The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-13 00:00:00

CORN EXCHANGE.

Very moderate supplies of wheat were exhibited in the
leading country markets on Saturday. Nearly all kinds
moved off steadily, and in some instances prices had an up-
ward tendency. All other kinds of produce were very firm.
Tho continental markets, almost generally, have been
very firm for fine wheats, barley, and oats. In the United
States both wheat and flour realised rather more money.
The arrivals of English produce up to our market last
week were limited. From abroad we received 17,734 (war-
ters of wheat, 1,783 barley, 19,721 oats, 761 beans, 1,255
peas, 1,945 tares, 2,668 linseed, 1,385 oilseeds, 920 maze,
40 sundry, and 407 sacks of flour.

Fresh up to-day, the arrivals of English wheat were very
limited, and for the most part in poor condition. All good
and fine samples met a steady sale, at quite the rates cur-
rent on this day se'nnigt ; otherwise, the trade was in a
sluggish state, yet no change took place in the quotations.
The demand for foreign wheat was by no mean active.
However, a fair retail business was transacted in most de-
criptions, and prices were well supported. The show of
samples was tolerably extensive.
A fair average business was done in cargoes afloat, and,
in some instances, the quotations had an upward tendency.
For the time of the year there was considerable activity
in the barley trade, especially as regards malting qualities,
at very full prices.

Malt was firm in value, although :the demand,"generally
speaking, was rather inactive.

All kinds of oats were in steady request, and late rates
were well maintained.
Beans were held at fully the late advance in their value.
The inquiry for peas was by no means active; neverthe-
less, prices ruled firm.
For most kinds of flour there was a moderate demand.
American barrels were held for rather more money.

CURRENCY PER IMPERIAL MEASURE.
Wheat —Essex and Kent, red, new
Ditto, old s9s 65s
Ditto, white, new s2s 63s
Ditto, old 6ls 72s
Norfolk and Lincoln, red, old tlGs 64s
Ditto, new
Rye—Old —s —s
New 4os 42s
Barley—Grinding 27s 32s
Malting ' 35s 45s
Malt—Suffolk and Norfolk s2s 68s
Brown
Kingstown and Ware s2s 70s
Chevalier 7os 72s
Oats —Yorkshire and Lincolnsh., Feeding 2ls 27s
Potato
Youghal and Cork, black .. 21s 26s
Cork, white. ~ ..
Scotch, Feeding 24s 28s
Beans—Tick
Pigeons 4Bs 60s
Peas—Grey
Maple
White 455 52s
Boilers sos 54s
Flour—Town-made
Suffolk 394 44s
Stockton and Norfolk. ...... .. 395 11s

LAIFINTELLIGENCE—(7hts Day).

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Before the Lord Chief Baron and a Special Jury.)
THIRD DAY.
HATCH V. LEWIS AND LEWIS.

The hearing of this case was resumed this morning.
Mr. Lewis, sen., was called, and examined by Mr. C.
Pollock.—l have been 33 years in profession, and was
clerk of indictments for 27 years. On Sunday, the 13th of
November, 1859, Mrs. Hatch came to me, at my residence
in Euston• square, and she brought little Lucy with her.
Whoa Mrs. Hatch intimated to me the nature of the charge
against her husband, I suggested the propriety of the child
going into another room, which she did. After discussing
the matter for a short time, she handed to me a letter
which the Plummers had sent to the Bishop of Winches •
ter, and she stated that that would give more particularly
_ _ _

the facts than she could give them. She, at the same time,
handed to me a copy of a letter which contained language
_ _

implying that her husband was guilty. I said tO
" Surely in writing this letter you never intended to sug-
gest your husband is guilty ?" and she answered, " No."
I then asked her if it had been written with her hus-
band's knowledge, and she said, "No, not with his know-
ledge." I then said, "The letter is of no consequence."
I subsequently saw the child, and told her to tell me the

