The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, JULY 25, 18b9,

RIFLE CANNON.

The New York Journal of Commerce gives a
synopsis of the official report on the new rifle can-
non experimented with at Chicopee, Massachusetts.

t says : • •
" The Board convened June 7, and continued

their experiments for several days: The guns ex-
amined were a 6-pound bronze cannon, with 3.80
inch calibre, and rifled 15 grooves ; a 12-pounder,
4 inch calibre and the same number of grooves. In
both instances, the twist in rifling was equivalent
to one turn in 60 feet at the beginning, and ending
in one in 20. _ _

" The projectile designed by General James for
these guns is a cast iron cylinder pointed by a solid
conoid head, the diameter being only 0.2 of an inch
less than the bore of the gun, and the length twice
the diameter of the calibre. The cylinder retains
its full diameter for a quarter of an inch of its
length at each end. For the intermediate length
its diameter is reduced half-an-inch, forming a re-
cess in its body, which is filled by a compound of
canvas, sheet•tin, and lead. The base of the
cylinder has a central cavity or opening of 1.95
inches in diameter, and 1.5 inches deep. When the
charge is fired, the gas evolved by the burning of
the powder, in its efforts to expel the projectile and
to escape from the gun, is forced into the cavity
against the compound filling, which is thereby
pressed into the grooves of the bore, and by its firm
hold in them the rotary motion is imparted to
the projectile.
" The Board, having examined the guns and pro-
jectiles, proceeded to testtheir efficiency, the results
of which were 'very satisfactory. The report says,
respecting the guns, their merit is due to the rifl-
ing, which can be readily applied, at little cost, to
all bronze cannon of the United States, and so
render them as far superior to the present smooth
bore guns as, in small arms, the most improved
rifle surpasses the musket. _

",The.. depth of
.grooving is so shallow as in no 1
wise materially to impair the strength of the gun,
while it is sufficient to compel the projectile to
take the rifle flight. The effect of these con-
trivances was exhibited in an extraordinary
manner by the increased range obtained while using
the same charge of powder and elevation in pro-
jecting masses of double the weight of the usual
spherical balls. The merits of the projectile are
represented to consist in their ' answering fully the
expectations desired of them ; their ready fabrica-
tion and adaptation to guns; their ease in loading ;
the certainty of file expansion of the filling and its
firm hold in the grooves of the guns. The greased
canvas wipes the rifling clean, and leaves the bore
in condition readily to receive the next charge, and
which is also a sure protection to the bore from in-
jury.' For these reasons the gun awl projectiles
are commended to the favourable consideration of
the Government ; and as the experimental firing
was subject to several disadvantages which may
hereafter be avoided, the board recommend that guns
of the service calibre be granted to General James,
for rifling, according to his principle. We learn
that another series of experiments is in contempla-
tion, in which to compare, side by side, the per-
formances of this new gun with those now in use.
Of course the remarkable precision and power of the
new rifled ordnance constitute its chief value, but
the great saving of ammunition effected is a matter
of no small importance. The results of the experi-
ments above referred to are expressed in tabular
form, at much length. As an example, it is shown
that in one instance 18 shots were fired a mean dis-
tance of 674 yards, at an elevation of one degree—
the powder weighing 111 b., the projectile 1211 b.—
the deviation being only four inches to the right of
centre, and half an inch above it. On reaching ground
the missile was buried five feet in comp Act saud. In
another instance a shot was fired 2,050 yards, at an
elevation of five degrees, and passed about 25 feet
above the top of the hill toward which it was di-
rected. The board believe, from the testimony of
several witnesses who were near the range, that the
projectile ' continued its flight many 100 yards be-
yond the hill,' the summit of which was nearly on the
samelevel as that upon which the gun was placed in
battery. According to the stateme at of Mr. Ames, the
manufacturer of the gun, who has carefully examined
the ground, ' it is almost certain the ball went four
miles.' After what is already known it is safe
to say that any object within the reach of an ordi-
nary spy-glass is a fair mark for this terrible weapon. ,
In one other respect the exploits of General James's
gun demand attention. According to the laws of
projectiles laid down in the Ordnance Manual, and
which have long been established, as was suppoSed
beyond power of refutation, the range of a 61b. shot
at 5 deg. elevation and 111 b. of powiter is 1,523
yards ; but, in the example now afforded, a ball
1211 b., with the specified quantity of powder, has
gone between three and four miles. As compared
with the celebrated Armstrong gun, the results are
not less curious. Mr. A. claims to have thrown a
ball 51 miles with 61bs. of powder, employing an
area or calibre of 31 inches,—which is a result of
55-100ths less favourable than that obtained by the
experiments at Chicopee. According to the latter,
any gun of calibre equal to Armstrong's will throw
a ball, with less than half the powder, the full dis-
tance attained in his practice."

