The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-02 00:00:00

THE CHESTER CUP.

The horses struck mitiziioivnupto ten o'clock this morn-
ing were the following:--
Wolfdog, lonian, Morpeth, Needful, Winchester, William-
le-Gros, Xanthus, Pythia, King Cob, Vates, Mount Charles,
Pilot, Milder], Johnny, Merryman, Colleen Dhas,
The Hero, Outcast, Pal, and Astonishment. The only horses
scratched at Chester on Thursday were Valiant and London.
BETTING AT MANCHESTER.—FAIDAT.
CHERTER CUP.-20 to 1 agst Sweatmeat-20 to 1 agst
Miss Burns-20 Co 1 agst Whinstone-20 to 1 agst Best Bower
—2O to 1 agst Mickey Free-40 to 1 agst Warp-40 to 1
agst Fitzallen-40 to 1 agst Hope-50 to 1 agst Salopian.
The first four in great force.
HUNTING APPOINTMENTS
Her Majesty's Stag lids., Mon., Sunning-hill Wells;
Fri., Salt-hill—at 11.
White Cross harrs., Tues., Betlow-lane ; Sat., Marsworth
Cross-road—at 12.
Linlithgow and Stirlingshire hds., Tues., Gosford ; Thurs.
A.ikenside ; Sat., Newbvth-1014.
B. V. H.. Tues , Melcombe-park-wood (Roe Deer) ; Sat.,
Manton Coppice-11%.
Mr. G. Notley's barn., Tues., Poulett's Arms, Loptn
Head.
Pembrokeshire hds., Mon., Llanstinan ; Thurs., Rosa-
market-10.
Seventh Hussars Stag lids., Mon., Crown Inn, Cod-
Seventh
; Thurs., Crown Inn, Iltord-114.
Lord Elctio's hds., Mon., Paxton ; 'hies., Rowchester ;
Wed.. Paston ; Fri., Zuitlaw ; Sat., Ford Bridge.
Mr. Lushington's hds., Mon., Doddington ; Thurs., Leeds
Castle-11.
Ledbury hds., Tues., Bosbury Turnpike; Fri., Colin Park
—lO%.
Monmouthshire lids., Mon., Landenry Court; Thurs., Din-
gestow-bridge —lO.
Sir William Stanley's hds., Tues., Thurseston ; Fri., Pud-
dington-11.
Tiverton hds., Mon., Windsford Hill; Thurs., Marsh-
bridge ; Sat., Dilverton-10%.
V. W. IL, Tues., Lydiard Plain; Thurs., Preston Toll-bar;
Sat., Crudwell-10%.
Cheshire lids., Mon., Oulton Park; Wed., Norton Priory;
Thurs., Daresbury Hall; Sat., Three Greyhounds—lo%.
Sir W. W. Wynn's hds., Mon., Penley ; Tues., Egerton
Arms, Broston Thurs., Gresford ; Sat., Wynnstay.
Earl Fitzwilliam's hds., Mon., Waslingley ; Wed., Leigh-,
ton Village ; Thurs., Wacot Park-10.
Duke of itutland's lids., Mon., Croxton Park ; Tues., Len-
t-n Village; Wed., Elton Manor; Fri, Caythorpe-101A.
Surrey stag hds., Tues., Wickham •, Sat., Reigate.
Albrighton hds., Mon., Tuck-hill ; Thurs., Flashbrook ;'
sat., Little Oun.
East Kent hds., Tues., Black Mill ; Fri., Sweech Gate-10%.
Mr. Heiler's hnds., Mon., Haugham Guide Post; Tues.,
Wilksby Mill; Thurs., Girsby ; Sat., Haugh-10%.
_Herefordshire lids., Wed., grockhall Turnpike; Fri.,
Epwnhope-10%.
Montgomeryshire lids., Tues., Pant-y Fridd ; Fri., Pont-
dolegech-10.
Thanet harrs., Mon., Gore-street ; Wed., Minster Rough.
Mr. Wall's hams.,
Mon., Paincastle; Wed., Llandefelly ;
Fri.. Llanstephan.
Mon., The Hardwicke Arms; Fri.,
Cambridgeshire lids.,
Black Hall.
Mr. Trelawny's lids., Tues., Holne Cot; Fri. Sheep's Torr
vinag,,e-10%•
Oakley lids., Tues., Wavendon Hall; Thurs. Harrold-
bridge; Sat., Knotting-bridge.
Mr. Drake's hd.s., Tues., Souldern Gate; 'Thurs., Arncott-
bridge ; Sat., Befield rollbar-10
Mr. S. Lownde's lids., Thurs., Shenley ; Sat., Winslow.
Warwickshire lids., Mon., Snittertield ; Tues., Mitford
; Thurs., Upton Wood; Fri., Wrotton Abbey; Sat.,
Ihningion-10142.
Heythrop lids., Mon., Chapel House ; Wed,, Tor Wood;
Fri., New Barn ; Sat., Blenheim.
Lord Parker's lids., r ues., Bolton Stone Pits ; Fri., Nettle-

bed.
Berkshire hds., Mon., the Stanford and Baulking Guide-post ;
Wed., Fuxcomb Hill; Fri., Milton Hill.
York and Ainsty lids., Tues., Street Houses; Thurs., Skip
Bridge; Sat., Skipwith Bridge-1011.
Lieutenant Colonel Hildyard's haus., Mon., High Laven ;
Wel., Kennels ; Fri., Putte-1014.
Bedale lids, Mon., Brough ; Wed. Camp ; Fri., Pep-
per fiall-10i.
Boroughbridge harrs., Tues., York Gate; Fri., Aldborough,

. .
Cleveland hds., Mun., Hunteliff; Thurs., Kilda
Durham County hds., Mon., Grindun ; Wed., Whin House
Fri., Maiusforth.
R thy thls., Tues., Mount St. John ; Fri., Tvlas Bridge.
Bur worth lids., Thurs., Croft Bridge ; Sat., Moor Bank-10i

ROYAL POLYTECHNIC INSTITEJ-
The chemical lecturer of the above most excellent.
establishment, Dr. John Ryan, has, we are delighted to
see, resumed the subject of general chemistry, which
has for a considerable time been set aside for that all-
engro sing subject, the potato disease. His lecture rn.
Thursday was on the subject of heat, introductory to
an extended series, explanatory of toe application of
chemistry to the general purposes of life. We need.
scarcely say that the lecture was attended by a crowded
and attentive audience, who listened to the Learned
Doctor with breathless silence. We are more and more'
convinced of the high character and the moral influence
of this splendid institution, especialiy while its pro-
fessors take so much pains to bring the most abstruse
subjects of science in such a plain and simple form. If
we might offer to this talented lecturer a fitting subject
for a future course, we would suggest to him, as a text-
the report of the Health of Towns' Commission-
ers. There he would Lind a wide and legitimate field
for his i'owers as a medical or chemical teacher. Dr.
13schhoffet7"3 lectures on natural philosophy are the
theme of praise itom. all who have heard him, and most
justly so, for the delighald way in which he blends .‘im-
plieity with science is greatly' t 9 be commended.