truth, and also to do so on the morrow, when she
would be examined by the magistrate. She said she never
saw the plaintiff do anything wrong to the little girls.
Mrs. Hatch then asked me if I would attend at Wands-
worth police-court in the morning. I said I had not my
list of attendances with me, but, under the circumstances
of the case, I would do so, and that my fee would be three
guineas. I desired her to have ready a complete statement
from her husband, and the attendance of all the witnesses
mentioned to me. I went to Wandsworth the next morn-
ing, and was introduced to Mr. Hatch, and he handed a
statement to me. Mr. Cooper, the barrister, made a state-
ment of the facts against the plaintiff, and called his wit-
nesses, and cross-examined them, and as the magistrate
intimated the case must go for trial, I proposed bail, and in
the end Mr. Hatch was admitted to bail in the sum of £5OO
himself, and two sureties of £250 each. The defendant
then said that ho visited the plaintiff in prison on the 15th,
17th, and 21st November, and referred to his diary to prove
the dates. On the last occasion he went into all matters
very fully during the half hour he remained with him, and
he then partly made a sketch of the late residence of the
plaintiff. 1 received a letter from Mr. Onslow to retain
Mr, Sergeant Ballantine on 22d of November. On the
the 23d I had a conversation with Mrs. Hatch about re•
taining Brannan, the detective, to make inquiries relative
to the Plummers. He was engaged, and I received com-
munications from him. Previous to 26th, before the brief
was delivered, 1 had a conversation with Sergeant Ballan-
tine for nearly an hour in Westminster Hall.
Mr. Chambers objected to that being received in evi-
dence, as it was a mere accidental meeting, and would not
be considered as a professional appointment. On that
ground he should object to any further examination on the
subject.

Mr. Sergeant Shee contended that it was immaterial
whether the conversation or consultation took place in
Westminster Hall or in chambers.

Witness—l communicated the result of the conversation
to Mr. Hatch.

Mr. M. Chambers—l altogether object to the opinion of
Mr. Ballantine being given as it were incidentally.
Witness—l had a long conversation shortly after the
meeting of Sergeant Ballantine. I told him, after briefs
were delivered, a full consultation would take place. Mt.
Hatch said ho must be guided by his counsel, but he wished
to have witnesses called. I told Mr. Hatch why I thought
such a course would not be judicious. 1 stated generally
with reference to that which occurred in the bed-
room that, as he or Mrs. Hatch could not be wit-
nesses, it must necessarily depend upon the evidence of
Lucy, who would confirm the fact that the girl had been in
bed with him. There were no witnesses at all as to the
assault on Stephanie, that was confined t 3 them two selves.

Mr. Pollock—And she hag never been contradicted up to
he present time.

Mr. Chambers—That is matter for argument.
T.nr,l Chief Baron thought there was some contradiction
relative to her leaving the drawing room.
Mr. Sergeant Shee—That 'does not apply to Stephanie.
The Lord Chief Baron—l suppose, brother Slice, you
intend to show the precise acts of perjury charged or proved.
I consider I am bound to express my own views as to the
exculpation of Mr. Hatch. There might have been suffi-
cient to justify the jury in saying that Eugenia had com-
mitted perjury without going to the root of another matter.
I think that when a pardon is issued it might be taken as
an authorised declaration that Mr. Hatch was innocent of
the charges made against him. The opinion of the jury
was of no value in comparison with it.
Mr. Chambers said the learned judge was consulted before
the indictment for perjury was proceeded with, and he was
of opinion that the indictment of the elder girl was quite
sufficient.

