The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-08 00:00:00

GAINSBOROUGH LINES.

The Committee assembled this day at two o'clock pursuant to ad-
journment, when—
Mr. PICKERING said he was happy to be able to state that the ob-
jection in reference to the question of the Gainsborough.brifige
Tolls Commissioners had been arranged, the Railway Company
having agreed to give the Commissioners of the bridge a sum of
money.
Mr. WEBSITR, on the part of Mr. Duckle, said he was also
happy to be able to state that an arrangement had been made by
which the Committee would be saved all further trouble its refer-
ence to that Gentleman's petition.
Clause 17 was then agreed to, it having stood over for considers.
tion from yesterday.
Mr. Cootes, Parliamentary agent, then proceeded to read the
amendment made in the clause, fixing the maximum rate of tolls
for the carriage of goods along the line by the Company's loco-
motives, and those which should be made to parties who supplied
their own carriage or locomotive, or both.
This concluded the labour of the Committee on this Bill.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, May 7.
(Sittings in Banco.)
EXPARTE W. G. WARD.

Mr. KELLY (with whom was Mr. Baddeley) moved for a rule to
show cause why a mandamus should not issue directed to the
Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford, to
command them to restore the Rev. W. G. Ward, late a Fellow of
Balliol College, to the degree of Bachelor of Arts and Mister of
Arts in the said University, of which degree he had been deprived
by the House of Convocation of that University. The affidavits
011 which the motion was made stated that the applicant =trio'.
lated in 1830 ; that he proceeded in 1834 to the degree of
Bachelor of Arts, and in 1837 to that of Master of Arts ; and
subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England,
and three articles in the 36th Canon, and continued to enjoy the
said degree until the month of February, 1835. In 1844 he pub-
lished a book, called " The Ideal of a Christian Church Consi-
dered," to which the attention of the University was called, and
the authorities there, after certain preliminary proceedings had
been adopted, held a convocation upon the 13th of February last,
and then by two several resolutions degraded the applicant
front his degree. He had since applied to the University to be
allowed to exercise the rights which the degree of Master of Arts
conferred upon him, and had been refused. He was, therefore,
compelled to apply for the mandamus. The first ground on which
this applica'ien rested was, that the applicant had not committed
any offence which could lawfully justify the loss of his degree, ac-
cording either to the laws of England or the statutes of the Uni-
versity. The next ground was, that even if it should appear that
the publication of the book referred to was a violation of the sta-
tutes of the University, it was submitted that he was not punishable
in the manner in which punishment had now been inflicted. But
thirdly, even if the publication of the book was punishable at the
University, and if that punishment was degradation, still the ap-
plicant was not liable to that punishment until after he had been
tried in the University, according to the proper forms in the Court of
the Chancellor of the University. In this instance he had not had
an opportunity of making his defence in any judicial proceeding,
as the Chancellor's Court was the only place in the University
where such proceedings could be held. By the arbitrary act
of the convocation he had been, without any trial whatever,
degraded from his degree, and deprived of all the rights and
benefits thereto attached. In the first place, it was clear that the
publication of this book was not any offence, and if it was, then it
was cognisable as such in the Chancellor's Court. The proceed-
ing by the Convocation alone;; without such preliminary trial, was
illegal and void, and yet by such a proceeding the applicant had
been deprived of a freehold interest of such a nature, that he was
entitled to a mandamus to restore him to his rights. The statute
showed that all that might be done by the Chancellor in his Court
might also be done in the Vice-Chancellor's Court; but, in order
at all to justify the exercise of the jurisdiction of the Court, the
offence proceeded against must clearly be shown to be within that
jurisdiction. Among the general powers of the Vice-Chancellor
was that of preventing heresy. Now, here the applicant had sub-

scribed the Articles of the Church when he first received his de-
grees, and, as he stated in his affidavit, he had not done anything
in violation of that subscription. If a person was not consistent
in maintaining the Thirty-nine Articles, he might be called
upon again to subscribe them, and if, after being three times
required to do so, he still refused, and was found so to have
refused, he might be punished, but his punishment would
be by exile, by banishment from the university, and not by

