The Sun.
London, England, 1858-12-24 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 24, 1858.

GEORGE BINGHAM, President.
WILLIAM DRONFIELD' Secretary.
Committee-room, Dove and Rainbow, Hartshead,
Sheffield, October 2, 1858.
[Hinchliffe, Printer, Sheffield.]
The plaintiff's examination was continued. He
said—l had 16 or 17 printers in my employment.
I did not give them notice. I said to about six of
them, " I intend a month hence to discontinue em-
ploying society hands. If you like to remain let
me know." The men, with the exception of two or
three, sent me written notices at a month. I ob-
jected to the union's restrictions and regulations.
The great objection was that their connection with
the union enabled them to rule me and to be my
master, instead of my ruling them and being their
master.
Mr. Chambers objected to the witness giving his
reasons.
Mr. James said his lordship would recollect that
the libel was justified.
The learned judge overruled the objection.
Examination continued—The men were my mas-
ters. I could not employ a nonunion man. They
would not allow me to make arrangements with
my men as to wages. I could not regulate the
wages according to the ability of the men. They
would not allow me to give each man his work ac-
cording as he was adapted for it. Theyheld a meet-
ing and came to a resolution that they would not
distribute some type, though it would have been of
advantage to them.
Mr. Baron Martin here interposed and suggested
that some arrangement might be come to between
the parties.
The plainiiff—l have suffered £l,OOO damages.
Mr. Chambers—Oh no, the libel was published
on the 4th of Oct., and the action was brought the
next day.
Mr. Baron Martin again suggested that some
amicable arrangement might be arrived at, the
defendants undertaking that they would not con-
tinue in the course complained of.
The plaintiff—lt is a question of ruin to me, lam
sorry to say. I had property worth £lO,OOO, and it
has been nearly destroyed.
Mr. Baron Martin—Well, let the case proceed.
Examination continued—Two of the men re-
mained. I saw the libel in the Daily Telegraph on
Oct. the 4th. I accordingly published a placard,
denying in general terms the statement in the libel
and sent it to the defendant.
The document which commenced with the words
" Malice and envy trampling on truth and justice,"
and was signed by the plaintiff's solicitors, threat-
ened legal proceedings against any one who should
circulate the libel. Advertisements published sub-
sequently in the Sheffield Daily Telegraph were
also read. They were to the effect that the Printers'
Society's officers were prepared to substantiate
their charges against Mr. Harrison.
Examination continued—l paid some of my men
by the piece and some by the week. I never said
I intended to reduce their wages if they would
stay. I had no such intention. I did not object to
pay extra for night work. It is not true. I had
always paid extra. I had never demurred
to the amount of wages, except that I told them the
extra charges for working a daily paper, which
were 15 per cent. for day-work and 50 for night
work, were exorbitant. Still I submitted to it. The
two men who remained received the same wages as
before. One of them is now with me. I advertised
for new hands, and received 100 offers in reply to
one advertisement. I got average men—nearly as
good as those I had before. The average wages I
paid to the new men during the 11 weeks they have
been with me have been £2 a week within a shil-
ling. This is more than the average wages earned
by the society's men. The average wages earned by
them in the previous quarter were £1 175., and the
quarter before that £1 7s. The other newspaper
proprietors pay lower wages than I do. I have not
engaged any of my new men at'24s. a week with-
out compensation for night-work. The very lowest
wages I pay are 285., and, unless they are inferior
hands, they have compensation for night work. I
was originally apprenticed to theprinting and book-
selling business in Sheffield. About the close of my
apprenticeship I was under the necessity of becom-
ing a member of the society, but only for a short
time, as I became a reporter. After I served my
apprenticeship I was out. of employment for five or
six weeks, and received 6s. a week from the society
as I was entitled to do. I purchased a bookselling
business for £1,200. It is not true that I was started
in life by my marriage. I got money with my wife,
but my marriage in no degree altered my position
in life. I never inserted " dummy advertisements."
I take " dummy advertisements" to mean fictitious
advertisements. I have occasionally, tor convenience
sake, inserted advertisements oftener than ordered.
I never cheated the public out of news. I always
gave the news first. Iconsider that, in consequence
of this libel, I -have sustained a very great loss.
The &ning off in the circulation of the Sheffield
Times was74oo a week. My morning paper has been
nearly destroyed, and the falling of in the half-
penny evening paper is 1,000. The advertisements
haie fallen off £8 or £lO a week. The circulation
of the Sheffield Times was 2,500 a week.
Cross-examined—I have brought four actions in
this matter. I have suffered more than a money
loss—l have suffered loss in character, and been
exposed to the detestation of the whole town. In
1853 I printed a bill-head which stated that the
circulation was between 4,000 and 5,000 a week.
It was sometimes as much as that. In that I fol-
lowed the example of my predecessor. I might
have done five years ago things which I would not
do now, though it was not wrong. Every one does
the same. (Laughter.) I have published the stamp
returns. I have circulated of the Sheffield Daily
News as much as from 20,000 to 30,000 a Week
Oat was in • the early part of the present year. I
do not believe the circulation had fallen down to
10,000 before March last. The highest circulation
ever attained by that paper was 9,900 in one day.
Mr. Chambers—Oh, that might have been an
election time or a horrid murder. (Laughter.)
What was the highest weekly circulation ? When
did it reach to between 20,000 and 30,000?
Witness—ln the week ending January 7, 1858,
the circulation was 21,100.
Mr. Chambers—Oh, that is what you call between
20,000 and 30,000 ?