PETERHEAD. —ln consequence of our whalers here
having been successful for the last two years, many persons
who were not formerly engaged in that trade have become
adventurers in the whale fishery, and are to send out two
additional ships, so that fourteen will go from, here this sea-
son. The herring fishery has certainly done much more good
to the community generally of this town than the whale
fishery. Last year there were 421 boats engaged, and there
were upwards of 50,000 barrels of herrings caught. During
the winter months, old men, women, and children find em-
ployment in making nets, and coopers making casks for the
next year ; and during the fishing hundreds of poor crea-
tures are employed in the curing of the fish, and gaining
from 21. 6d. up to ss. a day ; and this to a set of people who
otherwise could not gain half so much in a week. The in-
crease of population during the fishery is perhaps from 1,500
to 2,ooo—and they have to pay for lodgings equal to half
the yeariy rents of the houses into which they get huddled.
The money they spend for the various articles of food is be-
yond belief, and the consumption of whisky is awful.—lncer-
pass Courier.
RIPON ELECTION.—The Hon. Edward Lascelles has
issued an address offering himself as a candidate for the re
presentiniou of Ripon, vacant by the appointment of the
Right Hon. T. B. C. Smith to the office of Master of the
Rolls in Ireland. Mr. Lascelles states, in his address, that
he will strenuously resist any alteration in the corn-laws
which would deprive the agapulturists of adequate protec-
tion.—Doncaster Gazette.
The blister-Gein-ral of the Ord';2ance, Sir George
Murray, G.C.B , continues indisposed at his residence in Bel-
grave-square. Major-General Sir Frederick Trench and Mr.
Eliot transact the routine business of the Gallant Gene: +l's
department during his .illness.
The newly-appointed Solicitor to the Ordnance, Mr.
Clarke, in the room of Mr. Hignett, has had apartments as-
signed to him in the Ordnance Office, Pall-mall.
LLANDAFF CATHEDRAL.—The Lord Bishop of Llan-
dad' has contributed 5001. towards the restoration of this ca-
thedral,
Tiors.—BRISTOL, JAN. 29.—The high tide
this ev eni g overflowed the coffer-dam at the Dock Corn-
p .ny's works, at Cumberland Basin, and the men had only
just tiine to escape. We understand also that the water has
done considerable damage at the cotton works, and all the
land on the side of the city is inundated.—NEWPOßT, JAN. 2S.
—The tide rose to a very unusual height this morning, the
sea „Ails and the low lands for a number of miles being
inundated. The damage done is very considerable; a great
number of sheep were drowned in the moors, and ricks of
hay much damaged. The water in some of the houses in
the neighbourhood was upwards of four feet deep, and the
roads impassable far upwards of two hours —Nautical
Standard.
IMPORTANT MEETING OF THE LEAGETE.—.MANCITES•
TER, TIiCRSDAY.—An important and highly influential,
thougn private, meeting of the Council of the League took
place here this morning, to consider the steps it is necessary
to take upon the intended measures of the Premier in refe•
rence to the corn-laws. George Wilson, Esq., presided, and
among the other gentlemen present were James Heywood,
Esq. banker; R. H. Gregg (late M.P. for Manchester); J.
Kershaw, Esq, an alderman and magistrate; H. Ashworth,
Kitt., magistrate (of Turton); J. B.SmitkEsq., magistrate;
E. Armitage, Esq., magistrate; Thomas Bright; E
(bro-
ther to the Hon. Member for Durham); John Potter, ot
alderman and magistrate ; Thomas Woolley; Esq.; W. hick
ham, Esq. ; and A. Bannerman, Esq. It 13 understood
An animated discussion took place, in which there was au
unanimous feeling displayed that the measure of thePremiel
would not meet the exigencies of the present emergency, and
ti; it was a temporising policy unworthy of a statesman, con_
fesseny converted to the iinpolicv of any longer maintaining
prohibitiYe or protective laws._ A resolution was come to,
which was to the effect that the announcement of a new
corn-law rendered it desirable that the Mende of free trade
throughout the kingdom should be invited to origiaate p ii-
tions for the total and immediate abolition .of the coin mid
pi•ovision laws.
GALLANT CONDUCT OF THE COAST GUARD.—We. have
much plea Sure in recording- the following, as fully evincing
the character of the true British seaman. It appears that
about one in the morning of Thursday last, a vessel was
discovered ashore about one mile to the westward of llym-
church, which proved to be the pilat yawl " New Flora,"
of Dover. Being very dark at the time, and blowing a
heavy gale from the S.W., the situation of the poor fellows
vi.lo truly hetredin. On the tircumetance being made
.Liearut. n
Newgman, of the Dymehurch station, he
known to
mmediately
land he spot, and oe:lered his boa
proceeded
,d, a distance of a rif,!le and a
to be drawn row. by
ball, to a convenient place for launching ; when a hardy
hand of volunteers, from the Dymehureli and the adjoin-
in; station, manned her, and, after buffeting for some time
with the billowy waves, they succeeded in reaching the
fated vessel, and found the boat washed away, and the crew,
dye men, obliged to take.to the rigging—the
consisting of
ova her: Jender.ing it very haze_ !d-
-igest making a clean sweep
Die gatiant, tars, nothing
ons for the galley to approach.
fellow-creatures,
daunted, were determined to rescue their
which they providentially effected. The poorfs/lows had been
three hours in their dangerous position, and on safely reach •
ing the shore, through a heavy surf, expressed themselves
ano;t grateful for the great exertions used in their behalf. The
?teasel has subsequently gone to pieces, and the remains of
lserbeen sold. We trust that the praiseworthy conduct of
the
fellows, will meet with a commensurate reward Arr
141"/ AY •Acc
iDENT.—A fatal accident occurred
i'11:11.4.7tY 9
-o'clock
en the South-Eastern Railway, As the
Read:main from Dover was passing between
Pluckley and
tltis stoker of the engine imprudently
crossgd oyes' the lunar,'
of which he stood up. Ti, t° the next carriage, on the top
but his head came almost ineguniagb"-koti„, ned him to get down,
the bridges, and he was killed on-iji;;J_tx coined with one of
unfortunate man was George Teylor.69lll'.
__The name of the
kleadaorn to await the coroner's inquest, °°°7 wow lies at

HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

- _
SIR,-Mr. Lumley having addressed to several papers
a copy of a letter he has addressed to me, on the subk et
of my retiring from her Majesty's Theatre, may 1 re-
quest from you the insertion of the following answer to
his statements:—

Mr. Lumley asserts-
1. That I abandoned him at the eleventh hour.

2. That I insisted on the production of my operas as
the condition of my engagements.
3. That I asked for an increase of salary.
4. That I had, unknown to him, accepted the post of
conductor of another " establishment," meaning the
Philharmonic Society.
As to the charge that I had abandoned Mr. Lumley
at the last moment ; at the close of the last seas ni I
was not re-engaged, and there was a notice in the hall,
that all persons not having a written engagement for the
ensuing season, should consider themselves as not en-
gaged. On the 15th instant I received from Mr. Lum-
ley the first communication that he had return‘d from
the Continent and would be glad to see me as soon as
possible. From the fall of the curtain last August, till
the 15th of January, 1 heard nothing from Mr. Lumley
in any way.
I never insisted upon the production of my own operas,
but Mr. Lumley having required that I should abandon
composition altogether, I resisted such a monstrous ex-
ercise of power. No question was raised by me as to
the performance of any works of mine during the ensu-
ing season. In fact 1 have not an opera or ballet in
manuscript at this moment. The position of conductor,
does not, however, constitute an incompetency to pro-
duce operas, as Mr. Lumley supposes, and Meyerbeer,
Lindpainter, Marschner, Spontint, &c., bare been and
are before the public in the triple capacity of dirt ctor of
music, conductor, and composer.
As to an increase of salary, Mr. Lumley well knows
that the 2001., given as an increase last year, did not
compensate me for my extra services.
Lastly, as to my acceptance of the honourable post of
Philharmonic conductor (which only require, the super-
intendence of sight concerts), Mr. Lumley is well aware
that at the commencement of the last season I distinctly
stated to him my intention of accepting the office, if it
should be again proposed to me, though 1 had been in-
duced by him twice before to decline it. I was therefore
fully warranted, and there was no surprise or want of
courtesy. I would never have consented to have con-
ducted concerts which I considered prejudicial to the
opera interests.
Haling gone through Mr. Lumley's assertions, I will
not enter into a discussion a 3 to his opinions; it would
be as egotistical on my part to speak of Don Carlos, as
I conceive it to be indelicate for a manager to criticise
ithe productions of the professor who has for years been
❑amed by him in his own announcements and bills,
" Director of Music, Composer, and Conductor.
For the first time, on the 15th of January, Mr. Lum-
ley imposes conditions that he knew I could not, as a
man of honour, accept; on the 20th, as I understand, he
makes an engagement with another conductor ; on the
23d he informs me of the fact; and, on the 28th, he
brings my name before the public, by publishing, with-
out first consulting me, a private communication.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
71, Albany- street. M. COSTA.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
SlR,—The letter I was compelled to publish to refute
a public attack has produced an answer, in which,
although Mr. Costa has resorted to extraordinary con-
tradictions of some of the details, more than sufficient is
admitted by himself to prove that, whilst I implicitly
relied upon his sincerity, to my most set ions inconveei.
once, at the ♦ery eve of the season, he left me no other
resource than the course adopted.
By showing the character of the assertion on which he
principally rests his defence, I shall at once prove what
is the real value of Mr. Costa's statement.

Would it be imagined that the notice in the porter's
hall, from which he pretends to have concluded
that he was net engaged, and on which he grounds
his excuse of having concealed from me the Taut
of his new engagement, whilst it certainly included
the artisans of the theatre, not only could not
possib:y be considered by any heads of departmv nts
as applicable to them, but that the ',entice was actuali)
suggested to me by Mr. Costa himself, in consequence
of some difficulties which had arisen in departments
under him ; and on application to Mr. Robinson, the
treasurer, I discover that on the last night of last
season Mr. Costa had the notice in question prepared
under his (Mr. Costa's) own direction, he himself indro-
ducing an alteration, having in view his own direction
of the department under his charge during the now
present season. And again, could it be imagined from
that gentleman's letter that if any delay occurred in
his engagement it was through his own omission, as
'he he himself always prepared his own engagements
and sent them to me to be signed ? Could it be
imagined that none or these engagements were signed
in past years before the month of January, when he
complained that he received the first intimation of my
intention by my sending for him on my arrival in
England to settle upon various arrangements for the
opening of the season ?
The exact dates of his engagements are :-1842, Jan.
6 ; 1343, Feb. 20 ; 1844, Feb. 14 ; 1845, Jan. 25.
Mr. Costa should not have forgotten the oral and
written evidence the management possesses.
Then with these circumstances couple the fact that
from the hour I wrote the letter addressed to him to the
moment when I was compelled to publish it, he never for
a moment questioned the least particle of the fat ti it con-
tained.
.1 beg most positively to assert that Mr. Costa insisted
upon the production of operas of his composition, and
made it at the eleventh hour the sine quil non of his en-
gagement.
In answer to my objections that Don Carlos had not
responded to our wishes, he said that it arose from its
being an opera seria, and that this style of opera was un-
palatable to, the public, whilst the one he was preparing
was an opera buffe.
I had no desire to criticise Mr. Costa's compositions. I
stated not my opinion, but that of the public, whose
award he einestioned, urging the repetition of the op. ra
in the past season, when its failure had been proved, to
my serious cost, and I was compelled to refer to its urn-
poptilarity as a reason for my not acceding to his de-
mand ; • and being obliged to publish my letter, I was
bound to suppress nothing.
Mr. Costa does not deny that the rule, as to orchestral
conductors not producing operas in the theatres in
they are engaged, prevails in France and in Italy ; he
invokes, however, for the sake of comparison, the ex-
ample in Germany of such illustrious composers as M.
Meyerbeer—a man whose character is essentially that of
a composer, and not of a conductor—a man in a supreme
position, and whose office is attached more to the Court
than dependent on the theatre.
As regards Mr. Costa's statement, that the 2001.
extra did not pay him for extra services, the 2001. in-
crease was just the whole amount of salary he originally
received from the theatre fur his six months' services,
and that had been gradually increased to 8001. The
position he occupied secured him together probably
double the sum. _ .

