall, in the last term, and a verdict passed for
the plaintiff, subject to several points reserved.
A rule had been obtained ,by Mr. Crowder to set
aside the verdict for the plaintiff and enter a non-
suit, or for a new trial, on the ground that the de-
claration was not good, inasmuch as it did not de-
clare that the defendant agreed to deliver, it only
reciting " that the defendant agreed to sell, and
sold."

Mr. Watson, with whom was Mr. Hill, was heard
against the rule, Mr. Crowder in support thereof.
The Court took time to consider.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Jan. 20.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Evaxs.)
IN RE THOMAS WOOD.
To-day was appointed for the last examination of
Mr. Alderman Thomas Wood, described as of Corbet-
court, Gracechurch-street, in the city of London,
attorney-at• law, dealer and chapman.
Mr. D. WIRE appeared on the part of the as-
signees, who expressed themselves perfectly satisfied
with the accounts, which contained a detail of the
transactions of the bankrupt with the Talacre Coal
Company, and which showed a balance deficient on
31st December,lB4s, of 1,956/. Is. 33.
APPENDIX ACCOUNT OP LOSSES ON TUB TALACRE
COMPANY:
Debts and liabilities bona fide paid by
Alderman T. Wood from the corn-
mencement of the company up to
his bankruptcy £4,823 13 8
Claims arising thereunder and charges
incurred, at present in liquidation 587 0 0
Alderman Wood's professional bill
against the company, 1,128/. 75.,
less the sum of 2001. received for
stamping the deed of settlement,
which was the only money that ever
came to his hands from the company,
or through any other source on his
behalf . ,„ 928 7 0

Total loss
The bankrupt passed his examination without the
slightest opposition, and a day was fixed for the
certificate meeting.

SHERIFFS' COURT, Jan. 20.
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCHELL.)
LAWRENCE V. BRADBURY.
The plaintiff is a farmer at Harrow, and defendant
is a farmer at Eastcote, near Pinner. The action was
brought to recover the sum of 251. on a promissory
note.
The defendant pleaded several special pleas ; and it
was urged on his behalf that, the action being for
251., the Under-Sheriff had no jurisdiction to hear
the cause.
The Learned UNDER-SHERIFF said that he could
not refuse to execute the writ which had been sent
down from the Court above ; hut if the writ had been
improperly directed to him, the defendant must apply
to the Court above ; but it appeared to him that he
could hear the case, as the writ was only for 201.
It was then urged that if the claim had been re-
duced the action should have been brought in the
County Courts.---This objection was overruled.
The case was of no interest, and a verdict was
returned for 8!. 16s. 6,1, but
The UNDER SHERIFF said he did not consider that
he had any power to certify as to the costs.
There was only one other case, not of the slightest
interest.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Jan. 20.

(Before the CHIEF CoMMISSIONER.)
IN RE JOSEPH WHITFIELD COLLIER.

This insolvent, who described himself as a comedian
and licensed victualler, appeared to undergo his first
examination.
Mr. CamswEi.r., on behalf of a creditor, objected
that the petition was untrue, inasmuch as in that
document the insolvent stated that he had not charged
his estate in any way within the space of three months
prior to the filing of such petition ; whereas the fact
was, that he had in October delivered up possession
of his public-house, the Compasses, in White Hart-
street, Drury-lane, to his landlord.
Mr. Brunis, the landlord, was examined, and stated
that the insolvent, on the 6th of October, being una-
ble to 'fulfil his agreement for the payment of rent,
had yielded to him the property as it stood, receiving
an acquittance for the debt then due to him (Mr.
Brunis).
Upon the application of Mr. Dowse, the insol-
vent's counsel,
The COURT consented to adjourn the case for the
production of the original agreement with Mr.
Brunis; which it was suggested might show that
the insolvent had only acted in accordance with its
terms.