Cross-examined—There was not a turn-out of the
colliers in Sheffield about the time. I speak of the
weekly paper. I did not sell the daily paper. I
have 4s. a week.
Robert Goodchild—l sell the Weekly Sheffield
Times. Before October I used to sell 80 a week. In
consequence of the placards my sale fell to under 50.
Cross-examined—The placards were stuck up in
the public-houses.
George Downing—l am a razor-smith by trade.
I have been employed by Mr. Harrison to post pla-
cards. I was employed to post his answer. I have
sold his papers. My sale fell off after the placards
were published.
Cross-examined—l used to sell 350 a week of the
halfpenny paper ; the number was reduced one-
half. I was paid 225. a week.
William Ashwood—l am a newsao-ent in Sheffield.
After the placards my sale of Mr. Harrison's papers
fell to one-half. I used to sell about 100 to 112 of
them weekly. I now sell only 42 copies. The
falling off was decidedly attributable to the placards.
They caused great excitement.
Cross-examined—The placards were distributed
and posted.
The particulars of the defendant's justification,
furnished by him under an order of the court, were
then put in.
The defendant's counsel having intimated their
intention trot to call any witnesses,
Mr. E. James proceeded to sum up the case of
the plaintiff. He said if this had been a mere
squabble between two newspaper proprietors the
jury would never have been troubled with the case.,
but there could be no doubt that the publication
was a wicked and malicious attempt on the part of
the defendant, fighting behind the screen of the
trade union, to destroy the propertyof the plaintiff
by bringing to bear against him a power which
exercised an influence they could scarcely under-
stand, and which must prove fatal to his position
and prospects unless their verdict vindicated him.
The defendant stood before them utterly unjustified.
He had made no apology • and although he might
suggest he had merely published the document as
an advertisement, it bore internal evidence that it
must have proceeded from him. He had been con-
nected with the plaintiff's papa., and it was clear
he must have furnished the information for the
libel. Mr. Harrison had denied positively the alle-
gations made against him. To kis credit he was
not above stating he had once received relief from
the society. He had do wish to interfere with the
rights of labour—he only sought to protect the
rights of property. What had he done ? He had,
in point of fact, made no reduction of wages—he
had only discharged these society men, as he had a
perfect right to do.
Mr. M. Chambers, for the defence, said there
could be no doubt that this was an attempt by the
plaintiff to ruin the defendant. A great deal of ir-
elevant matter had been introduced which the jury
must dismiss from their consideration. The ques-
tion of the legality or propriety of trade unions wt.:
one with which they had nothing to do. The de-
fendant was a newspaper proprietor, and the action
was brought against him for the-publication of this
alleged libel as an advertisement. The plaintiff had
never asked for an apology, but had at once com-
menced his four actions. It now appeared every
allegation was proved by himself. He admitted lie
had inserted advertisements which had never been
ordered or paid for. What were these but dummy
advertisements P Every witness stated that the
mischief to the plaintiff, if any, had arisen from the
placards, and not from the advertisements. He was
prepared to contend the evidence for the plaintiff
showed every allegation made substantially true.
Defendant had nothing to do with the deductions
orisuggestions of the writers of the handbill, or with
the conclusions which a reader might draw from it

Witness—So it is. (Laughter.)
Mr. Chambers—Did you offer to purchase the
Daily Telegraph,the defendant's newspaper, for X5O?
Witness—About two years and half ago I offered
him that and other sums. He refused my offer: I
never said that if he did not sell me the paper I
would run him down. Ido not believe the defendant
ever remonstrated with me about publishing articles
against his newspaper. He published far worse
against Inc. (Laughter.) I have brought another
action against Mr. Hincheliffe, the proprietor of the
Argus. I did not threaten that if he did not give
up the Argus I would reduce the price of my paper
to 2d., and he would be compelled to do so. I said
nothing unfriendly to him. I have been employing