As to Mr. Costa's assertion, that I wished to prevent
'.2jm composing at all, and thus, I suppose, deprive him
of anoi—her source of profit, he must recollect that the: e
were si.z rrient;,,, in each year to which his engagement
with me could not pe;:jbly apply, and during which he
was free to compose. I had iiot the least objection to
his producing his operas at any theatre in Europe ex•
cept her Majesty's Theatre.
• As regards that admirable institution,- the Philhar-
monic, it is true the concerts are but tight in number,
but they are of that important character as to demand
constant attention, and take place during the opera
season ; there are, besides, as many rehearsals, having,
to a certain extent, the character of a representation, in-
dependent of ordinary practice.
But Mr. Costa has omitted to say how he could re-
' concile his complain s "of having too much to do" at
one establishment with his acceptance of onerous duties
at another.
Mr. Costa says, that at the commercement of last sea-
son he distinctly stated to me his intention of accepting
the ottic.., if it should be proposed to him.
This I deny most positively, and without asking that
any extra weight should be given to my assertion, were
the circumstance in the least material (which it is not),
is it likely that at that moment when I bad increased his
salary for the purpose of securing iris whole services to
the theatre, that I should have tamely listened to such a
suggestion?
'1 his, however, is not material, for he does not pre-
tend that he ever subsequently gave me notice that th-
situatien had been offered to him, much less does he p: e -
notice of his h .ving accepted
tend that he gage inn any
,he engagement until the middle of the present wcnth.
• Re leaves admitted that the engagement was signed
within fourteen days after my leaving London, and,
theretOre, it must have been contemplate! whilst actually
employed in my service, and be the close of last
semen.

That he ought, as a mere matter of common. courtesy,
not to have left me ignorant of the fact, is obvious.
I have, however, stated more than Anopsh to show
MIT unavoidably I was driven to adopt the only alter-
native compatible with the duties of my position and the
interests of her Msj.sty's Theatre,—l bare the hu-
nour to be; Sir, your obedient servant,
Jtm. 30, 1846. B. LUAILEY,

LORDS' COMMITTEE ON RAILWAY BILLS.—In the
House of Lord; on Thursday, the following Peers were
appointed to form a Committee "to consider the mode in
which the House shall deal with the railway Bills proposed to
be submitted to the House during the present session," viz. :
The Lord President of the Council, Lord Privy Seal, the
Duke of Richmond, Marquis of Lansdowne, Earls Devon,
Shaftesbury, Home, Clarendon, Grey, and St, Germains ;
Lords. Polwarth, Ponsonby, Redesdale, Ddlhousle,
chester, Somerhill, Brougham, Stanley, A4hburton, and
Mouteagle. ' - •

THE -SIM' TORY.—This 'vessel, which has beclm
such au object of Interest; and has excited Se macn attenti. a
said to havet
general 3 .-rnen t
i. enacted
among oq n
in consequence of the
board by the master, and V4U>.
tl:e men, the circumstances of wiYilitha
minds of the public, to require any leilingutteinVein fritesh in the
made to them iu this place is on the point of ilesaviQn ni,"n
indeed, she has not already left, the West India Docksin- fori°'
another voyage. Of courge she has been provided with witha
fresh master, although whether her former complement of
men has been retained we are unable to pay with certainty,
but we believe it has not been the ease. She' doei n proeed
aga;# to China and the East as formerly, but is bound
for Mo-
bile, United icitates, fqr a carAo of cotton. It is ruinoured that
her destination from thp States will be Liverpool, where she
14, at the termination Of . the return voyage, to undergo a
purse of repairs. It is stated amongst oth# things th4t it is
not at
.ojl improbahie tit' ownerswiplil fiwnidttoadeviiisnalltl;.traoi giiivide
well
-known
lovellgin :..?”,!e*Ong.
L... Hpefstittg• ns., aye been hlcard to e:.
press what theyappear to cu.... .ia si.4llC P i )
their safety in a vessel whila hiss
—4dai 4 iye •firqn, 0 fcar Pi;
• -- t 11;c
horrid and barbarous cruelty. heel, ' •

