The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-06 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT, Guildford, TVednesday, Aug. 5.
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE and a COMB3OII Jury.)
YOUNG V. KNIGHT.

This was an action of slander. The declaration
stated that a marriage was about to take place between
the plaintiff and one Clarissa Charrington, and that in
consequence of certain slanderous expressions made use
of by the defendant respecting the plaintiff, the lady re-
fused to marry him, and he :sought to obtain damages
for the injury and loss he had sustained by means of
such refusal.
Mr Montigue Chambers and Mr. James were for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Shee for the defendant.
Mr. CHAMBERS stated the case for the plaintiff, who,
he said, bad been compelled to bring the pre-
sent action in order to vindicate his character for the
gross attack that had been made upon it by the de-
fendant. He then proceeded to state that the plaintiff
was a respectable young man, who carried on the busi-
ness of a furrier in London, and the defendant was a
fishmonger in that city. The plaintiff had been intro
,fused to the family of a lady named Charrington, re-
siding at Croydon, and in a short time an affection had
sprung up between him and the daughter of that lady,
and it was eventually arranged, with the consent of the
young lady's mother and all her family, that she and
the plaintiff should be married, and the ceremony was
fixed to take place in the month of May. On the 13th
of March, however, the defendant happening to meet
with a person named Anderson, who was related to the
Charrington family, took upon himself to say that the
plaintiff was a scamp, and advised him to prevent the
marriage ; and in consequence of this communication,
which was, of course, conveyed to the mother of the
young lady, she refused to allow the marriage to take
place. The plaintiff had, of course, been very much
annoyed and injured by such a proceeding, his prospect
of being speedily united to the woman of his choice had
been destroyed, and when the jury were informed that
there was not the. least pretence for casting any imputa-
tion upon the character of the plaintiff, he was sure they
would feel that it was a case calling for such an amount
of damages as would satisfy the world and the family
with which he sought to be connected, that there was no
ground for the attack that had been made upon the
plaintiff by the defetiblnt.
Mr. Frederick Atkinson deposed that he was cousin
to Mrs. Charrington, and was acquainted with defendant.
He was also acquainted with the plaintiff, and he had in-
troduced him to Mrs. Charrington and her daughter,
and he had heard that the young lady and the plaintiff
were to have been married on the 16th of May. Witness
met defendant in March, and he asked him how Mr.

Young was getting on, and he replied, he believed very
well, and added that he was going to be married to one
of his relations. The defendant upon this said, "By
all means put a stop to it —there is not a greater scamp
in existence, and his father does not know what a scamp
he has got in his family." lie communicated what the
defendant had said to Mr. Joseph Freeman, who was a
trustee for Miss Charrington, and a friend of the family ;
and the statement of the defendant was subsequently
communicated to Mrs. Charrington. The defendant told
him that what he said was in confidence, and he asked
him not to mention it, but witness thought it was his
duty to tell Mrs. Cherrington what had occurred.
Cross-examined— He introduced the plaintiff to Mrs.
Charrington in July last year, and he understood that
the parties were engaged to be married after the fifth
visit, and from that time Mr. Young was received by
Mrs. Charrington as her daughter's suitor.
Mrs. Charrington deposed that she was the mother of
Miss Clarissa Charrington, the lady alluded to in the de-
claration. She remembered a communication being
made to her by Mr. Freeman, on the 16th of April,
respecting the plaintiff, who was at that time engaged
to be married to her daughter ; and in consequence of
that communication she wrote a letter to the plaintiff,
requesting him to discontinue his visits to her house,
and breaking off the engagement that existed between
him and her daughter. Sh was induced to make this
communication solely in consequence of what she heard
from Mr. Freeman, as having been stated by the de-
fendant.

Cross-examined—The day for the marriage had only
been fixed shortly before the communication in question,
but the plaintiff and her daughter were engaged to be
married a long time before she broke off the marriage,
in consequence of hearing that the plaintiff had been
described as a scamp. The plaintiff did come to her
house afterwards, but she had never sanctioned any
intimacy between him and her daughter since she had
received the communication from Mr: Freeman respect-
ing the plaintiff.

.Sergeant SHEE asked the witness whether she did not
know that her daughter and the plaintiff were at the
present time engaged to be married ?
Mrs. Charrington said she did not.
On being further cross examined, she said the plain-
tiff, and her daughter, and herself had travelled twice,
backwards and forwards, from Guilford, in the same
railway carriage, and that they had been at the same
inn, but she said it was an accidental circumstance.
Sergeant SREE—And have you not seen your daugh-
ter sitting close to the plaintiff ?—(A laugh.) Witness
---I cannot say.

Sergeant SHEE—NOW, have you not seen them kiss
one another when they have parted at night ?—(Laugh-
ter.) Witness—lf they have, I have not seen it.
Sergeant SHEE—Do yon not know that they have
agreed to be married, notwithstanding what has hap-
pened, and that the time is fixed ? Witness—lt is not
to my knowledge.
Sergeant SHEE—Oh ! you do not seem to be in their
se3rets.—(Renewed laughter.)
Mr. Baron PARKE, at this stage of the case, suggested
that the case should be put an end to by some amicable
arrangement. There did not appear to be any grounds
for casting an imputation upon the character of the
plaintiff
Sergeant SHEE said there never was such an inten-
tion, and he considered the evidence did not support the
allegation in the declaration.

