The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-18 00:00:00

THE ',SUM: LONDON,' SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 18, 1861

representations to the Spanish Government in refer-
ence to their intolerant conduct in regard to Pro-
testants in Spain. The Spaniards were. a people pe-
culiarly sensitive of any interference by foreigners
in their national affairs, and therefore any such
interference must be conducted with discretion. He was
glad to say that thd Spanish Government seemed disposed
to grant the privileges desired by Protestants, and
to allow them to exercise their religious worship in
private houses, and to have schools where the
children could be educated in the tenets of their
religion. With regard to the general question, everybody
knew that Spain had in former times been governed on the
most intolerable principles, and there had even been
lamentable executions for the profession of religious
faith. A great improvement had taken place in
this particular, but the prejudices of former times still
exercised an influence on the national mind. However, he
was sure that eventually the Government, which was more
liberal than the people, would introduce the necessary im-
provement. He could assure the hon. bart. (Sir R. Peel)
that the executive of this country would do all in their
power relative to the subject.
Sir IL PEEL enquired if any steps would be taken re-
specting Mr. Gordon's conduct in regard to the case which
had been brought under the attention of the house.
Lord PALMERSTON said his noble friend, the Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs, would adopt steps suitable to the
circumstances of the case.
The motion for adjournment was then agreed to.
EDUCATION.
Mr. T. BUNCOMBE moved an address for returns of
the number of inspectors and assistant inspectors of
schools under the committee of Privy Council on
Education, with the total payments received by them
in each year from 1840 to 1861, together with the names
of all clergymen of the Established Church who were in-
spectors or assistant-inspectors of schools under the said
committee in 1859 and 1860, with the total amount received
by each under the separate heads of salary, travelling and
personal expenses.—Ordered.
NATIONAL EDUCATION IN IRELAND.
On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. WHITESIDE moved the following r 'solutions :-
1. That the advantages afforded by Parliamentary grants for
the purpose of education in Ireland ought not
to be denied to any school upon the ern ""
that tho Holy Scriptures are daily read therein.
2. That a discretion should be vested in those who are en-
trusted with the administration of the Grant for Educational
Purposes in Ireland, to assist, with books and other school
requisites, all persons and societies engaged in carrying
on the work of moral and religious education in schools
in Ireland who may conscientiously decline to subscribe to
the rules of the National Board, subject, so far as relates to
secular education, to the inspection and control of the
officers of the board. 3. That the recent reconstruction of
the national board is not calculated to insure a satisfactory
administration of the Parliamentary grant for education in
Ireland. The hon. and learned gentleman said that it ap-
peared by the report of the committee that sat on this sub-
ject in 1812 that the educational wants of the country in
Ireland were not supplied by the parochial schools, but that
a body of gentlemen formed themselves into a society for
carrying out the work of education more extensively
than it could be conducted by the parochial clergy.
The Kildare-street Society educated 100,000 children for
£25,000 a year, and if they could do so much for a small
sum the house ought to bear that in mind when they came
to:consider what was done under the present system for a
large sum. Since the abolition of the Kildare-street Society,
those whom the represented had been excluded from the
benefits of education in consequence of conscientious scruples
which in Ireland was not much respected, particularly
when sincere. A general impression prevailed that what
was recommended by the commission was what was actually
done. But the very contrary was the case. It was recom-
mended that the existing schools should be kept up, and
and that where it was necessary, supplementary schools
should be added. It was thought that the parish schools
would answer this purpose best, and that each being under
the direction of the parish clergyman, the local manage-
ment would be simile and inexpensive. But subsequently
it was proposed to have larger schools, each to
include greater masses. When it was suggested to
Lord Derby, then Mr. Stanley, to establish schools
from which the Bible should be excluded, he said
that the public mind of England would not stand that.
The author of the book in which he had read this statement
ought not to have referred to a conversation which took
place at the Castle at a very late of ni4t, but it was a re-
mark the sagacity of which had been justified by the result.
A boy in one of the Protestant schools in Ireland being
asked the question, what was the use of the Scriptures, re-
plied, " To guide our conduct in life." That was the opinion
held by Protestants generally, and if the Scriptures were to be
the guide of our conduct in lite, how was it possible to carry
on education without them ? (Hear, hear.) The hon. and
learned gentleman then read an extract on this subject
from a work of Archbishop Whately, observing that with
such authority on his side, he was sure that, though he
might be outvoted—though even that would be doubtful,
when the house heard what the right hon. gentleman (Mr.
