The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-19 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 19, 185 S.

THE VICT.:,RIA CROSS.

(Front the Gazette of Friday.)
WAIL-OFFICE, JUNE 11.

out a standard-bearer, and in the presence of a number
of the enemy, killed him and captured the standard.
These are only a few of the gallant deeds of this brave
young officer."—(Despatch from Major-General James
Hope Grant, K.O 8., dated Jan. 10, 1858.).
Lieutenant John Watson, Ist Punjab Cavalry—Date of
act of brawn-, Nov. 14, IF-57 —" Lieutenant Watson, on
the 11th of November, with his own squadron, and that
under Captain, then Lieutenant Probyn, came upon a
body of the rebel cavalry." The Re.saldar in command
of them—a fine. specimen of the Hindustani Messultnan
—and backed by half-a-dozen equally brave men, rode
out to the front. Lieutenant ‘Vatson singled out this
fine-looking fellow, and attacked him. The Ressaldar
presented his pistol at, Lieutenant Watson's breast, at a
yard's distance, and tired, but, most providentially,
without effect ; the ball must by accident have pre-
viously fallen out. -Lieut. Watson ran the man through
with his sword, rill eiatnonntetl him; but 'the native
otficer, nothing daunted, drew his tulwar, and with his
sowars renewed his attack upon Lieut. Wataon, who
bravely defended himself until his 'own men joined in
the melee, and utterly routed the party. In this ren-
centre Lieut. Watson received a blow on the head from
a tulwar, another on the left arm, which severed his
chain gauntlet glave, a tulwar cut on his right arm,
which fortunately only divided the sleeve of his jacket,
but disabled the arm for some time ; a bullet also passed
through his coat, and he received a blow on his leg, which
lamed him for some days afterwards."—(Despatch from
Majotaq-eneral James Hope Grant, K.C.8., dated Jan.
10, 1858.

MEMORANDUM.. —Lieutonanta Duncan Charles Home
and Philip Salkeld, B.Jogal Enginaeri, upon whom the
Victoria Cross was provisionally conferred by Mr.ior-
General Sir Archdale Wilson, Bart., K.C.B , for
their conspicuous bravery in the Performance of the
desperate duty of blowing In the Cashmere Gate of the
fortress of Delhi, in broad daylight, under a heavy fire of
musketry, on the morning of the 14th Sept., 1857, prepa-
ratory to the assault, would have beanroceinmended to
her Majesty for confirmation-in that distinction, had they
survived.

4lr INTELLIGgNCE.--June 18.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Sitting; at Nisi Prins at Westminster, before Lord
C•unpbell and a Sdecial Jury.)
HUGHES V. LADY DINNIBSN-LIBEL.
(CO7l, tif.ited from 7he Sun of yesterday )

Miss Luiskill, examined by Mr. Honeyman—She was
a niece of the first Lord Dinorben's first Wife. After
her aunt's death she continued to reside with him at
Kirmel-park after his second marriage with the present
Lady Dinorben. She bad never seen her wri e, and
had only received one letter from her. Witness had
-een letters and notes addressed by her ladyship. She
had seen the letter addressed to Lord Ravensworth and
Mr. Liddell ; she was not well acquainted with her
ladyship's handwriting ; but to the hest of her belief she
considered they were in her ladyship's handwriting.
Crose-examined by Mr. Macaulay--She toll Mr.
Blexam last year, when he brought the letters to her,
that she thought they were in Lady Dinorben's hand-
writing. She received the letter referred to, in 1811,
after her mother's death. She had not kept it.
Re-examined—The letter to herself was anonymous.
Lord Campbell—How do you know they came from
Lady Dinorben ?
Witness —Because they were so very much like her
handwriting. She had rec:•ived,two letters from Lady
Dinorben with her signature, and one anonymouP. The
latter she seat to Lerd Dieorben, and wrote to him
respecting its centente. She had not preservel them.
Miss Teniel, ix-amined by Mr. E. James—Slie was
four years' governess in Lady Dinorbeu'e family. She
believed the letters produced were written by her lady-
ship. Toe writing eas very like her ladyship's.
Cross-ex trained by Mr. Macauiay—Tnere were great
pecttharitirs about the " and "L," and
others tiat resembled her ladyship's writing. Mr.
Bloxana my attention to them when he showed
me the le' tars.
Mr. Morris, in the employ of a stationer of Mount
Grosvenor-square—Liviy Dinorben dealt with u- for
7otee years bef re 1851. The letter commencing "the
bonsekeeper, oh the bousekreper," was written on
wiper met enclosed in an envelope, supplied by his firm.
The envelope had the name of the firm on it. The
letter was post el S.mth-itroet, Grosvenor-square, the
nearest post-office to Lady Dinorben's residence-
Cross-examined by Mr. Macaulay—The paper and
envelope were like that supplied to her ladyship—they
sell a large quantity of the same kind t r other persons.
R.-examined by Mr. James—The paper and envelope
produced were of the character supplied to her ladyship.
She was very particular in having that qnality and
description. When her ladyship was in mourning she
had another quality as well.
Mr. Netherel ff, examined by Mr. Dovill—He was a
lithographer, at.d was hilt] habit of eimilts of
VilkJiajds.P.ajde.,geeeee on ti e handwriting
of documents,
. . .