Mr. JAMES, on the part of his client, consented to
accept of a nominal verdict, on condition that the defen-
dant paid the costs of the action and the expense that
had been incurred by the plaintiff.
Mr.
.Baron PARKE expressed an opinion that this was
avery.tair offer, and suggested the propriety of acced-
ing to it ; but Mr. Sergeant Shee said his client was not
present, and in his absence he could not do so ; and the
case accordingly proceeded.
Sergeant SUES addressed the jury for the defendant,

and said he admitted that the defendant had made use
of some indiscreet words, but he should contend that he
was not amenable to the serious consequences that were
attempted to b cast upon him by the present action.
Ile submitted that the mere fact of calling a man a
scamp amounted to nothing, unless it was sown that
some actual injury had been occasioned to him in con-
sequence, and in the present instance it was for the jury
to say what injury had been inflicted. True, it was said
that the marriage of the plaintiff was postponed, but
would the jury have the slightest doubt that although
it did not, in point of fact, take place on the day origi-
nally intended, yet that the engagement was still con-
tinued, and that the parties had the full determination
to be married the moment this action was disposed of. He
should then submit to the jury that although the defendant
might have acted indiscreetly in making the communica-
tion he did to Mr. Atkinson, still not the slightest in-
jury had been occasioned by it, and that he ought not
to have been compelled to defend an action under such
circumstances, or be called upon to pay damages when in
reality no damage had been sustained.
Mr. Baron PARKE summed up, and the jury after de-
liberating for a few minutes, returned a verdict for the
plaintiff, damages 504

OXFORD ClRCUlT—Hereford, Aug. 2.
'rho commission for this county was yesterday opened by
Lord Chief Justice Wilde.

There are 23 prisoners for trial, of whom one is charged
with cutting and maiming with intent to murder, one with
assault and robbery, ten with burglary, five with house-
breaking, two with horse-stealing, and lour with larceny.
In the list there are sixteen causes, of which eight are
special jury cases.
This morning the Lord Chief Justice attended Divine
service at All Saints' Church, the repairs of •the cathedral
not being yet completed.

August 3.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice MAUL..)
John Churchill, aged 28, wa3 indicted for having, on the
Bth of January last, cut and maimed Elizabeth Morris with
intent to murder her.

Mr. Skinner appeared for the prosecution; the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Huddleston.
From the evidence for the prosecution the following ap-
peared to be the facts :—The prosecutrix, the gatekeeper of
a turnpike in the parish of St. Weonard's, lived in the toll-
house with her three children, the eldest of whom was a
girl of 15. On the night of the 7th of January last, Mr.
Wanklyn, a farmer in the neighbourhood, passed through
the gate, and as she expected him to pass again through it
on his way back, she did not go to bed, but waited fur him.
About nine show threw herself on the bed where her children
slept, leaving the candle lighted. She kept all the toll-
money, amounting to 3/. 45., in a tea-caddy, which she kept
in her room. A little before ten she heard a noise outside the
house, and some one cried out "Gate." Thinking that it was
Mr. Wanklyn returning, she got up, and going to her door
unbolted it, and saw a man there whom she knew to be the
prisoner, having seen him several times before. She was
just about to speak to him when he struck her a blow on
the head; she endeavoured to force the door to against him,
but he struck her again. She begged of him to let her say,
" Lord, save me," but he said nothing. The prisoner, as
she alleged, then dragged her to a heap of coal ashes,
where she fell down insensible. On recovering, she went
to the house' of Mrs. Williams, where, however, she
did not get in, and returned to her own house,
when she saw her children, very much alarmed, stand-
ind in the road without any clothes on. She then
went to the house of Richard Morgan, whom she roused,
and by whom, together with his sons, she was assisted
to get home and to bed. There was some discrepancy as
to what passed on the way to her house, and while there.
The prosecutrix most positively denied ever having said
that she did not know who it was that bad struck her,
which was corroborated by Morgan, the father, and one of
his sons, Charles; while his other son, Joseph, also present,
said, that on the road he asked her whether she knew who
had struck her, when she said she did not, and that she
made a similar answer when he put the same question to
her in the house. She was put to bed, and soon after Mr.
Wanklyn came by and saw her : he described the wounds,
which he dressed, as of a very serious character indeed in
his judgment The next morning the prisoner was brought
before the prosecutrix, when she told him, after looking a
short time at him, what he had done. He said he had not
done it. She, noticing that he had a white hat, said, " You
had not that same hat on last night ;" and he said, " No, I
had not." She at this time considered herself dying, for
she said to the prisoner, "As I hope to be saved, and I know
I shall die before night, you are the person as struck me the
blows on the head," to which he answered " T am innocent,
Missus ; but if you say lam guilty, I must suffer." She then
said, " But you had not that hat on." To which he replied,
" No, I had my black hat on." At this time there were in the
room several persons, and among them Captain Farmar,
the magistrate, and a woman, named Susannah Jeffries.
This woman stated that on the night of the assault she had
heard the prosecutrix repeatedly say that she would not
swear " punctually" to the prisoner; that when she opened
the door a man had struck her, and that she was sure there
were two men.

Mrs. Jeffries said, that on the morning of the Bth, while
Mr. Wanklyn and Captain Farmar were iu the room, who
could both hear what passed, the prosecutrix had said (in
answer to Captain Farmar) that she had one or two sights
at the man who struck her, but she would not " punctually"
swear to the prisoner.
Elizabeth Morris, the daughter of the prosecutrix, said,
that she woke on the night of the 7th, and saw a man in the
bedroom, who had a candle in his hand. He was opening
the money-box. She could not see his face. There was
some money in silver and copper on the mantel-piece and
window in the next room, which the prisoner entered, and
while be was there the girl heard some copper fall. Tue
next day the money was gone.
Soon after search was made, and under a holly-bush the
tea or money-box of the prosecutrix was found, and a track
of footsteps, the marks of which exactly corresponded with
those made by the prisoner's shoes, was discovered, beginning
at the back of the turnpike-house, and going directly to the
bush.

