The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-25 00:00:00

THE LATE GALE.

PORTSMOUTH, Sunday.—The American ship J.
H. Ryerson, Capt. Strong, 900 tons, coal laden, from
Liverpool for New York, arrived off the east end of
the Isle of Wight on Friday evening, with the loss
of her mizenmast, mainyard, bulwarks, and boats,
and cargo shifted, lying over at an angle of about
50 deg., having been struck by a heavy sea on the
19th inst., in lat. 49.30, long. 8.20. On the ship's
arrival, Captain Strong immediately communi-
cated with the American Consular agent and Lloyd's
agent at the port, Mr. James Garratt, when that
gentleman waited upon the Government authorities
in the dockyard, who at once placed at his serviee
the Comet steam-tug, which proceeded out to St.
Helen's, and brought the disabled vessel in safety
into Portsmouth harbour at an early hour on
Saturday morning. Captain Strong reports that
:he left Liverpool on Thursday, the 14th instant,
experiencing fresh breezes up to the 17th, when it
increased considerably, moderating on the follow-
ing day, but increasing again to a heavy gale on the
19th. The ship was hove to at 4 a.m. on that day,
and her sail reduced, a heavy sea running. At 12
30 p.m. the ship was • struck by a tremendous sea
which threw her on her beam ends, shifting her
cargo and filling the cabins with water. The ship
appeared to be settling down, and the pumps were
got
to work, when they showed the presence of a
considerable body of water in the ship. They had
been tried every half hour previously during the
gale, but gave no water. Captain Strong then en-
deavoured to get the ship on the opposite tack, but
was unable to do so without first cutting away the
mizenmast, in doing which the mainyard was car-
ried away with one of the quarter boats and poop
rail, and the remaining quarter boat stove. In
paying off before the gale on being freed from her
mizenmast the ship was struck by another sea,this
time on her port quarter, which carried away the
skylights and filled the cabins with water,the ship
becoming unmanageable. She was brought up to
the wind again, and hove to on the starboard tack
to enable the crew to endeavour to stop the leak
and clear the ship of water. To do this the ceiling
was cut away, and the injured planking secured,
and the aperture stopped up as far as the means
at hand at the time permitted, or the captain dare
carry out in his uncertain knowledge of the extent
of the damage the sliip's planking had received.
The crew were kept at this work and the pumps
all night, the weather pump sucking at 4 a.m. next
day. An attempt was then made to right the ship
by trimming her cargo, but from the great angle at
which the ship lav upon the water this was found
to be impossible, and accordingly at 9 a.m. the
captain bore up for the English Channel. Owing
to the thickness of the weather neither of the wes•
tern ports could be made. Off Dartmouth a pilot
belonging to that place hailed the ship and offered
to send a pilot on board if the captain would send
the pilot's boat in for assistance. Captain Strong
replied that the pilot could come on board as a pilot
to the ship to get her in to some anchorage, but the
only reply he received was by the pilot boat haul-
ing her wind and standing away from the ship.
The wind at this time was blowing a gale, nearly
off shore, and after keeping the ship hove to for
two hours, and seeing nothing more of the pilot-
boat nor any help from the shore, the ship's helm
was again put up and a course:steered for the Isle of
Wight,and at 1.30 p.m. on Friday a pilot was taken
on board from the pilot boat off St. Catherine's, who
brought the ship into St. Helen's Roads, where
she anchored until the arrival of the Government
steamer from Portsmouth. The greatest possible
praise is evidently due to Captain Strong, from
both owners and underwriters, for the seamnaship
and determined courage he has displayed in saving
ship and cargo.

[AnvEnnsEmE/Irr.]—Holloway's Ointment and Pills.—
Misapplication impossible.—lt is quite possible and very
probable that mistakes may occur in selecting the right
drug from the long list in the pharmacopoeia ; but Hollo-
way's medicaments must be beneficial in all diseases by
reason of their purifying, invigorating, soothing, and heal-
ing powers. The Ointment is as well adapted for internal
maladies as for external ailments. When rubbed upon the
skin it penetrates to the underlying organs, over which it
invariably exercises the most salutary control, by modera-
ting or increasing activity as circumstances may, require.
In all chronic cases Holloway's Pills should be taken
whilst his Ointment is used, as they strengthen the
stomach, purify the blood, invigorate the nerves, and give
general tone.

