The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-27 00:00:00

EVENING, APRIL 27, 1848.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
QUEEN'S BENCH, April 26.
The Court resumed its sittings this morning at the
usual hour.

In the course of the day his Royal Highness the Prince
of Prussia, accompanied by Lord Brougham, paid a visit
to the court, and occupied a seat on the bench with the
Noble and Learned Lord for upwards of ten minutes.
BRIGGS V. THE MERCHANT TRADERS' SHIP, LOAN, AND

INSURANCE ASSOCIATION.
This was an action on a policy of insurance effected
on the cargo of a ship named the Joseph Alexander,
tradinc, between Yarmouth and Goole, which was
wreckedb and lost in one of its voyages to the latter
place. The plaintiff, the owner of the vessel, had a lien
on the goods which belonged to other parties to the ex-
tent of 7004, and to recover it he brought the action,
which was decided in his favour, as a verdict was re-
turned for 7171. 10s.

Mr. PRENDERGAST now moved for a rule to show
cause why the verdict should not be set aside on the
grourill of misdirection. He (Mr. Prendergast) con-
tended that the plaintiff's claim was against the owners
of the goods and not upon the goods themselves, but the
Learned Judge told the jury that the plaintiff had a lien,
and that he possessed an insurable interest. He (Mr.
Prendergast) admitted that the point was a new one,
but as it was an important one, he trusted their Lord-
ships would give the parties an opportunity of arguing
it ,Rule granted.

COURT. OF EXCHEQUER, April 26.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius at Guildhall, before Mr. Baron
PARKE and Common Juries.)
Several undefended eases were disposed of at the sitting
of the Court.

lIIRBERD V. TAYLOR.
This was said to be an action for the recovery of
damages, in consaquenee of the defendant having held
criminal conversation with the wife of the plaintiff.
Mr. li:NowiAs said that it had been arranged between
his Learned Friend (Sergeant Talfourd) and himself
verdict should be taken for 40s. in this case,
subject to
to "private terms."
ict accordingly entered for the plaintiff—Damages
subject
s subject to " private terms."