For the prisoner witnesses were called, some of whose
evidence has been noticed above, to establish a case, first
in the nature of an Wild, by showing that the prisoner had
been at different houses in the neighbourhood, and at 10 by
the clock in his brother's house, where he lived, he had
returned there, and given to his brother-in-law, who also re-
turned there, his portion of some money he had received
from Thomas ➢Morgan that night. It was stated positively
by his brother-in-law and his brother that he was quite
calm when he returned, and that he went to bed soon after
10 by their clock, which was half an hour fast.

Vie prisoner's brother• in-law spoke to some facts respect-
ng his knowledge of where the prisoner was on the night of
the 7th, and also about one of the Morgans coming to look
after his brother Joseph at their house; but the constables
positively negatived the first portion of his evidence, and the
latter was not very material.

Witnesses to the character of the prisoner were called, but
Alone appeared. Mr. Wanklyn, however, stated that he had
known the prisoner for seven years, and had never heard
anything against him before.
Mr. HDDDLESTON replied on the evidence adduced to con-
tradict the prisoner's witnesses.
Mr. SKINNER replied generally, after which
His LORDSHIP summed up, and the jury, after deliberating
for half an hour, found the prisoner Guilty of cutting and
wounding with intent to do some grievous bodily harm.
The Learned JUDGE sectenced the prisoner to transporta-
tion for 15 years.

WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Bodinin, Aug. 3.
The commission for holding the assizes for the county of
Cornwall was opened here on Saturday night, about 11
o'clotk, by Mr. Justice Erle, who had been detained at
Exeter.

The business is heavy for this county, there being 16
causes for trial, and 23 prisoners in the calendar. It is
hardly possible to conceive a reason for so short a time
having been allowed for the assizes in this county; the usual
time was a week ; but now the commission day was last
Saturday, and the assize 3 for Somerset commence on
Thursday at Wells, a long distance off, and very difficult to
be got at; business must, therefore, of necessity, be much
hurried.

A learned Judge now on the bench has been heard to
say that in his opinion there was little justice done by candle
light. The minds of jurymen cannot be kept alive to the
true facts of a case for so many hours. Surely nine hours a
day are sufficient for a jury to be penned up in an incon-
venient box ; there is quite enough difficulty for them to
overcome in endeavouring to ascertain the truth of a com-
plicated case, made still more so by what is termed the in-
genuity ofcounsel, without having fatigue and inconvenience
added to it.

Yesterday the Learned Judges (Mr. Baron Platt having
arrived at an early hour in the morning) attended Divine
service, and this morning their Lordships commenced the
business of the assizes. Mr. Justice Erie presiding in
the Crown Court, and Mr. Baron Platt sitting at Nisi
Prius.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Newcastle, Aug. 3.
(Before Mr. Justice CRESWELL. )
BROWN V. WANLISB.
In this action, which was partly tried on Saturday, the
plaintiff sought compensation in damages for a malicious pro-
secution by the defendant, who had procured him to be taken
before a magistrate on a charge of sheep stealing.
Mr. Watson, Mr. Ingham, and the Hon. Mr. Liddell, were
for the plaintiff; Mr. Martin and Mr. H. Hill, for the de-
fendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff occupies, with his father and
brothers, a farm at Elsdoo, in this county, which they hold
of Mr. Selby. He is a sheep farmer. The defendant is also
a sheep farmer at Biddleston, about ten miles from the plain-
tiff's farm, sad it appeared that in the month of December
last the defendant, alleging that he had lost four gimmer
sheep, cime with his brother to the plaintiff's farm, and said
he had information that one of the sheep was there. He
went over the premises, and some time after returned with a
constable, and under a magistrate's warrant took the plaintiff
and his brother Thomas into custody, and seized a gimmer
sheep, which, he said, was one of those lie bad lost. The
prisoners were removed to Alnwick, a distance of fifteen
miles, and the complaint was heard the next day before the
Rev. Robert Goodenough and dismissed.
It was contended that the defendant had acted maliciously
in the transaction, in revenge for some offence which bad
been offered him by the plaintiff in a former dispute respect-
ing a sheep, which it was said had wandered from the plain-
tiff's to the defendant's land, and which the defendant had
been obliged to restore. It did not appear, however, that he
bad made any difficulty about returning it, when satisfied
that it was the property of the present plaintiff.
Evidence was adduced to show that the sheep found at the
plaintiff's was his own and not the sheep of defendant.
On the other side it appeared from the evidence of John
Wanliss, that he, and the defendant, his brother, had a farm
at Garrard, not far from that occupied by the plaintiff: The
farms were it appeared quite open, without any fence to
prevent the sheep straying' into those adjoining, and the
animals of each owner were distinguished by a peculiar
mark, usually on the ear. After the clipping in July, and
the salving in November, " gatherings" of the farmers were
held for the purpose of restoring any stray sheep which
might be found among the flocks, and sometimes a large
number of sheep, which had got into many hands, would
be found at one of these gatherings. The witness tranliss
stated that the defendant had lost four gimmer sheep;
and he deposed that of these the sheep now in question
was one.
It appeared from the testimony of other witnesses, that
the defendant had received positive information of the sheep I
being at the plaintiff's before he went there to seek it. t
was sought, too to discredit the evidence of' Thomas Brown,
the plaintiff's brother, in which he professed to identify the
sheep as that of the plaintiff's, by showing that he had at
one time stated he had never seen it until the end of July,
and that if it were his brother's, it would eat turnips, a
thing which sheep will not usually do without training,
n o
whereas others of the plaintiff's witnesses said it had been of
the plaintiff's breeding, and on truing the sheep with
turnips
it was only after a period of two days that it could be induced
to eat them.
It was sought to show, also, that themiearks.of the sheep
The in question had been tampered with.
plaintiff's marks
were a notch out of the right ear, and a slice off the margin
of the other. The defendant's sheep h
ad tWO oraall notches