[The anonymous letters, with genuine letters of her
'a'yship's writing, were put into the witness's handej
Photographs of the letters and tlocumonto were
heeded iu for the gui,!ance of the Jury.
The anonymous letters were writte I in a disguised
handwriting. There were different disguise, but they
were written by the same persor. Toe 1-tter " w" all
through the letters was an eccentric chanter er. There
was a ryculiarity raneing threugh all of them relative
to " wh," " tu,' cap. " II," and other lliters, especially
the " D.' in Dinorben. There was a dis.inet dash after
the fiord "g" or "y." 11, (witness) minertely poa-ited
out the peceleteity that led Lint to eta' e the azioeymous
letters produced were all written by the inns perion.
There were several instances where the e r;ter had ter-
gott:n to diegui e, and hid broken late the natural
hand.
Mr. Netbercliffe also pointel out similar peculiarities
in the genuine letters.
Crossex euined by Air. Macaulay—lfe hal three
tim-s I xamined the anonymous letters or part of them.
Tee first time was in 1852. One of the 1, tters sub-
mitted to him ea gamine, lie had since ascertai,e I was
not so. Same of the febuliarities of her ladyship's
writing were vrantir g in it.
Mr. ilen,y Adl srd, exatnned by Mr. James,
said he had for several years been euivl ,yed in
examining lla-cla-riting. He had exam nel the
,a(ici.d;u:tnoe
tv+lrlietlbi tshteutflrsul
ITignintsel,ei
ft,tca•rlil
tfioir,
atll7oll3ydinaoylst,3
letters, with the exc ptiou of No. 8 (the e °Atoll
letter) w, re written by the same pe,s .n, and in a
'
disl.iiis3l hand. Ile a'so th nglr thy were writ-
lisea'dni person who wrote the undispuit d
disguised hand always goes into the
tiEttc t by
r. s. r e
e 1 t:;:tn d towards the end of a paragraph or
sentence—it o .z s out i.t the end.
C 037-exatined by Mr. ' Macaulay—The witness
pointed int instances of the natu-al band "o-z'ng
out," as he eel!ed it. Tire le ter "w" is made iu
the pe,...uli-r form when it begins a word.
tjtrie''' was of opinion the anonymous
by the snore person. lie be-
Mr. Ssinuel Heiner, formerly inspect a- of "franks"
writtensot.us letters we:e written by the same
ps:rsoe who wrote the genuine letters. The wri'ing ;less
Gtwb
et ur taa
nr nao;
InlPyt
ri
bond aed clear fir a la'ty. Her .0. •
o 1 yship was disposed
lettersiiine vthe
(ei
to fl ,uriili is her writing. There was a great peculiarity
about the 4, w " which pervaded all the letters, both
genuine and anonymous. He was only doubtful about
the election letter.
D ,eid Breiwrie was then called open hil subpceas,
but did not answer.
This closed the plaintiff's case,
Alr. Alacauley then addre sed the jury on the part of
the defendant, who, he said, was most anxious to give
an indignant, direct`, and positive answer to this unjust
and grievous calumny, under which she had known the
had lahourel for twelve months', but which had vxisted
behind her back for some four or five years. This lotion
had been brought, not to viedicatt, the plaintiffs charac
ter, but in order to get rid of a ca'untee he had cast
upon his aunt about twelve mouths tie °. The excuse for
not bringing tee acts 'n eerly did not apply. The same
evidence that had been given no w might have been
given in 1852, except the production of writing, other
than that crineected with the case. It was inconceiv-
able how Mr. Hughes cool I have been advised to br n 4
this action, and cause so much pain to many persons
whose names bad been dragged into this else, because
Sir Richard Buikeley had blurted out his conscientious
belef of what he hsd suppressed upwards of five years,
in which the plaintiff was implicated. The learned
counsel said the Attorney-General hal been made
the mouthpiece of as wilful, malicious, and
groundless an
imputation against Lady Dinorben as hal ever been
convected. Ile complained of the prejudices
that had
been introduced to show an animosity on the part of
the defendant to the plaintiff ; but the facts were
that the plain iff had never teen his uncle, Lord
Dinorben, till he was between 22 and 23 years
of age. He was then at a ball in Wales, where Lady
Dinorben was, and she sought hOrt cut and made his
acquaintance. On the fallowing season she took pains
to find him, and sent for him into her opera b,.2c, when
she introduced him to his uncle; by him the pleintiff was
presented at Court; invited to Keninel Pork, but
the acquaintance was not continued. There was
no foundation for supposing that Lady Dinorben
wished to prevent his rearrie e for the sake
of her daugilter, and time At'orney-Ceneral, in
introducing the race to their noiee, citgl:t re.A to
have accempenied it with the imputation tiny.
Lord Dinerheu was the only pereoa who could
have hal any cause for preventing the plaintiff's
marriage with Miss Liddell. Tue answer to
this action was simply that the anonymous letters
were not written by Laity Dinorben. She would
go into the box and swear they were not,
and he should call numerous and respectable
persons who bad transacted business with her,
and who knew her writing well, ' who would
state they did net believe the anonymous letters were
in the handwriting of Lady Dinorben, Tnat be thought
would be convincing proof that the evidence of the ex-
perts could rot be relied upon. The leaned councilrefer-
red to the evidence of writing, and the difficulty there bad
been in proving the defendant wrote the letters, and in
• reference to the declau,tion called attention to the f:,t,

