The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-15 00:00:00

DUTCH MAIL.

NIMEGUEN, MAY 9.—By a decision of his Excel-
lency the ?sinister of the Interior, the Rhenish rail-
way from Arnhem is to be inaugurated on the 14th of
this month. 'The train of carriages is to leave the
station out of the Westerpool at Amsterdam, at ten
o'clock on that day. His Majesty the King has sig-
nified his intention of being present on the occasion.
Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Orange and
Princes Frederick, and Alexander, and Henry are
invited to honour the ceremony with their presence.
A great number of invitations to persons of distinction
have been issued.

The King, the Princes, and the public functionaries
are to be at the station at Amsterdam on the 14th,
and half-past nine is the hour. - _

We hear that some capitalists of Amsterdam have
obtained a licence from the Government for the con-
struction of an iron railway from the Hague to
Scheveningen, and with the intention of connecting
the new branch with the Dutch and with the station
near this city.
FRANKFORT, MAY 17.—Count Munich Belling-
hausen, President of the Diet, returned yesterday
from Venice to resume his important functions.
We hear from Vienna that Prince Metternich in-
tending first to visit his estate at Konigswart, in 13o-
hernia, will not come to the Rhine till the end of the
summer, about which time the King and Queen of
Prussia are expected.
Letters from Berlin say that the negotiations be-
tween the Courts of Prussia and Wurtemburgh for
a marriage of the Crown Prince of ‘Vurtemburgh to
a Princess of the Royal Family of Prussia are al-
ready so far advanced that it may be expected that
the result will shortly be published.

RAILWAY C, ►IIIMITTEES.
(I ESTERDAY.)

(Group F.)
LONDON, WORCESTER, AND SOUTH STAFFORD-
SHIRE RAILWAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. M'CoNNELL examined by Mr. Sergeant W RANG-
HAM.—The inconvenience on the Gloucester line greatly
deters merchants from sending goods by the line. Any
improvement of that inconvenience would occasion
considerable outlay. A great inconvenience resulted
in the transhipment of passengers, from the break of
guage, many persons being separated from their friends
who happen to get into the carriage first. Every plan
for the remedying of this difficulty was open to great
objection.
Cross-examined by Mr. COCKBURN.—Wav acquainted
with the Birmingham station, There is a large staff of
porters at that station, but not for the purpose of trans•
fcrring the goods from one carriage to another. The
traffic at that station was so great, that it required a
great many porters. If there were no change of gauge
at Gloucester, where two engines were now required,

one would be sufficient. Was of opinion that no new
mechanical contrivance would answer practically the
difficulty on that line. Had made drawings of plans for
remedying the difficulty, but so satisfied was he that
no plans, however well carried out, would answer the
deficiency, that he did not go to the expense of making
any experiment. Was of opinion, about a month ago,
that a broad gauge would remedy the defect. Had
changed that opinion.
Re-examined by Mr. S. WRANGIIAM.—Was once of
opinion that the broad gauge engine would be of great
advantage. He had altered Ghat opinion, inasmuch as
subsequent experiments on other lines prove its in-
adequacy.
Mr. W. Bass examined by Mr. HILDIYARD—Is agent
to the Messrs. Pickford, the carriers ; they are the
largest carriers in the kingdom. Is agent for all their
traffic from Colnbrook Dale to Plymouth. Is quite
aware of the great inconvenience arising from the gauge
at the Bristol junction of the Gloucester Railway. The
goods brought front Bristol to Gloucester are, oils,
leather, wool, iron, wood, and groceries. The gates of
the Gloucester line are closed two hours before the
Bristol and London gates. This was occasioned by the
great delay for regulating the alteration of the gauge.
Was acquainted st ith Mr. Jones, one of the Directors of
the Gloucester line. lie opposed the adoption of the
broad gauge, but he was outvoted by his brother
Directors. The inhabitants at Gloucester exceedingly
regretted the alteration of the gauges at the junction of
the British and Gloucester lines. The maximum weight
allowed to be carried on the narrow gauge was six tons ;
but there was no limit on the broad gauge.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE—The
broad gauge was a very good one for passenger traffic.
There was fish corning from Torbay to Bristol, which is
oonveyed from that place to Devon. The gates of the
Bristol and Gloucester station are closed two hours be-
fore the gates of the Bristol and London line. The
trains of the former certainly start two hours before the
trains of the latter line. This two hours start was neces-
sary in consequence of the difference of gauge.
This witness was briefly re-examined by Mr. HIL-
DIYARD.

