The Sun.
London, England, 1858-09-29 00:00:00

TUB WEEDaY FRAUDS.

11.41 L WAY INTELLIGENCE.

CAPE TOWN.
The directors of this railway and dock company
lave just issued their half-yearly report. Thcy
congratulate the shareholders upon having com-
pleted arrangements with the Government of the
Cape of Good Hope for the introduction of the rail-
way system into the colony. 13y the contract which
the board have concluded with the colonial Go-
vernment, interest at the rate of £6 per cent. per
annum was guaranteed for 50 years on the amount
" expended or Lona Ale paid by the company" for
the construction of the line, not exceeding the
sum of £470,000. The Government guarantee
would commence from the date of the opening of
the railway, but the amount required to pay the
same rate of interest on calls during construction
had been, with eonsentof the Government, included
in the estimate of the cost. The works were to be
commenced within six months, and completed within
three years of the signature of the contract, and
to be executed to the satisfaction of the colonial
engineer, or, in case of da rence, of Mr. Hawk-
shaw, who had been selectei as the standinm
referee. Securities of the value of £25,000 1 avc to
be deposited with trustees before the 10th of Novem-
ber next, as caution money, in order to secu-e the
expenditure of a like sum of £25,000 on the en-
terprise, within a twelvemonth of the date of the
contract. The line in the first instance would be a
single one, but the land given by the Government
would be sufficient for a double line. All materials
for its construction, executing wood, might be taken
from the Government lands free of charge, and all
such as were imported into the colony would be ad-
mitted without duties or port charges. The board
pledge themselves not to call up any more capital
than could be covered by the guarantee, without
the consent of an extraordinary general meeting of
shareholders. The board feel justified in estimating
that the entire preliminary expenses in England
and at the Cape from Oct., 1853, to Dec. 31, 1857,
including remuneration to directors, would not ex-
ceed £5,000. The directors recommend that the en-
tire management expenses in England during the
construction of the line be limited to £2,500 per
annum. They propose that a call of £1 18s, per
share be payable in October. They recommend
the sharchohlers to give Capt. Raymond, the pr:-
board,moter ofin
the
conclusion,
c
oml ally2oo paid-up shares. e
call attention to the sound
position
of the colony of the Cape. From the offi-
cial returns it appears that the revenue has nearly
£loy7e7a7r2s,hilialtvhe having
risen from
year endingdxo2u,b2l,eo(oloit
isnelflBm4l,ltin
40,0
March 31, 1858. In the year 1857 the revenue was
£353,737, and the expenditure £314,433, leaving a
balance of £39,304. In the next year the surplus
of revenue over expenditure had risen to £54,607.

SECRET BAPTISM ANI) FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
OF A Jewish communication from Italy informs
us that the Paragraph copied from the Jewish Chronicle
int
the English press, announcing the energetic measures tak-
ing by the Jewish Board of Deputies, particularly the in-
tention of sending a deputation to the Pope, has produced a
deep impression on the Papal authorities. The disconsolate
Mortara has, what under such circumstances is moat un-
usual, twice been permitted to see his child, -and is not alto-
gether without hope of its restoration.—Jewish Ci roniele.
REPRESENTATION OF GREEN WICK.—MR. WM.
ANGERSTEIN AT DEPTFoRD.—Last evening a public meet-
ing of the electors of Greenwich residing in the district of
Deptford and the hamlet of Hatcham, was held at the
Liter Institution, High-street, Deptford, to hear Mr. W.
Angary erstein as a candidate. The chair was occupied by Mr.
Cobbett. Mr. Angerstein was received with applause, and
a resolution to support him was passed,

WEEDON, Tueiday.—The commissioners—Mr.
Selfe, the magistrate, Mr. A. Turner, M.P., and
Col. French—appointed to inquire into the army
contract system and the Weedon defalcations, as-
sembled this morning, and devoted the greater' por-
tion of the day to an inspection of the clothing and
accoutrement stores there, in order to facilitate
their further inquiries.
After going through a number of the rooms the
commissioners proceeded to hear the following evi-
dence.