AGGREGATE MEETING OF JOURNEY-

MEN BAKERS.

On Saturday evening a numerous meeting of
journeymen bakers, from all parts of London, was
&id in the large room of the Horns Tavern, Ken-
nington, to take into consideration the present de-
graded position of the trade, and to endeavour, by
all legal means, to emancipate themselves from the
state of slavery they were now enduring. Mr.
Blackmore, the chief promoter of the moveMent,
was loudly cheered when taking his seat on' the
platform. A great number of master bakers and
their wives were also present.
Mr. F. W. Goddard, in the absence of Mr. W.
Williams, M.P., took the chair, and expressed his
regret that Mr. Williams had not been able to take
the chair, as he knew his heart was with them, and
that he felt most deeply for the working man. He
hoped, however, that he should be able in a degree
to fi,ll his place. He (Mr. Goddard) was a descend-
ant of five generations of bakers, and he felt most
deeply for the journeymen of that trade. He felt
that man should regard man, not fqr th purpose
of exacting as much work from him as could be ob-
tained, but that he should consider him as an in-
teger to make up the great whole of society.
When he saw the procession that evening he felt
how much they were entitled to consideration, when
they were struggling, not for the slaughter of their
fellow-men, but for obtaining their just rights.
(Hear.) The labour of the journeyman baker was
incessant, for he had not only to look after the work of
the night, but to see to the tally of the day; so that his
brain and his thews were constantly on the stretch.
(Cheers.) No human power could stand this; and
it was now time there should be an alteration.
(Cheers.)
Mr. BENNETT, in proposing the first resolution,
said—lt was to be regretted that Lord Robert
Grosvenor had been unsuccessful in his attempts
to ameliorate the condition of the working bakers.
He considered that every one had a part to per-
form, and it rested with each one individually to
give his support to enable them to accomplish the
emancipation of their fellow workmen. (Cheers.)
He moved—" That this meeting, being deeply sen-
sible of the evils resulting from the existing sys-
tem of conducting the practical operation of the
baking trade of London and its vicinity, do con-
sider it subversive to out best interests, rendering
us totally incapable of fulfilling those high moral
and social duties expected from us as rational and
accountable beings., and that the abolition of night-
work, and a limitation of the hours of labonr to 12
hours per day, is imperatively necessary for our
physical, mental, moral, and social improvement."
Mr. M`NAUGHTEN seconded the resolution.

Mr. AYRT ON, a master baker, supported the re-
solution, and said there were hundreds of workmen
who commenced working at eleven o'clock at
night, and never left it till six o'clock the follow-
ing evening, and had to undergo the same ordeal
from day to day. Now, he asked whether the
human constitution could stand that ? If they
worked ten days a-week the public 'would say—
" Well, they get paid accordingly," But that
was not the case. They were skilled labourers, and
yet received less wages than a dock labourer.
(Cheers.) How would they have this altered ? By
strikes ? That was impossible. By parliamentary
interference? They had appealed to,the Legisla-
ture through that good man, Lord Robert Grosvenor
(now Lord Ebury), and only asked for a committee
to inquire into their wrongs, and let them state their
grievances. But what did Mr. Cobden say ? He
said that he believed tie case of the journeymen
bakers was much exaggerated, or else so many
would not come up from Scotland tc seek employ-
ment. (Disapprobation.) Underthese circumstances
they had only to fall back upon their last resouree
—public opinion ; and upon that he relied with
confidence. (Cheers.)
The resolution was then carried unanimously.
Mr. BLACKMORE moved, " That this meeting
having duly considered the necessity and reason-
ableness of the request, abolition of night work
and a limitation of the hours of labour in an un-
healthy and heated atmosphere,' herewith pledges
itself to render every possible assistance to any
official directory whose powers spring from the
legitimately expressed will of the operatives of the
baking trade."
Mr. ROWLEY, a master baker, seconded the reso-
lution, and said he had adopted tho twelve hours'
movement, and had found it answer. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. BARNES and other speakers having sup-
ported the resoluiien, a vote of thanks to the
chairman terminated the proceedings.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YoRK, JULY 22.

(Before Mr. Baron Watson and a Special Jury.)
LORD FOLEY AND OTHERS V. SINGLETON AND

ANOTHER.
This was an action by the plaintiffs, as executors

of the late Duke of Nor-folk, to recover compensa-

tion for the use and occupation of a piece of land at
Sh+ afield. The defendants denied their liability.
Mr. Overend, Q.C., and Mr. Quain appeared for
the plaintiffs, and Mr. Bliss, Q.C., Mr. Manisty,
Q.C., and Mr. Blackburne for one of the defendants
and Mr. Temple, Q.C., and Mr. Cleaseby for the
other.