ARTISTS' GENERAL BENEVOLENT INSTITU-
TION.

On Saturday the forty-sixth anniversary festi-
val of this society was held at the Freemasons'
Tavern. The Right Hon. W. F. Cowper, M.P., was
in the chair, supported by Sir C. Eastlake. P.R.A.;
David Roberts, Esq., R.A. ; David Maclise, Esq.,
R.A. ; C. R. Cockrell, Esq., R,A. ; Messrs. Hook,
R.A. ; Redgrave, R.A. ; Dobson, R.A. • R. J. Lane,
A.R.A. ; Horsley, • Faed, ; Bon-
ham Carter, W. Holman A.R.A.Hunt, Hurlestone, God-
win, Henry Irawson, Barlow, Wyndham Phillips,
hon. sec., and about 150 gentlemen, chiefly, if not
altogether, artists—for it is a feature of these
gatherings that the professors of art assemble in a
self-dependent manner, to promote the interests of
an institution which enlists their warmest sympa-
thies. This so far from diminishing the claim of
the society on general benevolence ought to consti-
tute a reason for aiding those who show every dis-
position to help themselves. The object of the
society, which was founded ia'lBl4, cannot be too
often stated. It was established to extend relief
to distressed meritorious artists, whether subscri-
bers to its fund or not, whose works have been
generally known and esteemed by the public, as
well as to their widows and orphans, merit and
distress constituting the sole claims to its benevo-
lence. From the foundation of the institution up
to the end of last "year donations 1,859 in number
have been granted in various sums, the aggregate
amount being £22,098. On the present occasion,
after the discussion of a very excellent dinner, which
had at the last moment to be provided for an unex-
pected addition of over 50 guests, the attendance
being unusually large this year, the Chairman pro-
posed the usual loyal and patriotic toasts, coupling
with that of the Army and Navy the Volunteers,
and especially the " Artists' Corps ;" for which.
Mr. Wyndham Phillips, one of its officers, re-
turned thanks. In proposing " Prosperity to the
Institution," the Chairman stated that it had been
established for nearly fifty years, and though he
was glad to say that it had received the
support of all classes, yet it was the fact
the aid it had obtained was by no means commen-
surate with its merits. The result had been that
owing to its limited means the sphere of its useful.
ness and value had been necessarily narrowed, The
public, and especially the hardworking public, were
much indebted to the cultivators of art for the bene-
ficial influence which its production exercised upon
their minds and feelings ; and it was not too much
to expect that all who had enjoyed the gratification
which was caused by the contemplation and the
possession of the works of artistic genius, skill, and
labour, should do something towards the relief of
that misfortune which often pressed on meritorious
individuals, and which was generated by the force
of circumstances rather than by their own fault.
As regarded the society itself, its objects were ad-
mirable, its rules judiciously but generously framed,
while its management was a model of combined
economy and usefulness, producing the greatest
possible amount of good at a minimum expense.
" The Health of the Chairman" was proposed by
Sir C. Eastlake, P.R.A.,, and was followed by a
series of toasts relating to the various societies con-
nected with art. The musical arrangements com-
prised the services of the London Madrigal Union,
including Miss Eyles, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Cummings,
Mr. Lawler, and Mr. Land, who were aided by Mr.
J. L. Hatton. The performance of several glees
and madrigals was marked by the greatest perfec-
tion on the part of the vocalists, and was received
with great applause by the company.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—March 23.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before Sir C. Cresswell.)
ZHARGRAVE V. HARGRAVE.
This was a suit instituted by the husband for a
divorce, and was set down for hearing the week
before last, but was postponed in consequence of a
statement of counsel that the respondent was in a
dying condition.
Dr. Phillimore, Q,C., who was engaged with
Mr. Sergeant Parry for the respondent, informed
the Court this morning that he had received a let-
ter announcing the death of his unfortunate client.
PEARCEY V. PEARCEY AND LAKE. 1 •
This was an undefended suit, and was instituted
by the husband for a dissolution of marriage on the
ground of his wife's adultery with the co-respon-
dent.

