The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-09 00:00:00

THURSDAY EVENING_t
MARC 1-1 9, 1845.

and what after their arrival at the place of
of anger and into' as he was to oppression on the brain by
fcx the same year. Also of the number of gallons.o
Verdict- xication.
spirits permitted out of distillers' stocks in E.
.gh-
Mr. ,
_Not Guilty.
proof
number of proof gallons of Brit's
land, and the total .fiers, the ~ _baron ROLFE was engaged the greater part of
of rectifiers
brandy and spirit of wine permitted
.out ..ay with the cause of Jaekson v. Oates, an action
fproof old- P.
destination, man
stocks in England; also, the total quantity o;ir a 'malicious prosecution. It arose out of a transac-
, predisposed - ,
stocks
Parlia-- dating so far back as 1845, when the plaintiff be-
England, for the same year (in continuation cr. car Je the purchaser of some portions of the wreck of a
No. 297, of session 1847). Lastly, stiOlV- lye
efendant also purchased some other portions, and the
ssel which had been driven ashore at Sunderland. The
mlocenstaorfy ppraopoett, rum received into rectifier? i'.., ' tion
tScotlandry ad?. 0
plaintiff, in removing those he had purchased, took, it
,todtiastit nnugmuibsherinogf
trellgounasndtiistytililnedeainch cou n
was said, some of those belonging to the defendant. A
titles put into the bonded warehouses, for the same esarch -warrant was accordingly obtained, and the plain-
illgniruvgeealrnatehnded duty paid direct from distillers' stocks from the
year, tiff taken before the magistrate, and the complaint dis-
DROGHEDA, MARCH 7.—The Lewta, Billet, from 'missed, as being, in fact, a question of property. He
Preston, was in contact last night in the river, with commenced an action against the defendant, after which
the Bryan Boru steamer, for Liverpool, lost bowsprit the defendant indicted him for larceny at the sessions,
and jibboom, started her stern and makes water, the where he was acquitted. This action was delayed by
steamer proceeded. various circumstances, and finally discontinued, and the
_ present one commenced.
The jury bad not returned their verdict when the re-
port came away.
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Heath for the plaintiff, and Mr.
Martin and Mr Atherton for the defence.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

WESTMINSTER COUNTY COURT; March 8.
(Before D. C. MOYLAN, Esq., Judge.)
LITERARY LABOUR.7JOBSON W. HANSARD.

In this case (which has been two or three times before
the Court) Mr. Luke James Hansard, the well-known
printer, was defendant, and Mr. D. W. Jobson, the
plaintiff, the action being brought to recover a sum of
money for writing a " Sketch of the House of Lords,"
and two reviews, fora journal called The Spirit of the
imes.

WESTERN ClRCUlT:—Salisbury, March 7.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.)
STEALING A LETTER.— Reuben Wale and newts
Haywood were placed at ttie bar, the former charged
with having, whilst employed under the Post- oftic<.,
stolen a certain post letter containing a 101. note of the
Bristol branch of the Bank of England, and a half-
sovereign, the property of the Postmaster-General, and
Hayward was charged with having received the said 10L
note, well knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr. Rogers, Q.C., and Mr. Poulden, conducted the
prosecution.

The case on each occasion lasted a considerable time,
and excited much interest. In the month of March last,
the defendant started a journal, having for its object the
elevation of the " social and moral condition of the
people," the plaintiff being employed on it as one of
the writers. In one of his interviews with Mr. Hansard
the plaintiff produced a "Sketch of the House of Lords,"
which he had written for a magazine. Mr. Hansard, on
seeing it, expressed a wish to have it for the second
number of The Spirit of the Times, agreeing, according
to plaintiff, to give " three times magazine price for
it." The plaintiff accordingly gave up the article, and
also wrote a review of the works of the Rev. Robert
Hall, and one on the works of Schlegel, purchasing
the books at the request of the defendant, in conse-
quence of the publisher refusing to send them 'gratui-
tously. The plaintiff admitted that none of the articles
were inserted in The Spirit of the Times, because of its
" stopping short," but contended that it was the custom
in the literary world, and amongst newspaper pro-
Frietors, to pay for articles written by order, whether
they were inserted or not.
In support of the custom Mr. A. B. Reach and Mr. T.
P. Healy, proprietor of The Medical Times, were cx
ainined. The former gentleman could net 'speak poi.i-
tively as to the custom, but had been informed that it
was usual to pay a gentleman for an article written to
order whether it appeared or not. Mr. Healy said if he
ordered a gentleman to write an article for his paper, he
should feel bound to pay him for it if it was not wanted.
He was in the habit of employing literary gentlemen, and
had paid them for articles which had not appeared.
Mr. Hansard distinctly denied the contract entered
into with the plaintiff. He merely took the article, with
the consent of the plaintiff, to look over at his leisure,
and put it amongst other similar contributions.
The Learned JUDGE said he was clearly of opinion
that no contract had been proved by the plaintiff, and
therefore it was useless to entertain the question of
custom. The plaintiff having failed to prove any con-
tract, he must order him to he nonsuited.

