The Sun.
London, England, 1856-01-21 00:00:00

WOOL.

Fine English wools move off steadily, at fully last week's
prices. In otker kinds only a moderate business is doing,
en former terms. As the stocks of colonial are very mode-
rate, importers are firm, at full currencies, although pub-
lic sales will be held next month. Last week's imports
were only 400 bales from the Cape, and six from Jamaica.
The following are the current rates of English wool :
Down tega, 1s ld to is 3d ; half-bred hoggets, is ld to is
21 ; do. wailers, is Od to is ld ; Kent, fleeces, is ld to
is ; combing skin, 10d to is 1d ; Down ewes, is id to
is ld ; Leicester fleeces, lld to is Otid; flannel wool, is Od
to is 2d ; blanket wool, 9d tola Od per lb.

SEEDS.
'''Agricultural seeds are steady, at about last week's quo-
tations; but linseed. and rapeseed, including cakes, are
very dull, and lower to sell.
Turnip,wnite,per bash. 223 to 25s
Swede • • ...... • • --8 —s
idastsTd. Brown • • .... 12s 20s
TThite, new ••• • •• Hs lls
rares,Wlnter, new.... 6s 6d 7s 6d
Canary, per quarter .. 633 s 638
26481 38001
Foreign • 623 723
•• 703 85s1
40a 4631
C Yoev
White
rr
h,'Ristseed"E: *.? 7 3 0

Carraway (new) . • 429 44s
Coriander ....... 26ii s
llempseed, per quarter 548 60s
Linseed, Eng. Sowing .• —m s
Crashing 78s 84s
Baltic ••........ —a —s
Odessa .
Linseed Cake• pr. ton—
English .• ...AV 10s 15? Os
Foreign, per ton 13110 s 14ilVs
Rape Oakes pr ton 71108 8, Os
Rapeseed, New, pr cr.. 90s 9is

Trefoil• new.. •• •• •• ••

TAL:

.OW.

Owing to the possibility of
ket since Monday last has rul
considerable fall has taken p 1
from 68s to 585 per cwt.—
P.Y.C. on the spot to-day. .4
in the value of town tallow, a
35 per Sibs.

peace with Russia our mar-
led excessively heavy, and a
lace in the quotations, viz.,
-the latter being the price of
A. great fall has been observed
End rough fat has declined to

1851. 1852. 1863. 1854. 1860.
....--... ----- ------ --- ---.--- --.
Stock this day ...... 59,244 143,748 41.248 34.806 21,973
36s Od to 45s 6d 62s 91to 57 sOl to 58s Od
Price of Y. C .... i 36.1 31 to —s 08 —s 08 —.a Od to —s 08
Delivery last week .. 2,643 2,045 2,365. 1.417 1,451
Ditto from June 1.... 73,056 68,444 70,063 51;900 80.692
Arrivals last week., 1,356 1,528 269 14660 2,050
Ditto from Junel ~.. 95,766 71,524 87,936 51,706 56,123
Price of Town ..... , 394 Gd 478 34 644 Od sls 08 56s 6d

THE MURDER IN BEDFORD-BOW.—The E IdJOUrned in-
quest was resumed to-day, but it was further adjourned
to Wednesday next. The murderer Westi;on was not
in attendance.

PADWICK v. PALM.
Court of Queen's Bench.—(This Day.)

(Befora Mr. Justice Erie and a Common Jury.)

This was an action for the recovery of 2,0001. on a bill
of exchange, alleged to have been accepted by Mrs.
Palmer, of Rugeley, mother of William Palmer, charged
with the murder of his wife and Mr. J. P. Cools, but
which she pleaded was a forgery. In consequence of a
rumour being prevalent that the prisoner would be
brought up by habeas corpus from Stafford gaol to give
evidence in the case the most intense interest and ex-
citement prevailed, and for upwards of an hour and a
half before the commencement of the trial the avenues
leading to the court were densely crowded by persons
anxious to obtain a glance of the prisoner, who has be-
.some one of the celebrities of the day in consequence of
his former position in I;fe, and the heinous nature of the
offences with which be stands charged. The prisoner,
we understand, was brought up from Stafford gaol on
Saturday, and lodged in the House of Detention, from
whence he was removed to the court in a cab, at an
earlier hour this morning than was expected, when many
were deprived of gratifying their morbid curiosity by
obtaining a glimpse of him.
A body of the A division of the police was in attend-
ance, and preserved order at the doors and in the outer
Hall.