The CII IFS COMMISSION ER said the statute enacted
that if a petition was not drawn up in the form pre'
scribed it should be dismissed ; but here the form had
been adh !red to, although one of the allegations con-
tained iu it was untrue. It therefore was worthy of
consideration whether the Act rendered it imperative
on the Court to dismiss a petition under such circum-
stances. _ . .

A poor women, who had been servant to the in-
solvent, said she was a creditor for 1/. 2s. for
wages.
The CHIEF COMMISSIONER asked the insolvent what
his salary was ? Insolvent replied that, for the last
six weeks, he had been receiving 51. per week at
Drury-lane, and his wife was also getting 61. per
week at the Lyceum.
The Learned COMMISSIONER said it would be
better for the insolvent to settle this poor woman's
claim before the next hearing.
The case was then adjourned.
(Before Mr. Commissioner LAW.)
GRANLEY U. BROWNE. _ _

This was a summons under the Small Debts' Act
against Mr. R. D. Browne, M.P., for 15/.
The defendant did not appear.
The plaintiff's SOLICITOR said the summons had
been left at the Reform Club, but as the Act required
personal ser►ice, he should pray the Court to grant a
fresh summons, which, as Parliament was about to
re-assemble, they might, perhaps, be able to serve.
The COURT granted a fresh summons.

these boys had pursued, there was the slightest chance
of their reformation whilst they continued subject to
the influences and the tkreatenings which it was
known they had existed under from those who were
far more experienced in crime than themselves. By
being sent to another country, there was some reason
to hope that, by their own propriety and improve-
ment of conduct, they might be reclaimed from their
present evil propensities, and ultimately become good
members of society. Transporting these boys, then,
would not simply rid London of three confirmed
thieves, but would afford even them an
opportunity of reforming. They would be
removed to another land from all their
parents, relatives, friends, and bad connexions, many
of them, probably, they might never see again, to a
land where they would have an opportunity of com-
mencing a new life. Each of the prisoners, young as
they all were, had been in prison many times, and it
had been ascertained that they were under the in-
structions and within the fangs of men who had long
been known to be old in crime—a species of Fagin—
whom he trusted some day the officers would succeed
in catching and bringing to justice. The apprehen-
sion and the fear of these Fagins executing their feel-
ings of vengeance upon these boys would seem to
have disabled them, even had they been so disposed,
from releasing themselves from their clutches ; but
by their removal to another country they would be
beyond their influence and beyond the pernicious and
wicked instructions of such men. The sentence upon
each of the prisoners was that he be transported for
the term of ten years.

fortune-teller told her that that was the person who
had stolen the watch and chain. This circumstance,
added to her former suspicion, perkcbly confirmed
her in her opinion that Miss Turford vms the guilty
party, and she therefore, notwithstanding the injunc-
tions of her father, gave her into the charge of a
constable for stealing the property. Turford was
subsequently tried for the offence at the Old Bailey,
convicted, and sentenced to six months' hard labour
at Brixton House of Correction.