Mr. J. D. Payne examined by Mr. Sergeant WRANG-
HAM—Is manager of the goods traffic on the Birmingham
line. Had been manager of the goods traffic on the
Bristol and Gloucester line, and was well acquainted
with the traffic of that line. There had been an altera-
tion in the gauge of that line. The alteration had occa-
sioned much delay and great inconvenience. The accom-
modation gained by the alteration had been to make
larger shedding. The trade from Bristol to Gloucester
is very little compared to the traffic from Birmingham
to Gloucester. The latter traffic is very great. If the
break of the gauge took place at Birmingham, there
would be 700 tons of merchandise per week conveyed
from the latter place to Gloucester. If it took place at
Bristol, there would be no more than 40 tons per week
conveyed from that place to Gloucester. Made this
calculation from the present amount of treffic
between Bristol and Gloucester. Various claims had
been laid against the Gloucester Company for damage
to goods, and large sums had been paid. The damage
was occasioned by the great delay in transferring the
merchandise ; knew of an instance where the Company
tried to carry 40 or 50 tons of oysters to Manchester so
as to have them in the market by a Whitsun Monday,
that being a great day in Manchester for such a luxury.
—(Laughter.) A special train was put on, but only 10
tons were conveyed in time.
Cross-examined by Mr. TALBOT—That caused a great
disappointment to the lovers of oysters in Manchester,
to be sure they were not such as he (Mr. Talbot) would
like to eat, they were not the primest—(Great laughter)
—but they were not a bad quality. Could not say that
they would have arrived in time if the broad gauge had
been in use ; the delay occasioned by adopting that
gauge on the line would be very considerable.
Captain Laws examined by Mr. Sergeant WRANGTIAM
—ls manager of the Manchester and Leeds Railway
Company. The principal traffic on that railway was
wool and manufactured goods. Bristol was the great
depot for leather ; it was brought from parts surround-
ing Bristol and there warehoused. The retail and whole-
sale dealers went from the various provinces to thatplace
to make their purchases. The trade there in iron was
also considerable. The traffic tlirough the town of
Bristol was comparatively trifling for so large a depot.
Goods were generally conveyed from that seaport to
Wales by water. Steam-boat traffic would be a great
' competitor with a railway from Bristol into Wales.
This would be caused by the cheap mode of conveyance
afforded by steamers and other vessels, for if the latter
conveyed goods at is. 6d. per ton cheaper than a railway
the preference would be given, and vice versa if the
railway were as cheap it would take up the traffic.
Manchester was not supplied with groceries generally
from Bristol; remembered an instance of some loaf-
sugar having been brought there from that port. The
supply of groceries for Manchester came direct from
London. There was a clause in existence limiting the
profit of railway companies to ten per cent. on the
carriage of goods. The clause was introduced by the
late Duke of Sutherland, but it was wholly inoperative
from the fact that ten per cent. was never realised on
goods and tolls for carriage. On passenger traffic and
luggage, there was no limit to profit, as such was not
comprised under the Act. It was, however, in the
power of the Legislature to make such an Act as would
limit the gross profits to ten per cent. It would be a
wise law, and one from which no hardship could arise.
It could be: easily carried, inasmuch as the companies
could be made to show their books, and the result would
be that railway travelling would be generally less exor-
bitant, as the charges would have to be reduced when
the profits were higher.
The witness was briefly cross-examined by Mr.
TALBOT, but nothing of the slightest importance was
elicited.