The trial took place in the Lord Chancellor's Court,
a confined area, which was very speedily filled after
the opening of the doors, and continued so throughout
the trial. We have to express our thanks to the officers
of the Court for the facilities of egress and ingress to it
which they rendered the representatives of Tice Sun.
Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., and Mr. M‘Namana were
counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and
Mr. Gray were for the defendant.
The witnesses on each side were ordered out of Court.

Mr. M‘Namara opened the pleading. This was an
action brought by the plaintiff, endorsee of a bill of ex-
change for 2,0001. for three months, and the defendant,
Mrs. Sarah Palmer, was the acceptor. There was also
a count for money due, and an account stated. The
defendant pleaded that she did not aceept the bill, and
secondly, that she was never indebted as alleged.
Mr. James, in addressing the jury, said this bill was
given to the plaintiff, a gentleman of considerable pro-
perty, by Wm. Palmer, a person who had lately obtained
an unfortunate notoriety. Palmer being in want of money
was introduced to Mr. Padwick for an advance on a
bill of exchange, and the action was brought by the plain-
tiff against the defendant (the mother of Win. Palmer),
the acceptor of the bill in question. The bill was dated
Rugeley, July 3, 1854, for three months, and was drawn
y William Palmer on his mother, a lady of pre
party, possessed of at least 50,0001., whose in-
dorsement it purported to bear, payable at the
London and Westminster Bank, Lothbury, Lon
don. The plaintiff, under all the circumstances at-
tending the case, had brought this action before a jury
fur investigation, in order that the matter might be
strictly inquired into. Mr. Palmer was the owner of
a considerable number of race-horses, and getting into
embarrassments, made an application, as he (the learned
counsel) had stated to plaintiff, foran advance of money,
which was given him on the bill in question. On
the 28th November last Palmer gave the plaintiff a check
on the National Provincial Bank for 1,0001., which was
dishonoured, and en Bth Dec. a second check on the
same bank for 6001., which was also dishonoured. Pad-
wick, holding a power of attorney against Palmer as a
collateral security, issued a writ execution against
him, and he was taken into custody on the 12th Dec.
for the amount remaining due on the bill. During the
time Palmer was in custody the investigations oc-
curred which had attracted the attention not only of
every person in England but almost the whole of the
world, and the plaintiff was anxious that it should be
known that these proceedings had not been instituted
since the investigation of the coroner's jury, but that
Palmer was in his custody before that took place. When
the coroner's jury returned a verdict of guilty, Palmer
was taken from the custody of the sheriff and lodged in
gaol on the criminal charge.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins said at present it was not his
intention to call Wm. Palmer as a witness.

Mr. James said that was a question which must rest
with the discretion of the learned counsel, but it should
be known the defendant applied for the habeas corpus to
bang up the prisoner Palmer as her witness. Mr. Pad-
wick was anxious it should be known that in this pro-
ceeding he was not oppressing a man abiding the fear-
ful results of the charges now laid against him, but to
ascertain whether or not this was a forgery, and that he
had instituted proceedings against him before the coro-
ner's inquests were held. If the defendant's case proved
true, he was afraid Palmer would be found to have
added forgery to the other crimes with which he stood
charged. After some further remarks the learned coun-
sel called the following evidence :
Mr. Fred. Crabb, clerk to the magistrates at Rugeley,
was then called, who stated that he had known Mrs.
Palmer 12 or 13 years. She was a lady of property, re-
siding at Rugeley. He was acquainted with her hand-
writing, and he believed the bill he held in his hand was
in her handwriting. On the 3d of July some inquiry
relative to the bill was made to him, and he wrote the
letter produced.

Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—Did you ever see her write ?
Witness—He could not recollect.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—Upon your solemn oath, can
you swear you never saw her write ?
Witness—l cannot recollect.

Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—How have you became ac-
quainted with her handwriting ?

Witness—l have seen it attached to deeds.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—l submit that this witness is
not competent to speak to handwriting.
Mr. E. James—Have you acted upon the deed you
have seen the name of Mrs. Palmer attached to ?
Witness—Yes—The money was paid, and the deed
handad over.

Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—You spoke of some bills—are
they in the bands of your family ?
Witness—Yes.

Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—Do they not intend to act for
the recovory?

Witness—Certainly.

Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—Have they not had a hint
given them that action would be brought against
them ?

Witness—Certainly not.

Mr. Justice Erie said he could not see why Mrs. Pal-
mer's name should be attached to the deed.

Witness—lt was my usual practice to have both
parties to the mortgage to sign the deed.
Mr. John Serjeant said he knew William Palmer and
had had many money transactions with him. He intro-
duced Mr. Palmer to Mr. Padwick. In 1852 witness
had a bill drawn by Palmer upon his mother for 1,0001.
The bill was paid and returned to William Palmer. It
wax paid by a cheque from Mrs. Sarah Palmer.
Cross-examined by Sergeant Wilkins—The cheque was
forwarded to witness by Palmer from Rugeley.
By Mr. James—Witness paid the cheque to his
bankers, Messrs. Dixon, in Chancery-lane.
By the Judge—Witness advanced the money to Pal-
mer in the name of Mr. Padwick and through him, Mr.
Padwick being his solicitor at the time.
By Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—He believed the cheque
was drawn in favour of Mr. Pad wick, but he could not
say with perfect certainty.

A discussion here arose as to the time as to which a
certain letter was sent to Mr. G. Palmer, asking him to
produce a certain cheque. The counsel for the defendant
stated that time sufficient had not been given them to
produce the cheque.

Mr. E. James submitted that enough had been done
to admit secondary evidence.

The evidence was then admitted, with leave to move.

141 r. Sergeant re-examined—The cheque in question
paid the bill of 1,0001. The bill was drawn by Mrs.
Palmer. At the time the bill was due some questions
arose upon it, and Palmer said he would see it made all
right. He was acquainted with the handwriting of
Mrs. Palmer ; but he could not take upon himself to
positively swear that the name on the bill in
question was in her -handwriting as three years had
elapsed since the transaction which he had just men•
tioned bad taken place.

Mr. Justice Erle said he thought that this was valid
evidence, as Mrs. Palmer made no objection to the sig-
nature, and the money was paid in the ordinary course.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—What makes you believe that
the signature on the bill in question is Mrs. Palmer's
handwriting ?
Witness—By the imitation of the writing. The money
had been paid on the one cheque, and he should think
that money would also be paid on the other.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins—l believe you thave correctly
designated the writing on the bill when you used the
word imitation.
Mr. E.. James said with this witness, who really
thought that the signature was Mrs. Palmer's, his case
would close.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, in addressing the jury for the
defence, said that but for the wicked and unconstitu-
tional attempts that bad been made by those who ought
to he the guardians of their liberties and rights—that
but for the most infamous accumulations of malignity
that had been heaped on the head of that man whose

name appeared in this transaction, the cause would
not have occupied 10 minutes in investigation. When
they had heard the defendant's case, unless they had
allowed their minds to be prejudiced, and they had
taken for granted that the reports which had been
circulated, to pander to the worst appetites of
the public, were true—if their minds were free
from such prejudice, he should be able to present to
them a clear case for the defendant. One observation
his learned friend had made in concluding his remarks,
which he (Sergeant Wilkins) might venture to say had
unfortunately escaped his lips, because he did not think
him a man who would stab the helpless, and to wantonly
and wilfully accumulate the difficulties that others had
thrown in that poor man's way. When his friend closed
his 'observations by saying that if the defence set up
were true, that Palmer would have added to his cata.
logue of crimes that of forgery, he (Sergeant Wilkins)
thought that was an inadvertent expression he would
not repeat, and as a man, a lawyer, and a gentle-
man he could not justify. He should tall before
them Mrs. Palmer and different members of the
Palmer family, who would tell them that the signatur3
to this bill was not in the handwriting of the defendant.
The learned sergeant, after some other remarks called
the following witnesses.

Mr. Smith, an attorney, practising at Birmingham,
was then called, and stated that he had acted for her,
for some years, as her solicitor. Ile was well acquainted
with the handwriting of Mrs. Palmer, and he felt cer-
tain that the signature was not in Mrs. Palmer's hand
writing.