that after an interview between the attornios o' both
sides relative to the identification of the letters, the
plaintiff's attorney amended his dec'aration by
adding after the words wrote that her ladyship
had procured them to be sent, Colonel
Williams and Sir Richard Bulkeley both doubted the
au.henticity f the libels, and he thought their
evidence was more to be relied on than that of
the experts. Lady Dinorben's handwriting was of a
tight and 'feathering character—peculiarly a feminine
hand, wh- rats the anonymous letters, especially the one
referring to "coal," and " beef " were of a stiff, bold,
upright character, more like that of a male's writing
than a female's. Sir R. Bulkeley's evidence was the meat

important, facept that of the post-office clerk, for he
afterwards disavowed a belief of one of them being in
her handwriting, and be (11r. Macaulay) should prove
that that letter was not written by Lady Dinorben.
Tl;e I,!arned counsel then called the Lllowing
wi.riegieB

La•ly Dinr•rben, examined by Mr. Harcourt,
said—l am the defendant in this action, and the
widowof Wildrun Lewis, the first Lord of Dinorben.
About this time 1 .st year, in June, my attention
was first clll d t' these letters. I then learne.-1
for the fist time that it was imputed to me that I
had written them. I have never seen them. This

let-es, No. 1, addressed to Lord Ravensworth, was
not wri ten by me, nor t'y my desire or knowledge.
This letter, No. 2, addressed to Mr. Liddell, was
not written by me, nor was it written or sent by
my desire or knowledge. •The witne's said the
same of No. 3, and No. 4, and No. 5 (March 1853).
The letter, December 4, 1853, is not in my hand-
writing. This letter is not in my handwriting (he
election letter), nor is this .(the letter to Aii-s
AN/Mils). -idLso v r wrote ari anonymous letter.
Cro.-s-examined by Mr. James—l never wrote
an anonymous letter to Miss Wallis. I never
heard till to-day that she had accused me of
it. I heard that Mr. 'Wallis accused me of
writing that letter to his sister. He wrote tome in
F. bruary. I did not write t) Miss Wallis fie r some !
time before her death. She bad lived with me for
some years. I thought, as she was in a consump-
tion, she should provide apartment.. That made
some difference. I never spoke to her abaut leav-
ing her fortune t) her cousin. Miss Smyth, my
other niece, was not residing with me at the time
—shortly after. I had seen her just at the time.
My brother, Colonel Smyth, proposed to sze Mr.
Hughes, the same as Sir R Bulkeley, this time
last ye ir. I was anxious to remain at Einmael a
little longer, aed it was granted. I did net com-
plain. I did not complain to Mr. Williams that
Mr. Hughes had refused to let me remain. I c in-
not exactly remember. I dit ected a later to be
written to the plaintiff not to come to the funeral.
I may have done so. He came from Che for to the
funeral. My conFent was asked as to the ilaintiff
having an al!owance cut of Lord Dinerb n's esta, e
I had no voice. I had he srd he was paytrig his ad-
dresses to Miss Liddell. I knew it a long time. I
don't know at all whose writing the letters ar
Re-examined by Mr. Macaulay—The plaintiff
wished to be made committee of the estate. I never
gaveany intimation of intention to impute author-
ship of the lett( rs to Miss Wall a.

George L nnox Cunningham, exaniiivd. by Mr.
ea,id—l am chief clerk hi the office of the
Secie•ary of State for Foreign Affairs, an,i have
acquired a good knowledge of handwriting. I Ince
known Ipdy Dinorben for 30 years. I nave e-
quenly received litters from her, and am familiar
with the lctt rs whie`' I received fro n he-, signed
wiLli her na•no. I have examined the letters Non.