Mr. Ellis, of Leicester, was then called, but just as his
examination commenced the Committee adjourned at
five o'clock, to twelve o'clock to-morrow.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, May 8.
CROPKILL v. CAMBRIDGE.

In this case Mr. Kindersley, Q.C., with whom was
Mr. Metcalfe, moved the Court, on affidavits for an in
junction on behalf of Mr. Cropkill, proprietor of the
Beverley Iron-works at Hull, against Mr. Cambridge, of
Market I..avington,' Willits, to restrain him from making
or selling any olod-crusher rollers made in imitation of
Mr. Cropkill's patent ones. The defendant had obtained
a patent in October last for a clod crusher similar to the
plaintiff's. The Master of the Rolls granted the injunc-
tion as prayed, the defendant having consented thereto.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Guildhall, May 14.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius before Lord DENMAN and a
Common Jury.)
MARY ANNE PHILLIPS V.:WORSELEY.
Mr. Crowder, :Mr. M. Chambers, and Mr. Char-
Rock appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Cockburn, Mr.
Warren, and Mr. Bovill were engaged fur the defence.
The action was brought to recover compensation in
damages for tho injury which the plaintiff had sustained
by reason of the defendant having broken a promise of
marriage which he made to her. It appeared that the
plaintiff is the daughter of a person who was once the
treasurer of Covent-garden Theatre, but has more re-
cently been the landlord of some three or four public-
houses or taverns in and near the metropolis, of which
the latest was the Swan, in Hungerford-market. He
became unsuccessful in this latter occupation, and was
obliged to give it up, and as he had a large family, six
daughters and one son, the plaintiff, who had become
acquainted with the duties of a barmaid, procured em-
ployment in that situation at some two or three houses,
of which the latest was that of Mr. Doyle, in Chandos-
street, called the Marquis of Granby, where she became
acquainted with the defendant, who is a saddler, and a
person of some considerable property, residing in South
Audley-street. Miss Phillips had entered into some
previous engagement with a person of the name
of Ponder, which, however, was broken off before
her intimacy with the present defendant. An offer
of marriage having been made and accepted, the
parties continued to live upon the footing usual upon
such occasions, until a person called Metcalfe communi-
cated to the defendant some facts concerning the lady,
which statement the defendant conveyed to the plaintiff
herself, declaring at the same time that he believed it to
be true, and that he should put an end to the contract of
marriage accordingly. The plaintiff demanded the name
of her accuser and the particulars of the accusation, but
no distinct answer appeared to have been given to her
upon the subject. It seemed, however, that the indivi-
dual who was said to have been improperly intimate
with her was a Mr. Honey, the husband of the actress
of that name, who had died nine years before the circu-
lation of the report, and whose acquaintanca with Miss
Phillips and her family existed when she was only 14
years old. The efforts of the lady to procure an oppor-
tunity of justifying her conduct were very energetic, as
were her protestations of her] own innocence. The de-
fendant, however, continued inexorable upon the subject
of the marriage, and the present action was accordingly
brought. The declaration was in the usual form. The
defendant pleaded in justification, that after making the
promise in question he discovered that the plaintiff was
a person of loose, unchaste, and immodest character and
conduct; that she had appeared upon the stage of seve-
ral theatres in male and indelicate attire, and that she
had actually had illicit intercourse with a person of the
name of Lowry upon several occasions which were spe-
cifically set forth, and had upon other occasions, and
with other persons, been guilty of improper and indecent
familiarity.
Mr. CROWDER, having stated the case of the plaintiff,
called the fallowing witnesses:—
Charles Jay said that he was a coalmerchant at Black-
wall, and a fishmonger at Hungerford-market. He had
married an elder sister of the plaintiff, and he detailed
some of the circumstances which we have already men-
tioned about the commencement of the acquaintance
between the parties, and the footing upon which they
lived before the breaking off of the engagement. With
regard to the fact of the plaintiff having appeared upon
the boards of some two or three tin atres, the witness
deposed that the defendant upon one occasion told him
that the plaintiff had acknowledged to her lover that she
had been upon the stage, and that he (the defendant)
was perfectly satisfied with her statements and expleam.
tions upon that subject, and that no change in Vs con-
duct or deportment was at all made in consequence of
that information. The witness himself was not aware of
the fact that the young lady had appeared upon the
stage at all. The witness stated, on cross-examination,
that two sisters of the plaintiff and of witness's own
wife were married, but he said that he did not know
whether one of the husbands was a private in the Foot
Guards, and the other a private in the Blues. It was no
business of his to know who his sisters-in-law were
married to. He did not know whether the proposed
marriage of the plaintiff and defendant was known to
the plaintiff's mother, or whether the plaintiff had the
consent of her family for going on the stage.
A person named Humphreys, and another named
Phillips, the brother of the plaintiff, deposed to some of
the facts already mentioned, and they both stated that
they took all possible pains, but without effect, upon, the