close to one another on the left ear, at the same place as the
plaintiff's mark. The sheep in question had a notch out of
the right ear, but this seemed to have been lately done, and
on the left ear it was, it was alleged, apparent the mark had
been altered, in asmuch as the edge of the cut had no hair on
it, except at one extremity, which it was supposed had formed
the side of one of the old notches, which had been cut away
in taking off the slice which constituted the peculiar mark of
the sheep belonging to the plaintiff.
His LORDSHIP, in summing up, left it to the jury to say
whether the act of the defendant was malicious. They
would say, if they thought the defendant had lost the four
sheep, whether he had not grounds for suspecting they had
been stolen ? and, secondly, if the defendant had been in-
formed of one of his sheep being on the plaintiffs premises,
and believed it from the description to be his, whether he did
not suspect that the mark had been fraudulently altered, and
that the other sheep were secreted on the premises?
The jury, after being in consultation for an hour-and-a-
half, stated that they were of opinion the defendant had not
acted maliciously.
A verdict was accordingly entered for the defendant.
DoxFonD AND ANOTHER V. ICING.

This was an action to recover the amount of an insurance
effected on the schooner Helen, which was, with her cargo
of coals, lost at Bridlington in the month of April last.
Mr. Watson and Mr. 11. Hill were for the plaintiffs; Mr.
Martin and Mr. Atherton for the defendant.

At the Durham assizes, just concluded, the captain and
crew of the Helen had been tried on a charge of feloniously
casting the vessel away, but were all acquitted.
The plaintiffs had, it appeared, in the month of October
last, effected an insurance on the ship for i 2 months, for
GOO/. They afterwards disposed of her to a ➢lr. liutchin-
son, by whom she was, in April last, sent on a voyag.l to
Swinemunde in the Baltic. She had proceeded some way'
on her voyage, but, meeting with a head wind and severe
weather, she was found to have sprung a leak; and the
water increasing at the rate of pore than three feet an
hour, the captain put about and ran for tile Humber. Late
on the evening of the 26th of April she was seen passing
Flamborough-head, and ran some distance into Bridlington
Bay, in which a number of vessels were then lying, and
there, at a distance of two or three miles from the shore,
she, early the following morning, went down at her anchors.
She had been insured for 600/.; but, it was admitted, worth
a considerably larger sum. The loss, in the present declara-
tion, was alleged to have occurred by the perils of the seas.
A number of witnesses were called to show that the vessel
was seaworthy when she sailed on the voyage in question.
She was an American built ship, built three or four years
before, and had undergone extensive repairs shortly before
on the slip at Sunderland. The captain was examined, and
gave an account of the voyage, from which it would appear
that the severe weather and heavy sea had caused her to
spring the leak which caused her loss. He had put back to.
wards the Hur.nber, because with that wind and the ship:in
that condition the more northern ports would not have been
safe to enter.

For the defence it was contended that the ship was unsea-
worthy, and for this purpose a number of witnesses were
called who had examined her after she was got ashore, and
who stated that all her upper timbers and planking were
very much decayed. The vessel, it appeared, after going
down had with the force of the sea b2aten against the bottom
until her timbers gave way, and the coals coming out, she
partially floated, and her masts being cut away she was
towed ashore. It was then found that some holes had been
bored through her bottom, from a place adjoining the cabin
called the lazarette, a hole having been cut in the ceiling so
as to enable an auger to reach the outer planking. An auger
and chisel were found among the coals. It was on these
facts contended that the loss took place by barratry.
111 r. WATSON i❑ reply contended that the vessel was sea-
worthy on the evidence, not of those who had seen her when
broken up by the sea, but those who bad repaired her before
she sailed on the voyage, and that in all probability the holes
in question had been bored by some one during the six days
the vessel was lying in the beach for the purpose of letting
out the water. No motive for such an act could be suggested
on the part of the captain or crew.

The :jury found that the vessel was seaworthy, and that
she was lost by perils of the sea.—Verdict for the plaintiff.
The case of "Ford v. the Marquis of Waterford" is not yet
concluded.

NORTH WALES ClRCUlT.—Chester, Aug 3.
The business of these assizes commenced this day before
Lord Chief Justice Denman and Mr. Baron Rolfe.
The calendar contains 31 prisoners, of whom two are
charged with arson, 1 burglary, 4 cutting and maiming, 1
forgery, 2 horse stealing, 4 manslaughter, 2 murder, 5 with
rape, 3 receiving stolen goods, 4 with stealing from the per-
son, 2 unnatural crime, and 1 with a minor offence.

CROWN couriT.—(Before Mr. Baron Ror.YE.)
His LORDSHIP took his seat in this Court this morning at
10 o'clock, when the grand jury (of whom Sir R. Brooke,
of Norton Priory, was foreman), having been sworn, the
charge was delivered. The Learned Judge referred generaly
to the various cases in the calendar, and explained the law
relating to them, but particularly to one from Runcorn,
where a man and his wife are charged with the wilful mur-
der of two of their own offspring, by the administration of
arsenic, for the purpose of obtaining money from a funeral
club to which the children belonged, and also with attempt-
ing to poison a third. These shocking offences, it was alleged
had been committed by the parents for the purpose of get-
ting a small stun of money from the burial clubs to which
the children belonged ; and the motive of the crime appeared
to be such a totally inadequate one, that it almost appeared
to be impossible that it could have prompted such an offence.
Experience, however, had unfortunately proved that in some
cases which had occurred, even in this part of the country,
that motive had operated but too powerfully, and what had
happened might no doubt happen again. Great as this
charge was, he did not know that it would present any diffi-
culty in its investigation. They would have to consider, in
the first instance, whether the children had met with their
deaths by poison ; and then, whether that poison had been
taken accidentally, or administered by the persons who
were charged with giving it designedly. On the first ques-
tion they would depend upon the confidence they reposed in
the medical and scientific inquiries which had been instituted ;
and if satisfied that the deaths had occurred from poison, they
would further have to inquire how far the accused were
implicated in its administration.
The Court was then detained for upwards of an hour, wait-
ing for bills. A bill was at length returned against Thomas
Bell, fur a felonious assault on a child of tender years. The
prisoner, who was out on bail, was called on his recogni-
zances; but net answering, his own and sureties' bail was
ordered to be estreated.