Cardwell) had been doing since the last debate on this sub-
ject—he was sure he could not be out-argued. He com-
plained that, by the course now taken, Mr. Stanley's plan
had been subverted. Archbishop Whately had quitted
the board on that ground, considering that he would be
guilty of a breach of faith if he remained there when the
system was so carried out as not to satisfy the expectations
which he had assisted in raising. Several of the books that
had been recommended for the schools had been recently
excluded. A little work on the Evidences of Christianity,
written by Archbishop Whately himself, with all the clear-
ness and force of Paley, was amongst the books recom-
mended. That work was not to be found even in the
" model" schools, which ought to have all the works re-
commended, though others might be left free to take or
reject what they pleased. One of the rules had' been so in-
terpreted that if, in a school of 100 children, one child of
nine years of age should object to a book, it must be ex-
eluded, and the Archbishop held that this could not possibly
be the intention of the rule. When the Archbishop found
that practical absurdity he left the board, saying that he
was as much as ever attached to the system of national
education as originally proposed, but that he felt bound
to retire on account of the abandonment of all fixed prin-
ciples, the subversion of the original system, and the mis-
application of the grant. The board was broken up in con-
sequence of the retirement of Archbishop Whately, Judge
Blackburne, and Mr. Wilson Greene. It was originally
designed that the schools should be open to all persuasions
and should be conducted with a due regard to parental right,
but in these respects they had failed. When religious in-
struction was given, it was required to put up a printed
notification as to the nature of that instruction, to which the
Protestant clergy very much objected, as it had the effect of
warning many of the children off the premises. By another
rule, the religious instruction was given half-an-hour before
the usual school hour. Now, children who were very willing
to receive religious instruction in school hours would come
half-an-hour earlier, so that in most cases the attend-
ance was very small. It was very painful to the feelings of
clergymen, that after using the Bible they were obliged to
lock it up till the next day, so that it might not even by acci-
dent, be seen by the children during the hours of secular
instruction. There was this difference in the appearance
of these schools and the scriptural schools, that in the
latter the walls were ornamented with texts of Scrip-
ture, written in such large letters that very little
children could read them whin they were doing little
better than looking at the walls. But if a Government
inspector entered such a school, he would order that to be
all taken down, and tell the schoolmaster to hang up maps,
or pictures of those hideous creatures that we are told had
lived before the flood to frighten the poor little children.
(A laugh.) For the expenditure of £300,000 they only
after all educated 263,000 persons, as was shown by
the return of classes, for the return of rolls was
useless as a criterion, since it included the name of
every child who showed his face at the school, though
he might stay away for months at a time. In England it
was usually found that, if the roll was to be 500,000 it
might be expected that about 400,000 would attend. But
in Ireland, if the roll was 105, about 49 might be expected
to attend. He had several times visited these schools, and
had never found on any occasion, that half the number on
the roll were present in the school. The number in the
parish schools in the country did not exceed 150,000, and
this was owing in a great extent to the popularity of the
nun's schools, which he was bound to say were the best
conducted of any of the schoels in Ireland. (Hear, hear.)
There were 50,000 children in these convent schools.
But, notwithstanding that, many Christian persons were
excluded from participation in the grant to which they
contributed by the payment of taxes. There were in the
not less than
schools supported by these friends of scriptural education
73,497 children. In the Sunday School
society alone there were 230,676 children who were receiv-
ing scriptural education, and of these there were 130,000
who attended no other schools, and more than 21,000
Bibles and Testaments, and an immense quantity of edu-
cational books, all of which were supported by voluntary
did the Government refuse to give a supply of
efforts. He would ask the Rouse to declare upon what
grounds
grants thfeeyr the salaries
books to saluelohwaanscoecioeutyt
ofastht
eh
publici s, even would not
make any
of schoolmasters. The result of the voluntary efforts in
Ireland was to give education to 327,983 children, and
which was rt ally a larger number than was educated out of
the funds at the disposal cif the commissioners of national
education. In Belfast there was a school of 1,000 Protest-
ant children, who were not allowed the slightest assistance
out of the funds at the disposal of the commissioners; and
again he asked, why was it that their Protestants did not
receive some pecuniary assistance, because they wished to
have scriptural education ? The hon. and learned member
Proceeded to refer to some returns which had been laid be-
fore the
house, containing the statistics on the subject of
IPilueation• These returns were, he said, of the most illu-
sory character, and excited his indignation to the utmost
against the wretched system of red tapeism which prevailed
in the administering of this system. It was necessary to
administer some political emetic in order to draw up the
and obscured their imaginations. When he came
balls,of red tape which lodged in the stomachs of these red
analyse this return, he found that in many of the schools
were returned' as mixed, there was not more than
tta
whichp e i . t a,
ones is sore C415e5 two, 414 ilabthers throe protestant

dren. He called then phantom Protestants, for he believed
they were never seen in the flesh (A laugh.) The analysis
which had been made showed that there were 1,518 schools
where there was no pretence for saying mixed education ex-
isted. There were 218 prisons, workhouses, model and
agricultural schools where mixed education necessarily
existed, and the total number in which the mixed system
could be said fairly to exist was but 1,162 out of the 5,496.