It appeared that in the year 1853 the defendants,
who were timber merchants, applied to the agents
of the late Duke of Norfolk to lease the piece of
land in question, and accordingly, as alleged on the
part of the plaintiffs, it was agreed to grant the
plaintiffs a lease for 99 years at the rent of ls. a
yard.

No formal agreement was made, and the lease
was never granted. But it was alleged that the
defendants entered on the land and exercised over
it various acts of ownership during several years,
down to the death of the late duke in 1856, and
from these acts, coupled with the agreement for a
lease, it was now contended that the defendants
were liable for the rent, in the same way as if the
lease had been granted. A great deal of evidence
was given on both sides, and there was much con-
flict between the witnesses. For the plaintiffs evi-
dence was given of frequent demands of the rent,
and that such demands were not met by any denial
of liability. Tne defendants, on the other hand,
swore that they always repudiated the claim when-
ever it was made upon them.
The learned Judge told the jury that in order to
find for the plaintiffs they must be of opinion that
there was an agreement to pay a rent for the land,
notwithstanding that no formal lease was drawn
up, and until the lease was granted.
The jury, after a short consultation, found a ver-
dict for the defendants.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Hill.)
SATURDAY, July 23.
James Umpleby, aged 57, Thomas Naylor, aged
46, and Moses Butler, were charged with stealing
a quantity of wool and " nippings," and two wool
sheets, the property of Mr. Richard Ripley, at
Leeds, on the 13th of April last.
Mr. Middleton and Mr, West prosecuted ; Mr.
Bliss, Q.C., and Mr. Blanshard appeared for the
prisoner Butler, Mr. Campbell Foster for Naylor,
and Mr. Seymour for Umpleby.
It appeared that the prosecutor, Mr. Ripley, is a
woollen manufacturer and yarn spinner, having two
mills, one in Lace-lane, Leeds, and the other at
Holbeck, near Leeds. The prisoner Umpleby was
his carter, and had filled that situation for many
years. The prisoner Naylor also had been 20 years
in his service, and lived in a cottage in the mill-
yard at Holbeck. The prisoner Butler is a dealer
in woollen waste at Wortley, near Leeds. It was
the duty of Umpleby to carry goods out to customers
of Mr. Ripley, on his " wherry," and it appeared
that Umpleby, when he called at the mill of the
prosecutor in Holbeck, used generally to go there
with his wherry between 12 and 1 o clock, when
the workpeople we:.e at dinner. Fifty workpeople
were employed at this mill in scouring wool and
spinning it into yarn. The wool was weighed out
in large quantities and given to Naylor for the pur-
pose of being scoured. He was the head scourer,
and placed the wool in a building calied the dry-
house, and he weighed it out there in small quan-
tities of 41b. each, which he gave out to be scoured.
It•then passed through various hands until it came
back as spun yarn. In March last 122 stone 91b.
of Saxny wool, worth about 2s. 10d. per lb., were
weighed out and given to Naylor, and of. that quan-
tity so given out it was alleged the produce in yarn
was 901 b. short of what it ought to have been. On
the 13th of April, suspicions having arisen that wool
was missing, the manager communicated with the
police, and on that day Umpleby was observed to
drive into the mill-yard with his wherry and re-
ceive various packages of goods to deliver ; but
upon his wherry two packages of wool, fastened up
in sheets, were observed to be covered over. No
one was seen to place them on the wherry. When
Umpleby drove off he was followed and watched.
He drove to the prisoner Butler's house at Wort•
ley, and, without saying anything, Butler came out
of his house and took one of the sheets of wool,
weighing about 301 b., in his arms from the wherry,
and was carrying it into his house when the police-
man pounced upon him. On searching Hs house a
machine, called a " willey," was found in a room
upstairs ; and, on the part of the prosecution, it was
suggested that the oluect of having this machine
there was to mix and tear up the wool taken there
with woollen waste, nippings, and, other woollen
refuse, so as to destroy the identity of all of them.
On being taken into custody- Umpleby begged f-,r
mercy, and said that Naylor gave him the wool
from the dryhouse. Naylor was not, however, pre-
sent. Afterwards Naylor was taken into custody,
and a conversation between him and Umpleby was
given in evidence tending to show that Umpleby's
statement, that he had received the wool from him,
was correct. Naylor's house was searched, and in
a large box was found a quantity of woollen sheet•
ings made up into bags, the sheeting being such as
Mr. Ripley's wool was packed in, and in another
box £l6 odd in money. Witnesses were called; who
gave Butler an excellent character, and who proved
that the Willey found in his house would only
knock the dust out of waste and wool put through
it, and would not alter the identity of the article.
The learned, counsel for the prisoners having ad-
dressed the jury,
His,lordship directed the jury that as against
Naylor there was not legal evidence on which it
would be safe to convict, and summed up the evi-
dence against the other prisoners.
The jury retired, and after an ahsence of half an
hour, acquitted all the prisoners.
This case was commenced yesterday, and was
adjourned by his lordship at seven o'clock last
night, and occupied the Court until two o'clock to-
day, and concluded the business of these assizes.
In the Civil Court to-day Mr. Baron Watson
tried the last cause. Their lordships then departed
for Durham.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.—STAFFORD, July 22.
(Before Mr. Justice Willes, and a Common Jury.)