SUGAR DUTIES.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—As there exists a strong probability that the dif-
ferential portion of the duty on sugars will, with all others
of a like evil character, be speedily swept away, it is only
charitable to suggest how this great a.teration can be et-
ftcted in the best manner—that is, with justice to the
West India proprietors, the sugar consumers, and, at the
same time, to the safety of the revenue. It is a matter
of notoriety to those who frequent the sugar market that
the bulk of the quantity imported from the West Indies
is much inferior to the various kinds which are produced
in other quarters of the world, being the result of their
long enjoyed monopoly ; in fact, the British West Indies
possess the unenviable fame of producing, with the ex-
ception of ,Peru, sugars of the lowest description made.
This is not attributable to climate or soil, because the
French islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe have ex-
actly the same, and the sugar produced in those islands
is comparatively of good quality ; it is, therefore, in the
manufacture of the article that our colonists fail. One
uniform rate of duty has hitherto been imposed on all
British Muscovado sugar—of late that rate has been
14s. per cwt. ; this arrangement has operated unfairly
on some of the producers, while it has been profitable to
others ; for example, the sugars manufactured in Ja-
maica, St. Vincent, and Barbadoes, have all along been
very superior to those sent to Europe from the other
West India colonies: the amount of duty ought, conse-
quently, to be apportioned to the worth of the sugar.
During the many ages the West India colonists were in
the enjoyment of a pernicious monopoly no person cared
to draw public attention to these inequalites—it was uni-
versally considered to be a black job altogether, and the
West Indians were classed as one favoured body by the
rest of the world ; but now that they are about to lose
the protection of their monopoly, and to compete with
all other producers of sugar, the affair assumes another
aspect, and a distinction ought to be made in fairness
amongst them in imposing the duty, which, it has before
been stated, is 14s. per cwt. on good and bad Muscovado.
Now, what is Muscovado ? Can any person define the
term beyond telling us that it is a mixture of sugar,
treacle, and dirt ? But in what exact proportions these
are the one to the other no one can pretend to say, un-
less the sugar be analysed, and then that process will
wnly indicate the one sort tested, all the other kinds may
contain very various proportions. A sugar refiner
buys, in his estimation the Muscovado sugar, which has
the least quantity of treacle and dirt; but even he, used
as he is to the appearance and taste of the article, is fre-
quently deceived: it follows, then, that the most honest
method of assessing the duty would be to tax all sugars
at 50 per cent. ad valorem, which closely approximates to
the present rate, letting the purchasers pay the penalty
of their want of judgment; but then comes the question,
how is an ad valorem duty to be carried into effect with-
out subjecting the revenue to considerable risk? It is
true there may be a juggle between seller and buyer to
the injury of the revenue,-if the sale be effected by pri-
vate contract; but if all sugars are sold at public auc-
tion that chance ceases, for it is impossible to suppose
that two or three hundred buyers would combine to
defraud! The Government should, therefore, insist
that all sugars should be sold at auction; neither would
this mode be anything new to the practice of the mar-
kets, for many sales are made in such a manner already;
for instance, nearly all the Barbadoes sugars are so
sold, a large proportion of the sugars from St. Lucia,
the Mauritius, the East Indies, and from foreign
settlements, are in a like way put up to public com-
petition ; in fact, the sale of sugar by auction
is the general rule—the private sale the exception.
As the trouble of apportioning the duty to be paid
would occasion some expense at the Custom-house,
that expense might be defrayed by a small stamp on the
original catalogue—the one on which the selling broker
marks down the prices which the vrrious lots fetch is
meant; this, after the sale has closed, might be sealed up
and transmitted to the Customs for the officrrs. enidam e,
and then return dto the broker. Under such a system
no fraud could occur through a collusion between buyers
and sellers; moreover, a public sale at the ex-duty price
would benefit the producers, inasmuch as they would
have to pay commission on the value of the sugar only,
instead of plying them, as they now do, on the duty-
paid price. The diffe!ence will actually be a profit to
theai, and obviate the nece.sity of their being encum-
bered with the payment of the duty which would be
desirable in more ways than one. As the affair is at
present managed, should the purchaser fail the producer
not only becomes a ert ditor for the value of his sugar,
but for the amount of the duty also; besides, the very
first transaction made on his account establishes a debt
to his coasignee, on which he is charged 5 per cent. in-
terest, in some ca-.es more. It would not he in character
with the purport of this letter to expatiate either on the
proneress of mankind to increase their debts when the
ice is once broken, and the reluctance of contracting
debts is once overcome; or whether it is fair t..) a class
of persons, who are, or should be, far from the scene of
action, so to enthral them. -This, however, is undeniable
Vat many West Indians have been ruined by the ini-
quity of the system forced upon them by the regulations
of the market, and they ought to hail with gladness an
alteration by which they may be relieved.—l am, Sir,
your obedient servant, B. S. U.

THE SUN, LaiDON, MON-13-A:Y MORNI 1`;19-, r`lll3itlT A:R 2. 1846,

LA W ISTELLIGENCE.
ROLL'S COUR r, Jan. 31.
Lord LANGDALE sat at ten o'elo,k, and resumed the
hearing of petitions.

VICE-CHAN'CELLOR'S C5Ul?7', Jan. 31.
(Before Vice-ChaneAtor KNIDLIT BRUCE.)
POWLEB V. SAENz.

His HoNova, in giving judgment, said this e,:se was
between the plaintiffs, English merchants, who had a
house in London and in the State of New Granada, and
the defendants, who were citizAis of New Granada. In
1841 and 1842 contracts were entered into, first between
the plaintiffs and the Government of New Granada, and,
seem dly, between the plaintiffs and the defendants. By
the first the plaintiffs contracted with the Government
for 100,000 arobahs of tobacco annually, to be paid for
by remittances ; and by the second, the defendants con-
tracted to consign to the plaintiffs in London 40,000
arobahs of tobneeo, the defendants having permission to
draw on them to a certain amount. A third contract
was made between the plaintiffs and the defen-
dants and the Government of New Granada,
but it did not affect the merits of the suit. The com-
plaint was, that subsequently to that third contract the
d:-feadants had failed to fulfil the terms of the second
contract, and by sending the 40,01j0 arnbabs, or part of
them, to another house, had not only clepr.ved the plain-
tiffs of their commission, but had injured their character
in the tobacco r:iarket. An injunction was, therefore,
applied for by the plaintiffs.
His HONOUR said, that various questions of law, of
equity, and of fact were raised by the ease on which he
had not felt his mind satisfied by the arguments, though
able, which had been conducted before him. He there-
fore thought ho would do the least. in.;nry to any party
concerned if he refused the motion, and reserved the costs.

BURILIITT v. RANSOM.

his HONOUR said that the Court, would grant au
action at law in this case, if the parties concerned had
wished it, and the more so as he himself had felt inclined '
to have the opinion of a Court of law upon it, but as
both plaintiff and defendant agreed to waive that
election, he had considered the merits of the claim.
The claim of George Goldsmith against the estate of the
-estator was for 1,0001., the amount of a promissory
note. His Honour thought that the mere production of
the note, and the proof of the testator's signature, the
nudum factual, would have been sufficient to support the
pla;ntiff's claim. But he had to consider it in the light
of the evidence 'of Mr. Ransom, who was admitted on
both sides to be a neutral party, w hose evidence could
be received without prejudice. He alleges that the tes-
tator told him he had promised George Goldsmith
1,0001., and that he had given that amount to Ellistou
Allan, without security, considering that the money would
have been safe, but he had reason for fear from the state
of Allan's affairs. Allan became bankrupt, and George
Goldsmith meeting with the testator, reminded him of
his promise, and asked security to the amount of
1,0001., in consequence of which the testator
gave him the promissory note produced in the suit. Toe
testator and Allan had since both died. The questions
raised were, whether Goldsmith, before the note had been
given him, had acquired en equitable right nainst the
estate of the testator, or of Allan, that is, whether the
note was for value given, and whether the testator was
liable to make g 04,4 to Goldsmith the value of the note.
llis lioNoutt having commented on these questions
decided that the claim should be exlinitted.