ARCHES' COURT, Apeil99.
JUDGMENT.. GEILS V. GEILS.
The notoriety given to this case caused rather a fuller
attendance in court than upon ordinary occasions, al-
though it was known only to parties within a certain
circle that judgment was to be given to-day. Sir Her-
bert Jenner bust commenced at ten o'clock, and did not
conclude his judgment until half-past five.
The Learned JUDGE commenced by directing atten-
tion to the fact that the case was remitted to this Court
by the Bishop of Salisbury. The citation was notserved
publicly on Mrs. Geils, but was last September brought
into this Court under a new form, viz., that of suing for
the restoration of conjugal rights, when it was further
avowed, in allegations brought in and admitted, con-
taining the charges of cruelty, adultery, and other prac-
tices. This case was thus altered—The charge was now
brought by the husband, and 20 witnesses were exa-
mined; it was appealed from, and taken before the Privy
Council; it was then sent back to this Court. On the
allegation and answer of Mr. Ge,i3ls la2ilewgiattnieosiasse.s were
e
examined; the case was argued at great length, and
the question was
that whetherir
s. Golfs
Glelhadestablished
mr
all or either of the
charges
eseerra established
nto relief from this court. If
Courth charges,
w asoof
a opinionnd i
iis entitled
only one or two should be established, the Court will be
bound to give relief, and if not, then her husband will be
entitled to conjugal rights. It will be necessary to pro-
ceed without entering into particulars. The law will not
allow separation of man and wife. Adultery, cruelty,
&c., if one of these cannot be established, we must not
then pronounce for a separation. It is not my intention
to say, what I have already said in this case; there is
one subject upon which the Court must make some
observations, it is as to the Examiner of this court,
whether he has not conducted himself as hitherto. It is
impossible for me to speak too highly of the Examiner,
for his duty is one of the first importance. If he exceeds
his duty he is entitled to the censure of the Court;
hitherto the Court has had no reason to complain of
his conduct, and whatever may be the opinion of
some parties, I have always foued him so
correct that I cannot complain. The profession en-
tertains the same high opinion of him. Whether, in
this instance, be has forfeited the character he
had previously obtained is to be seen. We will
now proceed with the cause. It was on the Bth of Oct.,
1838, these parties were married, seven years before this
suit was established. The parties lived together at
various places till September, 1845, during which period
four children were born ; these children are all living at
this period. Mrs. Geils separated herself from her hus-
band, and has absented herself from her home ever since.
It is not necessary to dwell at great length, but I will
give a brief history of the parties. It appeared at the
time of their marriage Mrs. Geils was about eighteen or
nineteen years of age, the only child of a Mr. and Mrs.
Dickenson. He died when she was but seven years of
age ; he left considerable landed property, said to be
wortk 1,800/. a year, the property of Mrs. Geils was
about 3,2001. a year. Mr. Geils was the son of Colonel
Geils, and held a commission as Lieutenant in the
14th Light Dragoons, which was in India. He was
in England on the sick list, and was about 25 years
of age' having an income of about 500/. or 600/. a
year. There was, therefore, a great disparity of their
incomes. The family lived at Dumbarton, in Scot-
land, and the Colonel had an estate of about 1,2001. a
year, to which his son (the party in this case) would be
entitled, but it was encumbered. There had been an
intimacy between these two families for some time,
Colonel Geils addressing Mrs. D. as his " dear and
valued friend." The parties in the suit met in June,
1838, when Mrs. D. was on a visit to Colonel G oils,
whose family was of respectability and some antiquity
in that part of the country. He had four sons and one
daughter ; one son was in the same regiment with his
brother, and a third went out to India, and a fourth was
in the East India College. An attachment grew up at
the time, and Lieutenant Geils and Miss Dickenson were
married in October following, being only three or four
months after their first intimacy. Colonel Geils made
an offer through a letter to Mrs. Dickenson, which was
accepted, and preliminary matters were entered into, and
to Mr. Geils,
a wn a
aas
cn
cde
broughtstshi eo nr re
os
ft a ttho.
fortune
eut
a settlement drawn up, and 1,2001. a year was secured
r
l a year. In the course
swjeaatus
to get the property in their possession.
of the argument much was said of the manner in which
doubt ; but the Court has no reason to be-
' liDTbtihyeohivrsatteahtmauesancutet.caciniraihnpioiryod'per course has been pursued. It appears
that she was under an engagement to
bwrhoekne ni t owaS suggested that this engagementff. It must also h
a gentleman in
tsEhh neo gulmotheradn db e'
was in the same house;if,ethreemreeftaorhe, rsehde thhaadt
it wCa Col.
subject
. Geilsof concertediwma s
l
to makeup his son's income to 6004 .
any idea of such a view, or had any objection to the
family, sbe would have retired before her daughter's
affections bad been engaged. A settlement could not have
been made with the consent of the Court of Chancery,
is she was a ward of that Court; they had also the advice
of an intelligent friend, the old family solicitor, therefore
she was protected, and no censure could be fixed to the
family on bringing the marriage about. In reference to
their property, that it was encumbered, and it was not
till after the marriage with bliss Dickenson that it was
entirely free ; but the Master in Chancery must have
known whether Mr. Geils was entitled to this estate;
the mortgagees were endorsed on the deed, and there-
fore nu deception could have been practised. But whe-
ther the father forfeited his promise with reference to
600/. a„year is the question. The son lived upon the
farm,ohildr
eann dw
opnalidd
nnoot
br eenmt
afodre some
p
et inmdeen t oI ft twhaes fathersaid
case of the death of the mother. The agreement was
openly made, and there was no desire to hide or do any-
thing clandestinely. This could not be done without
the Court of Chancery. This is all I think necessary
to say. There was much said in the course of the ar-
gument on the conduct of these parties, with reference
to the property of this young lady, but this has been
answred, and the youni, lady might have declined the
offer made to her. Under these circumstances the mar-
riage took place on the Bth October, 1838, and all the
parties were present, with some of the sons, and it was
approved of by both families. After the marriage
Mr. and Mrs. Geils went into Scotland by
the Lakes of Cumberland; they took up their
residence about four miles from amber, but did
not remain long there, in consequence of one of the
servants taking the small pox; they then returned to
Cononel Geils's, they then went to reside at Dumbrick,
in May, 1841. The first child was born in April, 1841;
they again returned to Dumbarton, where they resided
three months. In 1843 the second child was born, and.
in 1844 the third child. It has been stated that differ-
ences commenced soon after the marriage, and continued
until the separation.- The cause of their disputes is said
to have arisen from a difference of their dispositions and
The
of their tastes. The marriage took place two or three months
after their intimacy, and therefore was a hasty one:
difference of taste was, no doubt, the cause
dis-
putes. Mrs. Geils was an only child, and after the
death of her father was brought up in seclusion, and
had no one to divide her affections with. Colonel
Geils had five children, who, of course, were more
divided in their affections. This young lady was
considered mild and gentle; she was counted of an
amiable and unimpeachable character; such was the
evidence of her near neighbours. Her temper was
neither violent nor passionate. These were qualities
which would make her an amiable wife. Considering
her situation in life with reference to temper and for-
tune, she was an object of attention to the family of
Colonel Geils, whose members had been much attached
to each other. Mrs. Dickenson says she had a great
dislike to this family after the marriage, particularly to
two of its members.•. Mr. Geils is said to be a man of
very amiable disposition by his own family, and they
attribute all this unhappiness to the temper of Mrs.
Geils; but there may be some bias in this. It appears
that after the marriage the property of Mrs. Geils was
taken possession of by Mr. Geils, and appropriated to his
own use. This was denied. It was said they had one com-
mon purse, which was devoted only to family purposes. A
great deal had been said of her treatment at Dumbarton,
where she was kept against her will; and that the house
was not properly furnished, Ste.; but it has been stated
on the other side, that it was her own choice that she
resided there. This is proved by certain letters which I
think have been improperly introduced in this suit, in
which it is said she expressed her dislike to this family.
The Examiner very properly refused to receive these
letters, but they were introduced by the other parties.
In the course of this suit a letter in 1839 stated, we have
received no money, &c., and John has nothing for his
farce, 3et she lived there of her own accord ; I cannot,
therefore, think this is a good cause of complaint.
During her, residence here she miscarried four times, and
hati;one infant, bueColonel and Mrs. Geils paid her every
attention during this period, and nursed her at these
'Periods, therefore, I think there was no want of atten-