" datal,',' or what we term " stab" hands ; nearly the whole society 'men for 10 years, but I was determined to
of the work in Sheffield (both daily and weekly) being, I wet rid of them and employ " rats."
however, done on piece, and the wages of course vary ac- Mr. Chambers—Rats! -What are they ?
cording to the ability and attentiveness of th workman.
Had Mr. Harrison proposed to place his hands on time at Witness—Non-society men are called "rats."
the recognised wages, we could not have complained; but (Great laughter.)
instead of this he offers an amount equal to a reduction of Mr. Chambers—And you set a trap to catch them.
about 10s. per week, including the extra charge for hours (Renewed laughter.)
worked after 10 in the evening. And beta is e the men will Witness—No, I did not.
not submit to this, and leave their union, th 3y are discharged .
Mr. Chambers—But you caught some by your
This, and this only, is the reason why they are sacrificed,
whatever Mr. Harrison may say to the contrary, and trap—your advertisement promising high wages.
however he may attempt to justify his conduct, as he doubt- Witness—lt was not a trap. There are always
less will, through the medium of his widely-circulated and more " rats" than non-rats. It is the usual practice
extensively-read newspapers—the Daily Times, Dail/ to pay extra for night-work y
ht-work, and I always did pay
News, and the original Weekly Tines. The public know
the many changes and transformations these influential it. When daily papers were introduced into Sheffield
journals have undergone since the present proprietor has the pay was fixed at 5d., and 3d. per hour for every
had them; but they do not know the actual position they hour after ten o'clock. That was fixed by the men
are in as to circulation, and the various schemes that are themselves, and the masters paid it veryun wil-
resorted to in order to cheat them of news, by filling up jingly.. I paid it myself. It is not true, as stated
space with what are termed "thimmy" advertisements, i.e., in the libel, that lam indebted for any improvement
advertisements that are never either ordered or paid for. .
in my position in life to my marriage. Twelve years
But we are in possession of these and many other facts as
to his present position and future prospects, which would ago, as stated in the libel, I received money from
astonish the public, should we be compelled to give them the society as an unemployed member of the trade
publicity. For the present, however, we will refrain from society. I have told some of my men to insert ad-
doing so. There is the less excuse for Mr. Harrison's con- vertisements of parties at a distance. They were
duct, seeing that all the other papers in the town arepaying
which had been ordered, but which
a proper price to their journeymen. The daily paper that advertisements
he hoped to rival and ultimately crush—the Telegraph— had expired. I will swear I never had advertise-
having been conducted in the most fair and honourable ments not ordered set up from other newspapers. I
manner ever since it was established, forming a striking and have not pursued such a practice. I have not done
yleasing contrast to its feeble and all but defunct contem- it occasionally in the sense you mean. Ima have
porary. The proprietor, too, of the , Independent also paid y
this extra charge, not only for his Morning's News," ' but done so in single instances for special reasons, but I
for the mere temporary daily published during the last have not done so lately. I have over and over again
borough election. told the compositors to give up setting news andto
By the means referred to, we regret to say that Mr. put in advertisements which had expired. But the
Harrison (favoured by a temporary depression in the busi- libel says "dummy advertisements," and they are
ness) has found a sufficient number of men base enough to
accept the situations of the discharged hands—all, with one fictitious ones. I put advertisements in the daily
isolated exception, of an unimportant and worthless cha- paper gratuitously which are published in the
racter—from a distance. But it remains to be seen how weekly paper. This is only a temporary arrange-
long this heterogeneous importation will enjoy their lucre- ment, because the daily paper has not been estab-
tive situations—some of them having engaged for 245. per lished long enough to get advertisements. " Dum-
week without compensation for night:work. This amount, Ties" are false, fictitious, unreal, made-up adver-
it is confidently anticipated, they cannot long enjoy, the
papers being unquestionably on their "last legs," if actual tisements. I have known men who are no men at
circulation be any criterion, the proprietor doutless adopt- all, but merely clothes stuffed up, who were dum-
ing extreme measures as a last resort. Failing to obtain mies. (Laughter.) I wrote the heading to the bill
public support by upright and honourable means, he seeks Malice and Envy Trampling on Truth and