ARSON.— William Hewett, twenty-seven, pleaded" Guilty"
to an indictment charging him with setting fire to a stack of
hay at 13rinnington, the property of John Millward, and was
sentenced to fifteen years' transportation.
Ho ILSE STEALING.—Joseph Nuttall, twenty-one, pleaded
" Guilty" to an indictment charging him with stealing a
mare, at Macclesfield, the property of James Medley.—Sen-
tence deferred.

MANSLAUGHTER BY A BOY.—An innocent-looking boy,
named John Jackson, aged thirteen, was indicted for killing
and slaying a girl named Mary Ridgway, at Chorley, in this
county, on the 7th of April last.
It appeared from the evidence adduced, that the prisoner
had induced a neighbour to lend him a gun loaded with
dust shot, for the purpose of killing sparrows ; that he had
gone out with it to a yard where the deceased was engaged
washing the face of her brother, when he threatened to
shoot her, and actually pointed the gun, and fired it off within
a few yards of her. The whole contents lodged in her face,
and produced almost instantaneous death. lie was found
Guilty, and
The Learned JUDGE, after reprehending the party who
had lent the gun, sentenced the prisoner to four days' im•
prisonment.

CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN.)
The cause list contains only nine cases, two of which are
special juries, and possess some interest. The whole of the
common jury cases, which were of no public interest, were
disposed of to-day.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS,
These sessions commenced on Tuesday before Mr. Sergeant
Adams, the Assistant Judge, and the usual bench of magis-
trates. The calender is a very heavy one for these sessions,
containing the names of no less than 126 prisoners, of which
number 102 are charged with felony, and the remainder with
assaults, misdeameanours, &c.
The grand jury having been sworn, the Learned Judge
delivered his charge to them, but there was nothing in it
that called for a repurt.
Edward Betteson, aged 16, and John Robert Durnford,
aged 15, were convicted on the clearest evidence of stealing
a Ivooden box value one shilling, the property of Thomas
Maltwood. Each of these juvenile offenders protested his
own innocence and endeavoured to prejudice the case of his
companion by telling the Court that he bad been "in
trouble" five or six times before. The latter part of their
respective stories turned out to be true as regarded both of
them; but while the first was telling his tale, the other
coolly advised him to take care what he was about ; and as
that did not stop his mouth, when it came to his turn to ad-
dress the Court, he acknowledged the compliment that had
been paid him by stating all he knew of his companion. They
were both sentenced to six months' imprisonment in the
House of Correction.
The other cases tried during the day were of no public in-
terest.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

A young man, of very gentlemanlike appearance
and address, named Henry Bidwell Dunn, was brought
before Alderman Gibbs yesterday, in the custody of
John Forrester, upon a very serious charge of forgery.
Mr. Bush, of the firm of Bush and Mullins, the so-
licitors to the Co:nmittee of Bankers for Prorection
against Forgeries and Frauds, appeared for the prosecu-
tion; and Mr. Woelfe, from Mr. Flower's offices, at-
tended for the defence.
Mr. Bush stated that the prisoner was a clerk in the
highly respectable firm of Hooper, Birch, and Ingram,
of Lincoln's Inn-fields, solicitors, and had been dealing
in the railway shares with which the Stock Exchange
was so abundantly supplied. It happened, that in the
progress of his dealings in that line, he had access to
the office of Mr. Rickards, a stockbroker of considerable
eminence, out of whose Canker's book a leaf containing
five cheques had been furtively abstracted. One of these
cheques had been filled up with the amount of 248/. 15s ,
and the name of Mr. Rickards, and the amount was ob-
tained from the firm of Barclay, Bevan, Hanbury, and
Tritton, the bankers of that gentleman. The only mode
of connecting the prisoner with the forged cheque was
the following:---The cheque was dated the 10th of No-
vember, 1845, and was paid in 5L and 10/. Bank of
England notes. Two days afterwards the prisoner was
sent by a fellow-clerk fora Post-office order for eleven
shillings. The evidence would show that cash was given
to the prisoner to obtain that order, but one of the notes
obtained from Messrs. Barclay and Co. in payment of
the forged cheque was paid at the Post-office by the pri-
soner instead of the cash given to him by his fellow-
clerk. The prisoner was stlso constantly sent by his
employer to pay large sums of money to their bankers,
and on the 15th of November ho paid in to Messrs.
Barclay and Co. four others .of the notes which were the
proceedsofnfr etoohtetsh from
notes
forged
his
rgedchequ e, he not having received
h e :bad employers,aetu
ablulyt
rheacveiinvge
ds ufbrsotmi -
theset
u t e d them four
them, and having paid th..ee of the notes received from
them to a deposit account i vhich he had opened with the
London and Westminster Bank (Bloomsbury branch)
on his own account.
Mr. John Mitchell, cashi 2r to Messrs. Barclay, Bevan,
and Co., bankers, produced a cheque for 2481. 155., pur-
porting to be signed by Mr. Rickard, who had kept an ac-
count with the house fora considerable time. It was
presented on the 10th of N :.vernber last by a man, but
witness could not say by w bom. He paid five notes of
Si. each, twenty of 101. ea cb, and 231. 15s. in cash.
(Hero Mr. Mitchell stated the number and dates of the
notes.) The note for 101, N O. 55,573, August 11, 1845,
was one of the notes so paid :away.
Mr. Rickard, of Bank-cl, mbers, stockbroker, stated
that he kept, and had for alainy years kept, cash at Bar-
clay's. The pheque pro' Awed by Mr. Mitc4ll Wits not

