The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-17 00:00:00

THIIII) EDITION•

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock,

C.RI.3IINAL COURT.-( THIS DAY.)

(Before the Lord Chief Baron.)

TRIAL OF DR. SMETHURST.—THIRD DAY.
The trial was resumed at nine o'clock this morning.
Dr. Alfred Suxine Taylor, examined by Mr. Bodkin,
said—l am Professor of Chemistry at Guy's Hospital, and
Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and of the Royal
Society. I have had a large experience for many years. On
Sunday, May 1, Mr. Buzzard called on me about one o'clock,
at my private residence. He brought with him a parcel
wrapped in paper. He told me that it contained two bottles,
and I ascertained that it did so. I only looked at one
bottle, marked No. 2. It was sealed with a Turkish
seal. In consequence of a communication made to me by
Mr. Buzzard, I consented to examine one of the bottles. I
took out the bottle which came first, and that was
No. 2. The bottle was opened and two drachms of its
contents poured out. I applied a process in the first in •
stance. The apparatus consisted of copper wire, muriatic
acid, distilled water, and an ordinary test-tube. The acid
and water were boiled. I had ascertained that the vessels
in which I tested were perfectly clean. On applying the
process I found that a metallic substance of a greyish
colour was attached to the wire. That indicated arsenic, or
mercury. On obtaining that deposit I proceeded no fur-
ther at that time. I then desired to have the authority of
a magistrate for proceeding with the analysis. The bottle
No. 2 was re-sealed by Mr. Buzzard in my presence, and
taken away by him ; he also took away the bottle No. 1.

After Mr. Buzzard had left I proceeded to examine the
contents. Application had been made to me in reference
to the life of the lady, and I was told that it had reference

to a living lady ; so, although it was Sunday, I pro-
ceeded with the investigation. I continued my experiments
by boiling copper gauze. I applied the gauze, and then
examined it, and saw a substance closely resembling me-
talic arsenia. I then obtained crystals from the gauze and
tubes. I had not the slightest doubt that the tubes con-
tained arsenic. [The tubes were handed to the Lord Chief
Baron, who said he saw. the crystals.] I examined the
crystals by the microscope, and having tested them further,
obtained prOof that it was really arsenic. On the evening

of the same day Mr. Buzzard came back, and brought back

both bottles, with a letter from Mr. Penrhyn, the ma-
gistrate, authorising me to proceed further with the analy-
sis. On the following morning I finished the examination
of No. 2. After that, having taken two ounces of the liquid,
I made a further examination of it by the same process,
thoroughly to satisfy myself about the arsenic, and I found
I was correct. I obtained drops on a larger scale. I came
to the conclusion that there was less than a quarter of a
grain of arsenic in the whole of the four ounces which I
tried I made a subsequent analysis and I found copper, a
mere trace, just enough to say that there was copper.
There was no trace of antimony, mercury, or bismuth. It
was the copper pill which the deceased took which probably
caused the copper I found. The process I used would have
detected antimony, bismuth, copper or mercury if it had
been there. I examined the organic matter of bottle No. 2,
by the microscope, and found it to consist of fibrous matter
and feculent matter—food mixed with bile and blood.
Having examined the evacuation I come to the conclusion
that it was that of a person suffering from the administration
of arsenic. I examined the contents of No. 1 the next
morning. It merely contained biliary matter, with mucas,
and no metallic matter at all. On Thursday, the sth May,
I received a parcel from Inspector M'lntyre and a jar sealed
up. That was found afterwards to contain a portion of the
viscera—the stomach unopened, the spleen, the large and
small intestines, the liver, part of the msophagus or pullet,
and the items: On the 7th of May I received a bottle con-
taining the two kidneys, and a small bottle containing
blood; 'said to have been taken from the heart. I also
received from M'lntyre a number of medicine bottles,
pill boxes, and other articles, making a total number of
Avienty-eight. ' Others followed on the 18th of May, chiefly
medicines supplied from the surgery. I examined the
contents of all those 28 bottles and packages. I first ex-
amined the uterus which was in an impregnated state, then
the oesophagus, of which only a portion was sent. It indi-
cated irritation in the throat. There was no arsenic or

antimony in the throat. (The witness was entering
with great minuteness into a description of tho state of the
various parts, when the Lord Chief Baron checked him and

desired him to confine himself to what bore on the case.)