THOMPSON AND OTHERS V. THOMAS.

Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. Scotland ap-
peared for the plaintiffs; and Mr. Kettle for the
defendant.

This was an action of trover, brought to recover
the value of an iron boat. The plaintiffs carried
on businep as :the Crook Hay Iron Company, and
in September, 1857, purchased -a boat of Messrs.
Woodhall and Smith, iron boatbuilders, at:Dudley,
and had it marked, and used it for some
time. The defendant was a creditor of Messrs.
Woodhall and Smith for the. sum. of 4170, and ob-
tained their authority to take a boat of theirs for
470 in part payment of the debt. The defendant
accordingly took possession of a boat, and the only,
question was, whether the boat in question was one
belonging to Messrs. Woodhall and Smith, which
the defendant had a right to take, or whether he
had..not by mistake taken possession of the pWn-
tiffs' boat.

The jury were locked up for several hours, and
eventually found their verdict for the defendant.

THOMAS V. BOOTH.

Mr. Sergeant Thomas and Mr. Holroyd appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. P. M'Mabon for the de-
fendant.

This was an action for ejectment, brought by the
plaintiff as assignee of a mortgage against the de-
fendant. to recover possession of a shop and pre-
mises adjoining the Red Cow, in Stafford. It ap-
peared that on the 24th March, 1838, J. Allcock
mortgaged the premises in question to John Talbot
for a sum of £5OO. Talbot died in 1848, and his
heir-at-law assigned the mortgage to the, plaintiff
in 1852. The defendant was the daughter of the
mortgagor, James Allcock, and claimed to be a
tenant, and entitled to notice to quit before giving up
possession. It appeared, howwer, that the only wit-
ness called by the defendant—viz., the plain tiff, that
the defendant had denied that she was a tenant
to the plaintiff, and that the latter had failed to
prove any tenancy in an action brought by him in
the County Court to recover rent.
Mr. Justice Willes, under these circumstances,
directed the jury to find their verdict for the plain-
tiff, which they did accordingly.