Mr. Hodges defended the prisoner Waite—Hayward
was undefended.

It appeared from the evidence adduced on the part of
the prosecution, that the Rev. Mr. Frampton, the Rec-
tor of Coomb Floy, in Somersetahire, had occasion to
remit ten guineas to the Rev. T. Frampton, who lived
at Tetbury, in Gloucestershire, and accordingly, on the
11th of November, 1847, enclosed a 10L note of the
Branch Bank of England at Bristol, of which he took
the date and number, together with a half-sovereign.
This letter was directed to Mr. Frampton, and posted
at Gore Inn, at Bishops Sideard, which was the
nearest post office. This was forwarded to Tiverton
in a post bag, and then on to Chippenham, where it
was the course of business for the letters sent in
that bag to be sorted, and those for Tetbury put in
the Tetbury bag and forwarded togetbury. The letter
however, never reached its destination. Inquiry was
then made, and the note traced to the possession of a
Mr. Broad, a clerk in the Chippenham station of the
Great Western Railway. Ile was enabled to trace it,
having received it from Woodman, another clerk in the
station, and having taken down, in the company's book,
the number and date of the note. Woodman, however,
could not remember from whom he received the note, but
believed he did so in the ordinary course of business at
the station, and here for the time all further trace of
the note or the person stealing the letter was lost. On
the 26th of January following, the prisoner Waite, who,
it was shown, was occasionally employed as a clerk in
the post-office at Chippenham, was in a public-house at
Chippenham, with a man named Swaine, who is a porter
employed at the railway station there, and asked him if
anything had been found out about the note which had
been stolen. Swaine said " No," upon which Waite said
I had the bill—l gave it to a man called Hayward, to
get it changed for me, which he did, and I gave him two
sovereigns for doing it., Swaine, upon this, told the pri-
soner that he should give information to the police of
what he had said. He begged him not to do so, but
Swaine persisted that he should, and accordingly he did
so. Search was made for Waite and Hayward, but it
was found that they had absconded, and ultimately they
were both found at a brother of Hay-ward's at Ciren-
cester. Waite had shaved off his whiskers, and otherwise
disguised himself. Upon being taken into custody,
Waite made a similar statement to the policeman to that
which he had to Swaine.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HO ME CIRCUIT.--Chelmsford, March 8.

The Commission for Essex was opened on Monday.
The criminal calendar is very heavy; but the business on
the civil side is lighter than usual, there being only four
special jury cues.
William Parsons, late sergeant in the K division of
police, was tried on Tuesday for a misdemeanour, in
having conspired to defeat the ends of justice by giving
false testimony upon an inquiry before Mr. Lewis, the
coroner for Essex, touching the death of a police-con-
stable named Clark.
Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Deedes prosecuted.

The circumstances under which the charge was made
against the defendant have been so frequently reported
that it will be unnecessary to go into them on the pre-
ient occasion. It will be remembered that in June, 1846,
a constable named Clark was found dead in a cornfield
at Dagenham, under circumstances which left no doubt
that his deuth was the result of violence. Several long
inquiries took place before the Coroner, and in the end
a verdict of Wilful murder against some persoa or
persons unknown" was returned. At the last summer
assizes, two constables, named Hickton and Kimpton,
were convicted of perjury upon the evidence given by
them before the Coroner, and the present charge arose
out of the same transaction.

Evidence was given to show that, at the time the let-
ter was posted. the prisoner Waite was employed in the
Chippenham Post-office as a sorter of letters, and had
been so for about a fortnight, and in the ordinary course
the letter which had been stolen would have passed
through his hands.
On his cross examination by Mr. HODGES, it was
elicited that the prisoner was only occasionally em-
ployed in the service of :the Post-office, and on this oc-
casion was so owing to the illness of one of the ordinary
clerks.

