The Sun.
London, England, 1858-12-04 00:00:00

THE FILIBUSTERING MOVEMENT.

A despatch from Washington, dated the 19th,
gives the following particulars of the Filibustering
movement :—" A keen watchfulness upon the
movements of the Walker emigrants is kept up by
the Government, and their proceedings are pretty
well known. His plan was to take between 250
and 300 men on a sailing vessel from Mobile to
San Juan del Norte, and go at once up the river
as.emigrants to Nicaragua. The President's pro-
clamation, and the announcement of Senor Yrisarri,
the Nicaragua Minister, that emigrants to the
republic must have passports from the Legation,
have greatly damped the ardour of the rank and
file of Walker's followers, and of many of his sup-
porters. Colonel Anderson, who was at Savannah
raising emigrants, has left there and gone to the
south-west, because the field of operations did not
yield fruit as was expected. Walker's agent at
Mobile is writing urgent letters to all parts of the
country that every effort must be made to get
recruits and to have them at Mobile by the 20th
inst., so that the expedition can start. The
chief persons engaged in this movement with
Walker are Hon. Pierre Soule, of New Orleans ;
Hon. W. S. Yancy and Major Julius Hesse, of
Alabama ; Captain Fayssoux, who commanded the
schooner Granada, with two guns, and blew up the
Costa Rican brig Once de Abril, with 10 grass;
Colonel Rudler, one of the original 45 who landed
in Nicaragua; Major Robert Ellis, of Washington
city, one of the Lopez expedition; Colonel Ander-
son, who captured Castillo in Walker's second
expedition; Colonel Henry and Colonel Swingle,
both well known in the history of Nicaragua
Filibusterism ; Lieutenant Maury, Lieutenant
Ray, and a few others. The effect of the Pre-
sident's proclamation upon them has been great.
The original intention was to sail on the 10th
inst. First, the departure was delayed, and.
Walker came here ; then he anti oumed that if
his presence with a peaceful expedition was to
mar it he would not go with it ; now the bcl et
is that the expedition will not go during the
present month, and it is doubtful if it gets off
at all. It is whispered here that if Walker can-
not get off his expedition from Mobile he will en-
deavour to obtain through tickets for California by
way of Panama, and trust to luck for getting into
Nicaragua. Senor Jerez has gone to New York.
He is not a little alarmed at the aspect of affairs, as
he believes that Walker has made extensive pre-
parations and has some chance of getting oft. His
new transit route contract has gone to Nicaragua
for ratification ; but, as the Assembly does not
meet there till January, it can hardly be presented
before 10 weeks or two months. By that time it
is supposed that the route will be open and in
operation under the Stebbins contract, and Nica-
ragua will hardly dare then to close it and give the
privilege to Vandyck. The President will take
strong ground in his message on this Nicaraguan
question and the ratification of the Cass-Yrisarri
treaty, and no combinations of European Powers
will be allowed to prejudice the interests of the
nation who must use these Isthmus routes in its
domestic trade a hundred-fold more than all the rest
of the world together.".

Mr. and Mrs. Geo. Mure have arrived at Fenton's
Hotel, from Suffolk.

SIR JORN NGLlS.—SOUTHAMPToN,FridayEven-
ing.—Major-General Sir John Inglis arrived here by the 3
p.m. train from London to-da and was immediately waited
upon by the mayor in reference., to the presentation of the
address voted at the council meeting on Wednesday. It has
bees arranged that John and Lad I Lady*Ch I -
ford, Captain and Mrs. Tml' ing andY Lnagdl;-'lngls's sister,tms
will be received by the mayor and corporation at the Town-
hall, at 12 o'clock on Saturday, when the address will be
presented. The address is being engrossed and illuminated
at the Ordnance map-office. Immediately after the inte-
resting ceremony Sir John and his lady embark on board
the Ceylon steamer, in which they proceed to Alexandria
on their way to India.
CAPTAIN COURTNEY OF TIIE INDIAN EMPIRE
We are glad to learn that the underwriters are about t
present Captain Courtney, commander of the steiunshi
Indian Empire, with a present of a handsome piece or plat
for his meritorious conduct, skill, and perseverance in
bringing the steamship safely through the late fearful ga leg
and hurricane which raged in the Atlantic Ocean. dur lug
the past three weeks, the vessel having been 30 days on
the passage and 10 days short of fuel.
The clearing of country cheques through the
London clearing-house may be considered to be working
very successfully, and the number of dissentient banks has
further diminished. The majority of these were identified
with the independent movement for establishing a separate
institution altogether, and consequently they are net pre-
pared immediately to enter into an arrangement which
would virtually show that they had abandoned their own
project. It is, however, thought that the advantage to be
derived from uniformity of system and careful management
, will eventually induce them to concur n adopth g the
I exittigfogiltrald Atrtute.