part of the plaintiff, to procure from the defendant and
his attorneys the fullest information upon the nature of
the imputation and the source from which it proceeded.
The plaintiff's brother deposed that he offered to release
the defendant from all personal responsibility if he would
only furnish the name of the party by whom the infor-
mation was given.
Evidence was also given to prove that the defendant,
besides his establishment, had received more than 5,0001.
at his father's death, and had other prop.rty worth about
6001. a year.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. COCKBURN addressed the jury for the defence,
and called

George Metcalfe, who said—l am an engraver, living
in Pall-mall. I know the plaintiff and defendant. Had
known plaintiff seven or eight years. She is 27 years of
age. I have frequented the Swan Tavern, kept by her
father. I know Edward Lucas Lowry. He made a
statement to me with regard to Miss Phillips. I men-
tioned it to the defendant. I had not made any corn-
municaton to him before the 7th of February last. I
know nothing of my own knowledge of any impropriety
in the conduct of Mary Anne Phillips. I never saw any
impropriety in the conduct of any person in the Swan,
where she was barmaid, and which was kept by her
father.

Cross-examined—Had been at the house several times
before Mr. Phillips gave it up. I had met Lowry there
several times. I believe he was not a friend of Worseley's.
I had been several times at Doyle's house whilst Miss
Phillips was barmaid there, and whilst the defendant was
paying his addresses to her ; and I had several opportu-
nities of observing her conduct.
Edward Lowry was then called.—He said, I am the
collector of the West Middlesex Waterworks Company.
I know Corby. He told me that Mary Anne Phillips
was going to be married, upon which I made an obser-
vation. Metcalfe afterwards called upon me upon the
subject, and I afterwards saw Mr. Worseley. I after-
wards repeated to Mr. Barlow, the defendant's attorney,
what I had stated to Metcalfe. I first knew Miss Phillips
about eight years ago, when she was barmaid at the
Swan. Our acquaintance continued about a year and a
half, and, terminated about six years ago. My inti-
macy with her was of a peculiar nature. It oc-
curred at the Greyhound, at Greenwich. I was in the
habit of going into the upper bar of the Swan. I have
had intercourse with her in the Swan. The first act of in-
tercourse occurred twelve months after the commence-
ment of our acquaintance, during the continuance of which
the illicit intercourse continued afterwards. The first
act of intercourse took place at the Greyhound, at Green-
wich. I did not ask permission of her father or mother
to let her come out. I never knew them. It was be-
tween eleven and three o'clock. We were home before
six o'clock. I was articled to an architect in Vincent-
square, and am now ready to act as such. I was not
with her at Greenwich more. than once. Once it cc-
curred in a room in the second floor of the Swan. I
am not aware of any other occasion. I can't recollect
if the second act was in the morning, or evening, or
middle of the day. I can't recollect whether it was light
or dark, or whether it was in summer or winter, or what
month it was, from January to December. There was
no bed in the room on the second floor of the Swan. I
don't know it there was a carpet. There were chairs
and a table. The occurrence took place upon the table.
There might have been a glass of sherry and water of
mine upon the table.
To Lord DENMAN—When I first had intercourse with
her I was of opinion that she was not a virgin. I have
known Mr. Corby seven years. My acquaintance with
Miss Phillips ceased about seven years ago. We had
something to eat and drink at the Greyhound.
Corby—l know the defendant, and Lowry, and
Metcalfe. When I heard that the plaintiff and defendant
were going to be married, I mentioned it to Lowry, who
said he was very much surprised and very sorry.
Metcalfe, re-called, stated that Lowry told him that
he (Lowry) had had connexion with Mary Anne Phil-
lips. A fter another communication with Lowry, I then
communicated the fact to the defendant.