Dr. Spinks was counsel for the petitioner.
The parties were married in 1850, and cohabited
at different places in the metropolis until 1845, in
which year the conduct of the respondent became
so intemperate that the husband, who is a commer-
cial traveller, was obliged to bring her before a
magistrate, and they separated, he allowing her
14s. a week. They had one child, which had been
grossly neglected by the respondent, and notwith-
standing her dissolute conduct the petitioner was
stated in evidence to have treated the latter with
uniform kindness. In 1857 it was discovered by
the petitioner that she was living in open adultery
at Hackney, with the co-respondent, who is a
labourer, and-he resolved to avail himself of the
facilities afforded by the establishment of the court
to rid himself of his disreputable spouse. The facts
were fully proved, and
The Court granted a' decree nisi, but made no
order with reference to costs, which were not applied
for by the petitioner.
SMITH BANNERMAN V. SMITH BANNERMAN AND
GREEN.
In this case the husband prayed for a dissolution
of marriage, on the ground of his wife's adultery
with the co-respondent, and the respondent entered
au appearance denying the adultery.
It appeared that the petitioner was a gentleman
of fortune and that the respondent was also in a
respectable station. At the time of the marriage,
which was solemnised at the parish church of Hun-
ton, Kent, the petitioner was 23 years of age, and
the respondent 18, and previous to the marriage
the respondent had entertained an affection for the
co-respondent, who is a clergyman of the Estab•
lished Church. The petitioner and his wife removed
from Hunton to Jenning, in Kent, where the co-
respondent officiated as curate. Notwithstanding
the early attachment of the respondent to the co-
respondent there was nothing in her conduct to
justify a belief of her infidelity to her husband
until the December of 1859. On the 12th of that
month the petitioner's gardener overheard some
persons in conversation in the petitioner's grounds,
and subsequently saw Mr. Green and Mrs. Banner-
man walking together. His suspicions were aroused
in consequence of having' seen some days previously
footmarks in a plantation situated between the
petitioner's grounds and those of the rector of the
parish, to whom Mr. Green was a frequent visitor.
This witness then stated that he concealed himself
in a summer-house which Mrs. Bannerman and Mr.
Green shortly after entered. The latter said,
" Where are the men ?" and she replied," I cannot
see them anywhere." He then said," How are you
to-day, all right?" She answered, " Yes." Im-
mediately afterwards he heard a rustling
as of a lady's dress, and Mrs. Bannerman
said, " Wait till I take my hat off.' He then saw
the parties in a position which left no doubt of
their criminality. He came forward, and on per-
ceiving him Mr. Green rose from the ground and
said to the witness, " Why did you not shoot me ?"
He replied that he did not wish to shoot any man,
but that he did not expect such conduct from him.
Mr. Green then took the gun out of his hands, and
turning to Mrs. Bannerman said, " What shall I
do ? Shall I shoot myself ?" She said, " Don't be
so excited." The witness took the gun from "Mr.
Green, who immediately afterwards gave him five
sovereigns not to say anything about what had
taken place to Mr. Bannerman, and he said
he would not. It appeared, further, that
the day after Mrs. Bannerman left her home, and
that Mr. Green left Hunton and came to London,
where he was joined by her, and that they lived
together as man and wife. They afterwards went
to Australia, where they are at present residing.
Dr. Deane, Q.C., who appeared for the respon-
dent, said that the evidence was so conclusive that
he did not intend to offer any opposition.
The Court granted the decree nisi with costs:
JENKINS V. JENKINS.
In this case the wife prayed for a divorce on
the ground of het husband's adultery, coupled
with cruelty and desertion. The respondent had
been a ward in Chancery and an articled clerk to
a solicitor, with an allowance of £BO a-year, and
he married the petitioner in 1847, while he was a
minor. They cohabited only a short time, and
he went to live with a young female with whom
he had become acquainted at a private theatre in
Camden Town, where they both performed as
amateurs. Subsequently he enlisted in the 14th
Dragoons, and went with his regiment to India.
There was no defence, and the Court granted
the decree nisi.