Cross-examined by Mr. E. James—He had heard that
William Palmer had been brought up from Stafford on
habeas corpus, as a witness for the defence, and he was
now in the neighbourhood of the court. He had seen
Mrs. Palmer write frequently in connection with matters
relative to her son Walter's bankruptcy.
Several documents were handed to witness which
bore the name of Mrs. Palmer. Some of them he iden-
tified as having her signature, others he was doubtful of.

Mrs. Sarah Palmer, mother of Mr. Palmer, deposed
she was a widow residing at Rugeley. She was upwards
of 60 years of age. The acceptance of the bill in ques-
ttion wait n her writing. aturday last was the first
line she saw the bill. She first learned of the accept-
ance of such 3 bill on the 12th December.

Sergeant Wilkins—The bill then would have been 17
months' old.

Mrs. Palmer, examination continued—She never
heard of the existence of the bill before that day. No
application had ever been made to her before this for
the payment of the bill. She never gave any one autho-
rity to sign her name to it. About three years ago she
accepted two bills for about 7001. for her son, but she
had security for it. She never accepted a bill for 1,0001
from him.

Cross-examined—• The bill was accepted three years
ago. She accepted one drawn by a person named
Buxton ; that is one with my signature, not
one like this, a forgery ; that was accepted
for his accommodation, but she did not then think
she would have had to pay it. Buxton's bill was
accepted about seven or eight months ago. She had
not a fresh security for that bill ; she hail security from
her son on real property at Stafford to the amount of
5,0001. or 6,0001. It was for advances made at different
times of money. She never accepted more than four
bills. She did not know then it was for Buxton. She
had paid 2601. on that bill, but she had not been sued.
The others were about 7001. In Dec., 1852, she did
not give a check to plaintiff for 1,0001. She had
banked for many years at the Rugeley Bank. She also
banked at Lichfield. Did not give a check for 1,000/.
in December for her son to Padwick or Sergeant. Her
son George had the management of the money for her
son William. She did not know if she gave him a
cheque for 1,0001. She had been told of the notice to
produce a cheque for 1,000/. The money came out of the
Lichfield bank. The whole of the money, 5,0001. or
6,0001., she advanced for her son William came out of
the Lichfield bank—Messrs. Palmer and Green, who
had now failed.

Examination continued-;She might have paid 2001.
some six weeks ago. Her son William was still in her
debt, but she held some property as security. She could
not say how much as she did not transact her business,
but through a solicitor. She never knew or heard that
a claim had been made upon her for 1,0001. When she
paid the 2001. she did not know it was on account of a
bill drawn for 1,0001. She could not say that she had
not advanced 1,0001. to her son. The bill in her Land
at that moment was not in her handwriting.
The learned counsel then placed some papers in the
witness's hand, and she selected three as genuine sig-
natures.

Mr. G. Palmer, a solicitor, son Of the last witness,
was then called, and examined by Mr. Grey. He was
sure the bill i❑ question was not signed by his mother.
M iss Sarah Palmer, deposed that the signature on
the bill in question was not in her mother's hand•

writing.
Cross-examined—Two bills handed in were in her
mother's writing, to her belief. She heard her brother
William ask her mother last summer to accept a small
bill for 5501., which she did, it was for a grocer.

Rev. Thomas Palmer, brother of the accused, at Coll-
ton Elms, Derbyshire, deposed the signature to the bill
in question was not in his mother's handwriting.
Cross-examined—The two bills produced he believed
to be in his mother's handwriting. A packet of receipts
was put into the witnesses hand, which he said were in
his mother's handwriting.

Re-examined—Looking at the general character of
the bill in question, he should say it was not his mother's
handwriting.

Mr. Strawbridge, manager of the Rugeley Bank, de-
posed the signature to the bill for 2,00 C/. was not in
the defendant's handwriting ; he should not pay a cheque
on that signature without confirmation.
Cross-examined—The acceptance to one of Wri
bills produced for 3501., he believed was the handwrit-
ing of the defendant, the "r" in Sarah and Palmer were
never connected in a genuine signature of the defendant.
Mr. Lander, solicitor, Rugeley, of the firm of Lander,
Gardiner, and Co., deposed that he believed the signa-
ture was hot in the defendant's handwriting.
Mr. Jae. Gardiner of the above firm gave similar evi-
dence, as did Mr. Joseph Cope, clerk to Mr. Geo. Pal-
mer, and Mr. Win. Barnett, of Panne, near Bir-
mingham.