In her cross-examination, Mrs. Ward admitted
that she was the chief witness, first against the young
woman Mary Ann Turford ; next against her own
son, who pleaded Guilty to the charge, and was sen-
tenced to seven years' transportation ; now prosecuted
her own brother; and all for the same watch and
chain. She positively denied having had any infor-
mation of the innocence of Turford and the guilt of
her son, until after the conviction of the former, and
said, that the next day after she became convinced of
it she gave her son into custody.
In reply to the questions of Mr. NORTON, Mrs.
Ward said, the prisoner had seen the watch and chain
at her house on the night before they had been stolen.
She then produced the watch to settle some argument
between the prisoner and her husband, about the
difference between opening an English and a French
watch. The prisoner on that occasion took the watch
into his hand, and attempted to open it, but she (wit-
ness) requested him not to do so, observing that it
appeared somewhat difficult, and told him it belonged
to their father, who had left it to have a glass put in,
adding, that he (the prisoner) knew what a particular
man their father was.
After the examination of some of the witnesses
called on the preceding day, John Ward was sworn.
He deposed that" he was the husband of Harriet
Ward, was a shoemaker, and resided at No. 40,
Brandon-street, Walworth. Recollected the prisoner
being at his house on the night before the watch and
chain had been missed, and saw the watch in his hand
when his wife produced it to settle the argument
between them, and Mrs: Ward then told him it
belonged to her father. The watch was of so peculiar
a description that any person seeing it once must
know it again. "Witness recollected the prisoner
coming to his house on the night of the 28th of Octo-
ber, and, in conversation, asking " I-low do they get
on about the watch affair ?" Witness replied that
on that day the young woman, Turford, had been
committed to take her trial on the charge. The pri-
soner then said it was a bad thing to punish any one's
child ; that his sister had children of her own ; and
asked if he agreed with his wife in the course she ha ,-1
adopted in prosecuting Turford. Witness replied
that he certainly did—that if persons were guilty 0!
such offences they deserved to be punished for it
The prisoner then said that Turford would go
seven years of it for the offence ; but le
(witness) said that her punishment would
not at the most exceed six months, and they made a
bet of a pot of ale on the result. He (witness) did
not see the prisoner again until the night of the 15th
or 16th of November, when he called at his house.
On that occasion his (witness's) wife sent for him
and, on his coining down stairs, she told him, in tin
prisoner's presence, that her son " Jem" had stater; a;
the station-house that his mother had parted with the
watch and chain herself; and then charged Mary Ann
Turford with it. The prisoner upon this observed,
that this was about right, and that the things hn
passed through his hands. Mrs. Ward begged of
him to state all he knew about it, and the prisoner
said that the fact was the boy had taken the watch
and chain and brought them to him, saying that in
mother had sent him with them to him to sell, foe
that she wanted the money worse than them, and he
(the prisoner) had disposed of them for 50s , handing
over the money to the lad. His (witness's) wife way
much affected on hearing this, upon which the prisoner
observed that they had better keep the matter ease,
and the boy might go to sea. His wife said she could
not allow a person to be punished innocently when
she knew the guilty party, and said her son " Jet)"
should never sleep under her roof again. The b -ty en
that night went to the house of the prisoner, and the
following morning was given into custody.
For the prisoner two witnesses were called, one a
woman, who, it was alleged, lived with him as his
wife, and the other her mother. The former said she
was at the prisoner's house when the lad Ward came
there and acknowledged he had stolen the wat.2h and
chain, and that they belonged to his grandfatle and
the latter said she was present when the pri,teeer paid
over to the boy Ward the sum of 50s which he hart
received for the watch.

Mr. Solomons submitted that there was nothing in
the evidence adduced that could lead any jury to
convict the prisoner. The case was evidundy got
up on the statement of a convicted person, and with
the intention, no doubt, of getting a commnt2tion of
the lad's sentence by implicating the prisoner in hi:,
guilt.

Mr. NORTON observed that he had before him the
statement of the boy Ward, made, as far as ho (Mr.
Norton) could see, without the slightest motive, in
which he declared that he had been induced to take
the property by his uncle, and that all he had re-
ceived out of what they had been sold for wa3 53. IL
(Mr. Norton) was aware that there would be no
probability of convicting the prisoner on the uni;up
ported testimony of the boy, but he found that the
statement was corroborated in many important points.
Lord Denman's Act admitted the testimony of con-
victed felons, and he (Mr. Norton) should take the
necessary means to have the boy brought before him
to hear his testimony on oath. In the interim he
should remand the prisoner, but had no objection to
accept good bail for his appearance on a future day.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

V,..,tcrday a Court was held for the dispatch of
r,,01,1ic business. The committees for the ensuing
Year were appointed. •

ABOLITION OF GRAND JURIES.