THOMPSON T. THOMPSON AND HUNTER.
This was a suit instituted by the husband for
a divorce by reason of his wife's adultery with
the co-respondent. The parties were married
in August, 1847, and lived together hap-
pily in the Grange-road, Bermondsey, until
1854, when the respondent became an habitual
drunkard, and was guilty of adultery with the co-
respondent, and several other persons. The evidence
fully established the adultery, and the Court made
a decree nisi.
GARRETT V. GARRETT AND RHODES.
The husband was the petitioner, and prayed for a
divorce, on the ground of his wife's adultery with
the co-respondent. The suit was undefended.
It appeared that the petitioner, who was the son
of a solicitor residing in Hyde Park.gardens, mar-

ried the respondent in March, 1859, and though she
was alleged to be a person of doubtful virtue at the
time, they lived happily together until the May of
1860, when she left him without any justifiable
cause. She took up her residence in the Maryle-
bone-road, and the petitioner's father allowed her
£1 a-week until it was discovered that she had
formed a criminal connexion with the co-respondent,
who is an omnibus conductor, when it was dis-
continued. The case was fully proved, and the
Court granted the decree nisi.

THEATRES V. MUSIC .Ii4ILLS .AND
SALOONS.

At a late hour on Saturday afternoon Mr. Bur-
cham, of the South wark Police Court, disposed of a
case of some importance to thrl theatrical profession
and the proprietors of the I:lumerous music halls in
and about London. Mr. R. Preece, the proprietor
of Winchester in Great Suffolk-street,
Borough, was summoned by Messrs. Sheppard and
Creswick, the lessees of the Surrey Theatre, under
the 6th and 7th Victoria, cap. 68, for enacting stage
plays in his ;music hall, such not being licensed by
the Lord f,:thamberlain.
Mr, Robinson, instructed by Mr. Jerwood,
appeared to prosecute the case. Mr. Sleigh, in-
structed by Mr. Ware, for the defendant, and Mr.
Lilley watched the case on behalf of the Misses
Giffords. The court was also crowded with mem-
bers of the theatrical profession, several of whom
were accommodated with seats on the Bench.
In opening the case, Mr. Robinson said he
appeared on behalf of the Messrs. Sheppard and
Creswick to support the present complaint, and in
doing so, those gentlemen wished to be understood
that they had no ill-feeling against Mr. Preece,
they on the oontrary having the highest respect for
that gentleman ; but they considered it their duty
that proceedings should be taken against him by
some person to protect the interest of the proprie-
tors of the regular licensed theatres. Such enter-
tainments as those given by Mr. Preece had spread
about in all parts of London, and no doubt attracted
the notice of the public who patronised them. He
should be able to show that those that had taken
place is the Winchester Hall were stage plays, and
in direct contravention of the law, and it had be-
come necessary that such illegal acts should be put
a stop to. The question now before the Court was,
whether the entertainment was or was not a stage
play. He was in a position to prove that it was so;
that the place in question was fitted up as a regular
theatre, with scenery, orchestra, and other theatri-
cal adjuncts. One portion of the entertainment
disclosed a scene in a gentleman's house, and in
short a regular farce was performed, and it would,
in reality, be a farce to urge that it was not a farce.
(Laughter.) There were three Misses Giffords in
the farce. One of them played the part of a gen-
tleman, another his servant, and the third a young
lady. There was of course a good deal of love mak-
ing in the case, and conversation about some one of
the name of Higgins, with whom the young lady
had been in love. Then the young lady was called
his darling Sophia, and she evinced a disposition to
have the gentleman for her husband. In short,
there was a good deal of badinage, and it all ended
in their being married, and having a large number
of children, he supposed, and so all ended amicably
and pleasantly. The question therefore was this,
Was it or was it not a theatrical entertainment
within the meaning of the act he had quoted P He
reminded his worship that similar cases bad been
decided at other courts, and the parties fined.
Mr. Burcham asked if money was taken at the
doors.

Mr. Robinson said he should be able to prove that
such was the case, and there were the usual seats
for the public.