1 and 2. In my opinion they ate certainly not iu
Lady Dint rben'. hand wiii in g.
Cross-examined by Mr. James—l can't say whe-
ther they are disguise]. (Looks at them.) I s-_.O
nothing in this letter to show that it is in a dis-
guised hand. In No. 2, the words " mrre I could
a 'y, but enough to open your eyes," do not re-
semble the c )mmencentent. The latter words are
a more natural hand than what goes before. Ido
no, think the whole was written by the same
perz,on. I think there are two handwritings,
and there may be three. (Caught r.) Toe rest
of the letter appears to me to bo written
by the same hand tint wrote the two first pages of
the not'. Tiers was nothing peculiar about Lady
Dinorben's " w." That " w"—in No. 2—is on!y
a bad attempt to make a " w." (Laughter.) I
think it is a woman's writing, and that three
women must have had something to do with it.
(Laughtt r.) I think the 5U1,11.0 perzo.. na v v tee
ftzPottio..of one_ letter who wrote the firs' p 9137
of
like, the. "w" in "what. 1 7111,k12
" true," in No. 1, is not written by the SAW hand
as the re t. I think both letters were written by
the Sam 3 parties, but whether they were more than
one I can't sly.
It,-extrnind by Mr. Micaulay—The mole of
mikins, the "w" in Lady Dinorben's lette,s is
common. I have received leters from Snith
Ametiza—(lauglit r)—in which 'lii "w" is male
in the same way, at,d also fram C iina.
M-. Janie; said he must object to this Cainesa
coms ponder! cp.
Mr. Campbl—lle Eays• the "w" is commonly
made in that way.
Dr. 111-Iyo, examined by Mr. Ma,laulav,
live in Witnpole-s'reet. I have k own 0.13 deftn-
dant 11 years. I hare fieglently seen he-, am.;
received n les born her. In my opinion the let-
ters era singularly uolike Lady Dinurlicn's hand-
wr;ting. I should say they are ungthi,ti nably

not her handwriting. -
Cress-exaninod by Mr. should think
rho let- era aro disguis rd, In No. 2 the words,
" More I coul•I say," be, ate unlike the ii et ; but
'hey are qni•e Ledy Dino;brie's. I b otOrt •
one down ; but I find it is Miss Spyr.t.'s. 1 nave
two or three limes talked with Lady Dinorbeit
about this. She has said she did riot write the
le tors. I have st, en Ler profesiional!y. I should
say that in the letter to Miss Wallis there is an
attempt io disguise. The " w" is peculiar, very
pecolir, and is like the " w" in No. 1. . I should
say the store person wrote No. 1 an I No. 2, but I
do ry,t see any ground for saying they wore writ en
by o to sex in re than e he-. I think the dit
tio to Lord Ravensworth is a gentleman's writing.
Re-examined by Mr. Macaulay—l see no sex in
the handwriting.
Mr. Mason, examined by Mr. IlmicounT, sa'd
• he was cashi-r in Court's bank, and had been in
the of cashing Lady Dinorbin's checks, He
gave his op pion that the letters were not in her
h andwi iting.
Ctoss-examinel liy Mr. JAMES tho tight
the letters were in a digtrisecl hand, and that in
No. 2 the natural hand came ou, at the words
"More I coeld say, & r."
Re-examined by Mr. MA.o.turay.—Where- it
comes out more natural is nut the diameter of
Lady D norb n's.
Colonel examined by Mr. Lusir,
—I have known Lady Dintrbm since 183'1, and
have recoiv d notes and invie:tions from her. I
do not believe either No. 1 or No. 2 are in li•-r
hand writing.
Cross-examined by Mr. JALtES.—My opinion is
that the first letter is written by somebody at-
tempting to imitate Lady D:nerbm's hand. Some
of the letters resemble Lady Diumben's. The
letter "L," in " Lord," and I think the " w's,"
and seme of the tails to the "y's," in some in-
stances. It appears to me that the band is too
cramped for Lady Dinorben's. The words, "M
I could say, but enough to opfn your eye=," is
more free, and is a bett-r imitation ; but still, in
my opinion, it appears to be crimped, and father
too heavy for Lidy Dinorben's writ n;;. It ap-
proaches a resemblance. The word "true" is a
bet•or imitation. The " w" in " wish" is rather
like. Tne " what," iu No. 2,
is au imitation, and
rather like.
Mr. Coffe Wall, examined by m
MACAULAY,
said,-1 have known Lldy anorhen 33 years, and
corresponded w:th her, particularly during the
list five or six years. I have aten her write. In
my beli--f the two letters ar3 certainly not rn her
handwritinn
Cro s-examined by Mr. JAMES Mn not any
business. I live at 7, Denmark-cott ages, CanibA.-
well. I have had commissions from her, and
known her brother many years. I don't think
either of the le tens is disguised ; I should
say they are written in the nitural hand of
the S 41.11.! perism. Tire words, " More I could say,
but enotoi to open your eyes," are not F 0 welt
written, bet 1 think they were written bi
the same person as the first. Tie word to true" is
not exactly the same. I do not agre e with Colonel
Wilson that there is any attempt to imit :te Lady
Dinorbm's handwriting. I have not brought any
of her letters with m.s. I received a letter a few
days a.;o. She had a reculiar mode of forming the
64 w," but, I have not observed it particularly.
Lawrence Walker, examined by Mr. Macaulay—
Up to 1855 I was member of the firm of Walker,
Grant, and Co. Our firm bad been from the year
1839 solicitors to Lord Dinorben, and since his
death for Lady Dinorhen. I was in frequent corres-
pondence with her on business. I acted as auditor
for Lord Dinorben. I have frequently seen Lady
DM, rben. I have inspected all the anonymous let
tern. I am of opinion that the leAers No. 1 and
No. 2 are most certaicly not in her handwr:ting.