in his handwriting,, to his knowledge. He knew notbing
of the body of the cheque, or of such a person as B.
L eson, and he had no transaction pith any such patois
in November last. Ile had known the prisoner for
twelve months past, and had transacted business for biro
~a several occa,ions, and had signed cheques upon Bar-
cl ry frequently f,r him. The prisoner had had frequent
access to witness's office, and had seen him draw and
sign cheques. The cheque produced was cut out of wit'
ness's book.
In answer to questions by Mr. Woolfe, the witness said
he firmly believed the signature to the cheque was not is
his handwriting. He had seen the cheque in November
last, and he directly said that it was a forgery. He perhaps
signed 10,000 cheques in the year. He had had transaTt
tions with the prisoner since the sth of May, 1845'
was possible he might have referred to the forgery in the
presence of the prisoner, but he did not recollect such !I
thing, There was a disputed account between the pm'
soner and him, and he wished to see the prisoner, w 134"
was indebted to him, on that account. Had not Beta
him more than five times since November.
Mr. Woolfe—When did you first hear of the 10/.11,01
having been paid at the post-office? Mr. Rickard
till the other day, when I saw Mr. Bush, in whose ben'
I left this busi
h—Hness.
Mr. Busow did the debt to you arise ? Mr. ni;;
kard—From transactions in shares which I exectitedt oof
him, think he owes me upwards of 4001., arising 014
these transaction. My solicitor has issued a writ elgx
him, and has been looking for him for some months. b,
Mr. Woolfe objected to the course taken by Mr' nus
who, he said, was cross-examining his own witness. line
Mr. Bush—You have opened the question bYrurt Story
of cross-examination, and you shall have the whole s)the
Mr. Rick:4rd stated, in answer to Mr. Bush, that fa
debt of the prisoner had increased since Noverebericet.
consequence of the fall in the prices in the share-10,r the
Mr. Woolfe —Had you not great confidence in
prisoner ? Mr. Rickard—l had confidence in hin3'. dne
Mr. Woolfe—Has he not claimed 801. as a balance
me
from you to him ? Mr. Rickard—No. He °wen" tbs,
upwards of 400/. I have known him about twelve ?
and it was during that time the debt was incurred' Mr.
Mr. Bush—Did he ever tell you what he was eed
Richard—No. It is not usual in the business trans'
by us to ask such a question. He gave me his nsll3oe.
address. I never knew that he was a clerk, to ole"

Rooper, Birch, and Ingram. Ace
Mr. C. S. W. Eicke, clerk in the Money-order",tea
of the General Post-office, St. Martin's-le-Grand, 8,4*
that on Wednesday, the 10th of November, an slit' or
tiou was made for an order for eleven shillings, in
° otew
of Mary Berry, and he received the 101.
ago
" No. 55,573, August 11, 1845," in payment, and
change for it to the person, who wrote the 7.4,
and address on the back of it as follows
Maize-hill, Greenwich." or
Mr. 11. W. Birch, one of the partners in the lir—tbe
Rooper, Birch, and Ingram, solicitors, stated tba:
too

prisoner was, and had been in their service about'
years. He knew the prisoner's handwriting well,
-
believed te writing uon the note to be his. 111°
Cross-exam—Hapd unlimited confidence
prisoner's integrity.
Mr. John Richards, of Maize-hill, Greenwicpuicy?
licitor, stated, that in November last he was enl
in the office of Messrs. Rooper, Burch, and legrarav• ost.
November last he requested the prisoner to get 11,2`errit
office order for eleven shillings, payable to Marl the
and he believed the order produced was the 0131101
prisoner brought back. Witness did not give 11151:- to
note, but gave him change. Did not authorise 11113001
sign his (witness) name upon the note produced.std
the prisoner's handwriting for about two years,
thought the writing on the note was his. tlO
Mr. Woolfe said the question he had to puit • re'
witness was most important to the prisoner, and id be
ceived answers the most explicit. The witness
was living on Maize-hill in November, and tber,e,ife—ss• "
have been no difficulty in finding him by that a°'„ierir:
and up to May last the prisoner was his felleW— sill
and was seen by him almost daily. The prisoner 0901
the habit of paying large sums into Messrs. Rooill'aer
Co., bankers, and witness had observed that the pre- of
always had plenty of money of his own, irresPe44ll°
the money belonging to the firm. hst 111 P
Mr. Bush re-examined the witness, who said re'
was aware that an inquiry was made in the 01117,061
specting some notes in November last. It was me "01059'
to him privately by his employers, and he, 01f -iegt°
never repeated it. The prisoner sever said any
him on te subect. Roc"
Mr. Bush then stated that he had to call g-/1
upon a new part of the case.
Mr. W. H. Waterhouse, clerk in Praed's 10.1,,grara
house, stated that Messrs. Rooper, Birch, and tbe
kept a cash account at their house. He prodecet book
town receipt-book for November, 1845, and in thtl f /sTo'
there was an entry of 219/. Os. 100., on the 15th °
vember to the credit of that firm. diarit
Mr. Birch produced a memorandum book, and a .„ the
found in his office, and which he believed to be is the
hand-writing of the prisoner, and in these beeksdereci„
entries of the 15th of November, which he cons!„ of
bad reference to matters connected with the subiu

the charge.
After some evidence of a complicated nature,
Mr. Bush applied for a remand.
M. Woolfe objected, and said that the case proeeeciel
with exaordinary slowness
Aldermtran Ginns said the. case was full of difficautig:
and it certainly proceeded slowly, but that was -
butable to the nature of the subject. 11111.10'er
Mr. Bush said, the question would lose the c so
'of tardiness, if the prisoner would show how be Pe'
possessed of the note;. and- w°
Mr. Woolfe protested against such a del:
b required to
unfair to expect that a prisoner sh°u—
prove his innocence ; it was for
his guilt. He trusted that bail would be tak
a.,,
an
Alderman GIBBS said, he could not accept of b
remanded the prisoner till Saturday.
the prosecuetonr. to prove

