The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-05 00:00:00

UNIVBRSITY INTELLIGENCE.

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON.—MASTERS OF ARTS, 1856.
—Branch 1. Classics : Swinton Henry Boult, Man-
chester New and University Colleges ; Rev. Humphry
Fitzroy Woolrycb, King's College ; James A. Picton,
Lancashire Independent and Owen's Colleges. Branch
2. Mathematics and Natural philosophy Wrn. Fiddian
Moulton (gold medal), Wesley College, Sheffield ; Robt.
Griffith Williams, University College. Branch 3. Logic,
Moral Philosophy, Philosophy of the Mind, Political
Philosophy, Political Economy Wm. Roby Fletcher
(gold medal), Lancashire Independent College ; Fred.
Evans Anthony, Western College, Plymouth ; Charles
Chapman, Western College, Plymouth ; Henry Charles
Leonar,,,University College ; Rev. Francis Wm, Har-
nett, University College.
CAMBRIDGE, July 4.—At a congregation held yester-
day, the degree of Master of Arts was conferred on Mr.
John Hewett, of Clare•hall, and Mr. Ed min Story, of
St. John's:College. At a congregation this day, the
term was dissOlved in the usual form. The number of
M.A. and B.A. degrees conferred during the past aca-
demical year is—M.A., 222 ; B A., 119.

[ADVERTISEMENT].—Nothing can be more interesting than
the numerous extraordinary cures without medicine of Indi-
gestion (Dyspesia), Flatulency, Constipation, Nervous, Bili-
ous, and Liver complaints, Cough, Asthma, Consumption,
and Debility effected by Du Barry's delicious Health.Restoriug
Revalenta Arabica Food. We give a few.—Winchester, De-
cember 3d, 1847. Gentlemen,—I am happy to be able to
inform you that the person for whom your Revalenta was
procured has derived a very great benefit from its use; dis-
tressing symptoms of Dropsy, Dyspepsia, and Constipation of
long standing have been removed, and a feeling of restored
health induced. Having witnessed the beneficial effects
in the above mentioned-case I can with confidence recom-
mend it, &c. JAMES SIIORLAND, late Surgeon, 96th Regiment.
Silvington Rectory, Cleobury Mortimer, Salop, Feb., 1851.
Gentlemen,—l was in a miserable state of nervous irritation,
but now I am entirely free from it; and in the enjoyment of
good health. Your Food is everything to be desired in
my case, as I feel as if I was in a new state of existence;
and I recommend others similarly affected to try it, for its
effects are most surprising and agreeable,—Rev. JOIN JONES.
Supported by testimonials from the celebrated Professors of
Chemistry Dr. 'Andrew Ure ; Dr. Shorland ; Dr. Harvey ;
Dr. Campbell ; Dr. Gattiker ; Dr. Wurzer ; Dr. Ingram ;
Lord Stuart de Decics ; the Dowager Countess of Castle-
stuart ; Major-Gen. Thomas King, and many other respectable
persons, whose health has been restored by it, after all other
means cf cure had failed. Suitably packed for all climates,
with full instructions, In canisters, 51bs., lls. ; 121b5., 228. ;
super-refined, 11b., 6s. ; 21bs., lls. ; fibs., 225, ; 101bs., 335.
The 101bs. and 121bs. carnage free, on receipt of post-office
order. Barry du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, London
Fortnum, Mason, and Co., Purveyors( to her Majesty, Picca-
dilly ; also at 60, Gracechurch-street; 33J and 451, Strand; 4,
Cheapside ; 63, Ccrnhill; 49, BishoTisgate-street 55, Char.
ing-cross ; 54, Upper Baker-street ; U 3 and 157, Oxford.
atceot
•

"The agent or representative of a celebrated military
tailor in London was unfortunate to engage in a personal
controversy with one of the provost-marshal's serjeants
some nights ago at Balaklava, and having been dining
out he was indiscreet and valorous enough to let fly with
his left on the official's frontispiece by way of bringing
the affair to a satisfactory termination. He was at once
seized and carried off to the main guard, where delin-
quents pass the night in fear and trembling till they are
jiect_up_for the attehtiSsaof the drummers in the morn-
ing.- Td vain 'did he entreat the presiding judge to send
for various distinguished clients to speak to character or
bail him out, in vain did be implore that Lord This or
General That, whose intimate friend he was, might be
summoned. No effort could avert or delay his doom ;
be was tied up when his turn came like the rest, and re-
ceived two dozen on the back."