Young, an officer of Excise, near Banbury, knew
the house whilst Miss Phillips was serving at the bar.
Saw Lowry there, and a person called Bone. I saw no
personal impropriety of behaviour upon her part, but
her freedom of behaviour with the young men who at-
tended there was not correct.

Hannah Hamlet lived with the Phillips family when
they kept the Jew's Harp, near Albany Barracks. The
house was frequented by soldiers, and two of the daugh-
ters married soldiers. The late Mr. Honey used to be
with them a great deal. Mary Anne Phillips, the wit-
ness, and the whole of the family went into mourning
when Honey was drowned. I never saw Honey's picture
with Miss Phillips. Never saw Honey take her out.
That I know. I never saw Mr. Lowry, and never had
any conversation with Miss Phillips about Lowry.
The witness proceeded to give several other answers,
which were in opposition to the anticipations of the
Learned Counsel by whom she was called. Some dis-
cussion thereupon arose as to the degree in which the
counsel for the defendant was at liberty to contradict the
testimony of his own witness from the written account
which the attorney had made of the witness's examina-
tion at his office. Lord Denman finally permitted a
cross-examination to proceed upon this footing, and
afterwards allowed the attorney himself to enter the
box, and state from the papr all the information which
the witness had originally given him. Part of the state-
ment given to the attorney was, that the witness never
thought there was anything criminal in the conduct of
Miss Phillip,
Morris Levy swore that there was not a better family
in the kingdom than the family of the plaintiff, and that
the plaintiff went upon the stage by the desire of her
mother, the family being in bad circumstances at the
time.

Mr. Ennis, the under-prompter of the Haymarket
Theatre, deposed to the plaintiff's having played the
part of a page in the Fair One of the Golden Locks.
Her salary was 9s. a•week.
John Doyle, the landlord of the Marquis of Granby, in
Chandos-street, said that whilst the plaintiff was re-
ceiving attentions from Mr. Ponder she was taken out
once or twice by the defendant ; and that whilst she was
engaged to the defendant himself she received presents
from a Mr. Laing. The witness remonstrated with her
about such impropriety, but she said that she should take
presents from anybody; but she did not wish the de-
fendant to know of it.. She also expressed a wish that
Mr. Worseley should not be informed of her having been
upon the stage. The witness when Miss Phillips left
his house told her that he should let her know what it
was to have an enemy.
Rebecca Bristow was barmaid with Mary Anne Phil-
lips at the Marquis of Granby. Saw Ponder, Crotch,
and Laing there. Cannot recollect if they paid any par-
ticular attention to her.
This was the case for the defendant.

Mr. CROWDER then replied, after which
Lord DENMAN left the case to the jury, who, after a
little consultation, found a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, 4001.
The case was not concluded until near ten o'clock at
night.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSIOIV-HOUSE.

Mr. E. Smith, of George-street, Mansion-house•street,
was summoned before the Lord Mayor and Sir John
Pirie, under the following circumstances, to answer for
having refused to deliver up the property of Mrs. Jaae
Foster.