to grind down his workmen to the lowest level, and thus Justice." In that bill I characterised the statements
hopes to keep his head above water.
Ths whole of the men whose notices expire this day have in the libel as malicious and false.
left the office, and we earnestly entreat all our townsmen Re-examined--None of the new men whom I have
who hate tyranny, oppression, and humbug—who like to employed have complained of the rate of wages
" live and let live"—and are anxious that every man should they receive.
receive " a fair day's wage for a fair day's work"—for the Wm. H. Whvbre —I am a journeyman printer
future to withdraw their support—little though it may be , W -
—from the conductor of these tottering papers, to support in plaintiffs employ. I was one of the new men. I
those only that are conducted on fair and honourable prin- wrote to him in consequence of the advertisement
ciples, and with something like consistency, and not coun- in the Times. On receiving an answer I went to
tenance one that for the sake of expediency will advocate Sheffield, and engaged with him at 30s. a week. I
all sorts of politics and religion in the same week. This we agreed to work 60 hours a week for that sum. We
askjwith the more confidence well knowing that our towns-
had an arrangement as to extra and night work.
men generally are opposed to those who wish to trample on
the rights and liberties of the working classes, and that Mr. M. Chambers objected to this class of evi-
they believe that " the labourer is worthy of his hire," and dente.
are desirous to see justice done between man and man. Mr. Baron Martin considered it admissible, as the
We remain, on behalf of the hands sacrificed, and by libel charged the plaintiff with endeavouring to
order of the Council of the Letterpress Printers' Society of
Sheffield, grind down his men.
Examination continued—l was to be paid 6d. an
hour for extra day, and Bd. an hour for midnight
work. Since I entered the employment I have
averaged within a shilling or two of £2 a week. I
do not work on Sundays.
Cross-examined—Midnight work is after 12
o'clock. I have 30s. a week certain. I work on all
three papers. lam a compositor. Ido not profess
to be the best of the lot. Ido not earn the highest
wages. There are 14 compositors. Ido not recollect
Charles Hall. I have heard his name. Mr. Harri-
son pays us himself. I entered his service on the
4th of Oct. I have never belonged to the society.
Before I went to Sheffield I was in an office in Lon-
don. I was at book or piecework. I believe the
men in that branch have also rules and regulations.
There are two of the 14 compositors here—the men
at the highest and next highest wages. The men
came from various parts. I have mae as much as
£:2 3s. in a week with Mr. Harrison.
Re-examined—l have heard no dissatisfaction ex-
pressed in the office.
George Ridge—l am a printer and stationer at
Sheffield. I am in the habit of employing journey-
men. I have union men in my employment. I
pay 28s. a week for ordinary work, 6d. per hour for
over hours, and after 10 o'clock at night, 9d. an
hour. There is no union amongst the master prin.
ters in Sheffield. Ido not find the rules of the men
an impediment or otherwise.
Cross-examined—I am still in business. I printed
a newspaper for 20 years. I employed union men
for some time. We had a very serious strike. I
then got new hands, but afterwards took back some
union men. I knew Mr. Harrison's three papers.
Henry Fielding—l am a journeyman-printer, and
one of the plaintiff's new hands. 1 went to him on
the 2d Oct. I agreed for 355. a week, and 6d. per
per hour overtime. I have since averaged a little
over £2 7s. a week. I have heard no complaints in
the establishment. Ido not belong to the union.
Cross-examined—I am still with Mr. Harrison.
I have mentioned to him that I may leave. lam
generally thought a good hand. I came .to him
from Liverpool. I worked there on the Northern
Daily Times. There we worked piecework. We
began at 6 o'clock in the evening, and worked till
3,4, or sin the morning. After leaving there I
was working in a jobbing house.
Re-examined—l am leaving Mr. Harrison in
order to better myself.
Thomas Algar--I am a bookseller and stationer
in Sheffield. I employ printers. My men are not
connected with the union. I have no scale of wages.
I pay what I think the men are worth. The highest
last week earned 455., the lowest 245. I used to
employ union men.
Cross-examined—The 455. man was a litho-
grapher. I employ about five men.
William Hodson—l am a shoemaker in Sheffield.
I am employed to sell Mr. Harrison's paper, the
Sheffield Times. My sale was among the saw-
grinders and colliers. Since they gave up the
Sheffield Times the circulation of the Sheffield
Daily Telegraph has increased. They gave up the
Sheffield Times after the handbills were put out.
My sale fell from 35 to 24. The placards were the
only cause of the falling off. I was threatened at
the factories if I took Mr. Harrison's paper in to
sell.