Mr. HODGES said the prisoner was not a servant to
the Post-office within the meaning of the Act of Parlia-
ment, but merely a temporary servant. There were
several cased on the subject cited in Fossil and Simias,
2d vol., p. 213.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN said that the cases there cited
were before the statute under which the present indict-
ment was prepared, Ist Vic., cap. 36. In that Act the
word office is used, but the interpretation alone enacts
that that word shall include any person emplyed in any
business of the Post-office. The simple employment by the
Post-office of any person would bring him within the
meaning of the Act.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, after several witnesses
had been Examined, expressed an opinion that the evi
dunce did not support the indictment at present before
the Court. It merely went to show that the defendant
had induced the other parties to make certain statements
to screen them all from a charge of neglecting their
duty; and, at the time when the supposed offence was
committed, there was no legal inquiry pending.
The jury accordingly returned a verdict of—Not
Guilty.
We,. Douglass, 27, a constablo belonging to the
Eastern Counties Railway, stationed at Colchester, and
James Keys, 20, a cab-driver, were indicted, the former
as a principal in committing a felonious assault upon
Agnes Mary Ann Luen, and the latter as an accessory
in aiding end abetting in the commission of the offence.
Mr. Ryland prosecuted; Mr. Charnock appeared for
the prisoners.

Mr. Hodges then addressed the jury for Waite, and
Mr. Justice Wightman having summed up,
The jury found both the prisoners Guilty.
Waite was then sentenced to be transported for
seven years, and Hayward to twelve months' impri-
sonment.

Riehard Newport and Ann Baker wire indicted for
having, on the Ist of September, assaulted George
Church, and robbed him of 371. 10s. at Swindon, in this
county_.

Fron3 the evidence adduced, it seemed that the pro-
secutrix, a very good looking girl, sixteen years old,
was the daughter of a beer shopkeeper at Ardleigh, and
she was in the service of a family near Colchester at the
time this occurrence happened. She had been, it ap-
pears, to pay a visit to her father, and returned back to
Colchester by the luggage train at night, and when she
'got into the town she inquired of the constable, Dou-
glass, whether he could procure her a cab or fly to con-
vey her home. He said he would do so, and called for
the cab driven by the other prisoner, and when the pro-
secutrix got in be said
,he would see her safe home,
and she consented. The prisoner accordingly got in,
and when they had proceeded a short distance be pro-
ceeded to take indecent liberties with the prosecutrix,
and, according to her testimony, succeeded in commit-
ting the offence imputed to him. She also stated that
when she called for assistance the other prisoner drove
all the faster and took no notice of her cries. _ _

Mr: Slade conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Chap-
man Smith defended Baker; the male prisoner was un-
defended.

It appeared that Mr. Church, a farmer, went to Swin
don, on the Ist of Septomber last, to attend the market.
At about eight o'clock in the evening he had occasion
to go down to what is called the New Town of Swindon,
when he came near to a place called the Gas House, he
was knocked down by a man by a blow on the side of
the head. The man came so softly, that the prosecutor
stated that he had no doubt that the man had no shoes
on. On the prosecutor falling to the ground, three men
came round him sad two women, one of whom kneeled
on hie breast, and the other two held bis legs. While
on the ground the prosecutor was able to distinguish the
features of the men, and clearly identified the prisoner
Newport as the man who knocked him down, and the
woman who held his legs he identified as Ann Baker.
While the prosecutor was thus held on the ground, one
of the men turned out his pockets, and robbed him of his
purse, containing bank-notes, gold, and silver to the
amount of 374 10s. They then all ran away. He
(prosecutor) pursued them for some little distance, but
lost sight of them by a turn in the road, near a lone
house.