In the province of Munster there was a total of 1,382
schools ; of these 433 were mixed ; but out of this number
there were 398 schools in which the maximum number of
Protestants was not more than 9 to 105 of the Catholics.
In Leinster there were 509 schools, and of these 438 had
no more than nine Protestants to 105 Catholics ; while in
Connaught there were 814 schools ; of these 354 were
mixed, and of these again there were as many as 242
with not more than nine Protestants, many of them
containing not more than one or two. In the county of
Carlow this state of things was still more strongly exhibited,
and the hon. member analysed in considerable detail the
statistics given of education in the schools of this country.
The whole number of schools in the county supported by,
the State grants gave education to 2,715 Catholics and 99
Protestants ; while the schools supported by voluntary con-
tributions, educated 1,538 Protestants and 168 Catholics.
He next proceeded to refer to the county of Wicklow, one
which was in every respect deserving of admiration for the
peaceable, orderly, and industrious character of the people.
There had not been an execution its the county for the last
30 years. There was in the return one school returned at
Bray, where there were 176 Catholics and one Protestant.
He could never catch this young Protestant or see him, and
he believed that he was kir( d for the occasion, and put in
the school when the inspector was about to make his visit,
and that he was in the habit of running on from this school
to appear again at some other and be returned as the " one
Protestant" which figured so frequently in these returns.
He did not blame the right hon. gentleman the Secretary for
Ireland because he had not invented, but had only spoilt, the
system. (A laugh.) He insisted upon it in the strongest
possible manner, that it was wrong for the Government to
exclude Protestants from any portion of the public grant,
on the ground that they wished to have the Scriptures read
in their schools. In the schools generally throughout Ulster
the proportion of pupils in attendance was one Roman Ca-
tholic to 120 or 150 Pro tortarate. Le Townsend-street school,
usicaet, there were 374 Protestants and one Roman Catholic.
In the model school in Dublin there were 112 Protestants
and 457 Roman Catholics, and in the smaller school 89
Protestants and 364 Roman Catholics ; but in the schools
situated in the parishes of St. Peter and St. Paul, Dublin,
there was only one Protestant in attendance. Could any
man of ordinary sense, then, allege that the mixed system
of education had been successful in Ireland ? (Hear.) There
were 119 convent schools in the country, which contained
42,909 scholars. These schools were conducted by ladies,
who made themselves familiar with the children, and minis-
tered to their temporal as well as spiritual wants. Would
any hon. member say that these schools, or schools from
which the Scriptures were excluded, were intended for the
education of the children of Protestants ? Why, of course,
not. Why, then, did not the Government extend the prin-
ciple of religious:education to the Protestants ? (Hear, hear.)
Now, how stood the money part of the question ? In the
year 1859, the Board received from the Treasury about
£208,000, and the balance in hand was £28,000. The ave-
rage salary given to the masters was £26 lls. 4d. In sala-
ries, the sum of £145,000 had been expended, and in allow-
ances to inspectors, £21,000. In Kells there were two na-
tional schools, the one opposite to the other. One was the
school belonging to the priest, in which there was not a
Protestant pupil, and the other was the school belonging to
Archdeacon Stopford, in which there was not a Roman
Catholic pupil. That was a specimen of the national sys-
tem. (Hear, hear.) As the board had not objected to the
establishment of a second school in the same town or district,
the result had been, that the Roman Catholics went to the
Roman Catholic school, and the Protestants to the Protes-
tant school ; and this was the mixed system of education
the Government patronised. (Hear, hear.) It was a very
remarkable fact that the more the grant for this purpose
had been increased, the more the number of pupils dimi-
nished. The Board of National Education in Ireland had
originally consisted of seven gentlemen, It was then ex-
tended to fourteen, but only four attended, and, in fact, the
resident commissioners became masters of the whole system.
Upon this subject I he Archbishop of Dublin, Mr. Cross, the
secretary, and Dr. Henry had been examined, and their
opinions as to the proper number to constitute the board,
and the times of their attendance, were exceedingly valuable.
He asked the house to consider, with an impartial mind,
why it was that the body in Dublin had appointed the
present board. It was simply to establish a denominational
system, and such a board was by no means a proper body to
have control in a matter of the kind. He objected to the
whole construction of the board, and contended that its very
constitution was of a nature to render it altogether useless.