Mr. M. Smith intimated that they had agreed to
withdraw a juror.
This was accordingly done.
It was understood in the court that defendant
had agreed to pay a sum of X3OO.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

Sittings at Nisi Prius in Middlesex.—(Before Lord
Chief Justice Cockburn and a Common Jury.)
BRETT V. PHILLIPS.-DISMISSAL OF A SHOPMAN.
This was an action to recover damages in conse-
quence of the plaintiff having been improperly dis-
missed from the service of the defendant, and there
was also a count for slander.
Mr. Ribton appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr.
Sergeant Petersdorff and Mr. Yates for the defen-
dant.

The plaintiff had been for four years in the
service of Mr. Carlin, a tobacconist, of Regent-
street, and afterwards for two years had been shop-
man to Mr. Martin, who carried on the same kind
of business in Ludgate-street. In December,
1857, Mr. Martin sold the business to the
defendant, and on the 11th of that month
it was agreed that the plaintiff should be his
shopman at a salary of £lOO a year. The
engagement, which was verbal, was to be for
one year certain, to commence on the 21st Dec.,
and was afterwards to be determinable by three
months' notice. The two quarters' salary due in
March and June were paid, and no complaint was
made until Monday, the 13th Sept. On that day
the plaintiff was called into the back room, where
he found Mr. Mayhew, the defendant's solicitor.
Mr. Mayhew said he had been informed by the
defendant that plaintiff had been robbing him to a
•very great extent. Plaintiff said he did not know
what he meant, and asked for an explanation. Mr.
Mayhew said, " How about the five dozen and nine
cigars ?" Plaintiff still said he did not know what
he meant, and the errand boy was then called in ;
and he said he had heard the plaintiff tell his
brother that he had got off on the Wednesday even-
ing with five dozen and nine. The boy also said
that he had taken for the plaintiff a parcel which
felt soft, as though it had tobacco in it. The parcel
was directed to the plaintiff's wife, who kept a
cigar-shop in Clerkenwell. Plaintiff explained that
the parcel contained an old coat, some aprons, some
tea and some small sashes. The real conversation
plaintiff had with his brother was in reference to
some meerschaum washed pipes, which the brother
had sold to the defendant. Plaintiff told his brother
that he had sold from three to four dozen before
nine on Saturday. There was nothing said about
five dozen and nine. Mr. Mayhew asked plaintiff
to confess, saying if he did, that defendant would
let him off. . Plaintiff said he had nothing to con-
fess, and he would not confess to what he had not
done for any man. The defendant said he had a
detective outside and that he would give plaintiff
into custody, and then send and arrest his wife and
his brother. Ultimately the plaintiff was told by
Mr. :Mayhew that he had better go. The plaintiff
said, " How about the quarter's salary ?" but get-
ting no answer, he left.
Mr. Sergeant Petersdorff submitted that the
engagment being for more than a year was not
valid unless in writing ; and that as to the count
for slander there was no evidence. The slander
alleged in the declaration was the following:—" He
took away with him on Wednesday night five
dozen and nine cigars, which he divided into two
packages, and put one of them into each pocket."
'ere was no evidence of the defendant having
said anything of the kind.
His lordship thought that the plaintiff could not
recover on these counts, but said that there was a
count for -
wages for that portion of time that
elapsed between Junoa and the 13th September,
when the plaintiff dismissed.w.
After a good deal of discussion as to the various
issues, it was decided to lay evidence before the
jury upon the count for wages between June and
September.
The defendant was then called. He said that
after Mr. Mayhew bad spoken to the plaintiff, he
begged to be allowed to go. He said he had a
wife, and he should be ruined, even if the charge
was not substantiated. Defendant said that before
he would consent to mercy plaintiff must show
contrition. He admitted he had taken away cigars
for his own smoking ; as many as half a dozen at
one time. He said lie thought witness allowed
that, as he allowed smoking in the shop. Five or
six days after plaintiff left, witness
.took stock and
found a deficiency—taking selling prices—of
£2lO.