as to Mr. Harrison's conduct. As far as he- was
concerned the plaintiff had admitted all that woe
stated. A good deal had been said as to the tyranny
' of the trades unions, but the masters called by
plaintiff proved that in Sheffield at least this union
was no tyranny, no impediment. This man had.
brought workmen from every quarter, and yet thele
had been no interference with them. The conduct
of the Sheffield society was a pattern and example
to all such bodies. The learned counsel then went
in detail through the alleged libel, and contended
that every fact stated in it was clearly proved. As
to the reflections and conclusions of the writers,
that was a matter with which the, defendant had
nothing to do. If the plaintiff was annoyed at
having his paper spoken of as a feeble and al-
most defunct journal, why did he not retaliate
on the defendant ? What was such a statement
but a mere incident of paper warfare. The plain-
tiff himself had next day published a placard
which was clearly libellous, and yet he had
ventured to bring four actions without so much
as asking for an apology. In any event the evi-
dence all showed that the damage to the plaintiff
arose from the posting of the placards, and not
from the publication of the advertisement, for which
alone the defendant was responsible.
Mr. Baron Martin, in summing up, expressed his
regret that some arrangement had not been made
between the parties. The defendant had pleaded
"not guilty" and a justification. The first question
for the jury was whether this was a libel or not;
that was a question for them ; but it was his duty
to tell them what a libel was ; it was defined to be
a publication calculated to injure the reputation of
another by exposing him to hatred. What could
more tend to expose to hatred a man who had risen
from the ranks himself than to say that he was en-
deavouring to grind down other workmen, that he
was trampling on the rights and privileges of the
working classes, and seeking to avoid doing justice
between man and man ? In his opinion there was
no doubt his paper was a libel in point of law, The
second question for the jury arose on the plea of
justification : in a civil proceeding for libel the de-
fendant was allowed to plead that his statement
was true. If they believed this plea was made out,
they ought to find for the defendant ; but if it was
not, then their verdict should be for the plaintiff.
The gist of the libel was that the plaintiff had un-
reasonably reduced his wages. As to his dismissing
the men, there could be no doubt trade unions were
lawful, but they had no right to dictate to their
masters as to other workmen. (His lordship hav-
ing then read the portions of the document com-
plained of, and gone through the evidence, con-
tinued.) If the jury were satisfied that the publi-
cation was a libel, and that the justification was
not made out, the next question for them was as
to the amount of damages. As to this they should
exercise their own discretion. The defendant said
he was not the only person who had published this
libel, and contended that the damage to the plain-
tiff, if any, arose from the acts of the other parties.
The jury should exercise their own judgment and
common sense. He would recommend them not to
allow themselves by any suggestion to be led into
an attempt to perform the impossible task of
distributing the damages among the several parties.
The plaintiff could not unite all the wrong-doers
in one action, and if he was to be met in that way
he might lose his damages altogether. If a man did
an unlawful act he was responsible for it, and had
no right to complain if a jury gave damages
against him.

The jury, after a few moments' consideration, re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages, £5OO.
Mr. M. Chambers asked his lordship to stay exe-
cution on the ground of misdirection. He contended
the jury should have been told the witnesses proved
that all the damage to the plaintiff arose from the
posting of the placards. He also made the applica-
tion on the ground that the damages were excessive.
Mr. Baron Martin refused the application on the
first ground ; as to the second, he was not satisfied
with the amount; but, if the plaintiff consented,
he would not refuse to stay execution, it being dis-
tinctly understood that he had expressed no dis-
satisfaction with the finding.
Mr. Mellish, for the plaintiff, consented.
Execution stayed.
HARRISON V. HINCHCLIFFE.
This was another action arising out of the same
transaction, brought by the same plain tiff against
the printer of the handbills.
When the case was called on there was some
difficulty in getting a fresh jury, and his lordship
suggested that it should be made a remanet. After
some discussion, the suggestion was adopted.
Mr. Baron artin expressed a hope that the par-
ties would now make peace, and put a stop to the
posting of these placards.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Dec. 23.