The jury found Douglas Guilty of an assault, and
Acquitted the other prisoner.
Douglas was sentenced to be kept to hard labour for
two years.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Durham, March 7.
(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
Mary Ann Wood, a young woman about 19 years of
age, was indicted for concealing the birth of her child.
Mr. Matthews and Mr. Seymour conducted the prose-
cution ; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Otter.
The prisoner, it appeared, was, about the 3d of
January, married at Bishop Wearmouth, to a person of
the name of Wood, a sailor. About three weeks after-
ward?, while she and her husband were stopping with
Mrs. Robinson, her mother-in-law, prisoner was taken
ill in the night, and her husband called Mrs. Robinson
up. She complained of internal pain, and some remedies
were given to her, by which she seemed relieved, and
Mrs. Robinson's servant was sent to attend her and sleep
with her the remainder of the night. The servant was
asleep for some hours, and on awaking went down
stairs, leaving the prisoner alone about an hour and a
half. In the course of the forenoon the prisoner, who
appeared to be better, wished her mother to be sent for;
but, before she arrived, some circumstances occurred
which induced Mrs. Robinson to charge her with having
had a child ; and finally the dead body of a female
child, of which she admitted herself to be the mother,
was found in a drawer in the bedroom, of which the
prisoner had the key. There was no doubt the child had
been still born.

Witnesses were then called, who proved that the pri-
soners had lodged at the house near which the prosecu-
tor lost sight of them. That they came there a few
days before the robbery in company, having with them
two dog-carts and five dogs. Just before tee robbery,
the two girls were standing outside the cottage, and
called to the two men, Newport and the other, who
were in the house, to come out; that they did, and went
up the road together towards the spot where Mr. Church
was robbed. At this time Ann Baker had on a black
bonnet and a " whitish" shawl. In about twenty
minutes one of the women returned, and was observed to
put something into the dog-cart which had been owned
by Baker and Newport. Just before this the witness
had heard a noise as if some one had called out in the
direction of where Mr. Church was robbed. Shortly
after Ann Baker returned without a bonnet. Shortly
after, from information given by Mr. Church, the
prisoner Baker was taken into custody and fully identi-
fied by Mr. Church, and in the yard was found her
bonnet, and in the dog-cart the shawl she had worn
when she left the house. Newport was also appre-
hended. The other three persons concerned in the
robbery absconded, but two of them were afterwards ap-
prehended on another charge for felony, and are waiting
their trial at Maidstone gaol.
Mr. SMITH having addressed the jury for Baker,
The Learned JUDGE summed up the case to the jury,
who immediately found both the prisoners Guilty.
Newport was then sentenced to be transported for ten
years, and Baker for seven years.
Mr. Baron Platt has been trying prisoners all day in
the Nisi Prins Court, but no case of public interest has
been taken.

The prisoner was found Guilty, but strongly recom-
mended to mercy.
His LORDSHIP said he thought it a great pity there
had been any prosecution. The old law on this subject
was, that the woman could not be convicted of conceal-
ment except under circumstances such as would justify
the grand jury in bringing in a bill for murder. He
thought the present law not an improvement. His
Lord.hip sentenced the prisoner to be kept in custody
till the rising of the Court, and then to be discharged.
James Hay was indicted for cutting and wounding
John Wade, with intent to do him some grievous bodily
harm.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

Mr. Liddell conducted the prosecution; the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Matthews.
It appeared from the statement of the prosecutor that
on the day when this occurred he was in a beer-shop at
Bury Edge, in this county, and was sitting in a room,
looking out of the window. The prisoner came
in, and before the prosecutor could turn round
to see who it was he received a blow on
the head from an iron bar about five feet long,
used to fasten a window, which the prisoner snatched up
in coming into the room. The blow inflicted a very
severe wound, and a large scar on the prosecutor's fore-
head showed the violence with which it had been given.
The prosecutor had no quarrel with the prisoner, who
would seem to have mistaken him for some other party,
there having been some quarrelling going on just before
in another part of the house.
Guilty, to be imprisoned one year.
John Graham was indicted for the wilful murder of
Robert Heseltine, at Brancepeth, in this county.
Mr. Warren conducted the prosecution ; the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Matthews.
It appeared that a person of the name of Lamb had
been quarrelling with Heseltine, who having the worst
of it, ran off to a beer-house in the neighbourhood, and
called out a person of the name of Peart, who went
back with him, and commenced fighting with Lamb.
Lamb was knocked down, and Graham then, desired
him not to fight any more, as Peart was' too
heavy for him. Heseltine, using some coarse
expressions, asked what he had to do with it ; on
which Graham repeated what he had said before. On
this Heseltine rushed at him and caught him by the hair
with one hand, while he struck him several times with
the other. Graham closed with him and caught him by
the handkerchief, when a struggle took place between
them. The attention of the bystanders was attracted
for some seconds by the other combatants, but when next
seen Graham and Heseltine were in a stooping position;
one of Heseltine's arms being over Graham's shoulder,
the other hanging by his side. It was called out that
Heseltine was hanging, and Graham was forced from
his hold, when Heseltine fell to the ground insensible,
and in a few seconds was dead. On a post mortem
examination the death was found to be caused by suffo-
cation.
Mr. MATTHEWS then addressed the jury for the de-
fence, contending that Graham being so assailed by
Heseltine, had only endeavoured to protect himself from
violence, and had thus caused the death of the unfortunate