There were 10 Roman Catholic gentlemen on the board,
and there were hardly any non-official persons on it, and he
objected to its constitution and practice in Coto. He should
propose to sweep away a board which gave no satisfaction
to Protestants and no power to Catholics, and establish a
commission which would carry out those moderate argu-
ments which would give satisfaction to all parties. (near,
hear.)
The O'CONOR DON craved the indulgence which the
house always extended to a new member. (Hear, hear.)
It would be his duty, on the present occasion, to vote upon
the res lutions and not upon the speech of the right hon.
gentleman, which seemed to him, he must say, to have been
a little inconsistent with them In a great portion of the
speech he fully concurred; but he could not say the same
of the resolutions, for he did not think that they would
afford to all parties the same advantages—in fact, he might
term them sectarian or party resolutions. (Hear.) The
first declared that aid was to be refused to no school in
which the Holy Scriptures were read. They would there
fore cause the aid to be given solely to Protestant denomi-
national schools. To be sure, that was not the interpreta-
tion which the right hon. gentleman had put upon it, but
he must take it as it stood. The right hon. gentleman said
that by his second resolution the schools of the Christian
brothers would gain a great advantage. But what was that
advantage ? Merely that they should have books and school
requisites ; whereas Protestant schools were to have all they
required. (Cheers.) Even that trifling benefit was to be
solely at the discretion of the board of commissioners, with
which the right hon. gentleman found so much fault. It
certainly did seem strange that the right hon. gentleman
should propose to entrust such large power to a board
which he had so strongly condemned. (Hear.) He fully
agreed with the right hon. gentleman that the present sys-
tem had not been successful, and that it was not in truth a
mixed system ; but he did not thirk that the evil would be
remedied by the scheme proposed by the right hon. gentle-
man—at least in his resolutions. The first did not permit
religious instruction to be given in any other form than the
reading of the Scriptures. Now, Roman Catholics did not
object to the reading of the Scriptures in their schools; but
they did not think that the reading of the Scriptures alone
—even in the Douay version—was sufficient (Hear, hear.).
To permit religious instruction to be given by one party in
the form which they thought sufficient, and to refuse the
same privilege to another, was not in accordance with the
principle of religious liberty; and that was not merely his
(the O'Conor Don's) opinion, it was the opinion of Lord
Derby, as expressed in his reply to the proposition of the
Ulster Synod in 1833, when the noble earl, then Mr. Stan-
ley, was Secretary for Ireland. they allowed to one
party—he cared not which—a privilege which they refused
to others, they violated the principle of religious liberty.
(Hear) Few Roman Catholics approved of the system as
at present carried out; though there was some difference
between them as to the nature of the remedy that was re-
quired. Some of them thought that the system might be
improved, others that there could be no change for the better
without a radical alteration. Some thought that all that
was wanting was merely a return to the plan as it was esta-
blished by Mr. Stanley—for there could be no doubt that
that plan had since been largely departed from. (Hear.)
For his own part he did not think any change would suf-
fice short of a radical alteration of the system. The objec-
tions of Roman Catholics had been set forth in a letter re-
cently laid on the table, and addressed to the Chief Secre-
tary by a majority of the Catholic members. They had also
been fully explained by the hon. member for Dungarvan.
One of the principal respects in which the 'system had
been varied since its establishment by Mr. Stanley was
that the children were no longer excluded from the
religious instruction. Mr. Stanley had plainly laid down
the rulOthat there should be a united secular and a sepa-
rate religious education. (Hear, hear.) Another point
clearly laid down by him was that the religious instruction
should be under the control of the clergy ; whereas the
authority of the clergy had latterly been denied, and their
interference had been treated almost as if it were an imper-
tinence. Another and more important change :was that
whereas the children of a different religion were formerly
ordered to leave the school before the religious instruction
was commenced, the present rule was merely that the
patrons should not force them to be preient. He was aware
the Chief Secretary contended that the rule had not been
altered, and that it had merely been interpreted ; but it
was really a matter of no moment which had been done ;
for the fact remained th rt a great change had taken place.