GL:

tion in these parties. In reference to Mr. Geils taking
possession of the property, he states they spent 8001. or
( 1,000/. a year for their common expenses ; 6001. was
expended in diamonds, but Mrs. Dickenson says she
advanced this money for the purchase of these dia-
monds. The complaint of residence at Dumbrick is an-
swered by its being stated it was by their mutual consent
While at Dumbarton, the family consisted of Colonel
and Mrs. Geils and three children, and it was stated she
was kept there against her consent. She knew what the
family consisted of before she took up her residence
there, and was not compelled to remain there, and yet it
appears she occupied three rooms. I therefore think
she could not complain of a want of accommodation
while at Dumbarton, The sixth article complained of
the terms on which she lived; that she was frequently
left alone, or else forced into the society of people be-
neath herself; that he used bad language to her, and ex-
ercised great violence to her. He replies he was often
forced to leave her society, and seek that of his family,
in consequence of her violent temper ; that she would
frequently make severe attacks upon his family, and
speak most disrespectfully of them. Ile denies using
coarse language, or exercising violence towards her, or
having threatened violence. In speaking of Mrs. Nepean,
his sister, Mrs. Geils sae! that she could not associate
with her, as they were like oil and water, though she
was very kind. Mrs. Dickenson said her daughter took
a dislike to Mr. Nepean at a very early period, and
other branches of the family, from the circumstance
that Mr. Geils paid more attention to them than to her,
that Mrs. Cul. Geils did not treat her daughter as she
should; this was three years after the marriage, and
there was a marked difference in Mr. Geils's conduct to
her and to his own family; she thought he treated her
daughter with some harshness ; there appeared a
jealousy on both sides. On the other side, it is stated
Mrs. Geils called her husband a contemptible wretch, a
brute, and a tyrant, which was used towards him on
many occasions, which often forced him from her
presence. She would follow him about the house and
continue her violence towards him. Three witnesses were
examined on this point, and I have no doubt but that
they gave their evidence with strong feelings in favour of
the family. Mr. Geils's sister gave evidence of this, and
that on one occasion Mrs. Geils struck her brother (a
youth), and called him names. In reply to this Mrs.
Geils states, she boxed his ears lightly on one occasion
because he opened her chamber door while she was re-
tiring to rest, and made some observation to her ; it was
was soon after that she had been a bride. She denies
following her husband about the house. The Court
could not justify such conduct ; that she did not receive
the protection of her husband from such conduct. No
doubt she had some violence of temper, for in a letter to
her mother she writes she was acting wrong towards her
husband, and promises to be better, hoping he will soon
return to her. It was evident she was an accomplished
lady, for she knew French, Italian, and German, though
they say she acted with childish simplicity. A complaint
was made that the Examiner had exceeded his duty in
taking down these answers to the interrogatories, but
the Court does not think so ; he was bound to take them
down. The words " childish devotion" towards her
husband were complained of, but I feel the Examiner
has done no more than his duty ; ho could have no
object in exceeding his duty, and I feel that he has not
departed from that high character he has hitherto held
in the profession. I feel it my duty to say so much of
the Examiner. In reference to the strong language used
towards her husband—it may be true, it may be false—
but, if she felt a strong affection for her husband, she
might have been jealous of her husband's attention to
his family. She might have been also disappointed in
the expected attention from her husband, she possessing
so large a fortune ; but no conduct on the part of th(
wife can justify his conduct towards his wife ; nothing
could extenuate it ; blows are sufficient to justify the
Court in sanctioning a separation, if they inflict an
injury. The Learned Judge referred to the case of
Holding v. Holding, and commented at some length upon
it. Walker is a witness who states the conduct of Mr.
Geils was not what a husband should exercise towards
his wife, and on one occasion it is said he pushed
violently into the room, and called her a —, and such
was Mr. Geils's conduct towards her, that she stated to
her mother, that if it were not for her children, to whom
she was strongly attached, she would have left long
since. On one occasion his violence was of such a
nature that he compelled her to go down upon
her knees before him, and that she suffered
from his blows ; but the Court has no proof
of this. In the 14th article she is said to have
expressed a wish to separate, when he replied in strong
language she should never have the children, and that
they should never darken her mother's doors again. If
his conduct justified a separation, the law will grant it.
The servant had said she had seen him very violent on
one occasion. It was when Mrs. Geils placed a smelling
bottle to the nose of one of the children, the salts were
too strong, and the child stepped back, when he seized
the bottle and threw it into the fire, and with violence-
said if ever he saw another in the house it would share
the same fate, but there was no personal violence. The
16th article states that he threatened to kill her, and
turned her out of the room. Mr. Geils admits he did
turn her out of the room, but not with any violence ; in
this attempt she caught hold of a shelf, which was torn
away. Here is proof of actual violence, and would on
that ground prove a case for separation, but the
parties continued to live together. This is an act
of condonation. He is charged with adultery with
three different parties. M'Queen was one, who
lived in his father's family previous to his mar-
riage, but this intimacy was renewed after the mar-
riage, and the wife became acquainted with the acts of
criminality, but forgave hisn on his promising ho would
not do so again, and living with him afterwards; this
was also an act of condonation. The other was a
monthly nurse, who proved in the family way, but she
swore John Webb was the father of the child; the female
was discharged in consequence, and the intimacy was
afterwards renewed; and there was strong evidence to
prove that he had criminal intercourse with the woman
Campbell. In reference to the charge of unnatural
practices, Mrs. Geils charges her husband with re-
peated attempts to have unnatural intercourse with her,
but did not succeed until the 6th of September, when she
informed her mother, at the same time expressing her
ignorance of the act. She then expressed her disgust
of her husband, at the same time stating that she will
never cohabit with him again. Friends are consulted,
and a communication is made with Mr. Geils to bring
about an amicable separation; but when Mr. Geils is
charged with this crime, he declared that none but the
foulest fiends in hell would make such a charge ; and, 0,4
Mr. Hume states, although he did not directly deny it,
yet this gentleman says he shook hands at parting with
Mr. Geils after having been the agent to convey the
charge to him, and even sat down and took wine with
him. But if Mr. Hume had been cross-examined
as to the language employed, it might have
a different effect to that now attributed to it.
However disgraceful it was to Mr. Geils to enter upon
the discussion referred to, he (the Learned Judge) could
not on that account pronounce a sentence which must
have the effect of driving him from society and making
him an outcast. He was not satisfied in his own mind
that the charge was established against him. He should
feel extremely reluctant, even for the sake of Mrs.
Geils, to pronounce that she had been a partaker with
Mr. Geils in his guilt, for a partaker in his guilt she
must be, if the story told were true. He was not prepared
on her account, and on account of those descending from
the marriage union, to hold that upon the evidence be-
fore him he could say that Mr. Geils was proved to
have been guilty of unnatural practices. The medical
evidence which had been produced proved that if the
least resistance had been made by Mrs. Geils the offence
could not have been committed. That Mrs. Geils might,
as had been suggested by her husband, have been mis-
taken was very possible. He thought it was not possible
that she could have acquiesced in the commission of the
offence. There was no violence complained of, and the
case rested, therefore, entirely upon the confession said
to have been made to Mr. Hume. In his (the Learned
Judge's) apprehension the proof was not sufficient. He
was of opinion that Mr. Geils had been guilty of adultery
both with M‘Phee and with Campbell, but he was not sa-
tisfied that the charges of cruelty would entitle Mrs.
Geils to a sentence on that ground. He therefore
pronounced that Mr. Geils had been guilty of adultery,
and that Mrs. Geils was entitled to a sentence of sepa-
ration.