business of a commission agent, and was in the '
habit of getting bills discounted at the bank of
Messrs. Dingnan and Co., at Walsall, went to their
bank on the 9th of December last, and, among other
bills, he tendered- one for discount which purported
to be drawn upon and accepted by John Stanley,
of the Crown Inn, Leamington. It was pro-
posed to read the deposition made before the magis-
trates by Stanley, on proof that he was so ill as to
be unable to travel; but, after some discussion on
this point, his Lordship ruled that the inability tb
travel was not proved, and the prisoner was
acquitted.
The prisoner was then tried on another indict-
ment, which charged him with forging and utter-
ing a bill purporting to have been accepted by
John Machin.
John Machin and his son, the only persons to
whom the signature to the bill courd be attributed,
proved that they had neither signed nor authorised
any one to accept it.
Mr. Scotland addressed the jury for the prisoner,
and they found him guilty.
Mr. Justice Byles then sentenced the prisoner to
six years' penal servitude.
The prisoner, who was very unwell, on receiving
his sentence fell down in the dock, and had to be
carried out of court.
Mr. Justice Byles directed that every care
should be taken of him, and that he should be sent
to the hospital, which was done accordingly.
John Horobin, Edward Jukes, and Humphrey
James surrendered•to take their trial on a cliarge of
manslaughter at Sheffield, on the 11th of June,
1859.
Mr. Cripps appeared for the prosesution ; Mr.
Motteram appeared for Horobin ; Mr. Scotland for
Jukes ; and Mr. Cook Evans for James.
It appeared from the opening statement of coun•
sel that the deceased man, Thomas Litherland, had
been engaged in a fight with the prisoner Horobin,
and the other two prisoners had acted as seconds.
After the fight the deceased was taken home, and
died the next day in consequence of the rupture of
a bloodvessel at the base of the brain, but there was
nothing distinctly to connect the rupture with any
particular blow, but it was suggested that it was
the result of the contest in which he had been en-
gaged.
Mr. Justice Byles said that if the deceased came
by his death in consequence of the contest the pri-
soners were in law guilty of manslaughter, but
there was nothing in the depositions to show tl,iat
there had been any unfairness.
The prisoners, under the advice of their counsel,
retracted their pleas, and pleaded guilty.
Mr. Justice Byles said he was glad to say that
there was nothing unfair in the conduct of the pri-
soners, and he thought that, under the circum-
stances, justice would be done by discharging the
prisoners on their entering into their recognisances
to appear and receive judgment when called upon.
His lordship was glad to find, what he did not
know before, that all the inhabitants of the parish,
with the clergymen, had come forward to speak to
the good character of Horobin.
The prisoners then entered into their recognis-
ances, and were discharged.
Henry Cotes surrendered to take his trial on a
charge of feloniously stabbing and wounding John
Chawier, with intent to do hiai some grievous
bodily harm, on the Ist of May, 1859, at Burton-
upon-Trent.
Mr. Breyton appeared for the prosecution ; Mr.
Motteram defended the prisoner.
It appeared from the statement of the prosecutor,
that, a little after 12 o'clock on the night in ques-
tion, he was going down Lichfield-street, Burton.
He had been to indle's to have some drink, and
was going home in company with two men, one of
whom was named Dakin, when he met the prisoner
and another man. The prisoner recognised Dakin
as a man whom he had seen before, and asked him
to take some snuff, which he did. The prisoner
then accused Dakin of taking his snuff-box, and the
prosecutor then ooserved that he did not think that
the prisoner and his companion had come honestly
by the box, which his companion was carrying.
Thereupon, the prisoner made a rush at the prose-
cutor, and stabbed him in the thigh with a knife,
and inflicted a wound two inches in depth. A clasp
knife was found on the prisoner which might have
inflicted the wound.
It appeared that the prosecutor had been more
than once in custody on criminal charges, and that
after he had been wounded, he was taken to the
police station, and soon after he had got there the
prisoner and his companion went to the station and
made a charge of robbery against the prosecutor,
whom he identified as one of a party who hadseized
the box the prisoner's companion was carrying, and
stolen four sovereigns from it.
Mr. Motteram, for the prisoner, commented on
the omission to call Dakin, and suggested that the
wound might have been inflicted by the prosecutor
falling upon some glass which was lying in the
entry where the scuffie took place.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, with a strong
recommendation to mercy on account of his good
character.
Mr. Justice Byles said the crime of stabbing
must be put down, and sentenced the prisoner to
three years' penal servitude. '

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—CAMBRIDGE, JULY 23.
(Before the Lord Chief Baron and.a Common Jury.)

BEVILL AND ANOTHER V. ROGERS.

Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and Mr. Newton were coun-
sel for the plaintiff; Mr. Keane for the defendant.
The plaintiffs, who were brothers, were trainers
of race horses at Royston, and the defendant a large
farmer, residing at Clapton-hall, Northamptonshire.
One of the plaintiffs had been living with the de-
fendant as his farming pupil, and the defendant
subsequently employed the plaintiffs to train a
horse called "Polish" and a filly called " Miss Fel-
lowes_" " Polish" turned out a failure, but " Miss
Fellowes" promised well, and a bill of £BO was sent
by the plaintiffs to the defendant for their expenses
in the nritter. The plaintiff was cross-examined
by Mr. Keane, and the amount of his claim, re-
duced to .£75 45., for which sum the jury gave
their verdict.

HOLBEN V. LILLEY.

Mr. Power, Q.C., and Mr. Henry Mills were
counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and
Mr. Couch for the defendant.

The declaration was for a trespass on the plain-
tiff's land, to which the defendant pleaded three
pleas, setting up a right of way. The plaintiff and
defendant were tenants of the Mercers' Company
and Kin g's'Col lege respectively, the latter being the
substantial parties to the cause. The question was
whether the occupier of a farm at Grantehester had
a right of way for horses and carriages over a cer-
tain field which was in the possession of the plain-
tiff as tenant to the provost and fellows of King's
College. This field had been open land until the
year 1839, when it was enclosed under the powers
of a private Act of Parliament. The enclosure
award which was put in by the plaintiff set out a
bridle and footpath only, but it was contended on
the part of the defendant that he was not thereby
precluded from proving the enjoyment of the larger
right. It was admitted that the 11th section of the
Commons Enclosure Act, the 41st of George 111.,
which was incorporated with the private Act, ope-
rated to extinguish all private roads :which wera
not set out in the award, but the two following
points were taken for the purpose of destroying the
effect of the award :-1, that long-continued uses of
the largei right, being inconsistent with the award,
rebutted the legal presumption that all the neces-
sary preliminaries to the due making of the award
had been fulfilled, and threw upon the other side
the lurden of proving that fact ; 2, that the actual
userrof the right for forty years, Fhich it was al-
leged tad, in fact, existed, rendered the right inde-
feasible under Lord Tenterden's Act, notwithstand-
ing the award.
The Lord Chief Baron overruled both these ob-
jections ; he must take the award as proved, and,
that being so, both parties were bound by it, and
everything outside of it which existed previously to
it could not be appealed to by either of them ; con-
sequently, as 19 years only had elapsed since the
making of the award, there was no case for the