Mr. IT.UMPIIRBYS rose to move " That it be re-
ferred to a committee to consider and to report as to
the expediency of presenting a petition to Parliament,
for an Act to give power to the Central Criminal
Court to try persons charged with offences within its
jurisdiction without the intervention of a grand jury;
and, further, to consider and report whether such
trials could not be most bensficially had by informa-
tion, or by some, and 'a hat other mode than
by indictment." He said his object was to get rid
of what was neither more nor less than a complete
nuisance to the community, and to propose some-
thing to supply its place with security to that com-
munity. It was well known that grand juries were
instituted at a time when the administration of jus-
:lce made the introduction of such a system ne-
cessary. The argument in their favour no longer
existed. Formerly there was no police magistrate
before whom a charge could be brought. The pre-
sentment of the grand: jury was sufficient authority
for putting a man upon his trial. The evil was that
.aftero the remedy has been applied to the correc-
on of the system, the system was itself in full exis-
tence. Under our present criminal legislation
everything connected with the accusation of an
individual took place before a magistrate. The man
was charged, taken to a station-house, accused pub-
licly before the magistrate, and all that could be said
gainst him was publicly brought forward and sup-
ported by evidence, which determined the magistrate
either to discharge or commit him. What followed ?
I.n inquiry took place before the grand jury in
secret upon evidence merely in support of the prose-
cution. It was brought forward behind the back of
the accused, who was denied the advantage of the
presence of a single friend, professionally or other-
wise, to aid him in the monstrous difficulty of a
secret attack made before an irresponsible tribunal,
sworn not to divulge the facts sworn to before them.
—(Hear, hear.) Now, if 'sufficient evidence were
given before the magistrate to send a party for trial,
what safeguard to the accused, or what advantage to
the public, could a grand jury, whose inquiry was
regulated upon the dangerous principle of concealment,
afford ? If he could not show that the institution
was wholly useless as regarded the public or pri-
soners, he would at once give up the question. The
time was coaes when the profession of the law and
the people thennelves thought there should be a
change. The press exercised its powerful influence
io the complaint that nothing was done. An inquiry
had taken place before a Committee of the House of
Commons into the subject of the institution, and two
out of three of the numerous witnesses examined had
riven evidence in favour of the complete abolition,
while several had expressed themselves the advocates
of an accomnioiation or modified plan. He wished
to have the question before a committee, because in
a committee the whole merits could be considered,
and a deliberate recommendation could be given to
the Court, upon the result of the most minute inves
tigation.—(llear, hear.) The injury inflicted by the
operation by grand juries was very extensive and very
material. There were, as was well known, to pro-
fessional men especially, numbers of persons in this po-
pulous metropolis, who were constantly employed
in deriving pecuniary advantage from false charges,
which they prepared themselves to support by false
evidence. With that sort of evidence these wretches
were ready to go before the grand jury at Clerken-
well, an I accuse innocent persons of keeping gambling-
houses or brothels, or of other offences to which great
opprobrium was attached, and bills were euddenly
`band without the ceremony of notice.—(Hear, hear.)
In such eases the first intimations received wore from
die warrants upon which the individuals accused were
apprehended and taken before the judge or magis-
trate, who had no alternative but to commit. In
various instances that horrible species of intimidation
led to pecuniary arrangements. An individual got a
hint to inquire whether an information was not laid
against him, and finding that such was the fact,
although there was not the slightest ground for
accusation, lie was glad to get rid of the charge
by satisfying the sordid demand of his unknown
enenas'a In other cases, by the intervention of the
grand jury, justice was altogether defeated, and
guilty parties escaped. He spoke of facts con-
stantly occurring. It was only last year that a re-
spectable female was charged with keeping a house of
an infamous description. The grand jury found the
bill, but her friends would not listen to any terms of
compromise; and what was the consequence? She
came to take her trial, but no prosecutor appeared.
There was no charge whatsoever against her.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, if that resolute course had not
been adopted, the proeeedings would have been
stopped by compliance with an extortionate demand.
—(Wear, hear.) The mischief he described arose
from tlo, practice of preferring indictments without
investigation before a magistrate, and there were
numbers of men who profited by the vile practice
which this obsolete institution promoted and fostered.