The REGISTRAR—Does the CoHrt make any order AS
;0 Costs ? his part of the prayer.

- -
The COURT—The bond has been given, I presume ?
The Reoistrar—Yes, Sir.
_t, _ _ _

Mr. ii"urciu.s (the proctor for Mrs. Geils)—Does the
Court give the coats ?

The—Couttr—The whole costs ?

Dr. ADDAMS—IC is the first time that I remember a
wife succeeding, and the costs being divided. Mr. Geils
has 1,2001. per annum.
The Coma—Have the whole been given where a
party has failed in part of the case ? Dr. Addams—
Certainly.
Dr. JENNER—Never in such a case as this, where so
large a part of the expenses has been incurred by a
charge of so gross a nature, which is not proved.
Dr. ADDAms—Which is held to be deficit probatio.
The COURT—I am inclined to condemn the party in
the whole of the costs of the proceedings. Two-thirds
of the case have been made out. I shall condemn Mr.
Geils in the costs of the proceedings.
The Learned Judge occupied seven hours and a half
in the delivery of the sentence.

E. 'COURT OF 13ANKRUPTCY, April 26.
)(Before Mr.' Coraniissioner FONBLANQUE.)
IN RE V. NORMAN.
This bankrupt, a builder, applied for his certificate.
He was supported 'by Mr. Bagley, and opposed on
the part of a Mr. Wright, on the grounds---4, misre-
presentation, upon' the advance of money by Mr.
Wright; 2,improper disposition of property; and, 3,
no books.
His HONOUR, upon looking over the proceedings, said
that there appeared to be a quantity of mortgages, but
whoever dealt with speculative builders might expect to
meet them.
The bankrupt having been examined,
Mr. BAGLEY submitted that none of the allegations
urged against the bankrupt were substantiated by evi-
dence, but, however. he was willing to admit that re-
gular books had not been kept, and the cause was that
he was an illiterate man.
His Homoua said that this case was as unsatisfactory
as all others when there were no books—no books, no
vouchers, all conjecture; accounts altered over and over
again, and profits put down to meet expenses. How-
ever, in this case, it was true that the material
point of opposition hall failed. The bankrupt had
mortgaged his property, but it was well known that
such was the course adopted by speculative builders,
and when creditors found a man meddling with
bricks and mortar, they ought to ask, " Are you med-
dling with parchmeat and wax?" On the 3d of
December the bankrupt gave a Mrs. Proctor security
for money previously advanced, and made himself a
bank rulit 9n the 14th of the same, month. That ee-
r •
ow,la .Wl4- a)Ja. ••• • •

curity had been given up, and that was a little in favour
of the bankrupt. Taking all the circumstances of the
case into consideration, the certificate must be suspended
for six months.
Mr. I3AGLEY—WiII your Honour grant protection?
Mr. Commissioner FONBLANQUE—There being no
fraud, you can take it.
IN BE A. WOOLFE.
The bankrupt, a wine-merchant, of Crooked-lane
Chambers, applied for his certificate. His debts amount
to about 2,5001., and assets little or nothing. He com-
menced with no capital, and made a profit of 5,500/., the
trade expenses exceeding that sum, and the domestic
expenditure about 1,200/.
He was supported by Mr. Cooke, and opposed by Mr.
Bagley, on the grounds, first, reckless trading; secondly,
not keeping proper books; thirdly, resorting to accom-
modation bill transactions; fourthly, excessive expendi-
ture; and, lastly, preference.
Mr. COOKE would not ask for an immediate certi
ficate, but must pray the Court to deal leniently with
his client.
His HONOUR considered that the allegations urged
against the bankrupt had been substantiated, and sus-
pended the certificate for twelve months.
Mr. COOKE applied for protection.
His HONOUR said that he would grant it, there being
no fraud, and it was his general practice so to do,
because by not giving protection it would be handing
a bankrupt over to one creditor who had not thought
fit to come in under the fiat, and therefore often tended
to such creditor getting a preference after the bank-
ruptcy, which, if given before, would have been pu-
nished by this Court.
Suspended aecording,ly with protection.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(Before the ASSISTANT-JUDGE.)
Louisa Gamble was yesterday indicted for stealing
from the person of John Richardson a silver watch,
value 61.
The prosecutor, it appeared, Was returning home at
an early hour on the morning of the 15th instant, and
when near Clement's-lane, Strand, he was met by the
prisoner and another woman, who importuned him tor
something. He refused to comply, upon which the pri-
soner snatched at his watch, and having succeeded in
breaking the chain, she got possession of it, and passed it
to her companion, who made off. The prosecutor
attempted to follow her, but the prisoner laid hold of his
collar, and forcibly detained him u
' until her accomplice
was out of sight. The prosecutor seeinc, that there was
no chance of overtaking her, then laid hold of the priso-
ner, and gave her into custody. The watch has not
since been recovered.
The prisoner said that the other woman was the real
thief.