(Hear, hear.) It was said that there had been no cases of
proselytism. That might be so ; but what was chiefly to
be feared was that children might learn to be bad Catholics
without becoming good Protestants. It was not to be ex-

petted that that they would be proselytised, because thoughthey
attended religious instruction with Protestants, they would
go to the churches usual with their parents ; but what was

to be feared was that hearing the teaching of the Sunday
contradicted by that of the week day, they might cease to
believe either. They had heard that this system was one
which would put an end to religious dissension in Ireland ;
but did experience bear them out in this ? He was happy
to say that experience had shown that religious dissension
had to a great extent declined. It had declined everywhere
except in the provir ce where mixed education to the largest
extent had been carried on. In that province where mixed
education had chiefly prevailed religious dissension was
most marked—where they had made the most stringent
rules they had made them apparently only to be broken—
(hear)—so that, as far as experience went, it was against
the principle of mixed education. But did not theory sug-
gest the samaresult ? Theory would suggest exactly the
same thing. He was happy to believe that no Christian j
forte of pligiva, Avinved diocora ajactbtrifp, Dionaicoa,

therefore, if they existed, were owing more to political and
party feelings than to any religious feeling. It was natural
therefore that on those grounds distinctions of religion
would be fostered and kept up in schools of mixed educa-
tion. It was to be expected that from party motives, and
from the restraints imposed by religious impressions being
taken away, persons educated in these schools would be
more likely to disagree and quarrel. On these grounds
therefore he thought both experience and theory would
teach them that a mixed system of education would not
be conducive to the putting an end to religious dissensions.
Then they had been told that Roman Catholics ought to be
contented with these terms. But he would wish to ask what,
there was unreasonable in asking that Roman Catholics in
Ireland should receive the same concessions which Roman
Catholics in England and in the colonies received with the
approbation of the house and of the Government. (Hear.)
It was perhaps only natural that those who taught in the
schools should be willing tha; the present system should
last, because they were interested in the denominational
system. But although he filly agreed with the right hon.
gentleman in much of what he had said against the
system of mixed education, he could not agree in
the resolutions, because they lid not extend to Roman Ca-
tholics the same advantages as they offered to Protestants.
He did not deny that many Protestants might have con-
scientious objections to purel3 secular education. These
objections, however, were no; a bit stronger than those
which were felt by Roman Catlolics. Apparently the rule
was as favourable to one class Is to the other. The rule
which excluded one excluded tie other also; and Protes
tants were not placed under the slightest disadvantage.
But no Roman Catholics approved of the separation of re-
ligious and secular education vhen they could avoid it.
They would willingly have no religion taught in schools
but their own; but they were al agreed in desiring that
secular and religious instruction should not be separated.
Protestants were not universaly so strict. Even in the
university which the right hon. gentleman so ably r epre-
sented the objections to purely secular instruction felt by
Protestants were not so strong a those which were felt by
Roman Catholics. The reason why Protestants had re-
fused this means of education, tnd Roman Catholics had
not refused it, was very clear, frmi the situation of the two
parties. The Protestants had schools of their own commu-
nion; the Roman Uatholies had no schools at all. (Hear.)
If the Roman Catholic did not accept the grant, education
for him was a mere nonentity. (Rear.) The grant no
doubt was offered to both. When therstate came to offer its
aid, it was somewhat extraordinary that the class which had
the greatest advantages should haverules made which were
more lenient for them. (Hear.) recause Protestants pos-
sessed many schools, it seemed that the rule was made far
more stringent and binding upon Roman Catholics, who
were most in want of Government aid. But should not a
grant be made rather in proportion to the wants of the peo-
ple than to the advantages which vere already possessed by
them ? (Hear.) In the present case the nominal right to
which the right hon. gentleman's ?arty objected was ins,.
partial to both classes. (Cheers.) He did not intend to
trespass much longer on the attention of the house;
bat, in conclusion, he must again express his accordance
in opinion with many of the statements made by the right
hon. gentleman. But he did not believe that the resolutions
would bear the interpretation whicl had been put upon them
by the right hon. gentleman. He Oelieved that if they were
carried to-night, the interpretation which would be put on
them in Ireland would be very clfferent from that which
the right hon. gentleman wished. When once an indiscri-
minate reading of the Scriptures was admitted in schools,
full and free liberty of religious instruction would not be
granted to Roman Catholics. Tie Scriptures were a great
element, but they were not the sole or even the chief part
of religious instruction amongvst the Roman Catholics,
Upon these grounds, therefore, he (the O'Conor Don) found
himself compelled to differ from the resolutions proposed
by the right hon. gentleman. If the right hon. gentleman
had proposed resolutions more in accordance with his
speech, or in accordance with the amendments put forward
by the hon. member for Youghal, he should have found
himself not only at liberty but most happy to support the
resolution of the right hon. gentleman. The honourable
gentleman concluded by thanking the house for the atten-
tion with which they had listened to him. (Upon resum.
ing his seat the hon. gentleman was loudly cheered, and
received the congratulations of several hon. members ;
amongst whom—the -'pecker having left the chair—Mr.
Disraeli crossed from the opposition side of the house and
shook hands with the hon. member.)