BRENTFORD PETTY SESSIONS.
At the Br-Ittford Petty Sessions, on Saturday, Mr.
Samuel Parnell. a master baker at Old Brentford, was
tined 40, and costs, for a mast cruel and brutal assault
upon a female named Anna Maria Smith.
It appe-tred that the female in question had had a
child by the defendant, which she had affiliated to him
before the Kensington magistrates, who bad ordered him
to pay 2s. a week for the support of the child. On the
18th inst. defendant sent complainant the amount of
two weeks, instead of three, which was owing, and part
of it was a bad half-crown. She accordingly went to
the shop to see him, and while she was telling his house-
keeper the object of her visit, the defendant seised her
by the shoulders behind, and forced her out of the shop,
and on leaving go of her he kicked her in a brutal
manner.
By the defendant—Had sent her 4s. out of the 64. he
owed her, amongst which was a bad half crown, and
that was the reason she went to him.

The defendant declared that he had sent her all the
money, and that so far from having sent a bad half-,
crown, he had sent it her all in halfpence, and the time
before all in farthings.
The BENch said that only showed the feeling he had
towards the mother of his child, and such payment ‘s as
quite illegal. The defendant had been guilty of a most
unmanly assault, and must pay a fine of 405., or 21 days.
imprisonment.—The fine was paid.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Jan. 31.
THE QUEEN U. THE REV, JOSIAH BARTLETT.
wit% a rule which had been obtained in the Bail
Court a short time since, for a criminal inf,rmation
against the defendant for the publication of a libel on
Mrs. Marianna Tozer. At the time the rule was oh-
tained the tqvticulars of the libd were make public,
and they then appeared to be of a most defamatory
character.

The ATTORNEY. GENE having ri)w moved to make
the rule absolute,
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS said he had been instructed to
show cause against it, but that it would rather be his
duly to rl,clare t') the Court that the defendant
extrettely regretted what he had ,'one, and that ad the
insinuations he ha I uttered against the lady were alto-
gether without foundation. Some err= .oua impression
under which defendant had laboured, had prompted him
to take the course which he now S,) deeply lamented, and
influenced by them he was induced to believe that the
lady had given rise to disorder in his family. In a fit
bordering on madness the letters bad been written, but
he wns now ready to avow that it did not c-mtain a word
of truth. Ile would also say that the lady was in fact
a most excellent person, and that to the last day of his
life he would deplore his having ever attacked her so
unjustifiably and so improperly. In making this state-
ment he hoped he hail only done his duty.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL express,d himself fully sa-
tisfied with so ample a retraction of so foul a calumny,
and one which had been so handsomely made by his
Learned Friend. Under ordinary circums'ances he
would have been content to discharge the rule on pay-
ment of the costs, but in the present instance he must
pres s the Court to make the rule absolute.—Rule ab-
solute.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jan. 30.

THE NEW ZEALAND COMPANY V. HEALY AND CURLING.

Mr. Sergeant 13mEs appeared this morning in this
cause, which was a motion made by Mr. Sergeant
Wilde on a previous day for two rules—one for the
issuing of a commissions to examine witnesses in New
Zealand reepeetieg a dispute between Mr. Healy, the
present defendant, and the New Zealand Company, about
the purehase lan I; and the other rule was to set aside
the proceedings hitherto taken in the cause by the defee-
dant's attorney, Mr. Curling, on the ground of irregularity,
and that the (Tows incurred be allowed the plaintiffs.
The Learned Gentleman went at length into the history
of the ease, whieh was purely of a technical character,
and did not develop the particulars of the original cause
of dispute between the Company an I Mr. [Telly. and
concluded by maintaining that every step taken by Mr.
Healy and his attorney had been perfectly straight-
forward and regular, and that the motions, therefore,
should he discharged.
Mr. Sergeant Wee..xnes followed, and briefly addressed.
the Court on the same side.
Mr. Sergeant Wreou followed, in support of the
rules, and also went into a detail of the ease. He snid
that the original case of legal proceedings was Mr.
Healy bringing an action against Mr. Young, the repre-
sentative of the New Zealand Company, to recover
damages for breach of contract. The Learned Sergeant
said the pleas of the then plaintiff had been met by
answers from the defendants, that notice had been given
that against a certain thee when the surveys were made
Mr. Healy would be at liberty to select his 100 acres of
land, the amount contracted for, but that the plaintiff
neglected to make his selection in time, and that even
after he had an opportunity of making a further selec-
tion in another section of land, which he refused. The
Learned Gentleman then went through all the legal steps
taken by the then plaintiff to enferce his suit, contending
that the whole course had been irregular ; that the de-
fendants had been taken by surprise ; and that diffi-
:elides had been thrown in the way of issuing a com-
mission, requested by the Company, to examine wit-
nesses in New Zealand that were calculated t ► serve
their case. The irregularity of these proceedings, which
had endel in no reset', had induced the defendants non
to become plaintiffs, and to make the present motions.
On these grounds he submitted that the rules be made
absolute.
_

The COURT decided that under such circumstances
the defendant was entitled to the commission ; but they
did not consider that there was sufficient ground for
calling upon the plaintiff, or his attorney, to pay the
costs of the defendant's attendance at Bristol. On the
atter po.nt, therefore, the rule was discharged.