CAUGHT AT LAST.—Yesterday Andrew Green and
Samuel Green, father and son, were brought before Mr.
Henry for re-examination, charged with stealing the
sum of 13s. 6d. from a servant girl, at a coffee-shop in
Drury-lane.
The prisoners were ordered to be remanded on Satur-
day last, in consequence of the elder prisoner having
mentioned the names of several respectable persons with
whom he pretended he was connected, as the proprietor
of the Parliamentary Chronicle, a weekly publication, in
order to give the officers an opportunity of making in-
quiries into the correctness of the representations, the
result of which was by no means satisfactory, several
gentlemen being in attendance to make disclosures of a
suspicious character against the prisoners.
In consequence of the elder prisoner having said that
ho was occasionally employed in the gallery of the House
of Commons by Mr. Neilson, of the Times, that gen-
tleman came forward to disclaim all knowledge of him.
The prisoner attempted to deny having ever said he
he was in the habit of attending the Houses of Parlia-
ment for any morning paper.
Mr. Neilson, upon looking at the prisoner, said he re-
collected, some years back, having seen the prisoner in
the gallery, and knowing he was not attached to any
public journal, be requested the messenger to put him
out which he did, but he never had any dealings with
him, and, as to the Parliamentary Chronicle, he believed
it had not been published for a great number of years.
Inspector Marsh, F. division, informed the court that
he had been to Southend, where the prisoner said he
resided, but he could obtain no intelligence of them.
He had also been at the Pulpit office, in Glasshouse-
yard, with which he said he was connected, and he got
a very unfavourable account of the elder prisoner.
A gentleman came forward and said that the prisoner
was in the habit, for several years, of obtaining money
from different insurance-offices to insert their advertise-
ments in his journal, although it had not appeared for
many years. He had obtained six guinesa from the
Atlas Insurance Office to insert their prospectus, but it
never appeared ; nor could a single bookseller, from
whom he had obtained money under the same circum-
stances, say that their advertisements ever appeared.
The prisoner was then charged with obtaining money
under false pretences.
Mr. Thomas *Johnson, solicitor, of Lincoln's Inn- fields,
stated that the elder prisoner came to him on Friday,
representing himself as Dr. Green, and mentioning the
name of his late father and Ur. Barry O'Meara, with

whom he had frequently dined, offered him orders to the
Opera and other theatres. He then gave his card, 3,
Curzon-street, Mayfair. and said that the sum of 161. 154.
6d. was due to him by his father for the journal, and that
ho had been directed by his executors to get a cheque
from witness for the amount. Witness had since seen
his brother upon the subject, and they could find nothing
about the journal since 1836, when two volumes were
supplied by Mr. Norcroft, the original proprietor. On
Saturday he came again in the evening, and said
that he was obliged to take up a bill for 3001., which
had been dishonoured, and that he was in the habit of
paying to his workmen 2501. per week during the Par-
liamentary session. Witness, upon this representation,
not only gave him a cheque for the amount, but also
cashed it ; and, on Tuesday, he discovered he had been
imposed upon. The prisoner gave a stamped receipt,
and said he would call again with orders for the Opera,
and other theatres.

Mr. Burton, ironmonger, of Oxford-street, identified
the prisoner as being the same who, some years ago,
obtained goods from him under false representations, at
which time he drove up in a handsome tilbury, and gave
his address Curzon-street, Mayfair ; but in a short time
he was told, when demand was made for the amount,
that 1)r. Green was dead.

Mr. Natali, a bookseller, also identified the prisoner,
to whom he was in the habit of paying five guineas
yearly for the insertion of advertisements in his journal,
which was not in existence.

Mr. Henry told the young female who had been
robbed in Drury-lane that the evidence did not press
against the younger prisoner, and he was discharged
upon the same recognisances to appear again if neces-
sary ; hut the elder prisoner should be again remanded
without bail for a week, and then be committed on the
two separate charges.
After the deputy bailiff of the County Court at Graves-
end came forward to say something to the disadvantage
of the prisoner, he was removed from the bar.