At the close of the hon. gentleman's speech a motion was
made teat the house be counted, and there not being forty
members present the house adjourned at 25 minutes to 9
o' clock.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE--May 17.

GUILDHALL. EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF
CHILD STEALING.—CharIes Nicholson, described
in the police-sheet as a clerk, having no fixed
residence, but who was stated to have lately kept
the Woolpack Tavern, at Romford, and John Tuler,
who was formerly in the service of Nicholson, and
nQw described himself as a clock maker, residing
at 16, Hermes-street, Pentonville, were placed at
the bar before Sir H. Muggeridge and Alderman
Humphrey, charged under the 9th Geo. IV. c. 31.
s. 21, with feloniously and maliciously taking
away by force and fraud a child, five years old,
named Charles Harry Waterman, with intent to
deprive the parents of the possession of the said
child.

Mr. Lewis, jun., appeared for the prosecution,
and Mr. Beard conducted the defence for both pri-
soners.

Mr. Lewis said it was his duty to prosecute the
persons at the bar upon a charge of a very serious
character—so serious, indeed, that upon conviction
they would be liable to a punishment of seven
years' transportation. There were, however, 'cir-
cumstances connected with the case of a very
peculiar character ; and however panful it
might be to the parties concerned, he
thought it only right to place the whole of
the facts before the Court, in order that the ma-
gistrates might not hereafter complain of anything
having been kept back. It appeared that the pro-
secutor, Wm. Harvey Waterman, was a builder's
clerk, living at Battersea, and about 12 months ago
the prisoner Nicholson, who at that time kept the
Woolpack Tavern at Romford, became acquainted
with the prosecutor's wife, and induced her to take
up her residence with him, and for some months
they lived together as man and wife. For the sake
of his child, however, the prosecutor forgave his
wife her past conduct, and she accordingly returned
to his home. Under such circumstances one would
naturally expect Nicholson would have refrained
from molesting her, but, on the contrary, he had
used every endeavour to coerce her into abandoning
•her husband, in order that she might return and
continue to live in a state of adultery with himself.
She had received ail his overtures with the utmost
scorn and contempt, and after hovering about her
house for a considerable time, he at length arranged
an interview for the purpose of giving up clothes
and other things belonging to 3er to the value of
£2O, which he had detained. They accordingly
met at the steamboat pier at Blaekfriars-bridge, or
which occasion Nicholson was accompanied by
Tuler, Mrs. Waterman having with her her:hus-
band's mother and the child in question. At the
suggestion of Nicholson they all repaired to a
publichouse in the neighbourhood, and on arriving
there Nicholson told Tuler to take the child out and
buy him a cake, but as Mrs. Waterman refused to
let him go, Nicholson engaged her in conversation,
during which Tuler stole away unperceived with
the child, but leaving his own hat and stick behind
him. When Mrs. Waterman missed the child,
Nicholson said it was all right, he had paid Tuler
to take the child, and it would be 100 miles away
before night. Mrs. Waterman ran out but could
see no trace of her child, and on the following day
a warrant was obtained at this office for the appre-
hension of the prisoners. The conduct of the detec-
tive officer, Baker, in securing them the same even-
ing was beyond commendation, and the prosecutor
was greatly indebted to him, for had it not been
for the prompt and energetic manner in which he
acted, and the intelligence he displayed in the
matter, the child would not have been restored to its
parents as it was that evening, by Tuler, on learn-
ing that Nicholson was in custody for stealing the
child. One aggravating circumstance in the case
against Nicholson was his avowal at the police-
station, that he would have the prosecutor's wife
even if he had to steallhe child again. Mr. Lewis
said he would prove these facts, and then ask for a
remand, with the view to the ultimate committal of
the prisoners to take their trial upon the charge.
Mr. Beard said this was one of those cases that
involved an expose alike discreditable to all the
parties concerned, and he bad hoped for the sake of
public morals, as well as the characters of those
accusing and the accused, that the charge would not
have been pressed forward as it lad been. If, how-
ever, the case went on, he should show that the
person hero represented as the injured husband was
not entitled to the sympathy of the Court, and that
his own conduct, in the absence of his wife, had
been as immoral as that which it was stated he
had so magnanimously forgiven in the mother of
the child in question.
Louisa Elizabeth Waterman, a rather attractive
young person, said—l am the wife of W. H. Water-
man, anel live at 2, Oak-pace, Bridge-road, Batter-
sea. My husband is a builder's clerk, I have been
married to him about ten years. This is the only
child I have living out of three. 1 have known
Nicholson about 12 months. About nine months
ago I was away from my husband, and was living
with Nicholson as his wife, and continued to do so
until about two months ago, and then I returned
to live with my husband, who forgave what had
past, and I have since lived comfortably with him.