If magisterial inquiry took place, the very magis-
trates who presided at the investigation would be
present at the trial, and have before them the
witnesses upon whose evidence they committed,
and who would be deterred from prevarication.
But the grand jury forming the intermediate
,authority, and bound to find upon the evidence
before them, are frequently obliged, by the inten-
tienid absence of the most important witness, to
ignore a bill, at the same time that the committing
magistrate and every one who heard the case, were
convinced of the guilt of the accused.—(Hear, hear.)
It was clear, then, that the grand jury undid what
was well done.—(Hear, hear.) He was anxious that
the question should undergo the strictest and most
public investigation, and he therefore had altered the
terms of his original motion. Indeed it was his
desire to have the investigation made by the whole
Court; but he knew that, from the very nature of the
subject, it was impracticable. 'With respect to the
second part of the motion, he would say, that bad as
grand juries were, he would not ask for their removal
without pointing out a substitute. lie would suggest
a constitutional remedy, which was known:to the law
and to the country. If a man hail to complain of a
grievance amounting to a misdemeanour, he could go
to the Queen's Bench without the intervention of a
grand jury, and proceed by criminal information.
What could be the difficulty of adopting a similar
course in all matters connected with the Central Cri-
minal Court ? The clerk could prepare the information
with the necessary formality, and all that would
be necessary to be done then was to step from the
magistrate to the court, and with the strongest proba-
bility of justice. He could not, however, help allud-
ing to a case which occurred about 18 months ago, in
which a party was charged with having forged a
cheque for 5,000/., and although the magistrate, and
every one else who heard the evidence, believed the
accused was guilty, the bill was thrown out by the
grand jury.—(Dear.) Upon the subject of expense,
he did not think that where justice was to be ren-
dered that ought to be any object, but he thought it
would be an additional argument in favour of his
position if it could be shown that a great nuisance
could be got rid of, and that ten shillings in the pound
would be the profit to the country upon its removal.
—(Hear.) Instead of waiting about the Central Crimi-
nal Court from day to day, as was the inevitable lot
of prosecutors and witnesses under the existing sys
tern, they would be directed by a list of cases regu-
lated by the clerk of the court, under the authority of
the judges, as to the particular periods fixed, and their
time would not be wasted, nor their ears offended, nor
their health injured, by their obligation to wait
amongst crowds of the lowest of mankind, in a place
little better than a cold, damp, underground cellar.—
(Hear, hear.) Mr. Hum ph reys' speech was through-
received with the most unquestionable evidence of
approbation.
Mr. WIRE seconded the motion. He knew that in
advocating the removal of grand juries he had to con-
tend against the prejudice which attached to a very
ancient institution ; but he knew, too, that that
Institution was formed when it was absolutely neces-
sary for the protection of personal liberty. The
times and circumstances had essentially changed.
When the grand jury system was established, the
object was to protect the innocent—to prevent any
one from being put upon trial in the absence of a
prima facie case of guilt. Such was not now the
case. Grand juries were now used for the gratifica-
tion of revenge, or the base purposes of extortion.--
(Hear, hear.) What could be done for an innocent
person when prosecutor and witnesses, all prepared,
went before a secret tribunal with statements unexa-,
mased, and, necessarily, uncontradicted ? As Mr.
Humphreys had said, a bench warrant was ften
the first intimation which a man had that he was
charged with an offence. The case, then, was
precluded from coming before a magistrate for in-
vestigation. The magistrate's duty was limited to
the absolute, unconditional committal of the accused;
$o that the tribunal, instead of operating as a
saield over the innocent, became a delusion and
snare.—(Hear, hear.) The police magistrates super-
s,aled the grand jurymen by the performance of more
tssential duties. If, upon the examination of the
vidence brought forward in open court, under the
eye of the magistrate, and in the presence of all ac-
quainted with the grounds of a charge, it appeared
that those grounds were not substantial, an immediate
dismissal of the case was the consequence—no com-
mittal took place. Before the grand jury, who were
obliged to deci,h upon ex parte evidence, the ends of
justice, were oh the contrary, completely defeated.
Grand juries were constantly throwing out bills in
cases were guilt was as certain as innocence was in
many instances in which true bills had been found.
Io his under-shrievalty forty-seven bills, all of which
ought to have been found, had been ignored, and thus
a nu:nerous gang of pickpockets and ruffians of ail
(I._,::criptions was let loose upon the public.—(Hear.)
Ile pail seen the depositions, find from his experi-