Samuel Tusland said he was errand boy to the
defendant. Before his master came to live on the
premises in Ludgate-street, witness had seen per-
sons waiting outside the shop. They came in after
the plaintiff left. The plaintiff used to hand them
cigars, and they stopped in the shop and smoked
them. Sometimes he would give them parcels,
which they would take away. Sometimes the
parcels would be given two or three times a week.
After the defendant came to live on the premises

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
COOPER AND SPARKS V. MOSS AND MOSS.
In this case the defendants had disputed the
validity of a will, by which the testator, Mr. Hill,
late of Derby, had left a considerable portion of his
property to local charities and dissenting chapels.
The defendants alleged that the instrument had
been procured through the undue influence of Mr.
Gawthorne, who was formerly the minister of the
chapels benefited.
Mr. Collier, Q.C., contended that the costs of the
next of kin might be paid out of the estate.
Sir C. Cresswell thought that as a general rule,
the costs ought to follow the result of the case, and
he should therefore decree probate of the will, con-
demning Mr. and Miss Moss in the costs.
ALLEN V. ALLEN AND DARCY.—ALIMONY.
Alimony, pendente lite, at the rate of £250 per
annum, was allotted to the wife, the income of the
husband, an army clothier, being taken at £1,25 0.
VICARS V. VICARS.—INCEST.
This was a petition brought by a wife against
her husband, on the ground of his desertion of her,
and of his cohabitation with an illegitimate daugh-
ter. The respondent denied both charges.
Dr. Addams, Q.C., and Mr. Jones appeared for
the wife ; Dr. Swabey for the respondent.
The respondent was the son of a Berson who
many years ago carried on the business of a cotton-
spinner at Bolton-le-Moors. The respondent, who
acted as his book-keeper, formed an intimacy with
Agnes Leach, who worked in a factory at West
Leigh. This girl, becoming pregnant, went in
1831 to Chorley to be confined, after which the re-
spondent fetched her back, had the child named
Mary Ann after his sister, and adopted her as his
own. In 1837 the respondent married his present
wife, a widow named Naomi Westwell, with whom
he had been lodging. Shortly afterwards he took
his illegitimate daughter into his house, and when
she grew old enough he apprenticed her to a mil-
liner. Afterwards he left his wife and took a house,
first at Southport, and then in Edge-lane, West
Derby, Liverpool ; at both of which places his
daughter went to live with him. The evidence of
the incest was furnished by a number of servants,
who spoke to finding Miss Vicars' room unoccupied,
to seeing her in her father's room, and to observing
traces of two persons having slept in the respon-
dent's bed. In 1853 Miss Vicars was confined of
an illegitimate child, which was baptised at St.
Peter's church. Mr. Vicars was one of the god-
fathers ; and the child was named Frederick Robins
Leach. It died in 1854. In 1855 another child, a
daughter who still survived, was born, to which the
respondent also acted as sponsor. A third child was
born in the following year, and two of the witnesses
declared that they left the service of the respondent
on account of his peculiar connection with his daugh-
ter. There was no evidence of wilful desertion,
the parties having apparently separated by mutual
consent.

Dr. Swabey contended that the evidence of iden-
tity was not sufficient. There was in reality no-
thing in the facts proved before the court from
which to infer that the persons whom the servants
represented as cohabiting together were those who
were now charged with the horrible crime imputed
to the respondent and his natural daughter.
The jury, by his lordship's direction, acquitted
the respondent of desertion ; but they found, with-
out hesitation, that he had been guilty of the inces-
tuous adultery with which he stood charged.
COULTHART V. COULTHART AND GOUTHWAITE.
In this case the wife had not put in any answer
to the charge of adultery, but the co-respondent
pleaded certain matters tending to show connivance.
Mr. E. James, Q.C., and Dr. Swabey appeared
for the petitioner ; Dr. Spinks for the co-respon-
dent.