jury.
Leave was then reserved for the defendant to go
to the Court above upon this ruling, and by the
consent of the plaintiff the judge agreed that if the
defendant should be dissatisfied with the decision
of the Court he would sign a bill of exceptions.
DAY V. DAY.

Mr. Power, Q.C., and Mr. W. Cooper were coun-
sel for the plaintiff ; Mr. Keane and Mr. Couch for
the defendant.

This was an action for breaking and entering the
plaintiff's land, and depasturing the same. The
plaintiff and defendant were no relations. The de-
fendant had been in possession of the land in ques-
tion as the guardian of a lunatic, and gave up pos-
session to the co:rimittees of the lunatic appointed
by the Lunacy Commissioners, who let the farm
to the plaintiff. A valuation of the stock and crops
upon the farm, as between outgoing and incoming
tenants, to the amount of £BO, not having been pad
to the defendant, he, under an impressic that he
was justified in so doing, turned his cattle on to
the farm, which was the trespass complained of.
The damages claimed by ,the plaintiff amounted to
£lO. Witness were called for the defendant with
the view of showing that the damages claimed were
excessive.
The jury, however, gave a verdict for 1% the
whole amount claimed.
MARSH V. AYRES.'

Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and Mr. W. Cooper appeared
for the plaintiff; Mr. Po*cr, Q.C., and Mr. Crouch
for the defendant.

The declaration was for an assault. The pleas
were 'rNot guilty," and "Son assault demesne: The

damages were laid at £5OO. The facts of the case
appear from the evidence as given by the plaintiff
in his examination in chief and on his cross exami-

•
Mr. John Marsh—l am the plaintiff. lam a far-
mer at Stuntney, near Ely. The defendant lets out
thrashing machines. I remember the defendant and
his brother-in-law coming over my land. I saw the
defendant after that. Some words passed between
us. I went to Eiy on the 3d of June. I met the de-
fendant on the road. He had a stick. I spoke first.
I said, " You're a nice sort of fellow to persuade
Wilson to let my horses go astray." Defendant
said, " You go to Ely and pay your debts ; you
havn't got a farthing." I said, "I have as such
money as you have, you midwifely humbug." (ITe
witness explained the allusion.) He said, " You
scoundrel, you haven't got a farthing." I said, " I
have as much as you." He then struck my mare. I
said, " Don't strike her ; strike me." He then struck ,
me on the head with his stick. He struck me a
second time and knocked me into a ditch on the
other side of the road. When I recovered I found
myself in the ditch. Defendant came towards me.
I said, " For God's sake, don't kill me." He said,
" You --, I'll murder you." He struck me again,
and I remember nothing else. I was carried home.
A medical man saw me next morning. I was very
bad. I can't see plain now. Mr. Muriel attends
me now.