Mr. Thomas William Capron surrendered to take
his trial upon an indictment charging him with
assaulting Mr. Mowbray Morris. The indictment
contained three counts varying the form of the
charge.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine and Mr. Giffard were
counsel for the prosecution ; Mr. Montagu Cham-
bers, Q.C., and Mr. Metcalfe were for the defence.
Mr. Ballantine, in opening the case, said the pro-
secution was instituted against tha defendant for
assaulting and inflicting upon the prosecutor griev-
ous bodily harm ; and it would be his duty to lay
before them the circumstances by which the investi-
gation was surrounded.
James Ellis, examined by Mr. Giffard—l am a
police-constable 255 B. On the night of November
5, I was on duty near Buckingham-gate. At half-
past 10 o'clock two cabs drove up to No. 13, James-
street. I saw a gentleman get out of the first cab,
and Mr. Capron got out instantly from the second
cab. I saw the defendant make a rush on to Mr.
Morris, the gentleman who got out of the first cab.
Hs struck him over the head and shoulders with a
light walking stick. Mr. Morris was taking a
picture out of the cab at the time. I ran up and
got between them and laid hold of Mr. Capron to
prevent any furthur assault. Mr. Morris said,
" Take him away—he is mad—he is drunk." Mr.
Morris then said he would not give him into cus-
tody. Then Mr. Capron got into his cab, and the
complainant came up and asked me to take Mr.
Capron's name and address. Mr. Capron then tried
to strike Mr. Morris again. Mr. Morris then said
he would give Mr. Capron into custody, and I took
him to the station-house. At the station-house he_
said, " I have given him a thrashing before, and I
hope I have given him a black eye to go to church
with in the morning." Mr. Capron was detained
for an hour, and as Mr. Morris did not come, he
was let go. Mr. Morris came ten minutes after.
wards.
Mr. Mowbray Morris was then called into the box.
the assault was taken as proved, and he was .not
examined in chief.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chambers—l am the pro-
secutor. lat first refused to give Mr. Capron into
custody, but he wan afterwards taken into custody
by the policeman. I then went to see the brother
of the lady to whom I was to be married on the
following day. lam a barrister, and practised at
Jamaica. I knew Mr. Capron some years ago, as
a student in the Temple. In 1853-1 don't know
for certain, but I believe about that time—our ac-
quaintance was renewed, and he invited me to his
house, and introduced me to Mrs. Capron. He
went out hunting with me.
The Assistant-Judge--This is not objected to;
but Mr. Chambers, may I ask what relevancy this
has to the case of assault ?
After some discussion as to withdrawing the two
first counts of the indictment, the examination pro-
ceeded.

Witness—l invited him to hunt with me. I be-
lieve I did not say that was to cement our union,
It was arranged that Mrs, Morris and Mrs. Capron
should exchange visits. In the year following the
renewal of our acquaintance we dined together
perhaps half a dozen times, irrespective of his visits
to me in the country
• I sent them opera tickets,
and also for the french and German plays, and
occasionally perhaps
down to June in that year
_I
sent Mrs. Capron bouquets of a morning.
Sergeant Ballantine did not at all object to these
matters of five years ago being fully gone into, but
he thought it right to say, that he should have to
produce documents and allude to circumstances of
a truly painful nature.
After some discussion, the learned sergeant said
he would not object; let it go on, and the result
would show whose
spare. feelings he was most anxious to

Witness—l may have sent bouquets when Mr.
Capron was out, but if so I did not know whether
Mr Capron was from home or not. When I visitcd
I did not know whether Mr. Capron was out or
not. did not in June, 1853, stay alone with Mrs.
Capron in the drawing-room two,. three, or four
hours at a time, but in the summer of that year, I
do n'-"t know the time, I frequently visited Mrs.
Capron, and saw her alone. I wish to speak accu-
rately, and to give every information required, but
I cannot speak with exactness of events which oc-
curred five years ago. I was in general shown up
stairs, and might have remained two hours at one
time. I did not to the best of my recollection ever
send any letters to Mrs. Capron under cover to
Bass. I do not remember anything of the kind.
Mr. Capron's house was in South-street, Grosvenor-
square. In July I met Mrs. Capron in the Park.
She did not ride down to the boat-house in my car-
riage. We went down to the boat-house; and
rowed on the Serpentine. I went to the Star and
Garter, Richmond, once with Mrs. Capron. I cat-
not say that I returned at 10 at night. I took Mrs.
Capron to the Beulah Spa Hotel, but do not recol-
lect it was on the day I met her in the Park. I

The Assistant-Judge and the magistrates retired.
On coming into court,
The Assistant-Judge, in passing sentence, observed
that the prisoner had been convicted upon the third
count of the indictment, on evidence which could not
be questioned or contravened. Although the sentence
of the court now would restrain the liberty of the
defendant only for a short period, yet, if ever he
should be brought before that court again for a
similar outrage, or for any breach of the law
amounting to an indictable misdemeanour against
Mr. Morris, he would be looked upon as a person
requiring--not for his own reformation merely,
but as a warning to all ill-disposed persons likely
to break the peace—a punishment not at all to be
measured by his present sentence, but totally .of a
different kind. In the hope, therefore, that the
defendant would abstain from any such conduct,
and at once submit to the necessity of keeping the
peace as long he lived in this country, the court
would pass on him the lowest sentence which, in