ence, he was qualified to judge that they were all
guilty ec erfei ess w;fl, whie, tl-ey were
charged. It ee;ee . lees, ever, that the 'tore-
man of the grand jury then& himself a lawyer, and
in every case in which the demeanour of a witness
did not hit his fancy, the bill was thrown out. In
other; cures it was well known that witnesses, whose
evidence was conclusive before the magistrate, were
bought off before they appeared before the interme-
diate tribunal, and it was no unfrequent complaint
that grand juries were made, unconsciously, the in-
struments of injustice.—(Hear, hear.) Who could
for a moment doubt, that for all the purposes of jus-
tice, a public examination before a public magistrate
was not superiOr to such a secret, irresponsible tri-
bunal ? He contended that by the existence of grand
juries a denial of justice was inflicted upon the public.
Who, he would be glad to know, after having once
prosecuted at the Old Bailey, after having undergone
the contaminating trial of attending in the avenues to
the Grand Jury-room, did not regret that he had not
allowed the offender to escape ? Mr. Wire then
called the attention of the Court to the useless con-
sumption of the time of the public, to the inconve-
nience visited upon the Judges, and to the enormous
expense occasioned by the system of which he com-
plained, and which, if it were abolished altogether,
would lead to a rapid, strict, and economical adminis-
tration of justice.—(Bear.)
Mr. Low said there was only one point on which
he agreed with the mover and seconder on that most
important question. He agreed with them that it
was objectionable to allow bills to be laid before grand
juries unless the parties accused had been previously
examined before a magistrate, for such parties had no
opportunity of defending themselves.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") All the rest of the objections were
perfectly fallacious. He did not believe that the wit-
nesses in cases would, if no grand juries existed, hang
about the court just as was their practice at present.
The grand juries were obliged to wait for bills of in-
dictment, and were not themselves the cause of delay.
It was true they ignored bills, and very justly ignored
them.—(llear, hear). They never did so, however,
without the strictest examination of the evidence, and
the strongest grounds ; and he trusted that a power so
beneficial in its operation would not be discontinued.
—(Hear, hear.) He had no objection to the inquiry,
for in the committee the true state of the case would
be developed, and all the fallacies exposed.
Mr. ANDERTON said the inquiry was the more- ne-
cessary, as the City Solicitor had given notice in
Parliament of his intention to propose a change in the
I system. lie instanced cases in which evidence which
had been given before magistrates was reversed before
grand juries, whom he considered to be a tribunal
sitting in judgment:upon the committing magistrate.
Mr. IL TAYLOR supported the motion, from a per-
suasion that the members by whom it had been brought
forward would, from their full acquaintance with the
subject, be able to bring before the committee
abundant matter to assist the judgment of the
Court. Grand juries had been viewed merely as
a safeguard against the Crown for the protection of
the innocent; but their history showed that they
were originally intended for the opposite purpose'of
bringing the guilty to trial ; and a Learned Judge
bad pronounced it to he a popular mistake that they
had been intended "in favorem vita:." It was no
doubt an evil that the innocent should be put upon
their trial ; but it was also a great evil that the guilty
should escape, as they too often did, from the inter-
vention of a grand jury.— (Hear, hear.)l There
was a strong feeling in sonic minds in favour of the
grand juries as an ancient institution, but in the state
in which it existed at present, it was not ancient, but
had been greatly changed from its original purpose.
Besides, formerly, until 1819, there existed a remedy
against the evil to which he had referred, in the right
of appeal, against the abolition of which that Court
had then petitioned. That form of procedure gave
the party injured the power of claiming redress, not-
withstanding the ignoring of a bill, and had been
held in high estimation by Chief Justice Holt, Lords
Ashburton and Camden, and by Horne Tooke and
Bentham. That the power of grand juries might
be abused to favour the escape of the guilty had been
fatally manifested, and in the case of the affair of the
Manchester massacre, where the squires who had led
on the yeomanry formed the grand jury, that frus-
trated all attempts to obtain justice.
Mr. HALE said he was for inquiry, but he would
not take for granted what had been stated in Court
against the principle and practice of grand juries.
Mr. HALL, as one who had served on grand juries,
was surprised at hearing what had been statedlagainst
them.—(Hear, hear.) He should, indeed, much
regret to see the power of ignoring a bill, by which
they could save an innocent person from danger and.
disgrace, taken from them.—(Hear.)
Mr. E AGLETON defended grand juries from the charge
of improperly ignoring bills.