The jury found her Guilty. .
The ASSISTANT-JUDGE said that it was necessary to
make an example of the prisoner. The Court was de-
termined to put a stop to such outrages as these. There
was no safety for the public if they were passed over
lightly. The sentence was that she be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for nine months.
Mary Ann Rice, alias Tation, a young Irishwoman,
was indicted for stealing some articles of clothing, the
property of Elizabeth Coventry.
The evidence left no doubt as to the prisoner's guilt.
She then entered into a long and rambling account of
the hardships she-had endured, and with much elo-
quence besought the Court to extend its clemency to
her, on account of being a stranger, and away from her
native land.

The jury found her Guilty.
The Learned ASSISTANT-JUDGE said that he knew
from personal experience and observation, that the great
bulk of the Irish peasantry were equally as well educated,
if not better, than the middle classes in this country, and
the prisoner was a proof of it.
The prisoner was twice previously convicted, and
under these circumstances the Court felt bound to send
her out of the country. Sentence, seven years' transpor-
tation.

The grand jury found a true bill against Moses Hart
and three others, for keeping a common-gambling house
in the parish of St. Martin-in. the Fields. The prose-
cutor was present, and was called on by the Court to
enter into his mognizAnces in 1001. to prosecute the
defendants. They also found a true bill agains Benjamin
Hunt for a misdemeanour, having appropriated to his
own use the proceeds of a bill of exchange, which he had
been entrusted to get discounted. The Court granted
warrants to apprehend both parties.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
•
John Sho!ski, an Austrian of' very miserable appear-
ance, was brought before Mr. Hardwick, charged with
having annoyed Prince Nletternich, and broken some
windows at the Brunswick Hotel, in Princes-street.
.John Watson said he was manager of the hotel.
Prince Metternich and suite were now stopping there.
About an hour two the prisoner came to the hotel and
requested to see Baron Hugel, who is attached to the
suite of the Prince. The prisoner was told that he
could not see the -Baron. He then sent a letter to Baron
Hugel, and a message was returned that there was no
answer to it. Tho prisoner used very energetic language,
and at last left tho hotel. In a moment or two some
stones were thrown from the street, which broke two of
the windows.
Joseph Earl, a labourer, said he was passing through
Princes-street, when he saw the prisoner eome out of
the hotel and aim a blow at the windows with his stick.
Failing in his object, the prisoner went into the road,
picked up some stones, and deliberately threw thorn at
the windows.
The prisoner asked permission to put a question to
the first witness. "Do you know," said the prisoner,
furiously, " that you harbour a reptile in your house?
Do you know that Prince Metternich is a tractor to his
country, and that he has been arraigned before the
Hungarian Diet, and dare not show his face there? Do
you know that he has not only embrued his hands, but
his arms, up to his armpits, in blood?"
Mr. HARDWICK asked the prisoner what he was ?
PrisAsner—l am a Doctor of Philosophy. I lodge at
No. 3, High-street, and have been there for seven or
' eight months. I have received money from the Austrian
Government-301. and 501. at a time; there is 501. coming
to me, to which I am entitled.
Mr. HARDWICK asked the prisoner how he obtained a
living? The prisoner said he had written several works,
and had also contributed to the quarterlies.
The manager of the hotel said Prince Metternich had
taken up his abode at the hotel in order to be in quiet,
but several Austrians who had found the Prince out had
come to the hotel, and had incommoded the Prince by
their importunity. There was a lady, who had just come
to the hotel, now in a state of great alarm through the
violence of the prisoner that morning.
The prisoner said the Prince had no reason to feel
alarm at any violence from his hands. He had passed
the Prince in the street the other day and took no notice,
not being a man of blood, as the Prince was.
Mr. HARDWICK asked why he had broken the windows
of the hotel ? The prisoner replied that he wished to
bring his wrongs and injuries before the public.
Mr. HARDWICK told the prisoner it was not to be en-
dured that persons should act in such a violent way as
the prisoner had acted. The proprietor of the hotel
had a perfect right to receive whom he pleased into his
house, and parties taking their residence at the hotel
were entitled to, be protected from intrusion or annoy-
ance. He should fine the prisoner 6s. for the damage,
and require him to find bail for his good behaviour.
SOUTH WARK.
George Izard, a leather dyer, of Bermondsey, was
brought before Mr. Cottingham charged with creating a
disturbance and assaulting a policeman.
The policeman stated that while on duty the previous
night his attention was called to the defendant, who
stood in the street and collected a mob, exclaiming that
he was a Chartist, and that at the next meeting they
would take care to be prepared and not to be diverted
from their purpose either by the soldiers or the police.
He then went on in a loud strain denouncing the Go-
vernment, and by his harangue caused a considerable
crowd of persons, who completely blocked up the
thoroughfare and prevented the free passage of the
people. He (the policeman) went up and desired the
defendant to move on, but he refused, and endeavoured
to excite the populace against him by calling him various
names, and pointing him out as one of those who inter-
rupted the proceedings of the meeting on Monday, the
10th inst. Finding that he was determined to go on in
the way described, and that the crowd was still collect-
ing, he (the policeman) went up for the purpose of put-
ting a stop to his .proceedings, but had no sooner ap-
proached him than he made an attack upon him, but he
eventually succeeded in taking him to the station-house.
The defendant said, that he had been drinking rather
freely, and had no recollection of addressing any obser-
vations to the crowd about Chartism. All he knew
about the matter was, that he was severely handled,
anti was afraid he would be thrown out of employment.
Mr. CorrlNGnAm said, that it would be much more
to the defendant's advantage were he minding his husi-
pneeesps,leinisntetande
tr
osfeemetbsarking in politics and haranguing
about Chartism and abusing the
Government. It did not signify a farthing what his '
politics were, for he might be what he liked in this free
sctoruenettsry,by g
so
ivinthatghe did not create annoyance in the
utterarnje to such language, and
thereby
collecting a crowd of idle persons and thieves,
who would take advantage of it and commit plunder. i
The magistrate then adjudged the defendant to find
sureties for his good behaviour, in default of which he
was committed to prison.