The smaller part of the middle intestines contained the
largest portion of antimony. There was antimony above

and below, and some was found in the emeum. I found

some in the kidney. There were traces of it in the blood

from the heart, and some in the blood from the urine.
I was assisted by Dr. Odling, and we calcu-
lated that the whole quantity of antimony found did not ex-

ceod half a grain. In the cmcum, besides the presence of
antimony, I found that it was ulcerated, and the small
members nearly destroyed throughout. The large intestines
were ulegated more or less throughout. The most remark-
able appearance was the almost total destruction of the liv-
ing membrane. The blood in the stomach indicated some

great cause of irritation. I next proceeded to examine the
contents of certain pill boxes which I received on the 7th of
May from Mr. M'lntyre. I was informed what they con-
tained, and I found the statements made to me were correct.

There were four copper pills, one of which was taken for

analysis.

The Lord Chief Baron—What do you mean by copper
pills ?

Witness—Pills containing sulphate of copper with pow-
dered opium. In the wadding taken from one of the boxes
I found the slightest trace of a white powder, which might
have been mercury, silver, or bismuth. I then examined

a large number of bottles and powders. There were two
bottles of bismuth. One was unopened, and the other had
about an ounce and a half taken from it. In other bottles

I found prussic acid, sulphuric acid, quinine, and other

;hings which corresponded with what I had been told. I

also examined some sugar and tapioca brought me by the
inspector, but I found nothing in it.
The Lord Chief Baron (to Mr. Bodkin)—ls it necessary
that I should take that down ?

Witness continued—This bottle, No. 5, was brought to
me by Mr. M'lntyre. I found it to contain 355 grains of
chlorate of potash, of the sort used in making explosive
mixtures and percussion caps. Bottle 21 corresponded
with another containing a genuine mixture. It contained
about one half of water of a saline taste. I had half
of it boiled and tested by Reinsch's process. I found
on testing it that the copper was immediately de-
stroyed, and I thought I detected arsenic. I then
put the bottle aside, thinking there was some-
thing remarkable about it, and wishing to have the
assistance of another chemist. Dr. Odling and myself
afterwards examined it, and found that there was neither
arsenic nor antimony. The arsenic which I thought I saw
had come from the copper gauze, which being destroyed,
the arsenic was set free. Chlorate of potash is a saline
mixture and slightly diuretic. I have heard the evidence
given in this case as to'the symptoms under which this lady
laboured, the remedies applied, and the result of the post
mortem examination. Taking the whole of the circum-
stances into consideration I can ascribeher death to nothing
but the action of the irritant poisons.

Cross•-examined by Sergeant Parry—l have been exa-
mined several times in this case—twice before the magis-
trate and once before the coroner. I found traces of
arsenic in bottle No. 2. I always reckoned it less than
the sixth part of a grain. I u.sed copper gauze for my test,
and also copper foil and wire. It was the same as I used for
testing bottle 21. I tested the copper before my experi-
ments. In testing the contents of bottle 21 I found that I
deposited the arsenic on the copper wire myself, but I must
say that that bottle was.the only one that contained chlorate
of potash, and the effect of that was to destroy the test.
Dr. Odling made an examination of bottle 21, and he came
to the same conclusion as myself, that arsenic was present.
We afterwards discovered that we were both wrong, and
that no arsenic was present. I did on my oath state that
I discovered arsenic in bottle 21 before the coroner more
than once. I was wrong. I have had the wire in my
possession for 14 years, I have used portions of the wire
before for tests, and shall do so again, but I will take care
to see there is no chlorate of potash in that which I shall
be called upon to test.

The deposition of Dr. Taylor before the Coroner, at the
inquest held at Richmond, was then read, in which he
stated that he had examined the whole of the bottles, and
with the exception of that numbered 21 no traces of arsenic
were found, but in that bottle the poison was present, and
that it was so mixed that it might be swallowed without
the slightest knowledge of its deadly nature.
The deposition taken before the magistrate was then
read, in which Dr. Taylor stated that the death of the lady
was caused by the administration of small dozes of irritant
poison.