JANUARY 31.
COCKSHEAD V. RICHARDS.
Their LORDSHIPS delivered judgment this morning in
the present case, which was a motion applied for a few
days ago by Sir Thomas Wilde for a rule for a flewtrial, on the
ground of mischrection. The action was one
for libel, and was tried before the Lord Chief Justice in
the last sittings after term. It arose out of the defendant
having received a letter from the n3a` e of the vessel, of
which the former was master, charging him with
drunkenness and other improper proceedings. The de-
fendant communicated the contents of the letter to Mr.
Ward, the owner, in order that he might take such steps
sis
r4c fooirplilai fniierdth of
he tilt ught expedient to protect the crew, the ship, and
the cargo. The plaintiff was eQnsmence, dismissed
from the command of the vessel, and accordingly he
came under
ttel:reote present
thehea d ground
privilegediut.tnnd. th A
atret
cumin andr de
iclett"te'a
that l c w4O ploratly btiatid to pi Ag 4och to the owner,
if he had good reasop tp stypose danger to the properq
and crew; aa otherwtss the ships and those in it, might
be placed in great danger.
Counsel showed cause against the rule, and the je,tg-
went of the Court was delivered by
TIPP' Chief tJustiue Titip4x,,, who deelared that the
letter complained of was a privileged communication, and
that the rule ought to be discharged.
Mr. Justice Cot ms.st dissented from the iticlotent of
the rest of their Lordships, ant} said, that after the most
careful consideration he could not lo l upon the letter
as a privileged communication.— Rule discharged.
CRIME. CoN.—CLARKE V. DIUNSFORD.
Mr. Sergeant CHANNEL was hoard this toning
against a rule obtained by Sir Thol7a4 Wide a few days
ago (a ref{ rt of which appeared in The Sun) for a new
trial or to enter a nonsuit. The point then raised by
the defendant was, that the plaintitfhad engaged to pro-
duce material evidence on the 444 rel4ting to r.-hat took
place in the county of Middlesex, whereas the only evi-
dence adduced was a letter from Mrs. VI( ekes, of Bath,
to the defendant, respecting the taking of lodgings in
that pity, which Counsel on that side eontetnicri was not
at all material to the case, and was not at all necessary
to the verclict.
yeltertiay, shortly before the rising of the Court, Mr.
Sergeant Tulfourd was heard against the rule, and this
morning Mr. Sergeant Channel followed on the same
side.
Their Loanswes, on reviewing the whole case, were
of opinion that the letter formed a connecting link in the
proceedit g, and
that they had not heard sufficient to
warrant them granting the application. Their decision,
therefore, was, that the rule be discharged.--74ule dis-
charged accordingly,

PIiEnoGATIVE COURT, Jan. 31.
(Before Sir HERBERT JENNER FEIST.
ADAIR V. SWETE.
This was a proceeding to admit additional arti?l( s to
revoke a codicil to the will of the late Sir R bert Adair.
The allegation statwd in 1839, at the tini9 Ow making
"
of t codicil, the testatOr-Wits Wholly incapable of execut-
ing any testamentary document, and the articles averred
that at the time the test:aor did not know who he left ex-
ecurAs, whether he had any sons or not, and he would
geitz,up at night and walk about and think it was day.
..1r EiFR-ER-
fi Jr.NNun. FpsT, givirtoiidgiOnt, sAid,
this proceeding mast hWielecited, as it now came too late,
the 9asp. Itad'heeri before o'o Court, and it
ht Kaye 004 fife 4
e ;

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
Mr. Webster Flockton, of Bermondsey, was summoned before
the Lord Mayor, by Henry Kirby, a free waterman, under the
24th section of the rules and bye-laws for the regulation of the
watermen and lightermen of the river Thames, which enacts
that no freeman shall lay or cause to be laid any boat,wherry,
barge, lighter, or craft before any of the public stairs, or any
plying place or causeway, so as to obstruct, hinder, or prevent
the due and orderly passing of any boat, wherry, barge,
lighter, or craft, under a penalty not exceeding 205., nor less
than ss.
The case arose out of the contest between the Corporation
and the Watermen's Steam-boat Company.
and The
m ee
o'clock,pl aihe t
saw ssatN a
stated ed
bargethat on‘vi
with'
Flockton"
Sunday last,
lying along the causeway at Paul's-wharf, which lie (and he
had been a waterman for a great number of years) always
believed to be the property of the Corporation of London.
between
upon nine
i
• The LORD MAYOR—Does it obstruct the navigation of the
river? The complainant—Certainly it does; and it lies
there still.
The Loup MAYOR Haveyou ascertained who placed it
there? The Complainant—lsio, my Lord; but the bye-
law says if the offender should not be known, the owner of
the barge or boat which constituted the obstruction shall pay
the penalty.
Mr. Flockton said, he wished the complainant to prove
satisfactorily that he was a free waterman, and he also
wished to be informed how it happened that Mr. Kirby
sustained any damage by the position of the barge at the
stairs.
The complainant said, that although he had not owned
a as berry for eight years, his claim to the character was un-
questionable.
The LouD MAYOR said, it mattered nothing whether the
complaint was made by a waterman or any other person, as
the Act determined that anybody who saw the obstruction
might give evidence. on the subject.
Mr. Flockton said, he did not entertain any idea of getting
clear of the matter by making objections of a frivolous
nature. He then contended that the barge was not in
an improper position at the wharf, that it was not cal-
culated to obstruct the navigation of the river, and that
he certainly had a right to place and keep it there.
The complainant said, the truth was the barge was so
deposited in order to be made a pier for the Watermen's
Steam packet Company, for the landing and embarkation of
the public.
Mr. Flockton—This complaint has no reference whatever
to personal injury; it arises entirely from a rival company,
which is allowed the use of the Blackfriars-bridge pier, from
which the Watermen's Steam-boat Company is excluded.
Now, the object of establishing a pier at Paul's-wharf is to do
away with the conflict about Blackfriars-bridge pier, and
remedy the inconvenience occasioned by the exclusion.
The complainant said the free passage was obstructed, and
the poor watermen who plied at the stairs had serious ground
for complaint against such impediments, which were calcu-
lated to aggravate the general distress arising from the appli-
cation of steam on the Thames.
The LORD MAYOR—The Corporation are either right or
wrong in the view they are taking of this question. lam
determined to give the most complete opportunity of trying
the merits 4f the question. I consider that the river is the
Queen's highway as well as the public streets. and that to
obstruct the navigation in the public plying-place for craft is
a violation of the statute. The case is satisfactorily proved,
and I adjudge the defendant to pay the fine of 20s.
Mr. Flockton—Am i entitled to appeal against your Lord-
ship's decision?
The LORD MAYOR—Certainly.
• The defendant then entered into recngnizances to appeal.
The complainant ther said the barge remained in the same
place still, and he p plied for a summons calling upon Mr.
Flockton to answer for the repetition of what the Lord Mayor
considered to be an offence. He at the same time said, that
he would not press for the summons if the defendant would
promise to remove his barge forthwith.
Mr. Flockton—No, I shall make no promise of the kind.
The object of making Paul's-wharf a place for steamers to
touch at for the pulic accommodation is to end this dis-
agreeable dispute about Blackfriars-pier.
The LORD MAYOR—I can say nothing about Blackfriars-
pier, as the subject is not before me.
The complainant declared that the body to which he be-
longed had never violated the City regulations in any way,
and that they had appealed by petition in the year 1844 to
the Navigation Committee upon the subject of the serious
damage they had sustained.
The second summons was then granted, and it appeared to
be the intention of the complainant to proceed by summons
daily against the defendant, who is a gentleman of un-
questionable respectability and a personal friend of the Lord
Mayor.
F. Tyler Russell, assistant to Mr. Saner, surgeon and ape:,
thecary, of No. 36, Finsbury-square, was brought up in
the custody of John Forrester for final examination, upon
the charge of having committed a forgery upon his em-
ployer.
A gentleman from the . firm of Messrs. Freshfield, soli-
citors to the Bank of England, attended for the prosecution.
Mr. Saner deposed, that the prisoner had been employed
by him about 11 months as an assistant, and had frequently
seen him write his name. On Tuesday last, on .arriving front
his country residence at the surgery, he found that the pri-
soner had gone away without leave or notice, and he also
found that his desk had been broken open, and that foUr
blank cheques had been taken from his cheque-book. He
then hastened to the bank of England, where he kept cash,
and there he found that a cheque for 551., purporting to be
drawn by him, had been cashed. He immediately pro-
nounced the instrument to be a forgery. The handwriting
was so like his own that he could hardly distinguish the
difference. Since that time he had received a letter from
the prisoner. He had never authorised the prisoner, or any-
body else, to sign his name upon any occasion ; but the pri-
soner might often have received accounts for the house and
given receipts in his own name.
The prisoner's letter was in a very supplicatory tone. It
called upon the complainant in the name of Heaven to for-
give him; intimated that good would spring out of evil, and
that the pardon for which he sought would have the effect
of preventing him from making any attempt upon his life,
as well as turn away the mind of his wife from the contem-
plation of a similar act. It stated that poverty was his
crime, that he had merely used the cash he had taken up
as a loan, and would expiate the offence without fail, and
it concluded by invoking blessings on the head of his bene-
factor.
Mr. Puzey, clerk in the Bank of England, stated that he
had paid the cheque for 551. produced, and signed with Mr.
Saner's name, to a person whom he believed to be the pri-
soner. The heque had been paid in sovereigns.
John Forrester, the officer, stated that the Bank authori-
ties having applied for a warrant against the prisoner, he
went, accompanied by his brother Daniel, in search of Ras
-
sell, and found him in a room at No. 9, Upper East Smith-
field, on Wednesday. Witness asked him where the money
was, and the prisoner opened a drawer and handed him a
purse containing 85/. 10s. in gold. The prisoner then put on
his clothes and accompanied witness.
The prisoner said he did not to wish to say anvtlaino
• and
was committed for trial.