Mr. Sleigh did not deny that, but he appeared on
behalf of Mr. Preece to suggest a course that
might be adopted in this matter, and also of saying
that, so far as Mr. Preece was concerned, he being
one of the oldest proprietors of music halls in the
metropolis, he would be the last man to infringe
the laws in any way whatever, whether those con-
cerned stage plays or anything else, Whether he,
in strictness, had infringed the law as to stage
plays on the night mentioned in the summons (the
9th instant), was a matter which, under the cir-
cumstances he was about to mention, he did not
think it necessary to enter into, and thereby
needlessly occupy the attention of the Court. He
was not there, in fact, to contend one way or an-
other, to say whether it was a stage play or not.
He was there on behalf of Mr. Preece, to say that,
rather than be entangled in litigation on the subject
—rather than what he would call " sail near the
wind," as to infringing or nearly infringing—he
would admit that the performance had taken place ;
and further, immediately on the decision which
had been arrived at in a recent case—that of Can-
terbury Hall, he meant—Mr. Preece gave notice
to the persons professionally engaged by him that
he should no longer require their services. "Ife
(Mr. Sleigh) believed he. should have the sar,ction
of the Court in designating this a very honourable
and proper step on the part of the pmprietor of
the Halt in question to do. That which had been
called a stage play had not since been acted, and
it was not Mr. Preece's intention o allow it to be
enacted any more. Under these: circumstances he
felt sure that those whom hi", learned friend Mr.
Robinson represented—and he gave them credit
for full sincerity when he said they had no personal
ill feeling in the matter, bat that they had merely
come forward to protect that which they believed
were their rights and privileges,—would see with
him that the proper course to be pursued, under all
the circumstances, was, that the summons should
be withdrawn. That, at any rate, was the pro-
position he had to make, and he hoped it would be
immediately responded to,and meet with the approval
of the Court. Supposing anything might be said
by his learned friend, about the continuance of
this performance, it was but right on his part to
say that it should be borne in mind that after the
decision of the Canterbury Hall case, which could
not, he took it, be regarded as a final decision,
notice of appeal having been given, and recognis-
ances entered into as to the appeal being prosecuted
to the utmost at the next quarter sessions, and the
question settled whether the decision was right or
not ; and it was not until within a short time back,
as he saw by the public prints, that the appeal was
withdrawn—that it had not been Mr. Preece's in-
tention to continue the piece. Although the piece
could not be said to be " all fours" with the one
to which the appeal referred, would take the
liberty of saying at once as to the withdrawal of
the appeal, that it was done by those who had in-
structed him, and who of course did as they pleased ;
but it had not been so withdrawn by his advice.
That was all he had to say about that, and he hoped
the prosecutors would adopt his suggestion by
withdrawing the summons.
Mr. Robinson observed that there was a course
open to Mr. Preece if he thought proper to pursue
it. It might have been urged in Mr. Morton's
case, that the matter was not properly decided, and,
he might have continued it a fortnight longer.
Mr. Sleigh admitted that.
Mr. Robinson further stated that he had read
the performance in Mr. Morton's case, but he had
no hesitation in saying as to the present case before
the Court, that there could be no question at all
about it. It might be difficult to draw a line some-
times, perhaps ; but in this case there were all the
elements necessary for a stage play, scenery, dresses,
characters, and everything.
Mr. Burcham said that there seemed no doubt
that if the learned counsel could prove all he had
stated, this piece would come within the prohibi-
tion of the act of Parliament referred to—that it
would, in fact, be a stage play.
Mr. Robinson said that there must have been
something in Mr. Morton's case, seeing that he
was fined £5. However, what he was instructed
to say was that in this case they could not
withdraw. The place in question was a theatre,
and they could not tell what uses the proprietor
intended to put it to if not to those connected with
a theatre. There was no guarantee that such
would not be the case.
Mr. Sleigh said that Mr. Preece was a very
respectable man. _

Stir. Robinson had no doubt of that, but very
respectable men were sometimes disposed to break
the law, and if they did others had a right to com-
plain. Those who instructed him thought it
unquestionably not their place to withdraw. He
repeated. that there was a course open to Mr. Preece
to pursue, and this would come properly from him.
He refused to withdraw, and therefore it was open
to Mr. Sleigh to proceed.

Mr. Sleigh could not do that. He was in the
hands of the Court.

Mr. Burcham observed that if Mr. Preece pleaded
guilty the other side would not press for a heavy
penalty.
Mr. Robinson had no wish to be harsh towards
Mr. Preece, as his client had no vindictive feeling
in the matter.
Mr. Sleigh said his client pleaded guilty, and
promised to discontinue the performance.
Mr. Burcham said that, under the circumstances,
he should impose the penalty of ss. on Mr. Preece,
with the costs of the summons.
Mr. Lilley made a few observations on behalf of
the Misses Gifford, but the manner in which the
case had been decided placed him out of a position
to take up the time of the Court.
The• penalty having
,been paid, all the parties
left the court, and thus ended the case.