WORSHIP-STREET.
Yesterday a middle-Aged man named Joseph Mondell,
was placed at the bar, before Mr. Arnold, charged with
the following outrageous assault upon Mr. Robert
Witherden, agent to a gentleman holding extensive
household property at Spite!fields:—
The complainant, one of whose eyes was terribly
swoolen and, contused, and who exhibited other evidence
of serious ill-usage, stated that the defendant being
greatly in arrear with his rent, and it being impossible
either to obtain the money from him or to induce him
to quit the premises, the witness was instructed by the
landlord to effect the latter object by issuing a distraint
upon his goods, but not wi+h the intention of taking
them, if it could be avoided. On proceeding to the house,
at 12 o'clock that day, accompanied by a broker, an
entry was effected in the defendant's absence, but he
shortly afterwards came in, and on witness offering him
to forego the execution if he would ♦acate the tenement
be indignantly refused to do so, loaded him with the vilest
epithets, and felled him to the ground by a terrific
blew over the eyes which nearly stunned him. The bro-
ker then attempted to rescue him from the defendant's
fury, but was immediately knocked down by a blow on
the face, which smashed his spectacles, and this was
rapidly succeeded by another blow across the hand from
a heavy stick, and a third upon the crown of the head,
which caused a severe gash and covered his clothes with
blood. The defendant then attempted to seize a hammer,
and was proceeding to further violence, when a police-
man fortunately happening to pass the house, was
called in, and the defendat was given in charge.
Robert Bushell, the broker, and a man named Urwin,
his assistant, fully corroborated the first witness, and
the former, who exhibited a severe wound in his head,
declared that he had been seriously ill ever since.
When called upon for his answer to the charge, the
defendant said that upon reaching home he found the
brokers in his house, and being informed that they had
effected an entrance by bursting in his door, he knew
that that was illegal and attempted to resist it, but was
immediately assailed by one of the complainants with a
heavy piece of wood, and, considering himself in great
danger, bad protected himself as well as he could.

Thisstatefilent, however, was positively contradicted
by all the witnesses, who declared that there was not
the slightest foundation for it, and
Mr. ARNOLD, whoseverely reprehended the outrageous
conduct the defendant had been guilty of; sentenced him
to pay the full penalty of 51. for the assault upon Mr.
Witherden, a second 51. for the ♦iolent attack upon the
broker, or in default to be committed to the House of
Correction for two months for each penalty, and in ad-
dition ordered him, at the expiration of the respective
terms, to put in substantial bail for his good and peace-
able behaviour for the succeeding three months; neither
of which conditions was the defendant able to comply
with, and he was therefore removed in the van.