.CORN.EXCRANGE, HULL, TUESDAY.—Not only
in this immediate neighbourhood, but for some distance
around us, the weather flaring the past week has been
anything. but what we expected from the experience of
this-day se'nnight, and we have some complaints from
practical agriculturists that the growing crop of wheat is
not all right, dry weather is much needed, both for the
sowing of spring corn,,now very backward, land for the
improvement of the young wheat plant. Owing to the
usual holidays at this season, business has been more or
less suspended during the week, still the bulk of the
arrivals have gone into consumption at the market rates.
New foreign wheats have been sold at 475. to 495.;
Barley (Saal) at 315., and new Danish at 295. to 305.;
Beans 325. Tho reports from inland markets are more
lifelesss ,than we expected, owing doubtless is great
measure to the severe check which every branch of trade
has received through existing political and commercial
disarrangements; still it must be remembered that stocks
in factors' or: millers' hands are universally low, and
hence we may calculate on present prices being sup-
ported, with a chance of some improvement. The
steamers arriving this morning from Hamburgh, states
the sound to be stopped to all Prussian vessels, and that
some have been detained. This will naturally affect our
supplies of Baltic produce, and may be expected
and
eexpeetedstotocksof
pro-
duce some stiffness on this side. Supplies wheat at Hamburgh were short, and the market is Is. to
2s. dearer.
INFRA market gardener calls the rage for
trees of lipery in Paris, and thinking they
will survive,a Misr delusion.",,T.P.unah.
"
•
only