The statement had been disseminated all through the
East, and wherever the plaintiff went, in Constantinople,
at Scutari, Malta, and Gibraltar, he was constantly met
by officers who made allusions to the statement about
his having been flogged. The annoyance arising from
this was of course very great, and when he arrived in
London ;he was subjected to the same sort of thing, for
almost everybody he met in the course of business had
something to say about the matter ; and to make the an-
noyance, complete_ he found that a clerk in Messrs.
Buckmaster's establishment had made a bet that the
plaintiff bad been flogged, and although the clerk heard
his declaration to the contrary, he refused to pay the
bet unless be eaw the plaintiff's back.
The plaintiff in his evidence proved the above circum-
stances, and he also stated that the libel must have re-
ferred to him, as there was no agent in his trade in the
Crimea eau:rept himself.
Mr. Justice Willes said it was not pretended that there
was any. truth in the libel, and he supposed that the only
object of the action was to clear character. There must
sometimes be blunders of this kind, and the proper way
was to withdraw the charge, the defendant to pay the

costs. :
_ _ _
Mr: Chamhers—That was always the way ; charges
were always withdrawn when it was found that they
must be withdrawn. He had stated in his opening
speech what lie required—a candid, honest, leading
article upon the subject— and nothing else should satisfy
him.

Mr. Justice Willes—You have your adversary down,
and yon ought not to jump on him.
Mr. Chambers--My adVersary is not down ; he is a
live lion at present", and the tail will be wagged to-mor-
row if I consent to what is proposed. (Laughter.)
Other witnesses were then called.

Mr. Adams, who is engaged in carrying on Messrs.
Buckinaster'ibusines, said that he went to the Times
office as .soon, as he saw the libel, and asked for the
editor ; but he was told -that " the editor could only be
approached by letter." Ete accordingly wrote, saying that
they had a traveller in the Crimea, and were anxious to
know the name of the individual referred to by the
Times correspondent ; and the answer he got was that
the name had not been sent by their correspondent, and
therefore they could not furnish him with it.
Two officers from the Crimea, and three ?gentlemen
engaged in trade in London, expressed their belief that
the libel referred to the plaintiff ; and one of the gentle-
men said that you could not convince officers even now
that the libel was not true. The other day an officer
asked him how that young man was who was flogged.
Witness said that the Times had contradicted it ; but
the officer replied that it was all nonsense, he knew it
was true.

Mr. Serjeant Shee then addressed the jury for the de-
fendant, and said that no complaint as to the want of
truth in the statement of the correspondent bad been
made until the plaintiff's solicitor wrote on the 23:1 April.
Immediately on the receipt of that letter a communica-
tion was made to the correspondent in the Crimea, and
an answer having been obtained from him on the 29:12
May, the folio Wing paragraph wai at once published in
the Timca, -It was placed at the bead of a column, was
printed in large type, and was in a portion of the paper
where it was most ikely.to attract attention. It was
in these terms :

"A ' Stave' ,; from the Camp.—A. letter fr‘km our cor-
respondent in the Crimea of the 20tli of November last,
published in the ?limes of the 4th of December, contained,
among many other matters, a statement concerning the
agent of a celebrated military tailor in London, who, it
was said, had been flogged at Balaklava by order of the
Provost Marshal. - The story pa-sed without comment
from any quarter until April last., when we received a
letter from the solicitors of a person who alleged that he
was the individual pointed by our correspondent, and
that there was no truth in the statement. We immedi-
ately wrote to the Crimea to have the matter inquired
into, and we received a reply confirming the denial of
the person hi question. We greatly regret having been
the instrument of promulgating what now appears to
have been a fabrication, and are happy to make this
p üblic reparation at the earliest possible opportunity."
The uarned Sergeant submitted to thejury that there
was nothing in the case to show that there was any ma-
lice on the part of the Times, nor was there any other
circumstances-that required that the jury should award
large damages.-:
Mr. Chambers replied in a Speech of some length, the
cone'usion of 'is/Filch was followed by the applause of the
spectators in court. •

The jury, after an hour's consideration, found a ver-
dict for the plaintiff, damages 4001. ; and the foreman
said that they did not consider the apology timely or
satisfactory.