Tuler used to assist Nicholson at the tavern. Since
I have returned to my husband I have frequently
seen Nicholson hovering about the house in which
I live. I also saw Tuler with him on Tuesday
g last; and in consequence of a communication I
I:eceir)4 gpttkes.-41-4w, i Went With

her on Wednesday last to Blackfriars-bridge, to
receive frem Nicholson- -some property - which
he had detained of mine, and which he proposed
giving up. I had my child with me, and Nichol-
son invited us into a pubic-house in Water lane,
Blackfriars, as he wanted, he said, to speak to me
alone. When we got inside, he told Tuler to take
the child and buy it a soft cake; but I objecteu
his being taken out, and nothing more was said
about it at the time. Nicholson then engaged my
attention in conversation, and when I turned round
shortly after, I found my child and Tuler were both
gone, but the latter had left his hat and stick be-
hind him. I went out at once to seek for them,
but could find no trace of either Tuler or the child.
Nicholson said, " Now I have done you at last : he
will be 100 miles away before night." I did not
see my child again until yesterday evening, about
eight o'clock, when he was brought home by Tuler.
He only brought him near the house, and a stranger
brought him home to the door.
Cross-examined by Mr. Beard—l have been living
apart from my husband for the last two years, be-
cause we could not agree ' • and during that period
I have had the child with me, and my husband al-
lowed me a separate maintenance until I went to
live with Nicholson. I had means of my own.
Nicholson did not buy me everything I had to wear.
He did not buy me jewellery. I have two small
brooches which he gave me. The child was with
me the whole of the time I was living with Nichol-
son as his wife, and he supported us both until I
left him, when I took the child to my husband's
mother. When I left Romford I came to London
on business. I came to receive some money, £l6O,
which I became entitled to under the will of an
aunt of mine, who died about nine months previous.
I had seen my husband twice before returning to
him, and after getting the money. I went home
with him voluntarily, not wishing to return
to Nicholson. I had the sole control over
the money, and have it still. My husband knew I
was entitled to the £l6O, and that I was going to
receive it before returning to him. He had been
trying to find me for months. Nicholson was not
particularly partial or unkind to the child. He
was more partial to the mother, without doubt.
' Since I have been home I have written to Nichol-
son, begging that he would keep away from me,
as I do not wish to have anything more to do with
him. I suppose my husband was living with whom
he thought proper in my absence. Ido not know
who he lived with. _

Charles Baker, a detective officer, said—l received
a warrant for the apprehension of the prisoners
yesterday afternoon, and immediately proceeded to
a publichouse called the Calthorpe Arms, in the
Gray's-inn-road, and I had not been there very long
when Nicholson came in. I followed him into the
passage leading to the back of the house, and ad-
dresse him by his name. He said his name was
Wilkinson, not Nicholson, but I told him I should
take him into custody on the charge of child steal•
ing, believing him to be the party named in the
warrant. He said he knew nothing about it, but
he afterwards said he wished the case to be settled
before Mr. Waterman, and he would make all things
right. On the way to the police-station he said he
would have Mrs. Waterman if it was five years to
come. I then went down to Battersea, and I saw
the prisoner Tuler near the bridge, but as soon as
he saw me he was about to make a start for it, when
I sprang forward and secured him. I told him the
charge, and at the station he said he would tell the
truth and all about it. - He said he certainly did
take the child away, and left it with Nicholson's
mother, but ha took it back the next day. He said
he took the child at Nicholson's request. The child
was stolen on Wednesday afternoon, about 4 o'clock.
I apprehended Nicholson at 5 o'clock on Thursday
afternoon, and within a quarter of an hour after-
wards Tuler became acquainted with the fact, and
at 8 o'clock the same evening I found him at Bat-
tersea, the child having been returned about half
an hour previously.
Mr. Lewis upon this evidence asked for a remand.
Mr. Beard trusted, after the disgraceful expose
which had taken place, that the Court would not
allow such a case to proceed any farther, If, how-
ever, the worthy aldermen thought it a case for re-
mand, it would be his duty to disclose, on a future
day, facts that would satisfy the Court that this
person prosecuting these parties was not the im-
maculate husband he had been represented, that
his wife had riot been seduced from her home by
Nicholson and that consequently Re was not the
injured individual he had been described. He
should prove that while the wife was living with
Nicholson, the husband was also living in adultery
with another woman, and his solicitude for the
welfare of his wife and child did not induce him
to make any inquiry for either of them until he
found that his wife was about to receive £l6O, and
then he could overlook that which few men could for-
give, and receive back his repentant wife,but not until
she had drawn her Ll6O. It was clear, therefore, that
the object on the part of the husband was to obtain
possession of the money, while that of Nicholson
was to obtain possession of the wife ; and however
immoral his conduct might be, it was quite clear
that his motive in taking the child was to induce
the mother to return and live with him as she had
been doing. He was a widower with several small
children, and having a good business at the Wool-
pack Tavern at Romford, he was anxious to obtain
the assistance of Mrs. Waterman in the manage-
ment of it, and the arrangements for that purpose
resulted in their living together as man and wife.