. _
Cross-eXamined by Mr. Power—This was at six
o'clock in the evening. I might have had two pints
of beer that afternoon. Sometimes I have more, some-
times less. I am not regular. My nearest way home
was by Quayning Drove ; if I had gone home that
way I should not have met defendant. I have land
there. I will swear I did not go that way to meet
the defendant. He was walking quietly along the
footway when I stopped my horse. I did not put my
horse across the footway. I did not see my horse s
head knock of defendant's hat. I never rode over
anybody in my life. I know Reeve of Ely. lam
not aware that I ever tried to ride over him. James
Mason says I tried to ride over him, but I believe
I did not. I never attempted to ride over anybody
else as I know of. I have been summoned for
beating a woman, but she beat me first. She did
not fall down. I paid her 4s. or ss. to settle. I
have been assaulted and have assaulted people my-
self several times. lam satisfied I never knocked
down a woman in the club room at Ely. If I did,
I've forgot it. I have been tipsy in my time. I
was struck as I was getting off the horse. I never
squared up to him. I hadn't the chance.
Mr. Brodrick, the manager of the gas works at
Ely, heard the defendant say, " Marsh came up to
the road and met me—he rode round me two or
three times, and I hit his horse on the head. He
said, If you mean that, hit me.' As he was get-
ting off his horse I hit him on the head and he
reeled into the ditch. He said, I'll make you pay
for this. • After that I hit him sharper than ever."
He (defendant) said, "If I had had a pitchfork I
should have driven it into him."
Cross-examined—There were two other persons
at the bar of the Angel when this conversation
occurred. He said Marsh rode found him two or
three times and then he hit the horse.
Thomas Cross spoke to another conversation with
the defendant, in which defendant stated that he
paid the plaintiff about over the head, legs, eyes,
and everywhere, and that when he (plaintiff) fell
in the ditch'his head came up like a float.
Another witness saw the assault from a distance.
Saw plaintiff and defendant meet, ,and then part.
Afterwards plaintiff rode after defendant, and plain-
tiff got olf his horse. This witness then described
the beating, and said that the plaintiff was nearly
dead when pulled out of the ditch.
Several other witnesses were called, who spoke to
statements made by the defendant, giving subs tan-
eally the same account of the transaction—namely,
that the plaintiff role round the defendant two or
three times, and that the plaintiff's horse knocked off
the defendant's hat. The beating was admitted by
the defendant, as stated by the plaintiff.
Mr. Muriel, of Ely, surgeon. saw the plaintiff on
the morning of the 4th. He had a cut over his eye ;
bruises on his head and body. He appeared to have
been very much punished indeed. He complained of
partial loss of sight, which might have resulted from
these blows.
Mr. O'Malley summed up the plaintiff's evidence
Mr. Power addressed the jury for the defendant,
and admitted that he could not justify the assault
as described by the plaintiff, but urged that the
plaintiff was the first aggressor and had greatly ir-
ritated the defendant by the insinuations he made,
and that it was a case for moderate damages.
The Lord Chief Baron, in summing up, said that
'he 'could understand occasions on which assaults
as violent or more so than the one concerning
which they had now to inquire might be, if not
justified, at all events in some degree excused. But
~was this such a case ? The defendant had not come
into the box to deny the imputation made on him
by the plaintiff. If that imputation had any foun-
dation, though it night be very unpleasant for the
defendant to be remnicle4. of it, still he could not
justify resenting it as.he ciid. No doubt the plain-
tiff to some extent biought it on himself, but was
not the assault unmanly and excessive ? The ques-
tion of the amount of damages was for them.
The jury gave £3O damages.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)
Geo. Hunt and Charles Rampling were indicted
for feloniously settilig fire to a stack of barley, the
property of Mr. Kent, of Ditton, near Cambridge.
Mr. Naylor prosecuted; the prisoners were not
defended by counsel.
On the afternoon of the 28th April the prisoners
were seen to go to windward of a stack of barley in
a field by the side of the road from Cambridge t
Newmarket. They were observed to leave it, and .a
few minutes afterwards some labourers observed
that the stack was on fire ; they therefore went
after the prisoners and took them into custody.
When charged with the offence they excused them-
selves by 'saying that one of them had lighted his
pipe, and was handing the lucifer to his mate, when
it fell, and must have set the stack on fire. The
stack, which was worth £l5O, was entirely de-
stroyed.
The jury, not believing this statement, found the
prisoners guilty, and they were each sentenced to
10 years' penal servitude.
Jas. Handley, and Elizabeth Connolly were in-
dicted for taking out of the possession, and against
the will of Thomas Mott, her father, one Eliza
Mott, she then and there being an unmarried girl
under the age. of 16 years.
Mr. Orridge prosecuted ; Mr. Naylor defended
both the prisoners.
The girl's father was a respectable farmer at
Wisbeach, ,in the Isle of Ely, and the prisoner
Handley was a labourer lodging at the house of the
prisoner Connolly. About three weeks before the
commission of the alleged offence the girl became
acquainted with the female prisoner, and at
her house met the prisoner Handley. Meetings
took place between the girl and the prisoners, and
yielding to their persuasions, on Sunday, May 22,
she left her father's house, went the same night
to Peterborough, and the following day to North-
ampton, where she was found in a low lodging with
the male prisoner. The friends of the girl had been
in pursuit until the discovery at Northamptton.
Mr. Naylor addressed the Jury for the prisoners,
urging that the evidence showed that the girl went
with the prisoners of her own free will, and for the
purpose of getting married to Handley.
The learned Judge, referring to the statute, 9th
George IV., cap. 31, under which the prisoners
were indictd, told the jury that the offence would
be complete quite independent of the object for
which the girl was taken. They must be satisfied
that the girl was under 16 years of age, and that
the father was unwilling that she should go with
the prisoner, and it would be against his will if,
had be known she was going, he would have re-
fused his consent. Moral force on the part of the
prisoners, inducing her to go, would constitute a
sufficient taking, if by such moral force a willing-
ness on her part to go was produced. If, however,
it was entirely voluntary on her part, the prisoners
would not be guilty of an offence against the act.
The jury acquitted both the prisoners.
This case concluded the criminal business for
the county of Cambridge.