We insert the following remarks from the Times
in reference to the above trial :

All who are as conversant with human nature
as we are obliged to be are aware that there ex-
ists in many minds a positive appetite for being
libelled. Rife as calumny is said to be, there is
a still deeper desire to be the victim of it. Per-
sons are found to speculate, not so much on the
purse of any .alleged libeller as on the sympathy of
the public. Such attempts would never be made
if there did not also exist a readiness in some other
minds, scarcely more healthy, as it seems to us, to
lavish their interest without inquiry. We are
driven to some such reasons to account for au ac-
tion, and the. present result of that action, at
Guildhall, yesterday, and reported in our columns
this morning. Our readers may remember, or
more likely will have forgotten, that in the thick
of our intelligence from the Crimea, when we
were daily giving all kinds of details of camp life,
a letter from our correspondent contained the
statement that the agent of a celebrated military
tailor in London had come into collision with the
Provost Marshal's people, and, in spite of remon-
strances and references, had been flogged. We
had not ourselves the smallest idea who the person
was, or who the military tailor was ; and, although
it was sworn on the trial yesterday that there was
only one representative of a military tailor in Bala-
klava, we had no reason to believe there were not
many. Even in this metropolis it is no unusual
thing for gentlemen to get into scrapes and to be
exposed to indignities ; and only in yesterday's
paper we gave an account of such an occurrence, in
which a--Mr: Graham was most grossly and brutally
ill-used by the Windsor police. We were aware
there was rather stern discipline for such people at
the camp. :It was, then, in perfect simplicity,
without the least offence, and, indeed, in utter ig-
norance of the hero of the story, that we published
the statement. In due time, however, we received
a lawyer's letter. demanding an apology. Our
apology would have been worth nothing, and, in
fact, we should not have been justified in making
it without some new information, which we could
only obtain by sending to the Crimea. This we
did at once, and:the very day after we received a
contradiction of the statement we published it in a
prominent form, and, we beg to submit, in a per-
fectly simple and inoffensive style. It will be
found in the report of the trial, and our readers
can judge for themselves whether, as Mr. M.
Chambers states, "it was a sneering and contemp-
tible paragraph, as offensive as it was scandalous."
Notwithstanding the very hard words which
Mr. M. Chambers thinks fit to apply to us, and
the effect they seem to have produced on the jury,
we beg to submit that regard to truth itself, not
to speak of self-Ospect, enjoined the duty of in-
quiry. We had published a statement that a re-
presentative of a military tailor had got into a
street row in Balaklava and had-been flogged, and
some months afterwards a solicitor sendsus a letter
on behalf of a " Mr. Smith," an utter stranger,
and calls upon-ns'to state in a leading article that
he.was not the man flogged. If there was a simple
I and honest desire to protect a servant of Messrs.
Buckmaster, bearing this
_not very uncommon

GUILDHALL.—WiIIiam Alexander Law was sum-
moned before Sir R. W. Carden for using a room in the
Sun and Last public-house, in Newgate•snarket, for the
purpose of betting.
Mr. Charles Pearson, the City solicitor, attended to
prosecute on behalf of the corporation.
The defendant, who pleaded guilty, handed in an ap-
peal in mitigation of the penalty, setting forth that he
was not a regular frequenter of the room, and that be
never made a bet in the house prior to the 26th of May.
He discontinued betting entirely on the 11th of June.
During that ttitna-heetas only. occasionally there, and
many days was not in the house. He trusted a distinc-
tion would be made between one who regularly and
systematically used a room for the purpose of betting,
and one who casually did so.
in answer to Sir R. W. Carden he stated that he bad
been a publican, but was out of business. He tried
betting as a speculation, but he did not find it so pro-
fitable ss he anticipated. _ _

Edward Briscall, 168, said he saw the defendant in
the room on the 27th of May, but he was not there on
the 28th, 29th, 30th, and 31st. On some occasions sub-
sequently he was in the room by himself, and sometimes
there were others there.