PUGILISM. jAMES EP-
JAMES MASSEY, OF MANCHESTER, AND ...
WARDS, OF CHELTENHA3I, FOR 2001. --The pair Of
light-weights, whose names preface this pass 3graPh, met
yesterday, and brought to an issue the. •
match, one which has been looked forward t, ) by i)lrnei
rolls patrons of the made as holding forth promises ,o 0
a display of skill and courage, which might go far ~,
important
remove the " heavy blow and great discour• ig.e,hient,..
which the ring had received by the inexplie.lhte P°l
troonery or knavery of the last "great affair" L'et:v_esen
Lane and Walker. The initiated, and those whi.
.ta‘.(l
an interest in fistic sports, were aware that the vie''n,il
of Newmarket was the locale, more especially as the 'II.
of meeting was shifted from the Tuesday to the i,reu
nesday, in order to avoid all chance of clashing with the
Two Thousand Guineas race on the first named days
those who
At nine o'clock, then, the men, and
overnight,
remained at Newmarket from the
came hy special train to Balshans- nroad, nine3r te
miles from the metropolis of racing, London
where the veteran commissary -general of the
l'. H. quickly formed an outer circle and
an inner
uld he
quadrangle, on as desirable a piece of turf as
co
selected even by his experienced eye. Bound this
1 paradox (the only instance of " squaring the circle,
bearing the misnomer of " the Ring ") groups of rustics
quickly formed themselves, while a we radius
had for its boundary a number of ages,carr fburs, lisir,,s
brirzkas, and gigs, coach, cart, eurricle, or tandem• his
a few minutes after ten o'clock Massey alighted from
hi:
conveyance, and coolly " skied " his cap within
the
ropes, amid the cheers of a strong division of
suppeing orterf:t:
his colours, purple with an orange border, b
more prevalent than the blue bird's-eye of the ma.°
Cheltenham. The fearless, hardy looks ofthis mini ii;
ture llercules, are two well known to ring-goers to nee
dilating on. His height 5 feet 4 inches, his weight 0..
101 b., and his form the perfection of concentrated pow.eirs
A few minutes after Edwards modestly tossed 11P 111),
nob-covering, and umpires and referee were qu.siesss-
chosen. At 28 minutes past 10 the athletm threw i"-,.n.,
selves in position, and gave us the opportunity of se"e,
ning their respective styles. The victories of gss_s
severs
over Clay, of Nottingham, Young Reed (1°34 h°fleveer;
by want of self-control), Welch, and Nor 'go,
won by the peculiar style of his rushes, and 0,
effective body-blows with the right,ito which thosel33_eeir
from their systematic leading with the left hanliss.reve,
tiered them peculiarly open; in fact, Massey sul-iiiy
amts backed by eneurance and strength, were °ea
ributable to his novel, natural style, which Litt, his
upset by its originality the scientific methods (nos
eandtv.ersaries. With Edwards, however, the ease sof
reach, (indeed, a stature for such a weight
'rely altered. In addition to remarkable lengi'.....
ides b:
to slenderness, and impressing at first view the
weakness), the Cheltenham man stands with his right
foot forward, and the dexter hand presented; a Plizz -60
position, somewhat a la Bendigo which calls for 0
entire change of tactics on the Part of his ollintle i
It ruts
This led to the
result we are about to narrate. ited
be as well to state that before setting-to, Massey ,b,13: f r
himself for 501. twice over at evens, and fins, „°%.
10 sovs., when he announced his exchequer to be '",s)
hausted. Macdonald and J. Wharton (Molyeseb,
were his seconds ; while Edwards was attended his
Solid Coates, of Birmingham, and Sears, °o,,f •se,
native Spa. It has not been our Pr-tio,
c ito
in
nor shall we now break through the
approace,
to detail the particulars of the rounds, 55is a
number, or to dwell upon them further till nisi,
sketchy outline. In the first eleven Massey made rh at
forcing his man, but by no means effectively ill°4ster
the close of each Edwards got down;
man, nevertheless, was clearly too far from its right'
the Meneli ht.
handed work, while Edwards countered with tbie 7by
many times with sharp effect. Indeed it Was clear
eS•
the time that the 19th round, and 38 minutes '',4" „d la
pired, that Massey had never before been 00 b.,,,,,,'",;55ds
his onslaught. In fact, he became much slower. -v",."',„-self
stopped Massey cleverly many times, while be 1101
hitter, and betting
NtVhaes onthe retreat, jobbing him now and agsin'„g well
Manchester hero appeared the stronger man, "" fi to
as the harder
but still Massey went lx and segfd-oo
four,At and in one instance we saw two to one laid
assey. Heavy betting occurred from the 20th r° sist
rounds,round was
n handswas tedious and sparring; the men Piltfilgiimes•
their had no decided lead. frheciosai
and looking at each other severa, cent to
Masseycome
e pointing to the ground to induce his oPlii°ughing
histo head. This
Tthheislatter repliedfor b'B minute
went on , n s
without any exchange of blows further tot' tool
feints and stops. From this VY bali-S"
period a he 3 -
fresbe i
having
passed over, Edwards seemed to get
; ' osition+ sea
while Massey, puzzled by his antagon.st s p became
staggered by his right-handed counter-hits, iz ill
slower and slower. His jumping styli; g g°n_P-aclil
seemedclaim
gradually to leave him. Ins tile 38th r...u--bt
was made for Edwards, on the grouncii le
Massey had struck him low, but this was overrule:: ed *
the 49they
stinging
. round Massey missed an up hit, and rector the
firisntgttinmgeretn, which brought him on his knees for
got
e had previously, with one excePiinfj'sooa
Edwards,first to earth, by hit or bustling. In tn:, being
round a close.
and shaking
took place, and both fell. On lists tore P
called from ' his corner, a group 5 tOre 11-
of his partizell „foil:I
a stake, and rushed within the ropes, by which cc)" again
a couple of minutes were gained, ere the tne,lic„,,ted,
faced each other. The fact was Massey was aes`— the
and hence the
next round a little ti
Edwards, after twice me.
-IS planting 00. s s'
man, got him under his right arm, and was about w t 4
minister a hit, , when Massey droppedboth Vie—.
Edwards
who was in the act of delivering, on
hand, and the round finished. A stayed 01
of " foul !" was now repeated by tnheeisy clamorous 011,0
umpires agreeing that nothing improper p MasmeYites, but i_,
roper had taken clam
Massey was in vain called for um-
nut nearly two - tes minti ,
had elapsed, when the referee declared
lone. „to Edwards. The contest lasted the victory to loj
three hours as,
twenty-one minutes, upwards of one-half ofwhich, ass
may be supposed, was spent in -
tedious pauses,
sparrring.