He had some feelings o affection for both the
mother and the child, whom he had supported for
many months, and his only object was, not to
deprive her of the possession of her child, but to
make it the medium for renewing the relation in
which they stood to each other prior to the recon-
ciliation, which would only last as long as the
money lasted, with the husband. He could not for an
instant justify the conduct of the prisoners, but he
t hought,un der all the circumstances, the Cout t would
scarcely feel itself justified in even holding them to
bail on such a charge. If the prosecutor had come
into court with clean hands it might have been dif-
ferent, but with the present aspect which the case
had assumed he confidently asked the Court to dis-
charge the accused.
Mr. Lewis said, not only was the charge a very
serious one, but the prisoner Nicholson's conduct
very much aggravated it. He felt bound to inform
the Court that Nicholson had lately been going
about with a loaded pistol in his possession, and
had held it to Mrs. Waterman 's head, and
threatened to kill her if she did not return and live
with him.

Sir H. Muggeridge said the case was surrounded
with great peculiarities, but from the facts which
had transpired in the course of the inquiry he could
not help thinking that the restoration of the child
was the result of the warrant and the officer's
promptitude in executing it. That being his
opinion, he should remand the prisoners until
Thursday next, but he would accept bail for
Nicholson in his own recognisances in £2OO and
two sureties in £lOO each, and half those amounts
for Tuler, who appeared to have been acting under
the instructions of Nicholson.
Bail was not procured before the rising of the
Court, and the prisoners were therefore conveyed
to Newgate.

It is reported that in last term in Oxford out of
180 candidates no less than 70 were rejected, and that these
had been recommended by the tutors to go in for their
degree.

' [ADVERTISEMENT.]—The greatest happiness of a jour-
nalist is to introduce to his readers some new discovery cal-
. culated to benefit that vast portion of our fellow-creatures
which has the strongest claims upon our sympathies. It is
with this feeling that we call the attention of invalids to the
• following extracts from Du Barry's interesting report of
cures without medicine by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica
Food. Cure 180—Mr. W. R. Reeves, 181, Fleet-street,
London, of twenty-five years nervousness, constipation,
indigestion, and debility. Cure No. 54,618—Wandsbeck,
near Hamburgh, May 12, 1857,—1 hereby certify that my
mother-in-law, Mrs. Holze, who has just completed her
I 107th year, after having suffered for half a century and
more, from indigestion (dyspepsia), and consequent dis-
orders, has been perfectly cured by Du Barry's Revalenta
Arabica Food, and is now enabled to digest almost
any kind of food with great comfort.—W. Holze.
Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invariably aggravate and
perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment,
and expense may be avoided by using Du Barry's Food
which, at a few pence per day, saves 5C times its cost in
other remedies, removing effectually, v thout purging,
constipation, indigestion (dyspepsia.) nervous, bilious and
liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate
No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew lire,
MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr.
Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu-
rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of
false pretences. Novill's imitations are prohibited by the
high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £5,000 against
Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents; and the pretences
that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Du
Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly fake.
No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry
and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, onthe seal and wrapper.
Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must
expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 11b.
2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 61. ; 51b. Ils. ; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The
121 b. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt
of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re
gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co.; Abbit.,
60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63 and 150, Ox•
bard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand ; 49 and 60, Bishopsgate-
street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and Co.
tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and Co., King -William-street
City : at 127 High Tiolborn: and all 0-rocerit
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Ointment and Pills.—
Look to the future.—The first symptom of departing health
should have instant attention and redress, not more for the
comfort of the present but for the happiness of the future.
Whatever be the irregularity, wherever situated, however
masked, ;Holloway's remedies will reach it and remove it.
The external employment of the ointment, and the internal
use of the pill will always restore order and ease. Cutane-
ous. complaints, defective nutrition, want of appetite, nausea,
and biliousness are immediately cured, and healthy functions
permanently restored to each organ. The united action of
Holloway's remedies over the human frame is so singularly
searching, soothing, and curative that few diseases can
long withstand tlle *rough puri•lcaton they couotantly
./Atag about. 4 It-.i„