Sir R. W. Carden said this was not a very bad case ;
but he knew he was transgressing the law.
The defendant said he knew he was, but he had dis-
continued the practice, and would not attempt it again.
Sir R. W. Carden said the practice was so demoralis-
ing that the magistrates weredetermined to put it down.
It was a species of small gambling, which led youths
to rob employers. He did not think the defendant
would be likely to open a place of the sort again,
and he did not want to punish him so much as to give a
warning to others. He should only fine him 51. and
costs, which was much easier than he had let others off.
He %Nisbed it to be understood that the Act of Parlia-
ment gave him the power of inflicting an imprisonment
of sir months, • with or without hard labour, and
without giving the defendant the option of paying a
fine.
The fine was paid.

BOW-STREET.—Louis Conrad, a Frenchman, for-
merly servant to Lady Mallett, was brought up on re-
mand, charged with obtaining goods from Messrs.
Stone, and Company, of Waterloo-house, on false pre-
tences.

It appeared that the prisoner, while in Lady Mallet's
service, had been frequently sent to Waterloo house for
goods for his 'mistress and for Lady Brougham. On such
occasions, however, he was always provided with a
written order. About a fortnight ago he was discharged,
and a few days afterwards he obtained 16 yards of an
expensive satin from Messrs. Pearce, in the name of his
late mistress.

The case was adjourned in the absence from illness of
Lady Mallet.
The prisoner was further charged with having ob-
tained a pair of boots from Mr. Paul Hase, a boot•
maker in the Burlington-arcade, on the false pretence
that they were ordered by Mr. Edward Mallet, son of
Lady Mallett.
He was committed for trial.

Wiliam, Stamp, described as the secretary of the
London Excbauge Advance Fund and Life Association,
was summoned before Mr. Jardine to answer a charge
of perjury.
Mr. T. Atkinson appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr. W. Cooper for the defendant.
The prosecution was instituted by Mr. R. Dawson, a
solicitor, of 5, Upper Charles-street, Westminster, who
stated that, being pressed for money in April last, he
applied to the society with which defendant was con-
nected for a loan of 1101. 'The business of the office
was carried on at 2, Adelphi-terrace, and the " managers"
appeared to be twu brothers named Hutchinson. They
were present, air? it was agreed that witness should give
them a bill of sale upon the furniture of bis house at
Hastings. Witness objected to this at first, but on heir)°,
assured that it was a matter of form, intended as much
for his own security as for, theirs, he ooneented. On_Sa-
turday, the 12th of April, witness, accompanied by his
brother-in•law,./a clergyman, went to the office to execute
the bill of sale When this was done the " managers"
handed him a cheque for 601. 10s. only charging 371.
103. for expenses, independently of 21. 12s. previously
received. They afterwards remitted 121. 10s. to wit-
ness's landlord for rent, and in three weeks afterwards,
without giving him any notice, they put•the bill of sale
into execution, took possession of his furniture, and sold
it „fl' by auction—sending down a London auctioneer for
the purpose. The sale only realised 1141., and the office
made him out a debtor to the extent of 291. 17s. 9d. in
additien to the amount.

