The Sun.
London, England, 1869-01-19 00:00:00

WOMAN AND THE CIVIL SER VICE.

Miss Cobbs, the well known ad voc..to of Women's Suf-
frage, writes to the Echo on "the question whether
the Government (if it assume the direction of the
telegraphs) will continue to employ female clerks, or
will discharge the two or three hundred now engaged."
" Those young women," she says, "receiving from 6s.
to 12e. a week in the small stations, and from 10s. to 20s.
at Mrs. Craig's large establishment at Lothbury, will, in
the grievous dearth and paucity of female employments,
find it hard to earn their living elsewhere. But the more
serious question is, will the English Liberal Government
adopt generally a generous course towards women, taking
into consideration their many natural and artificial disabilities,
and show them such favour as may be consonant with the
public service? In a very striking article in a recent number
of the Contemporary Review, on tho "Condition of Women
in France," Miss J. Boucherett described how the Imperial
Government has been gradually getting rid for years back of
all its female employees, because they could record no votes
for the Ministerial candidates. The position of women bad
thus rapidly altered for the worse under the so-called
liberalism of universal (male) suffrage. I would fain hope
that, as the English franchise is widened, no such tendencies
will come into play. The trades'-unionism of sex is the
cruellest trades' union of all. Live and lot live' may surely
be accounted a fair principle for the weaker as for the
stronger half of humanity."

CHARGE AGAINST THE DIRECTORS OF
THE MERCHANTS' COMPANY.

At the Mansion House on Monday Mr. Richard Stuart
Jane, of No. 8, Chesham-place, Belgrave-square ; Mr.
Horace Edward Chapman, of Roehampton ; and
John Hulbert Hulbert, of 23, New Bond-street, were
summoned by Mr. John Summerville, commisaion agent. of
Cathedral-street, Glasgow, for that they, in the month of
November, and, at divers other times during the year
1865, unlawfully did conspire together, by divers
false pretences and representations, to deceive and
defraud the complainant and divers other parsons
with the intent to induce them to become share-
holders in a certain company called the "Merchants' Com-
pany (Limited.)" There was a second summons against the
same defendants, charging them with conspiring together to
publish a false prospectus relating to the same company.
There was also a summons against Mr. Richard Stuart
I. sue and Mr. James Childs, at the instance of Mr. John
Land, of Litchurch, in the county of Derby, charging them
with publishing a false circular accompanying a call relating
to the same company. Mr. Humphreys (Humphreys and
Morgan) appeared for the prosecution. The defendants
were represented by Mr. Metcalfe, Mr. Montague Williams,
Mr. James, and Mr. G. Lewis.
The presiding magistrates were the Lord Mayor
and Alderman Sir Benjamin Phillips. The pro-
ceedings appeared to create great interest. Mr.
Humphreys said he had to prosecute the defendants
for a serious and fearful fraud upon the complainant and a
number of other persons. Mr. Somerville was a share-
holder in the Merchants' Company, and he came for-
ward as a prosecutor in that capacity. Mr. Lane was
fcrmerly a member of the firm of Hoare, Buxton, and Co.,
which failed in the year 1856. Ho subsequently received
a sum of £4,000 from Messrs. Overend, Gurney, and Co.,
and owed them a large sum of money at the time of the
failure. The charge against the defendants was framed
under the statute which enacted that any director who should
make a false statement, or cause a prospectus containing any
false statements with intent to induce persons to become
shareholders with intent to defraud, should be deemed guilty
of misdemeanour and be liable to penal servitude, or to be
imprisoned with hard labour, or be sentenced to solitary
confinement. The offence imputed to them would be that
of publishing a false prospectus and a false balance-sheet
with intent to defraud the complainant and the pal!c gene-
rally, and he thought he ought to state that it was extremely
probable tnat on a future day other persons would be in-
cluded in the charge. be was then about to read the pro-
spectus, but

Mr. Metcalfe and Mr. J. Lewis interposed, and contended
,hat some definite charge should be made against the do-

rendants.

The Lord Mayor, under the advice of Mr. Oke, ruled that
Mr. Humphreys was entitled to state all the facts.
Mr. Humphreys went on to show where, in his opinion,
the prisoners had acted fraudulently.
After evidence had been given in support of the opentng
statement, the inquiry was adjourned.

We have to record the death of Sir Henry Ellis,
K.II.

On Saturday afternoon the bodie3 of two men were
rocovere4 from tho workings of the Oak Colliery.