BO W-STREI7.
On Fridays builder, named Macey, occupyiag business pre-
mises in Drury-lane, appeared bef,Re Mr. Jardine to solicit
his Worship's protection aR4A4I4t the future violence of a poor
old woman of ensonnd 'Wed, who, he alleged, had recently,
on two Qv thfge eeperate occasions, set fire to his workshops
and the adjoining buildings,
The wetnen wawa placed in the prisoners' dock, and was
undoubtedly insane.
The complaintlit made a statement relative to the recent
fires in Drury-lane, the repeated occurrence of which induced
him to apply to the coroner to institute an inquiry into their
probable tirtifie, No satisfactory result was arrived at, and
tho inquest was Consequently adjourned. On the previous
night (Thursday), whilst engaged in his counting-house, at
about eight o'clock, he again discovered :that his premises
were in flames, and it was only by extraordinary efforts from
the firemen that they were prevented extending to a vast
range buildings on either side. Having heard that the
woman at the bar had often threatened to destroy his work-
shops, lieu which she resided with her husband, he felt it
his duty to take her before a magistrate, in the hope that his
Worship would hear evidence respecting her, and then take
steps to insure his future safety. .Mr. ',Macey stated that he
took the reet of the rooms in which she lived, and had
heown both her and her husband for twiny years. They
had earned a respectable livelihood by weaving; but three
years ago, in consequence of her evident insanity, the parish
authorities were applied to to take care of her. They did so
fora few days, and then informed the husband that be would
be required to go into the Union also if she remained any
longer. This he declined doing, so long as he could earn his
independence, and the woman was consequently sent back
to him, since wbieh time she had been under no other con-
trai than that which he was now and then enabled to ex-
ercise over her.
The woman, during and subsequent to this statement, in-
dulged in a variety of wild exclamations, declaring that
Macey harboured witches, sorcerers, and evil-doers in his
house, had murdered all her relations, and had set his own
premises on fire because, like all wicked people, he liked to
be in flames. She said also that he had plenty of money to
build them up again,
On Saturday Mr. Joseph Ninch. of Fleet-street, paper-
hanger, appeared before Mr. Twyford for final examina-
tion upon a eharge of forging a receipt for the purpose of
defrauding Mr. Fitzpatrick, a solicitor.
The evidence has already appeared in the columns
of The sun.
The case had been adjourned from this day fortnight,
at the prisoeer's own wish, in order that the statement
of another witness might be heard, and that he might not
be taken by surprise at the.sessions, but as Mr. Fitz
patrick had determined not to call this witness, the
prisoner was now committed to take his
Mr. Twvfonli took bail for the prisoner's appearance
at the sessions,

SOUTHWARK.
On Friday Diana Briswick, the wife of a tradesman resid-
ing in the vicinity of St. George's Church, Southwark, was
charged with threatening to murder her husband that
morning. _

The complainant stated that he had been living apart from
his wife for a font:4l%lole time, owing to her profligate habits
as well as the violence of her conduct; that on a recent oc •
casion she attacked him with a butcher's cleaver, and he had
great difficulty in preserving his life. On that day she
rushed into his shop, and, ejaculating that she came for Te:
range, swore that: she would never be at TAG Lunn she had
his de. The cctmplain4o; added, thit 'he was compelled to
t4aye is ihtti custody, or else murder would ensue.
The defendant, a fine-looking woman, was in such a state
of excitement, that it took two of the officers of the Court to
restrain her from rushing towards her hu,sbansiwblie !le was
giving his testimony in the witnoss;l44. Wow 4=14 all