An office copy of the bill of sale was produced, and it
appeared that the document was sworn to, in the affi-
davit of defendant, as having been filed on the 10th of
April, instead of the 12th.
In cross-examination Mr. Dawson admitted that he
might have agreed to execute the bill of sale on the 10th.
He was in difficulties at the time, but did not owe more
than 1001. He did not consent to the execution of the
bill of sale to avoid an order of the County Court, and
denied having removed any of his furniture to London
afttrwards, except his office furniture and papers, and a
few things not included in the bill of sale.
Mr. Cooper, for the defence, urged that the mistake of
date was merely the accident of a clerk, the appointment
having been originally made for the 10th of April, and
the whole proceeding was the result of revenge. The
terms of the loan office might ba harsh, but this arose
from what they had heard respecting the proceeding-8 of
the prosecutor.
Mr. Jardine said there was nothing in the evidence to
support a charge of " wilful and corrupt" perjury. There
had been false swearing as to a certain fact, but " false-
swearing," unless shown to be intentional, did not amount
to perjury. In this case it had been clearly proved that
the defendant, in an affidavit before the judge, requirsd
by the act of Parliament, had sworn that the bill of sale
was filed on the 10th of April—two days before it was
actually completed. But it had not been shown that the
office gained anything thereby, or that there could have
been any possible motive for making a false statement
as to the date. How, then, could he convict the defen-
dant of wilful and corrupt perjury ? The summons must
be dismissed.

During the proceedings Mr. Dawson complained that
the manager, Messrs. Hutchinson, had insulted him in
court, by offensive gestures and insulting expressions ;
upon which the brothers rejoined that Mr. Dawson had
called them a couple of " rascals." while passing from
the witness-box; and in this temper the parties left the
court.

WESTMINSTER.—Mrs. Emma Stevens, the wife of
a builder, residing at 14, Devonshire-terrace, Kensington,
underwent a lengthened examination before Mr. Paynter,
cbared with wilful and corrupt perjury.
Mr. Sleigh, instructed by Mr. W. H. Barber, conducted
the prosecution ; and Mr. Vaughan, solicitor, appeared
for the defence.

In 1854 Mrs. Palmer, an old lady of large property,
occupied apartments in the house of defendant and her
husband, 14, Devonshire-terrace, Kensington. Shortly
afterwards a hamper, containing valuable property be-
longing to Mrs. Palmer, was stolen from a store-room.
After some months Mrs. Palmer left, and having suspi-
aliy t
ea
s
suspi-
cions that Mr. and Mrs. Stevens had been implicated
in the robbery, sent one of her daughters (who was un-
knownspe inspect
finding
whetherthseo
anymf uer furnished
china,hheedr
property
apartm eton
wastFl,tbh uetmthi)enr er. Miss
reality
apparentlyPalmer,p tel
aert n
aad some curtains, &c., which her mother had lost, gave
Mrs. Stevens and her husband into custody. After three
examinations at the Hammersmith Police-court defendant
and his wife were discharged by Mr. Dayman, who sug-
gested that Mrs. Palmer might have left the cups and
other little things behind her by accident, evidence having
been given respecting the larger articles, the curtains, by
the accused, showing that they had bought them as de-
scribed. It was alleged by Mr. Sleigh that the defend-
ant, and her husband, " cultivating the suggestion"
thrown out by Mr. Dayman, brought an action for false
imprisonment against Mrs. Palmer, which was tried be-
fore Lord Chief Justice Campbell on the 19th June in
the. Court of Queen's Bench, when defendant swore
that she found the small articles enumerated in
the cupboard of the back parlour after Mrs. Palmer
had left the apartment, and upon this evidence
the jury gave 201. damages. The assignment of perjury
was that of having sworn the things were left in the cup-
board, and after proof that defendant had given had such
testimony, Mr. Sleigh called three witnesses who re•
moved Mrs. Palmer's goods from the house, who proved
that the cupboards were thoroughly and strictly exa-
mined by them, and that nothing was left behind. Mrs.
Palmer and her daughter also examined the curtains,
which were produced, and positively identified them.
Mr. Vaughan, for the defence, having commented on
the evidence,
Mr. Paynter thought that the case was proved as far
as a negative could be proved, and said he should com-
mit the accused, upon bail, for trial at the Central Cri-
minal Court, but must adjourn the case for the deposi-
tiOns to be prepared.
Mr. Vaughan said he would prove, on the trial, that
the things were left in the cupboard.