ASSIZES OF THE HAUTE GA-

RONNE.
TRIAL OF FBERE LEOTADE.
The important events which have occurred within the
last ten days have so fully absorbed public attention,
that it has been impossible hitherto for us to continue
our report of the proceedings of this remarkable trial.
Now that calm has been restored, and the press of
matter connected with the revolution is less severe, we
shall give a résumé of the sittings of the Court of Assizes
of the Haute Garonne, observing first, that although the
interest of the trial of Leotade had not fallen off, the
evidence produced has been of such a nature that even
if we could have found room for the reports, they must
have been short. The affair, besides, has taken a turn
which enables us to draw up our summary in brief terms.
It will be remembered that, up to the 17th ult. inclu-
sively, the date of our report, most of the witnesses for
the prosecution had been heard, and that Madeleine
Sabathie, who had been ordered into custo. ty on a
charge of prevarication and false evidence, had retracted
her declaration of having seen Cecile Combettes in the
street after the hour at which she was known to have
been in the establishment of the Freres. She was ex-
amined again after her retraction, with a view to ascer-
tain whether she had been suborned to give false evi-
dence, and who were her suborners; but on this point
she persisted in declaring that she had invented her
story merely with a view to serve the freres, and without
having been in any degree influenced by direct or indi-
rect overtures from them. The Frere Laurier, the gar-
dener of the establishment, who had also been ordered
into custody for false testimony, was repeatedly examined
during the remainder of the trial, but he continued to
persist in his first declarations, and when detected in
prevarications and inconsistencies, attributed them to a
defect of memory. The defence set up by Leutade was
chiefly by way of alibi. His object was to prove. that he
had been so engaged in various matters at the time when
Cecile Combettes must, according to the accusation, have
been inveigled from the parlour of the establishment of
the freres, and taken to the spot where she was violated
and destroyed, that he could not have committed those
crimes. He had also combined his defence in such a way
as to cast doubts upon the evidence :of Conte, as to that
witness having seen him and the Frere Jubrien at the
moment when Cecile Combettes was in the establish-
ment, and to create a supposition that the (-rime might
have been committed by Conte himself. A host of wit-
nesses, consisting principally of freres and pupils of the
establishment, came forward to establish the alibi. Their
evidence was of such a character that, if it could be be-
lieved, it was utterly impossible he could have been the
murderer, but most of these witnesses appeared to the
President to have had a lesson got up for them, and
when pressed hard by the President and the Procureur
du Roi they contradicted each other in such a way as to
confirm the suspicions which were entertained of their
veracity. They deposed to a variety of minute circuits
stances which they could hardly be supposed to have re-
membered after so great a lapse of time, and when
asked how they could recollect them, they had nearly
all the same answer ready, namely, that they recollected
the 15th of April, because it rained on that day. Until
the inconsistency of these statements, however, was
pointed out to them, and they began to contradict each
other, no thing could be a more regular and consecu-
tive chain of testimony which had been prepared.
The freres deposed, with an apparent convic-
tion of truth, to their having seen Leotade at
such an hour, such a moment, and such a place, and the
young pupils who were examined gave their evidence
cooly and deliberately, as if they had previously all got
it by heart. Some witnesses, unconnected with the
establishment, also came forward to declare that they
visited it on the 15th, and had seen Leotade occupied in
various parts of the premises at the very time when,
according to the act of accusation, he must have been
engaged in the perpetration of the horrid deed for which
he was now undergoing his trial. It appeared, however,
that some of these individuals had had their memory re-
freshed by letters from Frere Jubrien, written some
months after the murder, and the itupression of the
Court appeared to be that their evidence, although
honestlymeant, had been the result of this contrivance by
Jubrien, who was at one time implicated as an accom-
plice of Leotade. On the other hand, however, some of
the witnesses who were called for the prosecution
stated facts which were of a nature to raise
doubts as to the correctness of the premises on which
the act of accusation was based, and to confirm
portions of the testimony of the witnesses for the
defence, which had at first appeared to have been got
up for them, and to be false. The President, on more
occasions than one, declared the embarrassment that he
felt, and directed the jury to take particular notice of
these points, so that they might be weighed and appre-
ciated in connexion with the whole affair. On the 25th
ult. M. Joly, the advocate for the partie civile, addressed
the Court, the evidence having closed, and he was to
have reattnedhis address:oa the 26th. But on that day
the agitation in Toulouse, oh account of the news from
Paris of the revolution, was so great, that it was foiled
impossible for the Court to proceed with the calm which
so grave and difficult an affair required. M. Joly was
absent at the Hotel de Vjlle, re-organizing the National
Guard, and M. Saint-Grease, one of the counsel for the
defence, was absent on account of the recent death of his
father. The Procureur-General made an application to
the Court, to put off the affair to another assize, and the
Court, after a short deliberation, and with the consent of
M. Gasc, the other counsel for the defence, adjourned
the case to the next assize, on the double ground of the
absence of M. Joly and M. Saint-Grosse, and the excited
suite of the city of Toulouse. By order of the Court,
Madeleine Sabathie and Frere Lauriene were ordered to
bo set at liberty.

ATTEMPTED MURDER AND GALLANT DEFENCE.—
At Six-mile Bridge, Limerick, two ruffians took lodg-
ings a few nights since in the house of Mr. Irwin, a
respectable inhabitant. At midnight they called for a
candle, and thrusling the servant into a room, threatened
to shoot her if she opened her lips, and then admitted
a third bandit, Afterwards they went into Mr. and Mrs.
Irwin's bedroom, and cautioned them not to stir, or
mark the consequence; they, however, disobeyed, endstruggled hard with the assailants, whom Mrs. Irwin's
cries so alarmed that they fled. In their flight they
left behind a bayonet, a gun, and a hat.
Dispatches were reekrived.yestcrdo.y, at the Colonial-
office, from the Governor of the Nauritiu3.