I first saw them in Mr. Bloxam's office last Novem-
ber. I recognize the "w" 111 the afionymou3 letter.
I have seen the same " ►v" in the liandwriting of

others,—viz., Miss Wsilis And Mss Smyth. Two
or threi letters produced at Mr. Bloxam's as Lady
Dinlrben's wrre not hers. I told Mr. Bloxam that
was my c,invictioe. My attention was called to
the " w," and " .11," and "D."
By Lord Campbell—l have such a" w" made by
Miss Wallis and!Miss Saiy*h, and also by a corres-
pondent in Ireland.
Examinat o I) continued—There is no resemblance
in ill, general character of the handwriting. The
other anonymous letters bear no resemblance to
Lady Dinorben's handwriting.
Cross-examined by Mr. James—l should think
the letters are written in a disguised hand. Lady
Dinorben was a Miss Smyth.
R. R. Grei2, examined by Mr. Harcourt, said
thrst he was clerk in Mr. Walker's office, and for
years had seen Lady Dinorben's letters, and kept
her accounts. He should at once ray that the two
letters were not in her handwriting.
Cron-examined by Mr. James—l do not consider
the letters disguised.

Sir Kingston James, examined by by Mr. Lush,
said,—l have known Lady Dinorbeu for years,
and have been in the habit of c ,rresponding
with her. The letters No. 1 and No. 2 are not
in her handwriting. Mr. Wallis gave me the litter
to Miss Wallis, with thorequest that it should be
taken care of. When I returned it I placed it in an
envelope. It was scaled with wax by Mr. Walker,
and I Hit my seal upon it. I did nut observe the
seal. I can't remember whether the seal on the
envelope was over the other seal.
Cross-examined by Mr. James—The wax was
placed by Mr. Walker, and I put my seal on it. I
don't know how the seal got defaced. I did not
examine it. There was a head on the seal. I sup=
pose the heat of the outside wax melted that of the

inside. My wife is c,nnec'el with Lady Divorben.
Mr. Wallis recalled—l do not know whether I
have got the envelope in which the letter and enve-
lope were returned. It was returned with the seal
defaced.

Sir Kingston James—l showed the letter to Lady.
Dinorbeu. She read it. I showed it to her at her
house. The sea was not defaced then. I doh't
know whether it had a head on it or not. Lady
Dinorbeu read the lczWr. I don't know whether
she had the enevelope in her baud. I had no con-
versation with her about the letter. She knew rh
su stance of it before. Lady do Burgho, and, I
think, Mr. Greg, wore present.
Sir Richard de Bu gho, examined by Mr. liar-
court—sail, I am a connexion by marriage wick
Lady Dino: bet]. I Lave often seta' her latter s,
seen her write. In my opinion the two letters are
no, in her handwriting.
Cross-examinol by Mr. Jam's —I think they are
d s4niged partly, but not much. I never saw Lady
Lady Dinorben's di-guised band. I never s.vi itir
commit forgery.
Major Wardle gave similar evidence as to the
hand writin,!•.
Cross-examined by Mr. Tames—l called with Col.
Smyth upon Mr. Hugh-s. I saw ono le,ter. I
c lied to see him, al.d to aik for an exp'an 'lion of
the charge he had mlde zgdnst Lidy Dinorben. I
wAs.in 'tie Anstri,n service. lam now retired.
Mr. Hughes d-clintd to see me. It was in St.
James's-1 lace It ender in Col. Smyck being hound
over to keep the peace. I was not lnund over.
C.,loael Rowland Smyth, exinained. by Mr.
Macauley, said,—l are brother of Lady Dinorbea.
About this time twelvemonth I became awacce that
she was c;iarged with writing anonyinuu, letters. I
am well acquainted with her writing. There is a
great similiricy between her handwricinir and the
Princess's (of Capua). I went to Sir R. Bulkeey,
an i he produced a le ter from his desk to the and
M. Mitchell. I swear it is not my sister's hand-
writing. Sir R. Bulkeley said there were others.
The end of it was that he ap ilogizsd in the pre-
sence of several, and be wrote this letter :