MARKET NEWS-(YESTE-
R.DA/1
CORN EXCSANGE.
00000,3
yet S
had we Bo na dfaayi r tally% tta
grrei vgaulasntoiteyEonng lolffshe
r.Wlsiecai
etc
theypea :et/mitre;
off at pull prices, but all other kinds were much neglected' 401P' We
ports of Foreign Wheat continue liberal. Holders of fl„„cjeS; 014
were firm, and would not sell, except at previous carnraoe
had a limited supply of Barley on show, still, however, t'°o 110'45
in a sluggish state, at late figures. The supply of Malt re tooll
posed of, and prices were with difficulty supported- :f OLV,
large quantity of Foreign Oats on show. Selected par
were held at full prices, but other kinds were a mere al"'
Peas, and Flour commanded very little attention.
ARRIVALS.
Oats 9lO
Barley.
20 qrs. -
18,140

English ......
Irish •. • • ....
Foreign ......

Wheat.
570 qrs.

1,910
Malt, 1,590 ars.
006
NATEXTECHAPEZ. s e%W.0060
The supply of each kind of meat here was by no ineal„, p)d;
t bare J 0 se;
yet the demand was in a very sluggish state, a „ ,ta t 40 P"'
prices. Beef from 2s 44 to 3s ; Mutton, zS 4d to
Lamb, 4s 8d to 5s 8d : Veal, 33 4d to 4s 6d ; and reap "
per Blbs by the carcase. ,„11

10,210

1 113 .*"...Pee
THE NASSAU BALLOON.—The Nassau bali°t`nepref6voei*
ascended from Cremorne-gardens on Monday evening,!,n, 100°'pe
of several thousand spectators, after passing* over 1,"
t oceici,n
made its way towards Essex, and came down witl'lttuon't° 10r.
the farm of James Charton, at Iligham-hill, near W,30 Green'
half past eight o'clock. The- aeronauts, Mr. Clinneon
Burton, Mr. E. Landells, the well-known engravefher geotbods
Van Buren, Mr. Williams, Mr. Spencer, and five
.% and 11 aftetr.
were treated with great hospitality by Mr. Cherw,i; shor',4,tions'
procured post-horses, returned to Cremorne-garde-congrat,„" frolo
eleven o'clock, where they were received with iirbeir retu'-
of a large number of persons who had awaited •bes the
their aerial trip.
A letter from Ems, of the 29th it clreY7areleic.x.deiri°ol
shock of the earthquake experienced there as 0. to clo
.erf
alarming character. It took place about half-PaSt allY °Peter°
evening, when many families, from the early hours na.::eallS6bs then
there, were retiring to rest. Under the general terror oft
was a general rush into the street ; and at a concert f5i0.,•0004.
going on at the principal hotel of the place, the e00_,.."' „, the
treme, owing to the efforts of the audience to escape u".;
ing. Fortunately no serious injury or loss of life occurred • 11%,CP'irt
[ ADVERTISEMENT.] —R EMARKABLE C LIRE 01
,ter fr.sof
BY HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PILLS.-Extract of a 10b,.efeo,,y1
Hampton, Nor Brunswick, dated Feb. 10, 1846. "To ..-00.c.00
Holloway. Sir: A son of mine, sixteen years of age, W 0241,
with ulcers in his limbs and body for more than three tnos'-0.
which small pieces of bone had been extracted from tiro c pitqa 0
I applied to several medical men in St. John's, but all to '1„", altwilOS
I was then induced to try your Ointment and Pill, ohi
complete cure. Several months have since elapsed, and -
the slightest appearance of their return. ..ortol,lloljr

(Signed)- "JAMIEs 0„,go.). s
These medicines are sold by all druggists, and at Poza
way's Establishment, 244, Strand, London. ...
o°4*
BIRTHS.
On the 28th alt., at Swift-villa, near Alvers. to .I‘e'
rl°to
the wife of David Welch, Esq., R.N. ,i CO
On the Ist inst., at Upper Eccleston-street, Lady job°
Watson Taylor, of a daughter.
On the Ist inst., at Warwiek-villas, Maida-hill, the
Andrew Clarke, of a son. Illiire'
On the 2d inst., at Thomas's hotel, Berkel Cl'
lady of W. S. Wetmore, Esq., of New York, of a o:,
_.-
cwe
o, F ,
MARRIED. fr. AO'
On the Ist inst., at St. Mark's, Kennington, otha
Pagden, of Burton-en-Trent, to Emma, young es
.............„,...-
of the late Mr. Joseph Dermer. -
79'