Cross-examined—At the time I gave my evidence before
the magistrates I firmly believed that arsenic was present
in bottle 21, and that it had been placed there by some-
body else, and not by the test I myself applied.
I first discovered my mistake about the arsenic in bottle 21
about the 7th of June. Dr. Odling took some of the liquid
soon after to make an independent test. We both, in com-
pany with Professor Brand, made another examination of
the contents of bottle 21. We used two teaspoonfuls of the
mixture in using Marsh's test, and one to Reinche's test.
It was then discovered arsenic was not present. In the
case of Mr. Wooler, who was tried in 1855 for
the murder of his wife by slow poison, I went
down to give evidence by order of the Government.
There was no doubt then about arsenic being present. It
was found in the tissues and all parts of the body.
The Lord Chief Baron—Are you, brother Parry, seeking
to prove that the witness made a blunder in that case
Sergeant Parry—Oh,no, mylord ; Dr. Taylor has frankly
admitted the blunder he made in this case. lam now about
to examine him upon another point.
Cross-examination continued—ln the case of Mrs.
Wooler I did not examine the stomach. I did not see it at
all. As a result of a slow arsenical poisoning all the roots
of the vessels would be gorged with blood ; so it was in this
case.

Sergeant Parry—l wish you would merely answer my
question.
Witness—l wish to state the whole truth.

Sergeant Parry—l asked you a question, and you an met
it, saying at the same time "so it was in this case."
The Lord Chief Baron—l think Dr. Taylor was p sr-
fectly right in giving the answer he did.
Cross-examination continued—A hacking cough is a ae
of the symptoms of arsenical poisoning where there is irritt-
tion of the throat. Mucous is always increased by the ad-
ministration of arsenic. lam not acquainted with per uliar
cases of dysentery. A cold clamminess of the ski nis a
symptom of antimonial poisoning.
By the Lord Chief Baron—ln all my experience, which
extends over 29 years, I never met with chlorate or.. potash
in connection with arsenic.
The Lord Chief Baron—Then when chlorate rif potash is
not present the copper test is always correct.
Witness—Always.
Sergeant Ballantine—Have you examined the four speci-
mens of medicine obtained from Dr. Julius's, viz. bismuth,
nitrate of silver, sulphate of copper, and acetate of lead
Witness—Yes. In ten grains of the sulphate of copper
I found traces of arsenic.
Lord Chief Baron—Did you find antirctony among either
of them? .
Witness—No, my lord.
Sergeant Parry—What test did you use ?
Witness—Marsh's.
Sergeant Parry—ln point of fact, is not arsenic some-
times found in bismuth ?
Witness—Yes.
Dr. Odling, examined by Sergeant Ballantino—l am a
professor of practical chemistry at Guy's Hospital. I have
made several examinations in conjunction with Dr. Taylor.
I concur in all the evidence. lam satisfied that antimony
was present in the body of the deceased.
Sergeant Baltantine—You have the evidence in this case ?
Witness—l have.
Sergeant Ballantine—Have you formed an opinion as to
the cause of death?
Witness—l have.
Sergeant Ballantine—What opinion have you formed ?
Witness—That death was caused by irritant poison.
Sergeant Ballantine—ls there any form in natural dis
ease to which you can attribute death ?
Witness—Not to my knowledge.

Professor Brand—l was requested to examine a portion
of the liquid that had been in the possession of Dr. Taylor
to ascertain whether arsenic was present. I made that
analysis. There was no arsenic present. Chlorate of
potash would dissolve copper. The circumstance that
occurred in Dr. Taylor's experiments does not shake my
faith in Renish's test.

Mrs. Smith, of Rifle-terrace, recalled and said the pri-
soner left her house on Saturday the- 11th of December.
She could not say where he was on the 9th or 10th,
whether he was at home or not on those days.
Dr. Julius was also recalled, and said that when Dr.
Smethurst was before the magistrate he said that if there
were any metallic substances found they must have been
contained in the medicines that came from his (Dr. Julius's)
shop.