An American paper states that at a camp meeting
recently held near West Baltimore, Montgomery county,
Ohio, Bishop Russell forbade anyone with hoops on to
partake of the sacrament, affirming that they would not be
welcome to the table 9f the Lord.

CHURCH RATES IN THE RURAL DISTRICTS.

The following address " to the Opponents of
Church Rates in Rural Parishes," has just been
issued by the committee appointed at the Confer-
ence of Abolitionists lately held in London :
Fellow Countrymen,—ln spite of the most for-
midable opposition it has ever encountered, the
Church-rate Abolition Bill has been once more read
a second time in the House of Commons. Never
before have so many members voted on the ques-
tion ; never have so many voted for the bill. It
has now passed through committee without altera-
tion, and stands for a third reading on the sth of
J.une, when, we trust, it will be sent to the House
of Lords.

These are cheering facts ; but do not suppose that
the bill is now safe. Its foes will try to give the
the Lords an excuse for rejecting it, by diminishing
the majority on the third reading. They will make
further attempts to bring about a compromise, and,
by other means, they will endeavour to keep up for
some time longer a system which has already dis-
turbed the peace of the community for 30 years.
There must therefore be no relaxation of effort on
the part of the supporters of the bill until it has
become the law of the land. New measures even
must be adopted to ensure that result, and they
must be taken by you—the abolitionists of the
rural parishes. For it is now declared that it is
only for the sake of such parishes that the tax 15 i
retained. The large towns long ago abolished t.
The smaller towns are fast following their ex"
ample. But country ratepayers, it is asserted,
prefer the exaction, and would resent its being
abolished. Whether those who say this believe it
or not, they constantly reiterate it. They know"
that church rates cannot be re-imposed upon ;the
many, but they hope to fasten the yoke afresh on
the necks of the few. They will respect the rights
of majorities, but want still to trample on those of
minorities. True, they offer to objectors exemp-
tion from payment ; but who that has felt the
weight of landlord and clerical influence in rural
parishes would accept so delusive a measure of
relief ?

There is but one practical way of disproving
such assertions and of defeating such designs. You
have petitioned against church rates ; you must
now speak and vote against them. You have gone
to Parliament for redress ; you must now fight the
battle in your vestries. If you have hitherto been
silent, you must now speak, and that loudly ; for
advantage has been taken of your silence, and your
patience has been abused. Wherever there is
hostility to the impost, it must now be manifested
in an unmistakeable form. You can not only offer
conscientious objections ; you have the right to
compel a strict observance of the law. You maY
be in a minority ; but minorities are the forerun-
ners of majorities, and, whether you succeed or
fail, Parliament will see that the spirit of resistance
spreads, and that town and country unite in de-
manding total abolition.
Such a policy may involve some personal sacrifice.
It may expose you to loss. It may occasion a dis-
turbance of good feeling. But the evil will be tempo:
rary, while the advantage will be lasting. Nor will
the responsibility rest on you. It will be on those
who force such action upon you. You are told, le
effect, that if you would be rid of church rates, ee
others have been, you must do as they have done
prevent rates being levied when you can, and, when
that is impossible, make the process f obtaining
them difficult and disagreeable. You are, in truth,
challenged to declare whether you will insist on
possessing all the rights enjoyed by others, or will
allow one law to prevail in the town and another
in the country parishes.
The time is most favourable for such a parochial
demonstration. At Easter a new ecclesiastical year
begins ; fresh churchwardens are appointed ; and
either then, or shortly after, a church rate is usually
demanded. Before June 5, therefore, there may be
contests in hundreds of parishes where the question
has not yet been agitated, and as the result the
House of Commons may send the Abolition Bill to
the Lords with an increased conviction that church
rates cannot be continued in any form.
Be assured that abolitionists will everywhere
sympathise with you, and as far as possible hell)
you in the struggle. It is in your power to strike
the last blow at a hateful system. Let it be strucx
at once, and with the energy of men who knout
their cause to be righteous, and its triumph to be
sure,

WILLIAM SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman•
2, Serjeants'-inn, Fleet-street, London.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

NORWICH-MARCH 23.