took her to Thames Ditton, and we gined at an inn
on the side of the water: I also took her to the
Trafalgar, at Greenwich. We might have returned
about 10 at night, not so late as 12. Mr. Capron
was out of town on the Ist of August. I cannot
say whether I went out with Mrs. Capron that
night. I don't recollect whether on the 2d of Au-
gust I took Mrs. Capron to the theatre, but I admit
that I did take her to the theatre. I don't know
that Mr. Capron was out of town. Ido not recol-
lect dining with Mr. and Mrs. Capron on any par-
ticular occasion just prior to the naval review. I
had not made arrangements to go to that review,
more probably the reverse. I recollect Mr.
Capron going out, as was understood, yachting, and
as matter of history I know it was about that time.
I recollect his leaving town to go yachting. I
never took her out and remained out till 12 o'clock.
I recollect nothing of the sort. I knew that
Mr. Capron came from yachting, and I think I
did not see him after he returned. I frequently
saw Mrs. Capron. I was in the habit of going out
of town. Bass, the maid, brought me a note to
the Oxford and Cambridge Club from Mrs. Capron.
I took her to my lodgings in Pall-mall, and wrote
an answer.
The Assistant-Judge asked if this was evidence.
Sergeant Ballantine—l have the most complete
answer to it, and desire it, may be most fully gone
into.

Court—Do you pursue that course of exami-
nation, then ?
Sergeant Ballantine.—lf Mr. Capron had any
complaint to make against Mr. Morris, why did he
not take the proper legal course ? We want pro-
tection from violence.
The Assistant-Judge understood the object of the
inquiry was with reference to the assault. Had it
been committed ?
Sergeant Ballantine—Mr. Morris has come here
to meet these matters, and it is now obligatory to
go on with it. I said at the outset I was fully
prepared to meet these imputations, however pain-
ful the duty, but those who have brought them for-
ward must hear the answer. I hope the examina-
tion may go on.
Witness—l am so desirous of perfect accuracy
that I will not speak of anything that I do not re-
collect well. I recollect giving Bass (Mrs. Capron's
maid) a letter—l believe for her mistress. I don't
recollect when Mrs. Capron went to Richmond. I
don't know that it was on the same day that I went
to Richmond. She came once to my lodgings, but
did not stay. I saw Mrs. Capron at Richmond and
walked with her to the railway station. I did not
return that night in a cab with Mr. Bowlby. The
next day Mrs. Capron left Richmond, and went to
live at the Queen's Hotel, Bayswater. I visited
there once or twice, and made her a present of a
writing-case. Do not recollect a work-box as well.
I took Mrs. Capron to the Star and Garter, with
Mr. Bowlby, who was acting as her solicitor in a
suit of divorce which she had then commenced
against her husband for cruelty. We dined there,
and Mrs. Capron's brother came in before dinner was
over. I sent for the landlord and asked him how it
was that a person had intruded into a private room.
Mrs. Capron mentioned the brother's name when she
saw him. An action was brought against Capron
for his wife's expenses at the Queen's Hotel, but it
was put off and the expenses paid, Mrs. Capron
returned to her husband on the Bth of November.
I saw her at Eastbourne; that was before she re-
turned to her husband. The next I saw of defen-
dant was in Paris. In July, 1854, he assaulted me
in the Place Vendome, and was tried by the Tri•
bunal of Correctional Police and fined 100 f. I was
not then present through a mistake as to the time
I could be absent from Paris attending to my
duties in London, but I was present in the first
instance, after the assault was committed. I em-
ployed an avocat. I did not know, never heard,
that the newspapers hadreports of the proceedings.
I afterwards saw him at the Exhibition of the
Royal Academy in 1856. I was accompanied by a
friend and his brother. The defendant said to his
(witness's) friend, " I had the honour of being in-
troduced to you by Mr. Mowbray Morris. He is,
I believe, your friend. It is right you should
know what he is, and I tell you what he is—that
he is a scoundrel and a coward. My name is Ca-
pron." It was to that effect. He repeated it aloud.
I went to get a policeman to give him into custody,
but was advised by my friends not to do so. Capron
was then left to take what proceedings he thought
fit to bring the matter before some judicial tribunal,
if he felt aggrieved.
Sergeant Ballantizie—And you have at last done
so, as he would not ?
Witness—Certainly. I have seen two pamphlets,
but I did not take any proceedings against him
respecting them. Ido not know that Mrs. Capron
is now in a lunatic asylum, but I heard so a few
days since. I never saw her after she returned to
her husband in November, 1853. I was married
the day after the asiault now in question.
Re-examined—When I was assaulted by de-
fendant in Paris, my wife, since dead, was with
rue. She lived with me down to the day of her
death, and she was fully acquainted with my
visits to Mrs. Capron, and knew the object. When
that assault was committed I was walking by the side
of Mrs. Morris—not arm in arm, we were a little
apart—when defendant rushed past us from behind,
and turning round upon me, struck me across the
head with a stick, and the blood spurted over my
wife's dress. After the insult in the Royal Academy,
I took legal advice—consulted with Mr. Hawkins,
the counsel—and upon his opinion I acted. I was
advised that I had no legal remedy. The defendant's
pamphlets were sent to my wife just before she
died.
Sergeant Ballantine—Now, before the jury, and
by the solemn obligation of your oath, was there
ever any criminality between you and Mrs. Capron ?
Mr. Morris—Never.
Sergeant Ballantine—Did you ever take her out,
or see her, or drive her about, up to June, 1853,
during the time you dined with the defendant ?
Mr. Morris—Most certainly not. I never was
anywhere with her without her husband before
that time. On one occasion we had been to Chob-
ham; and after we had dined Mr. Capron sug-
gested to his wife to go to bed, as she was tired;
but she did not, and he muttered, " You d-
-." On the following day she made a verbal
communication to me, and I then learned thatthero
had 'been two separations for cruelty and miscon-
duct on his part. (This was objected to, but
allowed by the court.) She said she wished to be
separated from him again. She made a communi-
cation respecting her own mother and other rela-
tives, and gave that as an excuse for consulting
me. I told her I was not the proper person to
advise her; she ought to go :to her mother. She
reiterated her reasons for not seeking her advice.
I told her that out of respect to my own character
and her own I could not do anything in The matter
unless all other means had been tried and failed.
There was nothing in whatever passed of which
either Mrs. Capron or myself need be ashamed, in
the least possible degree. She consulted me as
a friend. I recommended her to Laurence,
Crowdy, and Bowlby, and a suit was commenced
for divorce. That was when Mrs. Capron
refused to live with Mr. Capron. Mr. Nelson, a
proctor, was consulted, and Mrs. Capron put in her
own statement of Mr. Capron's conduct to and
treatment of her.
It was proposed to put this statement in, but
defendant's counsel objected.
Mr. Chambers then proceeded to address the
jury. He said it was a most extraordinary case,
and he should have abandoned his duty if he had
not accepted the challenge to have these matters
fully investigated, and the result had been, that by
the oath of Mr. Morris Mrs. Capron had been re-
lieved from all imputation of having broken her
marriage vow, but she had been imprudent to a
•degree which could not be too much regretted.
,Nothing could be charged against the defendant
but a common assault, yet two serious counts had
been put into the indictment, and he much com-
plained that documents which had been confiden-
tially placed in the hands of an attorney should
have been shown, and openly produced and read in
court. Mr. Morris was engaged in the matter of
the separation, and the defendant, in a moment of
indignation and in the excitement of his affection
for his wife, and under the provocation of what
had taken place, had been induced to commit what
he could not but say was an assault, but surely not
so serious a one as to require three counts of an in-
dictment to define it. It was well, perhaps, how-
ever painful, that this inquiry had taken place, as
an explanation had been afforded which exculpated
Mrs. Capron. The learned counsel then commented
upon the evidence at some length, and urged that
the s.ffence was one of a very trivial nature.
The jury found the defendant guilty on the third
count.