No evidence being adduced in support of the co-
respondent's allegations, they were at once nega-
tived by the jury.
TISDELL V. TISDELL-ADULTERY.
The petitioner, Mrs. Eleanor Tisdell, sought a
judicial separation from her husband Mark Antony
on the ground of adultery.
Mr. Sergeant Parry and Mr. Thompson were
counsel for the petitioner ; the respondent appeared
in person. - -
The marriage. took place at Milford, in South
Wales on ,the• Bth of December, 1842, and there
were three children born of the union, the eldest
being a boy about 14 years of age, a daughter about
three, and another daughter who had died. The
respondent, who was a clerk in the shipping trade,
cohabited with his wife in various places, but she
left him on pore -than one occasion, on account,
as she alleged, of his misconduct. She finally,
quitted him on the Bth of July last, having dis-
covered that he had an intrigue with a person
named Mary Ann James. Witnesses were called to
show that the alleged paramours had lived toge-
ther in Drummond-street, Sidney-street, and War-
rington-street, Somers-town.
The respondent then addressed the jury at some
length, contending that his wife had condoned
everything up to the Bth of July, when they were
living together. His avocations about that time
kept him away from home for two or three days,
and on his return he found that she had deserted
him.

The learned judge said the jury had nothing to
do with any question of condonation, the respon•
dent having put no such plea on record, and raised
no such issue. They had simply to say whether he
had or had not committed adultery with a person
named James.
The jury found this issue in the affirmative.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.
(Before the Chief Commissioner.)
IN RE GEORGE JAMES PHILLIPS-BREACH OF
PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.
This insolvent, a shell fishmonger, whose case
was before reported, appeared to receive judgment,
Mr. Macrae opposed for a young woman, named
Harriett Ellis ; and Mr. Sargood supported.
Harriett Ellis, after the insolvent's rr aniage with
a widow, brought an action against him for breach
of promise of marriage, and obtained a verdict,
with £75 damages, which, with the costs, exceeded
£lOO. The case stood over to see whether any.
thing could be done for the young woman.
Mr. Macrae informed the learned Commissioner

It appeared that on the 10th Sept. the prisoner,
the deceased, and several other young men were at
a public-house in West Tilbury, and the deceased
and the prisoner began sparring together in play ;
but at length they got in earnest, and some sharp
blows were exchanged, and the deceased took off
his coat and waistcoat and insisted upon having a
regular fight. The prisoner, it appeared, did not
wish to fight ; but the deceased insisted that he
should do so, and at length some more blows were
exchanged, and in the course of the scuffle the de-
ceased fell to the ground insensible, and he was
picked up and expired shortly afterwards. All the
witnesses concurred in stating that the fight was
forced upon the prisoner by the deceased, and there
was no evidence to show thatthe fall was occasioned
by a blow given by the prisoner. The surgeon who
was called in also stated that, although the death
was occasioned by a rupture of one of the blood
vessels of the brain, still this event, he said, was
equally attributable to a fall as to a blow.
Mr. Tayler, at the close of the case for the pro-
secution, submitted that there was nothing to go to
the jury against the prisoner. Even supposing,
he said, the jury should be of opinion that a blow
given by the prisoner was the cause of death, he
submitted that as the deceased was clearly the ag-
gressor, the prisoner was justified in protecting
himself, and all that he did was merely in self-
defence,

Mr. Justice Wightman said that undoubtedly
before the jury would be justified in convicting
the prisoner they must be satisfied that by some
blow or act of his he had occasioned the death
of the deceased,- and the jury would not in such
a case as this criticise the conduct of a prisoner
too harshly. The struggle 'appeared to have been
conducted fairly between the parties, and the de-
ceased had evidently forced the affair upon the pri-
soner, and under these circumstances, even if the
jury should be of opinion that the blow struck by
the prisoner was the cause of death, still, if they
should think he struck that blow to protect himself
and did not use any more violence than was neces-
sary to effect that object, they ought not to con-
-vict him of manslaughter.
The jury immediately returned a verdict of not
guilty.
Robert Maynard, 42, was charged with stealing
381 b. of lead, the property of her Majesty's Princi-
pal Secretary of State for War.
Mr. J. F. Smith conducted the prosecution.
The prisoner, it appeared, was employed as
plumber's labourer upon the Government works at
Waltham-Bross, and he was stopped by a policeman
carrying a bag, which, on being opened, was found
to contain a quantity of lead that had been taken
from the works.

He was found guilty, and, as it appeared that he
had been in gaol already for three months, the
learned judge only sentenced him to undergo a
further imprisonment of a fortnight.
The commission for the county of 'Kent will be
opened on Monday next, at Maidstone.