knowou
cn
"57, Eaton-square June 27, 1317.
"D •ar Lldy Diunrben.—lt is, I confess, a relief to me
to hear from Colonel Smyth that I was mistaken in imput-
ing the anonymous letter which was given inc by Mr.
Hughes to yon.
" I am extremely sorry I ever did believe it, but I
very good grounds, but the instant you assure
as-
sure you it was with the greatest relucta•sco, an•t on what
snoorrtyhitnhgaotflitdl
iamno,s)tt
choelretidlyira.,,icrtiot;ooll:
loinstelivlntl:l:rt
when the anonymous let•or ~.,:zwv.5:A..,71,07 hands.
" The _ _
W IL LI ..I.m.s
I do not know any ouu n u...rs-item a " w" sani!af
to the " w" in the libels.
Cross-examined by Mr. James—l called up-m
Mr. Hughes. Ater I had called a so2oild tins, a
corteapoudeuee took place (which w's lire read).
0:1 the Ist July Co!on.I Smyth wr.te the folow-
ing letter to the pl,i11`111:
Sir,—ln consequence of your r,fusal to grant me an in-
terview I now wish to explain to you the object of my
visit.

My sister, Lady Dinorhsn, as I have reason to believe
Jon ara perfectly aware, has Inen informed by Sir Iticha.id
Bulkeley that you Nava at various times received anony-
mous letters which you atti ihated to Lady Dinorben.
" Lady Dinorboa deulea that there i+ any foundation
whatever for this calumny, and I, as h3r next relation, call
upon you to eJahlish the charge yin have male, or at
one.) to a.ilinowletige it is unt'oun.led, an l to make a proper
apology.

"I ant, Sir, your'dob.Aientiv,
"R. 11. Hughes, Esq. J. R. SltY MI"
01 2d July, 1857, the plaintiff wrote to Col.
Sruyth to a .y that the whole suhjeet was one a hiell
had better be diseu :sad thim:4,l th,• into of
;heir resp-ntive frivnds, and tegoesting Col S.ny,l).
to g, we tic lda nt if the name of a friend, and he
wool I lose no Lime in appointing one of his friends
to
eunfor with him. Oa the snipue,id.a,..y4Cr,,el,
wrote to the pl iintilr to say lie die-
tinetly t ) understand that he (Col. Smyth) was the
person to arrangH ;natter wi.h the plaintiff and
tits fcienh, ant ilia. at 2 o'clock s',ould t.O
par,d to Ince: him at No. 2":),
dilly. The saute d.y ihe pl Liht w,ot, to col
Smyth to say th it his friend 0.1.)nul
Knox had advised him to theine a p
view, but that Ito (Co'. Knox) wo.ild himself b
ready to see hitn. 01,3 next day at Whitu's Cub, and
Col. Smyth wto'e to de,l no any interview wit
Knox, or any other person but the plaintiff
and friend oti Scl d-dica'e a subject, and added,
" Unless granted I shall be foiNesi to have recourse
to other measures." That le'ter was Nimbly
acknowltAgtd by the plaintiff, and Col. Smyth then
wrote the following lettcr :
" U. S. Club, July 4, 1557.
" Sir,—l c,n no longer refrain from saying that your
conduct in refusing to meet me for the purpose of your
either substantiating or retracing a cbaige so flee and so
odiously affecting the character of my sister, a lady of
position and conn,xion of your own, proves tba'. jou arJ
unfit to mix in the society of gentlemen, and I shall take
every opportunity of making public your unmanly conduct,
en Ito your face if I meet you anywhere. Your now
scree:Aug yourself under false repiee•entations to those you
call your friends will be of no avail when your conduct is
clearly laid beforo imprttial persons. Your not meeting
me is only attributable to total want of feeling as a c-entlt-
man and a man of honour. —Your obedient 11.:,r
•• H. It. Hughes, Esq. J. R. Sauna."

Tue wi mess wa3 cross-examined on this coires-
pocrlence, and said,-1 refus,Al to meet Colonel
Knox on the ground stated to Mr. Hugh-s. I said
Mr. Hughes was the proper pers.ar to decide a sub-
ject of so delicate a nature, arid I declined an inter-
view with Colonel Knox. In my le t!r I if he
would not meet me I should have rt course to otl.er
measures. A charge has already been made in this
court that I have killed two people. It happenel
onc-, but it has been a caution to me. I should
have exposed him as slandering a lady b:thind Ler
back. I did not approve of Colonel Knox b -cause
I did uo approve his character. When I said '• I
should have recourse to o'her measures," I had no
intention of a duel. I did not think him worthy
of a duel.