This was the case for the prosecution.
The Court then adjourned for refreshment; on the learned
Judge resuming his seat on the bench,
Mr. Sergeant Parry rose to address the jury for the pri-
soner. He commenced by saying that after the protracted
agony of a double trial, and a sensibility that prejudice was
being accumulated against him by the lapse of time, the
prisoner bad now an opportunity of making his defence to
this charge. In the position he then occupied he was fear-
ful that he should inadequately discharge his duty, but he
relied upon the assistance of all in acquitting himself of his
painful duty. The jury he was then addressing was the
only tribunal that could sit in judgment upon the life of
a human being. To no other civil institution was ac-
corded that fearful power, and he had to call upon them
to exercise that important duty, and in doing so he felt they
would act under a strong sense and an earnest desire to
come to a right conclusion. The importance of the con-
clusion to which they must come was one of the highest,
because if they pronounced the word guilty, they would
pronounce a doom which was inevitable, and from which
there was no appeal. The jury had the power of saying
to the gentleman at the bar, you shall live or die; and such
being so, he felt that atwhatever result they might arrive it
would not be come to before they had given everything the
utmost consideration, with a full sense of the paramount im-
portance of the decision towards the prisoner. The charge
against the prisoner was that of murder—murder of the
most hideous form; but he contended that the evidence as it
stood could enable them to come to no such conclusion, but,
on the contrary, he thought, the only result they could
arrive at, after giving it their utmost consideration, was
that the charge had not been proven. It had been proved
that Dr. Smethurst had committed an act for which there
was no justification, he alluded to the marriage with the
deceased lady, and they afterwards went to live together,
and the first they heard of them was, that they went to
live together as man and wife. The first thing that the
sister heard of the circumstance was the letter of the 9th of
Jan., but in. which there was not one word of complaint against
the priscmer,- but on the contrary it was in terms which
was calculated to show that they were living together in
comparative happiness. It was at Alma Villa's that it
was imputed that Dr. Smethurst deprived the deceased
lady of life. Now, how was that proved. It had been
said that Dr. Smethurst intended to return to his wife, and
that he never intended his connection with Miss Bankes
was to be a permanent one, but was that so. He agreed to
allow his wife so much a week, but there was not the
slightest expression that could induce the belief that he
intended ever to re-unite himself to the old
lady, so he thought that the jury would be per-
fectly of opinion that the marriage with Miss Bankes was
to be a permanent one. He denied that the letter found
upon the person of the prisoner, addressed to his first wife,
proved that the marriage with Miss Bankes was to be merely
a temporary attachment. It had been asserted that Dr.
Smethurst had inveigled Miss Bankes away, and that he
avoided all publicity, but there was no pretence for this,
for it came out that he visited London two or three times a-
week, and that the landlady at each house at Richmond
was in constant attendance on Miss Bankes. The whole
conduct of Dr. Smethurst showed a pure motive as well as
the utmost affection for the deceased. Every do • 1
mestic office was performed by Dr. Smethurst, and he
denied that there was ever the slightest attempts at con-
cealment made by the prisoner. Every small act had been
turned against him for the purpose of proving that he had
in one instance put poison in the soup, and when that was
taken out of the room the sister of deceased said she heard
him stir it round ; but did not she say that she heard the
key turn in the secretary outside the door ? Then another
charge made against him was that he had refused to have
a nurse when he had a considerable sum of money in his
possession, on the ground that he could not afford
it; but the evidence did not bear out such
an assertion, as Mrs. Wheatley distinctly said Mr.
Smethurst never said anything to her about not being able
to afford one ; and yet for the purpose of strengthening this
case, which, if true, would be one unparalleled in the his-
tory of crime, all .sorts of suggestions had been made—
great reliance having been placed upon the fact that
prussic acid was given. Why, it was constantly adminis-
tered to the most delicate women at the most delicate
period of life. Then with respect to the will mad e
by the deceased, undoubtedly it was greatly to the
the interest of the prisoner that the lady should live,
and it could not be used against the prisoner to his detriment,
because it was as much Missßankes's act as the prisoner's—
just as much her act as that of her marriage. He had gone
through the whole of the conduct of the prisoner, and it was
for the jury to act on it, but he thought that the very most
they could say would be, that there was a suspicion ; but it
was not upon suspicion that they could act. -They must have
proof—proof as clear as daylight, before they could arrive at
such a conclusion, or a 'verdict in favour of the prisoner must
be given. He could net for a moment believe that the jury
would imagine that such horrible conduct as that imputed
to the prisoner had been committed without it was proved
plainly—much more plainly than had been done by the
prosecution—and beyond the possibility of doubt. Turning
to the conduct of the prisoner when additional medical
assistance was required he denied that he had any objection
to the uncle of the deceased lady visiting her. He was not
the objecting party, and his letter proved that the reason
he was not sent 'for was solely the wish of Miss Bankes,
that at least, for some time, none of the male members of
her family might by possibility become acquainted with the
position she was in with the prisoner. The conduct of the
prisoner, so far froxi proving that a crime had been com-
mitted, clearly showed that such was not the fact.
Passing to the medical evidence, it was stated that the
state of the lady was caused by the administration of an
irritant poison such as antimony and arsenic ; but had one
witness shown that he had ever had in his possession any-
thing of so deadly a nature as arsenic or antimony. Cer-
tainly not. And then, with respect to the stupid and igno-
rant theory that chloride of potash had been used to carry
off the poison after it had been administered—if it had ever
been administered—he believed the evidence that he should
place before them would totally explode, if it had not
already been exploded, such an utter absurdity,
which was only the imagination of a fertile brain to
account for the absence of poison. Again, it was
tried to be sustained that during the time between the pri-
soner'sfirstbeing accused of the crime and taken into custody
he had ample time to destroy everything that would prove the
truth of such, but did the evidence warrant such a state •
ment. Referring to Dr. Taylor's evidence the learned
counsel dwelt in strong terms upon the mistake made in
the analysis of the bottle containing chlorate of potash, and
said that in the event of such a mistake not being found
out, an innocent man might have been sent to the
scaffold and suffered an ignominious death. Under such
circumstances he thought that the duty of Dr. Taylor in
the present case was to get up and withdraw the whole of it,
but he would not do that, and he (Sergeant Parry) there-
fore called upon the jury to reject Dr. Taylor's evidence as
utterly worthless. He should call before them witnesses to
prove that bismuthand greypowder both contained arsenic.
Such being the case that would account for the traces of arsenic
found in the body of the deceased, and this being so, there
was abundant evidence to p,he that both those medicines
had been sent from the shop of Dr. Julius. The learned
counsel then deseribed-fhe nature.of the evidence he in-
tended to call, and concluded by an eloquent appeal to the
jury, stating that he thought they would agree with him
that the case for the prosecution had entirely failed, and