RAIL WAY SHARE MARKET'
LIVERPOOL, APRIL 26. Wes.
STOCK EXCHANGE.-The sales are-Birkenbead, nd
shire, and Cheshire Junction, 311. Shares (late C-iteterli,,,
12%-Edinburgh and Glasgow, 41 c.-Great 11Y0
Fifths, 191k-Lancashire and Yorkshire (L. and Wititerlb
dis.-Ditto, Fifths, 1% dis.-London and Norttinues CIP
126%-Ditto, New Quarters, 1% p.-Ditto 40/.,; Pl'
and 51.), 81/2 p.-Ditto (M. and B.), Quarters V°,,...fereiWZ
p.-Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire,rth St
dis.-Midland, 97-Ditto, Halves, 64 dis•-•-•r4°l:l)itt°'
fordshire, 3*, dis.-South-Eastern and Dover, 22j cioaflaf'
No. 4, Thirds, 34 dis.-Huddersfield Canal and •
7% dis.-Erewash Valley, 6% p.
MANCHESTER, APRIL 26. .3, fdaii‘
STOCK EXCHANGE.-The sales are-Birkenheauties, 31.
shire, and Cheshire Junction 7% dis.-Eastern C"Phern, 9/1
-East Lancashire, New, 73/4 C. dis.-Great NlOO4ll
dis. -Lancashire ana Yorkshire (West Riding ti° • es
dis.-Liverpool, Mancheste_i_r, and Newcastle Tact ic,
dis.-London and North-Western, Quarters :(tl)' 5.1 11-
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire,
-Ditto (Grimsby), 121. 10s. Shares, 5 dis.__Nortke'l
shire, 3', dis.-South-Eastern and Dover, No 4,
.BIRMINGHAM, APRIL 26. d 2.10 f:,".
STOCK ExCHANGE.-The sales are-London. 350.4-
Western, 127-Ambergate, Nottingham, and Bow'
_EAEDtSri,flAinPßlbLus2ins.ess
-North Staffordshire, 337 di s. in
STOCK EXCHANGE': an 1100!;r
shares to-day, at the following prices :-Easy LNorta
BNt Ut!ljsb
941. es 7186,
sd7..3dAdi
sidzi L.L—La
neDecita
stl
st oh
and,
rQe anduaTrht sos
kr,gk, 38213435 i
r.l 4e d(
TI.7E:
tgGa hit
rNrhelivilciasltl4e4,sa.ndc.Bdeirsl.v-ieNk,orNtho. S2taffordstireiv,icls), 50. ~•";(:,0
(New er
YORK, APRIL 25. A to-dilztoll
STOCK EXCHANGE.-The business transaci.e.- th j
as follows: -Great Northern, 3/. Is. ',611.--,ltrdastlai 111
Thirds, 145.-Ditto, Extension, 45.-York, Ile" •
Berwick (Original), 27%. rertb'
EDINBURGH, APRIL 25. and
STOCK ExctiaNGE.-The sales are-Dundee a, 61'..„.
26/. 155.-Edinburgh and Northern. (NewOlis. 6
Great Northern, 3-North British, Quarters,
Ditto, Thirds, 15s.
140'
GLASGOW, APRIL 25. ,
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are-Dunnel Gino,
Quarters, 31s. 6d.-Edinburgh and Glasgow, 114 I, 6,1'
Kilmarnock, and Ayr, 70'A-Ditto Halves, °;d,,,20,,
-North British, Thirds, 14s. 6d.-Scottish CO".
• ell
- Og
rADVERTISEMENT.]-THE EARL OF o 00014, ofirP-0
AND HOLLOWAY'S P ILLS .—A.II astounding cure bir-tra t fre, "10;
medicine, after every other means had failed. See *."--Fecb.2.,." Dt.l-
- letter, dated " Villa Messina, Leghorn. ose;
Professor Holloway-Sir : I beg to acquaint you that Yu° 40 tb:4
effected a cure of a disorder in my liver and swint;me-ent,
eininenrot the faculty, at home and all ever the c0n,..."-iusidM
been able to effect; nay, not.ever the waters` of C."_:„1
rienbad. (Signed) " Atosoaotron." These one,-,--00„0
cure any disease of the liver or stomach.-Sold (ali°000" •
Ointment) at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 24:Losei000/
‘ll medicine vendors throughout the civilised world.
BIRTH 111°'S. raptiin
On the 31st ult., at Bermuda, the lady 0,
ander Cameron, 42d Royal Highlanders, of a Oa. the P' •
On the 20th inst., at Tusmore-park, Oxfordshire,
Mrs. Percy Barrington, of a son and heir. Steele' Of
On the 21st inst., at Dalaton, Mrs. IL F• tr
daughter.
On the 22d inst., at John-street,Bedford-roW,
of a son.
On the 22d inst.. at the Vicarage, Chisvelep
wife of the Rev. J. E. Robinson, of a daughter. „ ~„er,r;
On the 22d inst., the wife of William James ra'""
the',Close, Lichfield, of a son.
On the 24th inst., at De Crespigny-park,
Mrs. William Edwards, of a daughter. stto.
On the 24th inst., in Eburv-stieet Mrs. Alfred Degs
a daughter.
On the 24th inst., at Snaresbrook, Mrs. Thonlas
of a son.
.03
•• adesbi
•,
On the 25th inst., at the British Museum, Ladd,
of a daughter.
14/1194
On the 25th inst., the wife of Mr. William'
„2""
Colebrooke-row, Islington, of a daughter, still-bora•

On the 24th inst., at St.ll3:'; Church, ile".°
f•
treAtiii
CSnhonwrldesel ngieussne.,oefr,Dartford,
,e fgarjotrod.Mildred, daughter of

DIED.

On the 23d inst., WilliamTrittlebank, ESCO
the county of Derby, aged 84. o‘4l' ill°'
On the 233 inst., at Hadley, Middlesex, 'Millar' e,
seventh son of the late Lieuienant-Colonel White...es, AO ,
On the 24th inst., at Forest-place, Leytonstonel '''''l
ell°
Maria Privat, aged 72. rDO '
On the -.4th inst., in Half Moon-street, Pete-
refer,
Snow, aged 37. of gr. .•
On the 24th inst., at Islington, Liza, wife =,
for",,.
Cam
On tpbheell,
24th Robert, aed 37. bert
inst., at Union-road, Clapham, --- ~.
nell, Esq., aged 63. Micle'tow
On the 24th inst., Thomas Smith, of Uxbridge, • '
banker, aged 63. 6 S6IWO
,
On the 25th ,inst., at Clapham-common, Georg .
Esq., aged 67. ,tirg (11'1V-i:
a.
On the 25th inst., at Kennington-green, 0.---'
Hall, aged 30. - ---,11- era
______—;6loo.ol;,,
London: Printed and Published by IVIURDO_ 1 pfo.o;
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun 01104,00.1 i
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, 11.1 9.4°4
Middlege4 Thurilday, April 27, lea j= :"