degradation. In 1834 and ]837 the applicant subscribed these
articles; he might have chonged his opinion since then, but if
he had, or if he had done anything which was inconsistent with the
articles, he ought to have been called on again to subscribe the
articles, and had he then refused to do so he might have been tried
for the offence of refusal, and, on conviction, might have been
banished from the University, but could not be degraded from his
degree. As the case now stood, no offence had been committed
which could be the subject of trial and punishment in the Uni-
versity, and the proceedings taken were not warranted by the
statutes of the University. The publication of the applicant's
book was net a violation of the University statutes, nor of the
law of England. It was purely a matter of ecclesiastical cogni-
sance. But, even supposing it to be an offence against these eta.
tutee, the only proper course would have been to send Mr. Ward
before the Vice-Chancellor's Court, and to subject him to a
regular trial. After that he might, upon conviction, have been
sentenced to whatever punishment the statutes allowed. But even
the statutes would not have allowed the punishment now inflicted,
for that punishment was only capable of being applied to a par-
ticular class of offences, of which this was not one. The act of
Convocation was illegal, and, therefore, void. The only remaining
question was, whether this was a case in which the Court would
interfere by way of mandamus ? There was no doubt it would do
cttnna rtiverel; de' tiegrre -,A*4 heceasary to cp, alify
its possessor to take holy orders to obtain certain advantages
the University, and to vote for the Members sent to Parliament to
represent the University.
Lord DENMAN asked whether anything was said in the MM_
davits of the visitatorial power ?
Mr. KELLY answered in the affirmative. The existence of that
power was denied in a case of this kind.
Lord DEN MAN—You may take a rule.

CATASTROPHE AT YARMOUTH.
YARMOUTH, MAY 6.—The jury re-assembled this morning at
the Church-hall, shortly after nine o'clock, and thence proceeded
at once to view the bodies of eleven persons, whose names had been
registered at the police-office.
The names of the eleven other deceased persons are : —Henry
Dye, aged 9 years; Elizabeth Read, 6; Mary Ann Roberts, 19 ;
Ann Beckett, 8; William Walter Watts, 9; Reeder Hunston
Balls, 16; Elizabeth Fulcher, 16; Alice Gott, juts., 9; Alice Gott,
51 ; Emily Young, 6 ; Susannah Field, 8.

Thejtiry, having completed the view of their bodies, returned
to the Church-hall and re-commenced the task of formal identi-
cation.

The whole of the eleven above.mentioned were identified, and
the total number that had been viewed by the jury and formally
identified amounts now to 75.

At the conclusion of this duty,

The CORONER said— We must now consider what is, as far as
we are concerned, the most important part of the question. There
are several reasons why this matter should be re-considered, and
there is, I believe, a gentleman in Norwich who can throw some
light upon this matter; for he states that on Thursday he saw a
fracture in that portion of the bridge where the bar broke.
The Foreman said it was certainly a matter of necessity in the
consideration of so important a case as this to ascertain in what
state the bridge was at the time of the accident, He thought it
was essentially necessary that some scientific gentleman should be
had before them, and he had in his hand a list of questions which
had been suggested to him as fit ones to be proposed to such a
witness. In the propriety of these questions he fully concurred,
and he would read them to the jury. They were these:—" By
whose orders did you make the bridge wider? What was the
extra width, and how many square feet were added 7 What was
the weight of the cast and wrought iron with the wood placed
extra upon the bridge? Did you offer or give to Mr. Cory any
mechanical ideas as to the propriety or impropriety of making the
bridge wider, or explain the consequences of adding extra weigtht
and breadth to act as leverage beyond the chains ? Did you
know the weight the bridge was calculated to bear by the con-
tractors, or inquire of Mr. Cory the terms of the specification ?
Did you examine the chains, bolts, bars, &c., before commencing
the alterations, and report the same to Mr. Cory as to their
soundness and capability? Did you calculate the extra weight
you were going to add to the bridge before you commenced the alte-
rations, and report tha same to Mr. Cory ? Did you suppose that
if the bridge had been in its original state, it would have broken
with the number of persons then upon it ?"
A juror said, that according to the mechanical rule, he believed,
that every square foot of surface should bear a hundred weight,
and that the suspending power was generally made exactly in that
proportion. It appeared here that one-third additional surface had
been added to the bridge by the platforms on each side of it, and
that nothing had been added to the suspending power.