that the result of such an agreement would be a verdict of
acquittal.
[The learned counsel occupied nearly three hours in the
delivery of his speech, during the whole of which time the
prisoner scarcely 'took his eyes off the jury for'an instant.]
The following wi s 1 asses were then called for the defence :
Benjamin Ward Richardson, examined by Mr. Giffard,
said-1 cm a doctor of medicine, a licentiate of the College
of Physicians, and Professor of Pathology in the Grosvenor
School of Medicine. I obtained Astley Cooper's prize, and I
am the author of several works on medical jurisprudence. I
have been in court, and the symptoms detailed of the death
of the deceased are, in my opinion, nut in the main consis-
tent with arsenical poisoning.
The Lord, Chief Baron—Nor antimonial poisoning ?
Witness--No.
The Lord Chief Baron—Nor with both together?
Witness—No. In the case of Miss Bankes there were
symptoms absent which would be present in a case of arseni-
cal poisoning. There was also an absence of those nervous
symptoms which peculiarly characterise arsenical poisoning.
Those symptoms are tremor of the limbs—suppressed con-
vulsion. , I don't believe it possible that all these symptoms
could be absent in a case of arsenical poisoning. The post
mortin, examination, taken altogether, is not in my opinion
consistent with arsenical poisoning. In my opinion it is
quite impossible for a person to be poisoned with arsenic
without its being found in the tissues. It would not mat-
ter what way the arsenic was introduced, traces
of it would always be found. I made experi-
ments on the 26th of May and the 2d of June last,
with respect to arsenic. The first experiment was made
out of philosophical curiosity, and not with reference to the
prisoner. I made my experiments in the presence of Dr.
Webb In one of the experiments we took a large dog and
daily gave it arsenious acid and chlorate of potash. I gave
the latter in such doses as to ensure diuretic action. I
gave small doses for 18 days, three times a day, with food ;
18 grains of arsenious and 365 grains of chlorate of potash.
Sometimes the animal could not take its food, and then 1
decreased the dose. I then killed the animal, and on ex-
amining it I found arsenic in the liver,' slight traces in the
spleen and in the kidneys. The greatest-part was in the
liver.

The Lord Chief Baron—You must have expected that
when you went on giving arsenic and then suddenly
stopped ?
Witness—l thought the chlorate would have been
eliminated.
The Lord Chief Baron—Then it was eliminated ?
Witness—No. I would add that in the dog there was
intense ulceration in the stomach, and in the lower part of
the alimentary canal.
The Lord Chief Baron.—How much arsenic did you find ?
Witness—l cannot gay.
The Lord Chief Baron—Can you venture to say you
found a grain ?
Witness—No, I cannot.
The Lord Chief Baron—Can, you venture to say half a
grain ?
Witness—Really, my lord, I cannot say.
The Lord Chief Baron—Can you venture to say you
found a quarter of a grain ?

Witness—Yes, my lord. I think I can venture to say I
found a quarter of a grain. There was vomiting and

purging.