VACANCIES, APPOINTMENTS, AND PROMOTIONS
IN THE CIVIL SERVICE.—Foreign Department.—The office
of First Paid Attache at Paris has become vacant by the
promotion of Mr. Fletcher C. C. Norton to be Secretary to
the Legation at Athens. Law Department.—The Judge-
ship of County Courts, N 0.4 district—Blackburn, Burnley,
Lancaster, Preston, sc.—has become vacant by the death of
Mr. John Addison. War Office.—The following gentlemen
have received certificates of qualification from the Civil
Service Commissioners :—Mr. G. A. Huxford, as purveyor's
clerk ; Mr. James Nelson Marsden, as temporary out-
station clerk; Mr. G. W. Browne, temporary clerk, Lon-
don ; Mr. T. M. Porter, temporary clerk, London ; Mr. C.
IL M. Stopford has passed his examination as temporary
clerk in the Quartermaster-General's Office. General Post
Office.—The postmastership of Ipswich has become vacant
by the death of Mr. William S. Fitch—salary £250 ; there
are vacancies for junior clerks; Mr. William Duck has
passed his examination as provincial clerk at Bath ; Mr.
John Brier has passed his examination as provincial clerk
at Huddersfield. British Musoum.—There is a vacancy
for an assistant librarian—commencing? salary £l5O per
annum. Greenwich Hospital.—There is a vacancy for a
third class clerk in the Civil Department of Greenwich
Hospital, consequent upon the retirement of Mr. James F.
Wright—it is in the patronage of the Lords of the Admi-
ralty. General Register Office.—Mr. George Wood has
passed his examination as sorter in the General Register
Office. Customs.—Mr. Henry Anderson has been ap.
landing-waiter at Glasgow; Mr. G. A. Adams has
been pointed
i
apinted landing-waiter and tide-surveyor at Ram-
sey, Isle of Man. The following gentlemen have passed.
their examinations and received certificates from the Civil.
Service Commissioners :—Mr. John Reeves, as clerk, at
Arbroath; Mr. W. E. Wheeler, as extra clerk, at Southamp-
ton ; Mr. Bernard Timothy M'Garry, as tide-waiter, at
Lis-et-pools—avid Service Gazette.

TILE LONDON AND NORTIL-WES.TERN
RAILTVAL

The exigencies of the vastly-increasing railway
traffic to and from the north will nbt, improbably,
in the course of time, convert the larger " refresh-
ment rooms" on the railways into central hotels for
the better accommodation of passengers. Already
the directors have found it necessary to add to this
department of the Stafford station a new dining
hail of large proportions, where the passengers by
the Scotch trains, known as " the Scotch Express,"
leaving Glasgow at 9.45 a.m., and Edinburgh at
10, will find, ready for them, on arriving at 5.57, a
hot dinner, after the fashion of the old coaching
inns, c insisting of soups, fish, joints, pastry, con-
fectionary, and fruit, at the fixed price of half a-
crown. This dining hall is of magnificent dimen-
sions, and is handsomely decorated, and furnished
with all appliances. The special dinner, for which
a clear quarter of an hour is allowed, is under the,
direction of Mr. Wm. Frazer, the master of the re-
freshment room, and favourably known to all tra-
vellers on the line for 17 years past. The economy
at the refreshment rooms at the Stafford station

—now one of the most frequented in England, for
not less than 40 passenger trains stop and take up
up passengers there daily—is not unworthy of
remark. The visitors to the refreshment and
dining rooms average from 500 to 800 daily, whose
wants are administered to by' 20 young females as
waitresses, two cooks, and two bakers. , These
young persons all live on the premises, one half of
them going on duty at six a.m., remaining until
nine in the evening, while the others commence at-
tendance at half•past ten a.m., and remain on duty
until the departure of the last up mail train at half-
past two a.m. -The new building, which is on the
up-side, by no means interferes with the ordinary
first and second•class refreshment rooms, but is an
additional accommodation, provided especially for
the northern passengers by the liberality of the
directors. A gas kitchen, by Kimbersley, of Bir-
mingham, has been erected in conjunction with the
new dining-hall, by means of which a dinner for 40
persons can be made ready at an hour's notice.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

LEICESTER-JuLY 23.

There was a rather limited show of wheat, which met a
good demand, at 2s per qr. higher. White sold at 40s to
48s ; red, 40a to 46s per qr. Barley, 34s to 40s. Oats were
a moderate sale, from 28s to 36s per 24 stone, Beans, 48s
to 52s per 38 stone.. Flour, 30s to 34s per 20 stone.