DIED.
,red 7y'
On the 31st ult., at Ralston, J. Newman, Esq., si ,80, „ogre-
On the 31st ult., in Gordon-square, Meyer David' of
On the Ist inst., Ann, the wife of S. Adams, 11%01 Ylie
On the 2d inst., Mr. William Baker, late n>.,-/
James-street, Covent- garden.
MONTHLY MILITARY OBITUA L., D., G. 04'
General—Right Hon. Sir George Murray, G. JAVe"-
and K.C., Colonel of the Ist Foot, Governor ohlateMaster- General of the Ordnance, London.
Lieutenant-General—Sir Charles Phillips. covto-
Major-General—Lord William Russell, G.C.n— erPsotier'
Colonels—llans Allen, late Royal Irish Arty' /".
cester ; Zuhleke, Unattached, Edinburgh ; fin'
Kilkenny Militia, London. po Cap
Lieutenant-Colonel—Di by. Unattached, Cot 0,1! led)'. 9th
Cu ptains—B am brick, 7th -Dragoon Guards
.c.rco
31st
of Good Hope; Campbell, 2d Dragoons; IV"' ,
Lancers, Meerut, Bengal. AtOkoys
Lieutenants—Hamilton, 14th Foot, Quebpj.:sol,,,,"joill.:
Foot; M`Cann, 84th Foot, Fort St. George; -`,l.,v'w artrines,
Artillery; Winterbottom, Royal Artillery; _"'
.P.P.
pay Royal Marines; Maltby, half-pay WOO,
Douglass, half-pay 3d Garrison Battalion;
ball
pay 88th Foot. Ike rs 400',
Second Lieutenants and Ensigns--T. ,ar Foot,
Royal Marines ;D. O'Connell, half-pay if.'„ya3,424o.pSi
Manson, half-pay 87th Foot ; Watkins,. P
Biggs, late 3d Royal Veteran Battalion; %-",
.O,Di
89th Foot.
Quartermasters—Forbcs, Royal Artillery; 01111::13r.,,,tol;
pay 56th Foot. Luc
Paymasters of Recruiting Districts—J-deg•
„. Dr•
Lieut. Storey, Coventry. peer., Asia
Iv!
sl
te,doi cfa
thee
11th eFnotost.
aStu rege eao;n A
sB us
subtar gal
otrAr fit 0000,11 r
Locke(Ord n a( noc
re
d)
n,
(Ordnance), Trinidad ; Assistant-Surgeon c Lon Gorlci
anScued),busrwya,
trnbeaamr
;11arr.oLvn;t
er's Departm
Barrack and Storekeepers
Kendrick, St. Vincent.
Trinidad ; Assistant- Surgeon Curtis (Ordnan e
-cliutu......rrtgiseootmeos tivs:00:01:

1.
o. 11
London:
Printed and Published by 11fURDO YOUNG, ~recioct
Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, 10.112, Strand, in tb°l-Atdt
of the Savoy, in the County of Dfiddloos, _ _
6, 180.

„ CONTRACTS FOR TRAIN AND PALE SEAL OIL.
PARTMENT of the STOREKEEPER GENERAL of the NAVY,

SOMERSET-PLACE. R SET-PLACE.
August 4th, 1546.
THE Commissioners for executing the Office of
and I Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
Ireland, do hereby give notice, that on THURSDAY, the 27th inst.,
at One
o'clock, they will be ready to treat with such Persons as
raiY be willing to CONTRACT for SUPPLYING her Majesty's save
Dock
with

TRAIN or PILCHARD, and PALE SEAL OIL.
A distribution of the oil and a form of the Tender may be seen at
the said office. No Tender will he received after one o'Aock, on the
day of treaty, nor any noticed, unless the pasty attends, or an
Vent for him duly authorised in writing.
Every Tender must be addressed to th,. Secretary of the Admiralty,
end bear in the left hand corner the words " Tender for
I'te must also be delivered at. Somerset-place, accompanied by a
et signed by
With a responsible person, engaging to become bound
the person tendering, in the sum of 4001. for the due perform-
!ti?Ca of the Contracts.

INSURANCE AGENT WANTED.
A respectable AGENT is NV anted in London for an Old Eata-
thed PROVINCIAL LIFE OFFICE, Ni hos e premiums are such
ai
will eiainm-tnd an extensive business.
8 Arications to be made by letter, wit reference, addressed to
•T. Grelt Trinity-lane, read street, Cheapside.s

RICHMOND RAILWAY.—The RICHMOND
Ltr„ COMPANY have engaged to supply OMNI-
r.,S tomeet evc,ry train to convey passengers from the station at
Che,ll°,l(l to Twickenham, Teddington, and Hampton Court.
, each.
"14 31 184 C

ASTURIAN MINING COMPANY.
The Board of Directors hereby give notice, that they have
th',!" a further call of one pound per share upon the shares held in
r: caPital stock of this Company, and that such c.;11 is payable at
0411
oLondon and County Banking Company, No. 21, Lombard-street,
bet ~)re the Ist day of September next.
Directors have great satisfaction in acknowledging that the
:w forfei 7, call has been well paid up, and that very few shares remain liable
ture
The •
fro_Directors have also much pleasure in stating that the railroad
011:1 their concessions to the coast is now certain of being carried
and that their iron works are nearly completed.

U. COLQUHOUN, Chairman.
K. MACKENZIE, Secretary.
• - Austin Friars, Ist August,
1846.

NATIONAL LOAN FUND LIFE ASSUIt•
ANCE SOCIETY,
.2G, CORNHILL LONDON.
Capital £500,000.
Empowered by Act of Parliament.
tiY Institution embraces important and substantial advantages
ha. respect to Life Assurances and Deferred Annuities. The assured
reit' °n all occasions, the power to borrow, without expense or for-
-44180_14;1: the Policy, two-thirds of the nremiunis paid (see Table) ;
option of selecting benefits, and the conversion of his in-
rns to meet other conveniences or necessity.
kiZnrences for terms of years are granted on the lowest possible

DIVISION OF PROFITS.
6112 remarkable success and increasing prosperity of the Society
4 toVb, led theory Directors, at the last annual Investigatlon;!o declare
bonus, ing from 35 to 85 per cent. on the premiums paid
"e 4 Policy effected on the Profit scale.