The motion Was then carried, and after the trans-
action of some business of no public consequence the
Court adjourned.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.

BRISTOL, JAN. 20.
STOCK ExcuAsuE.—The market was firm, and prices
were well maintained, although there was not much business
done, except in the new shares of the Great Western Com-
pany. The sales are—Great Western, Quarters, 2 5-16 p.
—Ditto, New 171. Shares, 1 7-16 p.—North British, Ex-
tension, 1 1-16 p.
LIVERPOOL, JAN. 20.
STOCK Exc iIANGE.—The sales are—Birkhenhead, Lanca.
shire, and Cheshire Junction (late C. and B. ), 5 per cent.
hi 1847 and 1848, and 6 per cent. in 1849, 16n—Ditto, 221.
Shares, 5 per cent. in 1847 and 1848, and 6 per cent. in 1819,
7% dis.—Birmingham and Oxford Junction, 241/4—Glasgow
and Dumfries, 74—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Halves (late
L. and B.), 9 dis.—London and North-Western, 152'4
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference, % p.—
Midland, 115—Ditto, 401. Shares, 441—Ditto, Halves, 1
dis.—Ditto. Consolidated Birmingham and Derby, 88—
North British, New llalves, par—North Staffordshire, % p.
—North Union (A), 209—South-Eastern and Dover, 31—
Ditto, New, N 0.4, 1% dis.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick
(G. N. E. Purchase), 13/4 p.
MANCIIESTER, JAN. 20.
STOCK ExciLoram.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lan-
cashire, and Cheshire Junction, 5% dis.—Caledonian, 85%
—Great Northern, 6 dis.— Lancashire and Yorkshire (West
Riding Union), 23q—Ditto (Preston and Wyre), Halves
(A), 2% c. p. —London and North-Western (Manchester
and Birmingham), 60%—Ditto, Quarters (B), 4 p.—Man-
chester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 24 die.—Man-
chester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference, 1-16 p.—
North British, Thirds, % p.—North Staffordshire, % n.—
South-Eastern and Dover, No. 1, 37/8 dis.—Ditto, No. 4,1%
dis.

LEEDS, Jaw. 20.
STOCK ExcirmraE.—The sales are—Ambergate, Notting-
ham, and Boston, 265. ti. dis.—Eastern Counties, 16—Great
Northern, 5'44 dis.—Malton and Driflield Junction, 434 dis.
—North British, Halves, 13',4—Ditto, Thirds, 2s. 6d.
Ditto, Extension, Is. dis.—North Staffordshire, 3s.
Northern Counties Union, 3/. 18s. dis.—North-Western,
41. 1 Is. 9d. dis.—South Yorkshire, Doncaster, &c.,
York, Newcastle, and Berwick,;iNo. 2 (New Berwirks), 5624
3d. P.
BIRMINGHAM, JAN. 20.
STOCK ExcHANon.—So little business was transacted
to-day that no official list has been published. North Staf-
fordshire closed at p.
YORE, JAN. 19.
STOCK Exen.tNGE.—The sales are—North British, Thirds,
2/. Is. 6d.—Ditto, Quarters, V. 11s.—York, Newcastle, and
Berwick, 34,H—Ditto (Original Newcastle and Berwick),
3134—Ditto (G. N. E. Purcinvie), 9% ex int.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, JAN. 20.
STOCK ExcnANos.—The only sale was—North British,
Thirds, ls. p.