lighted at an open safety lamp, or through a de-
fective one. As to the ventilation, I have mea-
sured the air, and find there is rather less than

6,000 cubic feet per minute passing for the whole
of the working —both the east and the west side ;
it should be about 25,000 feet. At the time of the
explosion there would not be more than 6,000 cubic
feet of air passinc, from the whole of the workings,
and there would be considerable escapes. There
ought to be an adequate amoant of ventilation con•
sl,antiv to dilute and render harmless noxious gases
to such an extent that the levels would be in a fit
state for working, as required by the first general
rule of the Coal Mines Inspection Act, and which
is required to be observed by the owners and prin-
cipal agent, and is not in this case deputed to any
other person. Those who understood fire-damp,
and worked in the far ends of Nos. 1 and 2 jig-brows
must, in my opinion, have been aware that such
was the case ; and it is to be regretted that they
did not give me any intimation of what was going
on.

Mr. Dickenson resumed—The responsibility of
carrying out the general rule rests with the owners
and their agent. • There was no viewer here com-
bining practical and scientific knowledge.
By Mr. Part—The proprietors of this pit have
attended to any directions I gave them.
Richard Gee—l was employed in this mine, and
was in the far end at the time of the .explosion.

The adjourned inquiry before the coroner, Mr.
W. S. Rutter, into the causes of the explosion
which occurred on the 11th inst., at Tyldesley, was
resumed, at the George and Dragon Inn, on Wed-
nesday. Mr. Joseph Dickenson, the inspector of
coal mines, and Messrs. Green and Holland, the
proprietors of the colliery, were present. Mr. Part,
solicitor, Wigan, attended on behalf of the pro-
prietors. The first witness examined was
Wm. Stott, Tyldesley, who deposed—l was em-
ployed in the mine at the time of the explosion,
and was working in a lower level. Hugh Aspinall
came to me, and asked if I had seen any gas in my
place. I said " No." He said there was some in
his. It was then about 11 o'clock. He wished me to
examine my place. I took hold of my lamp, looked
into the old workings, and found gas there. His
place was about one hundred yards above mine.
Aspinall went away with his lamp, and the explo-
sion occurred in 20 minutes after. I believe that
Beswick the fireman, had not been down before me.
Atkinson, the otherfirenaan, said Beswick, who had
to look after the workings on the west side (where
the explosion happened) had not come, and we
must look out for ourselves. I don't know why
Beswick was not down That morning. I heard he
had been drinking the night before. I did not
notice any of them appeared worse for liquor when
they entered the pit on the morning of the acci-
dent. All used safety lamps, but lam not aware
that all of them were perfect. Moses Brook' was
under-fireman, but I did not see him. The bottoms
of the lamps are left with a man to be cleaned and
supplied with oil. We take the gauze part home
to clean. The lamps are not locked.
John Brooks, a boy 14 years of age, son of the
deceased Moses Brooks, deposed—l worked in the
mine, under my father. I was at the bottom of
No. 1 jig-brow about a quarter of an hour before
the explosion, and Hugh Aspinall came and asked
where my father was. I said he had gone to the
bottom of the engine-brow. He said I was to send
my father to his place, and to go out with my naked
light. I went to the bottom of the engine-brow,
saw my father, and told him what Aspinall had
said. Aspinall said I was to tell my father that the
place was filling with sulphur, and I did so. He
went towards Aspinall's-place. I saw Thos. Beswick
at the bottom of the engine-brow that morning at
six o'clock. Beswick went with my father, after
I told him what Aspinall said. Aspinall had a
lamp with him when be came to me. It was then
about eleven o'clock. Open lights were allowed on
the first level, to the No. 1 jig-brow, to the engine-
brow. and up the engine-brow to the pit.
Bold Ratcliffe, a miner, said—l was at the top of
the down brow, on the second level, and worked
the coals up by a hand-turn. I had a naked lamp,
and a lad, Thomas Stott, came and called, " Bold,
Bold ! 'there is sulphur," that was nearly a quarter
of an hour before the fire. He put my light out,
and then ran back. I soon after felt something
pressing my ears ; I saw a light, and called out,
" Oh, dear, what must Ido ?" My head and hands
were much burnt. I saw Hugh Aspinall at six
o'clock, and at half-past ten, but he said nothing
about fire. Six years ago I was burnt from head to
foot in the same pit. I have not had a gill of ale
in two months. I had not seen Beswick or Brooks,
the firemen, that morning.
Mr. Joseph Dickenson, the Government inspector
of mines for the district, stated that he had. been
down the pit on three separate occasions since the
explosion, and had investigated the circumstances
under which the explosion appeared to have taken
place. The engine pit is 160 yards deep to the
coal called the Crombouk four feet. There is
another.pit down to the seam, called the upcast
shaft. I went down by the winding pit. At the
bottom of this there are two steam boilers, the fire
under which, and the waste steam, are used as ven•
tilating power. There is a steam engine for wind-
ing up the engine-brow, the boiler fires being fed
with fresh air. Mr. Dickenson described the
workings, which generally extended about 1,000
yards, level course, east and west, and about 600
yards north and south (the dip being about 1 in 41-
to the south), and embraced galleries about nine
miles in length. He proceeded—At present all the
workings going on are to the deep of the engine
pit, the coals being drawn up the engine-brow.
This begins about 40 yards from the engine pit,
and goes down about 340 yards. The west levels,
in which the explosion happened, extend about 640
yards, also to a fault. From this first level, at
390' yards from the engine-brow, the No. 1 jig-
brow goes up ; it is about 220 yards long, and at
the top of it there are several narrow workings ;
the levels to the west extending about 270 yards
from the top of the jig, which is the extreme point
of the workings, the distance from the engine shaft
being about 1,190 yards. The thirteen persons
spoke it of by William GI egory as being suffocated,
with the three safety-!amps burning beside them,
were all found near the top of the jig-brow, and
were evidently making their way out. The flame
of the explosion does not appear to have extended
up this jig-brow. At about 130 yards beyond the
bottom of No. 1 jig-brow, the No. 2 jig-brow goes
up. It is about 160 yards long, and the levels ex-
tend westward rather more than 165 yards from
the top of the brow. It was in the far ends of two
of these workings that four persons spoken of were
found suffocated, another being found at the top of
the brow, also suffocated. I cannot find any trace
of flame in these far ends, nor yet on the No. 2
jig-brow ; but from the fact of Foulds being found
on the brow, it seems likely that the flame extended
up the brow, if not into the levels at the top. The
afterdamp would be at once upon these men, and
they would be suffocated, as they were found,
almost before they could leave their places. There
is another brow going down from the first to the
second level, called the balance jig-brow. At two
places to the west of this balance jig-brow, Hugh
Aspinall and Thomas Stott, also Richard Brad-
shaw, were killed. They were working thepillars
back, leaving a goaf, which we may call Aspinall's
goaf, also to the deep of the second level to the
down-brow. Bold Radcliffe worked to a hand-turn
at the top of it. George Kay, Richard Aspden,
William Stott, Joshua Hodgkinson, and Richard
Gee worked, at the down-brow, at a goaf which we
may call Kay's goaf. At the east side of this down-
brow another small goaf has been similarly
formed. These three goavcs are all ventilated
by the intake air of the west split, the east
workings being ventilated by a separate split ; the
air having to pass through them before it enters any
of the places where straight work is going on, so
that any gas coming through these goavcs has
to pass through all the other working places,
which is a very bad arrangement, and it is at
Thomas Stott and Hugh Aspinall's places, and
above them, in the far end of the first level, and the
rank end above, from which the explosion seems to
have emanated, there being traces of fire visible
there. Upon my visit on Monday, the 13th, the
fire-damp was then coming out so strong at these
points, that I could not get to the far end. On the
16th I.got to the far end, but the air was at the
explosive point. According to the witnesses exa-
mined, Aspinall found the sulphur increasing, and
had sent for Moses Brooks, and Thos. Beswick, the
fireman, and no doubt those persons were going to
attend to the gas, Brooks being found horribly
mutilated at the bottom of No. 2 jig-brow, and
Beswick and Aspinall, about 100 yards off, near the
bottom of No. 1 jig-brow, I think, therefore, it
may be taken that a larger quantity of gas than
usual was coming off from some of these workings.
In my opinion, it came from one of the three goaves
I have alluded to—apparently Aspinall's goaf. I
cannot, as yet, offer any opinion as to where the
gas was lighted, but it does not appear to have
been at any of the points where open lights were
allowed. -It must, therefore have either been