Re-exarnined —I
halt of a sistey .vho was toting as a brother on be-
WAS slandered by a man of no
chara,:ter. (mere was here some applause in
C3nit.)
L•trd Catnpl,)ell—l will ordtr any person to be
taken into cns;ody who bhave4s) indecently.
J. P. Martineau, (xamiued by Mr. Ltvh, slid
he was one of Lady Dinorbeu's solicitors, and knew
her handwriting, but did not beleve the lett:rs
were hers.
M-ty Smyth, examined by Mr. 1-‘l.3ra"lay, .9"6(1,
—I am Lail), Dit oib.::n's ni,-c.. I lived with lt r I r
10 37,,..r; to Sett.-Lnb r, 1852. I want abroad in
Sep! ember, 1852, an l came howe in 1857. I have
coastantly sf. en her handwriting, anal corre3rond
Ime wroteany
with her. I went tn Mr. Blexatn's in Novemlier,
and saw a letter which hal been writte I by myself
in my aunt's nsme. It was an invitwion to Mr.
Flumberstoo. Ido net think either No. lor No.
2 are in Lady Dinorben's handwriting.
Cr.::ss-examined by Mr. James—The handwriting
of both appuirs t..) be slightly disguised. I was at
Wallis edrisd not leaveherself.
St. Leonard's at the time of my cousin's, Miss
Wallis' , death. I went down before. Lady Din-
otiriboeinuvwitrtAtieunlie.r bi‘u;iisn:svvs
of her property.
This concluded the case for the defendant.
Lard Campbell said ho would now
adjourn the
Court till ilr6 m9rn;ng.
The Cour~ was accordingly adjr.tlrrod.

"'OLIVA_ INT.V:LIG,ENO47
,mANsiort-ll,_
cheques, one
Lfoor3n4bsa7:;
described as a clerk, residing 4.
terrace HacktreY,,Vatt charged \i,
the 11th inst., 'at' Tenterden, KbutsctviiTi
Cl,osuonot/y., with intent to defraud the Ireadon- ands
Mr. Wilkinson said th't circumstances of the case'
wet eof a somewhat ie.-airier nature. The London.,
and County Bank lad bandits at Tenterden aria 'a
at Craubrook, and it appeared that smart years ago st
the prisoner kept-an account Oahe latter, by which
he had been enabled to retain some blank cheques.
Beeman," for
In 1848 he was indicted at Oxford for a forgery OA,
the London and County Bank there, and .was sen-
tenced to trausport4tion for life, and when-he was
apprehended a ticket-of-leave was found on his
person. On the 14th of June a letter was reeeired ;.;
at the Tenterden Bank, sinned " J.
" E. Beeman," and dat,clCranbrook, la which the
writer enclosed a cheque for 1,5001. on the 'crati,,
brook Bank, also s'gned " E. Beeman," requesting
that it might be placed to the credit of Mr. R.
Smith, whom his (the writer's) father .had recoup,
mended to open an account there, and 'by- the mate -)
nest another letter was rec-ivt d, dated from the
bull and Mouth, London, June 10, and signKt
" Henry to Shies the writer stated that he.
had been advised of Mr. Beeman having placed.
1,500/. there to Ye credit, and stating lis wish
to open an account with the hank, as he had
purchased an e,tate, and was abut to reside in
the neighbourhood. He alto stated that he should .
give the batik a call is a few days, when he should
require a cheque-book, &c., and that meanwhile he
had a drawn cheque for 457/. 10s. in favour of a
Mr. W. Williams, and he added, " Please observe.
and tnt 004 t,
the dots over the i' in my name in all my cheques."
The idea of writing thege two letters wag, .no
doubt, that as Mr. Beeman was a gentleman beld
in high respect in the neighbourhood and of known
substance, the cheque for 457/. 10s. would be paid
without waiting to send the cheque for 1,5)0l. to
Cranbrook ; but when the prisoner the tame day
presented the cheque for 4571.105., the. clerk, hay',
ing some suspicion, Old Lim there was no acCourit
then in Mr. Smith's name, and he must wait till
the cheque for 1,500/. bad boon rent to Cranbrook.
The prisoner ace )rdingly left, taking the cheque
for 4571. 103. with hint, and when he was appre- r
heeded an Thut:iclay evening it was found in his '
possessi n. There bad not been time to get the
necessary wain ss( a up from the country, and
therefore, after the evidence of the officer who had
apprehendedthepri
prisoner, he (Mr. Wilkinson)
should ask fora remand.