The Lord Chief Baron—The result of your experiments
proves that chlorate of potash does not eliminate all the
arsenic, and it also results that after 18 grains of arsenic
had been given in 16 days, only a quarter of a grain was
discovered in the body after death.
Witness—Yes. I made other experiments with two dogs,
which I gave alternate doses of arsenic and antimony on
alternate days, giving chlorate to one and not to the other.
I discovered arsenic in the body of each. I have heard the
symptoms presented in the case of Miss Bankes, and they
were not, in his opinion, recnncileable with slow antimonial
poisoning. I have made other experiments with—

The Lord Chief Baron—l don't think any experiments
made since the 9th of May can be considered, with reference
to this case, part of the general body of medical knowledge.
Witness continued—l consider, from what I have heard,
that Miss Bankes would be a likely person to be subject to
dysentery. I have analysed bismuth. The result of my
experiment is that every specimen in London contained
arsenic.

Mr. Gifford—As a matter of chemical science, are you
aware that arsenic is to be found in bismuth ?
The Lord Chief Baron—ln what quantities ?
Witness—lt varies very much.
The Lord Chief Baron—What are the limits P

Witness—The largest quantity I know of is half a grain
to the ounce. I have had a patient to whom I have ad:
ministered 2as much as five grains three times a day for
six days. I analysed the urine and found arsenic.
The Lord Chief Baron—How much ?
Witness—l cannot say—there was the fiftieth part of a
grain.

Cross-examined by Sergeant Ballantine—Did you give
the bismuth with respect to this case ?
Witness—l began my experiments on the dog on the 26th
of May. It was merely tosee whether chlorate would pass
off the arsenic. I had seen the report of the case in the
papers, and read Dr. Taylor's evidence. I did not
communicate the result of the experiments to the prisoner
or his solicitor.
Mr. Ballantine—How, then, did you become connected
with the case ?
Witness—Mr. Humphries, the solicitor, called upon me.
Mr. Ballantine—Without your communicating with any
person ?
Witness—My experiments were known to two or three

collegians. _
Mr. Ballantine—You were examined on Palmer's trial ?
Witness—l came to give my opinion that death was
occasioned by angina pectoris, and not strychnia. I merely
gave a similar case to that of Cook's, and argued that
Cook might have died of angina pectoris. It is true
that I gave an opinion that Cook's symptoms were
those of angina pectoris, as given by all the best authors,
and that they were more consistent with that disease than
with death by strychnia. I don't dispute that I want to
support the theory of death by angina pectoris. I have
been consulted in one other criminal case, but I was not
called.
[At the conclusion of this witness's evidence the trial
was adjourned till to-morrow.]

YORK RACES. (This Day.)

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
ZETLAND HANDICAP.

Kestrel
Springwell
Lady Kingston

Bilberry ....
Olympias
Maid of Mist

2

Fifteen ran.
YORKSHIRE OAKS.

Seven ran.
QUEEN'S PLATE.

Newcastle
Fisherman.

Six ran.
JUVENILE STAKES.

Trovatore....
Substraetion
Grenadier...

BIENNIAL STAKES.

Volatile ..
Gamester.

CONVIVIAL STAKES.

Cramond .

Restes .

Thormanby

Thirteen ran.
Arrived—Peeress, Slave, and Courier.
LATEST BETTING.
EBOR HANDICAP.
10 to 3 agst Volatile (taken)
4to 1 agst Starke (taken)
5 1 agst Peeress (taken)
Bto 1 agst Courier (taken)
Bto 1 agst Archduchess (taken)
Bto 1 agst Underhand (taken)

FROM THE GAZETTE OF LAST NIGHT

ADMIRALTY, AUG. 15.
NAVAL KNIGHTS OF WINDSOR.
The Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty do hereby
give notice to such Lieutenants in her Majesty's Navy as
are desirous of being recommended for the appointment of
Naval Knight of Windsor, under the will of the late
Samuel Travers, Esq., that they must apply at this office,
on or before the 26th Sept. next, when they will be in-
formed of the nature of the certificates and testimonials which
are required to show that they come within the mean-
ing of the said will, which expresses that they " are to be
superannuated -or disabled Lieutenants of Eliglish
men of war," and shall be single men withoechildren, in-
clined to lead a virtuous, studious, and devout life, to be
removed if they give occasion for scandal. C. .PAGET.
BANKRUPTCIES ANNULLED.
Samuel Farnan, colonial broker, Mincing-lane City.
Samuel Longden, grocer, Chesterfield Derbyshire.