The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-24 00:00:00

securing the necessary annuities. The- sub-commit-
tee add that the claims upon them are
" So numerous that they cannot form an accurate
estimate of the total sum likely to be expended. It
is evident that a large number of cases still remain
to be considered. Officers generally appear to shrink
from applying for aid, and yet the sub-committee,
knowing that the destruction of property and the
loss of staff allowances occuring contemporaneously
with events that have occasioned many unusual
and unexpected expenses must have placed many of
them in circumstances of great embarrassment, have
all along been willing and prepared to afford liberal
assistance. It has already been stated that all the
grants of the sub-committee are confidential, and
that no names will be published. To officers and to
all others who are really sufferers the sub-committee
offer their succour, and they believe that they have
justly represented, the public feeling in their endea-
vour hitherto to make their aid in every instance,
substantial and effectual. If in any cases they have
granted more than was sufficient, the error has arisen
from the desire so to administer their trust that no
real want should be unrelieved, and that the afflic-
tions of these eventful times should not be aggra-
vated by a narrow and jealous spirit in the distri-
bution of the Relief Fund. In many cases the sub-
committee well knew that their grants have afforded
timely and necessary aid to those who had seen all
their property destroyed, and their earthly pro-
spects blighted, and their dearest relatives taken
frora them by a stroke ; and they fail to estimate
the extent of suffering to which hundreds must
have been exposed had no such fund existed."
The aggregate number of persons relieved by the
fund up to the date of this report is not given, but
it is incidentally stated that up to the 3d February
assistance had been afforded in nearly 2,000 cases.
One of the tabular statements accompanying the
report shows the various glasses of persons (includ-
ing men, womeitoind children) to whom relief has
been given. The total number included in this
table is 777, of whom 6 were officers, 101 officers'
wives and children, 70 in the railway and public
works' departments, 91 in the uncovenanted and
patrol service, 116 indigo planters and agents, 29
clerks in public offices, 101 traders, 18 missionaries
(Protestant and Roman Catholic), with 23 women
and 54 children, 78 non-commissioned officers, &c.,
and 90 widows and orphans. The appendix also
contains the correspondence which has taken place
on the subject of the fund between officials in India
and the late Lord Mayof of London (Mr. Alderman
Finnis), the late Mayor of Liverpool, and other
gentlemen who took an active part in promoting
the subscription on behalf of the sufferers by the
mutiny in this country. Portions of this corre-
spondence have already been published, and the re-
mainder, from the lapse of time since it took place,
has ceased to possess any interest for the general
reader.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—Jan. 22.

COURT FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF
CROWN CASES RESERVED.

(Present, Lord Campbell and Justices Crowder and
Willes, and Barons Martin and Watson.)
THE QUEEN V. BERRY.

The prisoner was indicted for perjury, committed
before a magistrate upon a matter of affiliation of
an illegitimate child. It was proved that the
mother of the child had laid an, information, not
in writing or upon oath, upon which a summons
against the prisoner was issued. The prisoner and his
attorney attended before the stipendiary magistrate,
the merits of the case were gone into, the mother
swore that the prisoner had visited her several
times at a particular house, and was the father of
the child, and she also swore that he had paid her
money for the maintenance of the child within 12
months of its birth. The prisoner then was sworn,
and he stated that he had never visited the mother
at that particular house, and that he had not paid
the mother money within 12 months of the birth of
the child. Upon this the prisoner was indicted for
perjury. It was objected that the magistrate had
no jurisdiction, as the information ought to have
been in writing and upon oath ; and further, that
the payment of the money was not material, so as
to justify the proceedings for perjury ; and it was
also urged that the prisoner could not have waived
the objection, although he permitted the case to be
gone into upon the merits without objection.
The prisoner was convicted, but these points were
reserved.

Mr. Sergeant Atkinson (with whom was Dr.
Wheeler), was heard in support of the objections on
behalf of the prisoner ; and Mr. Cross argued in
support of the conviction.

Yhe Court took time to consider its judgment.
THE QUEEN V. RICE.

The prisoners were convicted for stealing 8501 b.
weight of lead affixed to a wharf. They were also
charged with a simple larceny of stealing lead. The
points left were whether lead affixed to a wharf
could be considered as affixed to a building, so as to
bring it within the statute, and whether it could
be a larceny, as no other lead was stolen but that
affixed to the wharf.

Mr. Laxton appeared for the prisoners. The lead
formed the gutters of a shed. There was no vari-
ance between the indictment and the proof—one
charging that the lead was affixed to a wharf, the
other that it was affixed to a building.
The Court said it was too clear—the wharf con-
sisted of timber, brick, and tiles, and it was a build-
ing to which the lead was affixed.—Conviction con-
firmed.