The CORONER observed, tbat that matter would more properly
be discussed when the general merits of the case should come on.
The room was then cleared of strangers , and, after a short dis-
cussion amongst the jury, the following presentment to the Town
Council was agreed to :

" We, the undersigned, now acting as jurymen upon the in-
quisition upon the bodies of the several persons who met their
death from the falling of the suspension.bridge on the River Burt,
within this borougi, beg to represent to the Mayor, Aldermen, and
Councillors of this borough, in council assembled, the absolute or.
ccssity that exists for the employing some scientific engineer, in
order to come to a just consideration of the circumstances in which
the bridge was placed, and to enable them to discharge the oaths
they have taken."

litr. S. Cobb, a magistrate, who was on the bench, undertook to
support it.

The inquiry was then adjourned to enable the jury to receive
the determination of the Council.
The excitement appears to have nearly subsided in Yarmouth.
The bodies found and identified are far short of the numter
returned as found by the boatmen. The discrepancy can only
be accounted for by supposing that they returned, as dead,
parties who were afterwards recovered. The Coroner stated that
ttaejury had viewed 75 bodies, which, with the four missing, makes
79 in all.

COAL MARKET.
Prices per ton at the close of the market :—Adair's Main,
15s ; Buddle's West Hartley, 163 6d ; Carr's llartley, 17s ;
Chester Main, 15s 6d Charlotte, 15s; East Tantield, 14e;
Hasting's Hartley, 16s 6d; Holywell Main, 16s; Nelson's
West Hartley, 16s 6d; New Tanfield, 14s; Old Pontop,
13s 6d; Pott's Primrose, 13s; Ravensworth West Hartley,
16s 6d ; Taylor's West Hartley, 16s ; Tanfield Moor, 17s 6d ;
Townley, 153; West Hartley, 17s ; West Wylam, 15s 6d ;
Wall's-end, Clennell, 16s; Heaton, 16s 6d; Hilda. 163;
Killingworth, 16s ; New March, 15s 6d ' • Riddell's, 16s 6d ;
Walker, 163; Wharncliffe, 163 3d ; Eden Main, 17s 3d ;
Braddyll's Hetton' 18s 6d ; Haswell, IBs 9d ; Hetton, 183 641;
Hylton, 15s; Lamhton, 18s; Russell's Hetton, 18s 3d • Rich-
mond, 17s; Caradoc, 18s; llartlepool, 18s 6d ; Heugh
17s ; Kelloe, 17s 3d ; Adelaide, 17s 9d ; Evenwood, 15s 2d ;
Eden Hartlepool, lis ; Maclean's Tees, 15s 6d ; Seymour
Tees, I7s ; South Durham, 17s ; Tees, 183; Cowpen Hartley,
lis ; Derwentwater Hartley, 16s ; Hartley, 163; Sidney's
Hartley, 16s 6d; West Hartley Netherton, 16s 6d.—Ships
arrived, 103.

C 0 )I\l PIAANGYNTiorIisCIBENHTEmETPRESENT
.—FROM Tll
epoß EASTdeportment INDIAof
friendly
Pacha of Egypt towards our country is about to be acknowledged
by the Court of Directors of the East India Company in a manner
d the
worthy of the greatest political and military power of the East.
A silver fountain of extraordinary magnitude and exquisite work-
manship, intended as a present to Mehemet Ali from the Company,
has just been completed by Mr. Smith, of Duke-street, Lincoln's-
inn-fields. It is upwards of ten feet high, and contains 10,400
ounces of silver. It is richly ornamented with fruits and flowers,
itt
employedp r m atnheaeur te
tEite3g
the likeness of beast, bird, or fish being scrupulously avoided, in
deference to the feelings of the good Mahomedans, among whom
irestingohf, placet heLatin,gi
Aecrrasasbt
daTnthdhe
erf
co:nein:ate:L:lr:
cai
ntn:oi nlunstcdraiianpny.
cordingionon each of the four sides, simply, and in excellent taste, re.
ic,
addition. The language on each side varies ; the four languages
Nail, May 7.