W. Russell--I am a detective officer in the city
of London police f• ree, and was employed to make
inquiries in this case. Last eight, in .consequence
of inf relation I received, I went to Weymouth-
terrace, Hackney-road,: where, after waiting-some.
little time, I stw the prisoner go into the house
No. 29. I followed him in and said, " Mr. Wilm-
. shire, I want to speak to you. You were at Ten-
t, mien lest Friday, and presented to a bank there
a f rged cheerio for 4571. 10s. Have you any
explanation to give of the affair P He said, "1
!ewe. I had it from Mr. White." I asked him
whet e Mr. White lived, and he said at 58, lincolu'a
in-fields. Ho was in the pass,ae at that time, and
told a woman to go into a little room and get the
ale gee and le ter. She brought out the check and
let or nre:dit ed, and he "There is the chock,
and an acknowl-dgem.ent from Mr. White," in
explanation. I t-ild him I was not satisfied wibh
that explanation, and I must take him into-custody
for u toting wo c!leAcs with intent to defraud the•
London and County 13,11 k—one for 4571. 10A., and
one for 1,5001. I aided that I. must search his
house, but that I oily wanted the old cheques he
had, and if he tol i me where they were that would
satisfy me. Ilis wife said, "Oh ! they are down-
st ai,s, I don't think he has seen them a long while,
and if you go downstairs with me I will give theta -
to you." I went downstairs with her, when she
opened a 1 rree b x, from which I took out a num-
ber of old cheques, including the three cheques
now re odueed.

Mr. Wilkinson—These three cheques are cheques
on the C. anb' oak Bank, which were tilled up by the
prisoner himself when he kept an account there,
an.l if you will compare them wiih the cheque for
4571. 108. presented by the priswier at the Ten-
terden lxauch the otntr day, 3ou will find that
they ccrreBpond exactly.
The Lord Mayor (After inspecting the cheques),
—Y, s, I see the reFernblanc.•.
Witness (cross-examined by Mr. Hobiery—Tote:
check fur 4571. 10s. was given up to me by the pri-
soner's wife felded in a letter, as if to be ready tor
anybody wbo wikeht, 001. • There was no obitruo-:
don offered by the priscuier or his wife. I have
oot yet 111,1 time to inquire after Mr. White, of

Mr. Wilkinson ti.en applied for a remand.
..010i71,4 oneTtr-fori,L;,-• Lir lir khale, 41, *nee
mist Leattlesi tre-s-.110,ii.n. When I apprehended
tl,e prisoner I found upon him a purse containing
1/. 11P.,•and I have since ascertained that he yes-
terd.y stole the purse, containing 6/. 10s., from a
moor woman who kevs SOIII9 officei where the pri-
soner was employed as clerk, and that it was all
the money she had.
A poorly-clad woman stood up in the wi'ness•
box and identified the purA3 as having been stolen
from her on the pr,:vietti thy, when it contained
6/. 10s.—all the money she hal.
The icird Major d,r .c el inqu;ry to be made as
to what had be3ome of the rertiainder of themouey,
and remanded the prisoner on the principal charge.

1711 E -LATE muR, Ogll AND SUICIDE AT

INGTON.

CORONER'S INQUEST.

yes..erday afternoon Mr. Wakley held au in-
que,t a Oa., K,112: of Deutnalk Tavern, Park •ruad,
B•onsbury-r ad, bling.on, tespeeting the death of
M. he•ay R 11,td;os, aged 25 years, a clerk
in sums d,T4rtm,. a of the (Jona of Chancery, who
eontudtt,-d suicide at No. 10, Park-road, and :Liao
f Eliz ti Pi aged 35 ye:tr-,, who was murdered

Iw,spector Julge, of N division of police, at-
tenderl.

------ -
Tha jury having viewed the bodies, the first wit-
ness Usatione.l w ,s LcrenziPoitlips, of 19, Trinity-
zd
ova„ !on gs.ce
hT, iitr.,giec.estisicolitaa, ce;da,:yisaide.gnidencidn:lii
gtigihntiAccrtatli.aglataileviilN.iins:ce:nv,ot..tdue2htere.e
sti e: t, LAT, i pcY .1 row!, Mington, who said—The
aiiitles,ect,u-lat.istteld woinan vvai her sister. S'te saw her Fair*
tit-) sex van., left them t•ittieg in the parlour, and
then retired to rest, h .r (the servant's) beclr,otn
being over the L1)or in wh'ch the tragical occurrence
iencaisiic,dssotsn,lisispoi.tiostet,,saiiolidi knew hits lu:it:di by his club-foot,
111P11:1: IPst rt:;anntleeidll-i.rit'' 'il
alla:iri : JohnNi e:
:we- Nri- °iw°r ta.
lr ft home.

The police produced a revolver, a larg,‘ Spaulah
knife, un i utlitr articles.

Mr. Hodges .aid they belonged to his son. He
was a ste,.dy, careful young man until he became
acquainted with t' is woman some months ago.
Thu Coroner deired the polielinan ,o go to the
house and search for a silvtr watch, which be did,
but it was wit found.

The remainder of the evidence was a mere re-
capituiation f what his already appeared.
The Coroner observed that there did not appear
to b; the slightest evidence of insanity.
The jury retired for Tome time, and returned a
verdict that " Henry Robert liodgts wilfully mur-
dered Eliza Phillip., and afterwards muzdertd
himself;'