Lord Chief Baron--I should have been surprised if he had
done otherwise, Stephanie was but eight years old.'
Witness proceeded—l wrote a letter to Mr. Onslow re-
lative to the expenses of carrying on the defence, and two
or throe letters passed between our firm and Mr, Onslow,
who said he would not be responsible for costs beyond £7b.
The statement from Brannan was put into the hands of
counsel on the Monday before the trial. I saw Mr. Ainslie
once, Mr. Girdwood twice, and Mrs. Hatch, when I told
them I would give them the earliest intelligence relative to the
finding of the bill of indictment. I continued my inquiries
till the 29th of November, and on tha,t day I attended Mrs.
Hatch and assisted her in despatchinglettertito her witnesses.
On the morning of the trial I had a consultation with coun-
sel, and the result was that witnesses were not to be called.
On the morning of trial I saw Mrs. Hatch's witnesses in
attendance, and also witnesses for the prosecution. I have
no doubt I might have said to Mrs. Hatch, "Don't tease
me, I'm in a hurry." I was present at the trial at the Old
Bailey, and received many short communications from Mr.
Hatch, which I have in my possession. The trial lasted
from ten in the morning till seven in the evening, When
the court adjourned for luncheon I had another consulta-
tion with counsel, and after that I told Mrs. Hatch her
witnesses would not be wanted. I deny most posi-
tively that I ever asked Mrs. Hatch whether
her husband was innocent or guilty. I was
in court by accident during a portion of the trial of Eugenia
Plummer, and I then said to Mr. Edwin James that if it
would at all assist Mr. Hatch's case he might place me in
the witness-box on Mr. Hatch's behalf, and state tat wit-
nesses were in attendance, and that he (Mr. Hatch) wished
the witnesses to be called, but that counsel had decided
otherwise.

Mr. Chambers—l object to giving evidence relative to a
conversation with Mr. Edwin James, who is not present.
Lord Chief Baron—That's of no importance. It would
make no difference it he were.

Mr. Chambers—l think we had better have the short
hand writer's notes read of what the witness really did say.
After some discussion, the examination of Mr. Lewis was
proceeded with. [He handed in a letter received by Mr. P
Edwards, and written by Mr. Hatch, telling him that he.
was informed that his trial was fixed for the Ist of Decem-
ber, and asking him to attend as a witness. A number of
memoranda made by Mr. Hatch at the trial, and banded
over to Mr. Lewis, were also put in.and rdad.J

Cross-examined by Mr. M. Chambers—My first visit to
Horsemonger-lane Gaol was on the 21st of November. I
put in my own diary to prove it. You will there find it
Marked in pencil.

The learned counsel was about to put a number of ques-
tions relative to the other business transacted by the wit-
ness on the 21st, as it was stated by Mr. Hatch that Mr.
Lewis did not call on him at the gaol as mentioned, but

Mr. Sergeant Shee interposed, and objected to names of
other parties being mentioned during this trial.

The Lord Chief Baron to Mr. Chambers—You can only
refer to the book as far as the particular entry upon which
you wish to examine the witness.
Mr. Lewis then proceeded to explain, by aid of his book,
how he was occupied during the whole of the 21st of No-
vember. Nineteen-twentieths of what he said was devoted
to Mr. Hatch's case. I will swear I was not in
attendance at a police-court on other business that day.
My son transacted the ordinary business while I was en-
gaged in Mr. Hatch's business. I believe it was in the
afternoon when I went to ace Mr. Hatch, but I cannot
speak positiVely as to the time. My next visit to Horse-
monger-lane Gaol was on the 26th—the only two visits I
thought it necessary to make. The depositions were ob-
tained by our firm. We never sent a clerk to transact
business at Wandsworth. I saw the witness at the trial in
Mr. Clark's room in the 011 Bailey. I was not there mere
than about half a minute.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine examined by Sergeant Shee—l
have been at the bar 25 years. I practised principally at the
Central Criminal Court, until I received the coif, when I
only attended occasionally. I recollect meeting Mr. Lewis
in Westminster-hall, when he explained to me the nature
of a case he intended to send to me. I did not(give "3'
opinion. I received the brief: I had a consultation on it
at chambers. The fact of calling witnesses was fully (lls-
cussed by myself, Mr. Robinson, the jttnior counsel, and
others. I expressed a very strong opinion at the time s
, an
and
d
I gave Mr. Lewis my reasons for it. My reason
opinions I believe still to be Mr. Hatch's property ;
tint geiltpAuwa yriekvi it, l Ogg ii 9 91),N016#4,

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—(Tars EVENING.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

ROMAN CATHOLIC PATTERS.
The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition com-
plaining of the treatment of Roman Catholic children in
workhouses.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Baggymoor !Drainage, Whitehaven, Cleator, and
Egremont Railway Bills were read a second time.
The Fife and Kinross Railway, Tiverton Roads, Elton
and Blackburn Roads, Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway
(extension to Settle) Bills were read a third time and
pa'sed.