At this market to-day wheat was in fair supply, but
rather a thin attendance. The condition was better, but
prices were the same as last week; Barley was in limited
supply, and last week's rates were supported.
White wheat. 64s to 66s I Red wheat 55s to 618
Malting barley....4ss to 47s I Chevalier barley 41s to 448
Distilling d0......31s to 34s I Oat 5....
Flour, 41s to —s Od per sack from the miller.

OXFORD—MARCH 23.
The market was well attended, and a good business done.
at a improvement of is to 2s per qr. for dry descriptions of
wheat , ill-conditioned samples scarcely looked at. Berle/
in middling demand. Other articles firm.

LE I CE STE R--MAROR:23.
The supply of wheat scarcely an average one, and prices
fully as high, with a fair trade. White wheat, 70s to 74°
—red, 65s to 73s per 36 stone; a rather quiet demand for,
barley; grinding, 32s to 34s ; malting, 37s to 43s per qr.,
oats, 24s to 38s per 24 stone. Beans—old, 66s to 58°
new, 38s to 40s per 38 stone.
Fine flour, 50s I Seconds, 47s I Thirds, 46s per 20 stone.

YORK— MARCH 23.
The trade was firm, and wheat in fair supply; sale!
were effected at fully previous prices. Oats in request, buy
no advance upon late rates. Beans against the buyer.
Wheat, red 4ss to 56s I Oats..., 26s to 2r'
White do .58s to 64s 1 Beans 48s to 50°
Barley .38s to 42s f Peas . to .--4
Malt, 70s to 72s per qr. ; rye, 37s per qr ; flour, 4
to bOs per sack. .

NO RTHAMP T ON—MAncn 23.
At this corn-market the wheat supply was middling, btit
the quality irregular, prices ranging from 65s to 69s fa
old, and 42s' to 62s for new. In barley a steady busineo.6
malting 38s to 435, grinding 29s to 32s per qr. Oats 111
moderate show, and prices as before—quoted at 22s to s°ll
per 24 stone. Beans, old, 51s to 565; peas, 40s to 500.
Rye, 378 to 425; malt, 68s to 725; flour, 33s to 34s pet
sack •

[ADVERTISEMENT].--The most interesting cures of
vast complication of diseases, without the aid of medicinet
by Du'Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food are re"
corded in the following letters :—Cure 52,422.—.4 Bridge',
d Frimley, Surrey, April 3, 1854.—Thirty-three year!'
diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, dear
ness, singing in the ears, constipation, debility, shortneee
of breath and cough, have been removed by your Revalel2
Arabica. My lungs, liver, stomach, head, and ears are
right, my hearing perfect, and my recovery is a marvel
all my acquaintances.—James Roberts, timber-merchant,•
Cure No. 4,208.—" Eight years' dyspepsia, nery ouinles4
debility, with 'cramps and nausea, have keen effectusig
cured by Du Barry's health- restoring Food. I shall ,
happy to answer any inquiries. Rev. John W. FlavePt_
Bidlington. Rectory, Norfolk." Curs No. 3,906.-1-
" Thirteen years' cough, indigestion, and genet
debility have been removed by Du Barry's exeeo
lent Food. James Porter, Athol-street, Perth-,
Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invariably aggravate aIT
perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointrae9
and expense may be avoided by using Du Barry's Fe?!
which, at a few pence per day, saves 50 times its cost in
other remedies, removing effectually, w.thout purgiangl
constipation,. indigestion (dyspepaia) nervous, bilious an
liver complaints and all their consequences. Certitl_rer:
No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew u_r.
MD., F.R.S. Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland,
Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spy.;
rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of
false pretences. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the
high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £6,000 against
Alfred Hooper Neill and his agents ; and the pretences
that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Pi
Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly false'
No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Bari"'
and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, ontheseal and wraPPer;
Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article inns
expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins It;
2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; 51b. lls.; 121 b. 225.; 241 b. 40s. T 1
121 b. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on recelP
of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re'
gent-seet, Lohurch-sndontr e; Fortnum Mason, and C. ; AbbA
60, Grtracecet ; 4, Cheapside ; 63 and 160, Cabard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand; 49 and 60, Bishopsgs,t'„
street ; Batty 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and ";
tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and Co., King Wilham-street
City ; at 127 High Holborn: and all grocers