EDINBURGH, J. 19.
Srrocx ExcuwiciE.—The sales are—Caledonian, 86—Edin-
burgh and Northern, 161. ss. —Ditto (Newport), New, 11.
103.—Great Northern, 87s. 6d.—North British, 26/. ss--
Ditto, Quarters, 51.55. 61—Ditto, Thirds, 41s.—Scottish
Centrals, 29—Shrewsbury and Chester, 8
per cent. Prefe-
rence, U. 15s. 6d.

GLASGOW, JAN. 19.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Caledonian, 35%
Dunblane, Donne, and Callender, 13s.—East Indian Railway,
178.—Edinburgh and Perth, 135.—Glasgow, Kilmarnock,
and Ayr, 100—Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan, 81s.
—Monklaad and Kirkintilloch, 181.10 s. 6d.—Scottish Grand
Junction, 10s. 6d.

SERIOUS FIRE AT BERMONDSEY.—Last night,
shortly before twelve o'clock, a fire, involving a serious
destruction of property, and nearly attended with a
lamentable loss of life, broke out upon th'- premises in
the occupation of Mr:Crag°, a linendraper and silk-
mercer, carrying on business in the Spa-road, Bermond-
sey. After considerable trouble the residents, consist-
ing of two children and an aged female, were aroused,
but not before the whole of the contents of the front
shop were wrapped in a general blaze. The engines of
the parish and .London Brigade were quick in their
attendance, and under the direction of Mr. Henderson,
the foreman of the district, they were worked until
nearly one o'clock this morning, when the flames were
extinguished, but not until the whole of the stock in trade
was destroyed.
DESTRUCTIVE FIRE.—The extensive cotton-mills
at Stanley, near Perth, belonging to Messrs. Dcnnis-
toun, Buchanan and Co., of Glasgow, took fire on
Sunday evening, and a great part of the mills have been
destroyed. The premises are said to be fully insured.—
Scctsm an.

81R711,53.
On the 14th inst., at Chichester, thu lady of Captain G. T.
Johnson, Coldstream Guards, of a daughter.
On the 17th inst., at Burn-hall, Durham, Mrs. l'.farma-
duke Salvin, of a daughter.
On the 17th inst., in Albemarle-street, Mrs. Reid, of the
Node, near W(lwyn, of a son, still-born.
On the 18th inst., in Cadogun-place, the wife of John B.
Lee' Esq., of a soli.
On the 19th ins-., the wife of John Murdoch, Esq., of Al-
bion Cottage., Holloway, of a daughter.

MARRIED.
On the 18th inst., at St. John's, Hampstead, James Sluife,
Esq., of Edinburgh, to Caroline Matilda, eldest daughter of
the late G. Niblett, Esq., of Bow, Middlesex.

DIED.
On tha 15th inst., of Influenza, Anna Moses, the beloved
wife of Mr. G. Johnston, aged 22.
On the 13th inst., Major John Staunton, of the Ist Royal
Veteran Battalion, aged 71.
On the 18th inst., Mr. James IVllltelintr, of Lichfield-
street, Soho, aged GS.

London : Printed and Published 17,, MURDO YOUNG, at
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at 7. 'he Sun Office, No. 114
Strand, in the Precinct of the avoy, in the county of
Middlesex, Friday, January 2) , 18413.