Mr. Nethercliffe deposed he had compared genuine
signatures of the defendant's with the one in dispute, and
said it was not Mrs. Palmer's handwriting. There was a
similarity about the capital letters to her writing, but
the S was rather carefully and slowly done. The P
was a little shakey. The "r" in Sarah and also the "r"
iu Palmer were not the running-hand "r" like Mrs.
Palmer's, but the round text schoolboy-hand. This
was written slowly, with the pen frequently taken off in
the word Palmer no less than five times, and not joined
again ; in all the genuine ones the letters " abner
showed no join between any of the letters. It wanted
also the freedom of a genuine signature. It was close,
compact, and slowly done.

This was the defendant's case.
The plaintiff then called

William Palmer, who, amidst much excitement, en-
tered the court in custody of an officer. The prisoner is
a person of ordinary height, and rather corpulent. He
has round and rather expressive features, with a
light complexion. He wears little whiskers, and hair
which is of a very light auburn. His eyes are also of a
light colour, but very expressive. He entered the wit-
ness box in a perfectly cool and collected manner, sur-
veyed leisurely the crowded audience, to some
of whom he nodded in a familiar manner, and
appeared to fix his attention on some person located near
the learned counsel who conducted the plaintiff's case.
The prisoner was then sworn and answered the follow-
ing questions put to him by the learned counsel in a
low, yet firm and distinct voice, 'betraying not the least
hesitation or trepidation, or at all moved by the gaze of
the audience, collected together to obtain a glimpse of
an individual who has lately obtained so much
notoriety.
Mr. Edlwin James, to the witness, handing him the
bill of exchange—ls the signature " Wiiam Palmer,"
as the drawer of that bill, in your handwriting ?

Palmer—Yes.
Air. E. James—And you applied to Padwick to ad-
vance you money on it ?
Prisoner--I did.

Mr. E.. James—Who wrote Sarah Palmer's accept-
ance on it ?
Prisoner—Anne Palmer.
Mr. E.. James—Who is she ?
Prisoner—She is now dead.
M. E. James—Do you mean your late wife ?
Prisonrer - Yes.
Mr. EL James—Did you see her write it ?
Pi ismer —Yes.

Mr. E.. James—Then there is an end of the case, my
lord.

Mr. Ji te.tice Erie to the witness—You may retire.
The witness was then removed in custody of the officer.
Mr, E. win James said that in consequence of the
evidence they had just beard, he retired from the case.
He trust ed his lordship and the jury would think that
under al 1 the circumstances the plaintiff had done right
in having• this investigation, and that he now honourably
retired fr em the case.
Mr. St irgeant Wilkins as counsel for the defendant

said he must admit that the plaintiff had acted with th
greatest propriety in bringing this action, and the defendant
felt so strongly that the plaintiff had ►uffered from the
improper conduct, probably of a member of the family,
that it would be very dishonourable on their
part to ask for costs from the plaiutif. That, of
course, was all they could do ; and, although they bad
obtained the verdict, they were bound to express
their obligations to the plaintiff for the manner
in which he had conducted his case. There were
other actions of a similar nature pending, but be hoped
that the result of this case would put an and to them.
The learned Judge then directed the jury to return a
verdict for the defendant, which they accordingly did,
and the case terminated.

During the progress of the trial the number of persons
congregated outside the building increased considerably,
the roadway between 'Westminster Abbey and the pri-
vate entrance to the court being blocked up by persons
anxiously waiting to see Palmer enter the cab on his
way back to prison. At the corners of Parliament-
street and St. George street large numbers of persons
were also collected. '

We understand that the trial of Wm. Palmer for the
murder of his wife and Mr. Cook will in all probability
take place in London, in consequence of the strong
feeling against him in Staffordshire by all classes. It is
the intention of the friends of the accused to instruct
counsel in the ensuing terai to apply for a certiorari to
remove the trial from that county to Westminster.
The prisoner was attired in mourning, and his general
appearance was that of a man against whom the sus-
picion of so foul an act as that with which he is charged
would not rest. He appeared in excellent health and
spirits, and not to have suffered from incarceration or
mental excitement.