James Grove—l have been in this establishment
nearly three years. I came as foreman of viewers
in the boot department, at a salary of 275. a week.
I lodged with a man named Eary aloout ten months
after I came. Whitham came in 1856, and lodged
with me at Eary's for some time. I was suspended
in April, before Whitham came, for being insubor-
dinate to my superior officer. That was the only
reason. I was called before Mr. Elliott, who said
I had been insolent to my superior officer, and that
he had complained of me to the 'War-office. I do
not think lie said anything about my passing boots
improperly. A man named Holmes had said some-
thing about my having accepted a bribe, and Mr.
Elliott mentioned the circumstance to me, but not
as a ground for my suspension. I was suspended
for a month,.and then appointed in the capacity of
packer for a little time, and I went to Hayter and
Howell's, in Mark-lane. I had 275. a week before
I was suspended, and'when I was reappointed I
had 225. a week.
The Chairman—Did you ever receive a bribe ?
-Witness—l never did, on my honour and word,
either in London or in Weedon. I solemnly declare
I never told Whitham or any other person that I had
been suspended for bribery, or that I had received £2
on one occasion and £1 on another. I never told him
that Holmes had split upon me. I was suspended
for passing boots irregularly, as stated by Mr. Elliott
in. his report to the War-office at the time. I
was never accused of bribery to my knowledge until
the report made of me by Holmes ; that was about
the time of the suspension, about two years ago. It
was nota subject of conversation here, to my know-
ledge, that I was bribed. I asked Holmes why he
had so accused me, but he refused to make me any
answer. I positively assert that I never received
£2 as a bribe on one occasion and £1 on another,
as stated by Whitham.
Robert Eary—l live in Weedon, and am a painter.
Grove lodged with me for some time, as did also
Whitham. They occupied the same room, and, in-
deed, the same bed. I never heard anything said
of Grove being suspected of receiving a bribe. I
remember Grove being suspended for incivility to
his superior officer. Grove was a sober man. Whit-
ham was very irregular in his babits.
Hoyle—l am an inspector of clothing at
Weedon. I remember making a report to the War-
office which led to Grove's suspension. There was
nothing in that report about insolence to his supe-
rior officers or about bribery. I learnt from Mr.
Elliott that he was suspended. Some time after
that a labourer named Holmes, not of a very good
character, said that Grove took a bribe of half-a-
crown. The matter was reported to Mr. Elliott by
me, and he investigated it. The story was this :
Some short time after the formation of the depot
the canteen, which had belonged to the barracks,
was continued, and the men employed at the depot
used to resort there for beer during the dinner
hour. On one occasion, when Grove and some others
called at the canteen, the man who kept it said, " A
gentleman has been here and left you half-a-crown
for some bread and cheese and beer." The money
was spent among them in that way, and I believe
that is the sum and substance of the story about
bribery. Grove was a man of good character.
After his suspension his testimonials were " fished
up" and considered satisfactory, and he was re-em-
ployed, but not in his former capacity. It is but
right to say that the two inspectors who re-
ported Grove have since stated in writing
that he was not more lax as a viewer than the
viewers in the Tower, of whom he had been formerly
one, but happening to " come down " first on this
poor fellow they reported him.
William Walter—l am a boot viewer at Weedon.
I came here at the beginning of the establishment.
My wages are 30s. a week. They were formerly
225. I have worked in my business, after hours,
for Parker and Son, of Northampton, who were not
then contractors, though they have since become so.
I had then only 225. a week, and a wife and family
to support. I have not viewed any of Parker's boots
since I worked for them. I have never known the
inspector reject boots that I have passed, but I have
known him pass a few that I have rejected. My
hours of working are from half-past 7in the morn-
ing to half-past 5 in the afternoon.
By Mr. Turner—The contractors never came into
the viewers' room unless accompanied by one of the
clerks of the establishment.
John Thwaitcs said he was a practical bootmaker
and had been employedatWced.on,partly as viewer,
for two years. He had never 'made a boot for a
contractor for 25 years, nor had he received any
compliment, nor had any compliment been pro-
mised to him by any contractor. He never knew
one of the inspectors pass boots that the other had
rejected, as stated by Whitham in his evidence.
By Mr. Turner—l receive los. a week, which is
more of a certainty than if I worked at my business
on my own account.
Edwin Mawsbridge, a boot-viewer at Weedon
ever since the establishment of the depot, also stated
that he had not worked for any contractor. He had
never had boots rejected by an inspector that he
had passed, but in some few cases boots that he had
rejected had been passed by, the inspector. He had
never known one of the inspectors to pass boots
which had been rejected by another.
John Daly, a packer at Weedon, denied the state-
ment of Whitham that he had packed damp cloth.
He did not remember Whitham ever 'remonstrating
with him for packing damp goods, nor had any in-
jury resulted to goods from that cause. He did
not remember ever packing goods at Wcedon direc
for shipping.
The inquiry was then vdjourned until the nex
morning.