Mr. Humphreys, who attended for the complainant,
stated that he believed that Mr. Smith was not impli-
cated in the transaction in sr,ch a manner as to reflect
the least dishonour upon him, but it became necessary
to summon him, as he was the person in whose pos-
session the property actually was, and by the Metropo-
litan Police Act it lay in the power of the magistrates to
adjudicate in the matter. The complaint of Mrs. Foster
was, that the goods which hal been obtained from her
by a Mr. Fitzgerald, had been unlawfully deposited at
the warehouse of Mr. Smith, and that she could not
obtain possession of them.

Mrs. Foster deposed that she lived at No. 4, Asks-
street, Iloxton, and was a widow. She had lived in
Sydney-square, and a Mr. Fitzgerald lodged with her
there. She was requested by Mr. Fitzgerald to give up
that house, and go to live in one in Arundel street,
Strand, and she accordingly took her furniture to that
house, which he took, and became his housekeeper, and
gave him 161. to pay the required advance of rent.
Witness remained in the house from the 29th of Novem-
ber till the 10th of February. An effort was made on
the Ist of February by Mr. Fitzgerald to get her out of
the house. The gentleman had got married, and he
wrote a certificate stating that she was entitled to the
furniture, and that she alone should receive it. She was
taken away to lodgings from the house by Mr. Fitz-
gerald, who told her that he only wanted her to be
quiet for a short time, and then she should have her
property. She could not, in fact, remain any longer in
the house. On the 3d of May her furniture was taken
out of the house and conveyed to the premises of the de-
fendant, where she believed it to be at the present mo-
ment. She had taken a promissory note from Mr. Fitz-
gerald, payable at the rate of 10/. per month, for 501.,
upon going out of the house, but that note had no refe-
rence to her furniture, which was worth between 100/.
and 2001.

A gentleman from the offices of Mr. Cross, solicitor,
asked (for the defendant) whether that note had not
actually been given in consideration of the purchase of
the furniture? The complainant—Not at all. I never
received a shilling, or the value of a shilling, with refe-
rence to my furniture, which was, in fact, the source of
my livelihood. They wished to get me out of the house
as soon as possible.

The defendant's solicitor stated that his client had
purchased the furniture of Mr. Fitzgerald in a regular
tradesmanlike manner, to which no man could possibly
object; and he called witnesses to prove the bond fide
nature of the transaction.
_ _

Mr. John Cavanagh, of No. 19, Tower-street, St.
Martin's-lane, stated that he came to London from Ire-
land for the purpose of being connected with the press.
He v0....s present in February when the complainant left
the house in Arundel-street, No. 35, kept by Mr. Fitz-
gerald. Mr. Fitzgerald offered her, upon the occasion,
two 51. notes, and his note for 501., as an acquittance of
any claims she might have upon him for the furniture,
or anything else. At first she refused the offer, but she
afterwards consented to take it. The bill given by Mr.
Fitzgerald was payable by instalments of 101. each. The
complainant acted as housekeeper to Mr. Fitzgerald.
Cross-examined by Mr. HUMPHREYS—Witness came
to London to be connected with the press. He had been
in no employment since his arrival on the 10th of No-
vember last. He resided with Mr. Fitzgerald in Arun-
del-street the greater part of the time. He had con-
ducted a boarding and day-school in Banagher, in
King's county, and he had been connected with the
press in Ireland. He had resided with Mr. Fitzgerald
at that gentleman's expense, and had been acquainted
with him in Ireland, where they met twice. He did not
know what Mr. Fitzgerald was, but hoped that Mr.
Fitzgerald was a gentleman.

Mr. liumpuitEis—Of what occupation is Mr. Fitz-
gerald ? Witness—lle is of no occupation that I am

aware of. I was given to understand that he was con-
nected with the press. He said so. I have no kno-
lege of that fact. My opinion is that he is not eon 7
netted with the press.
The witness here requested to state that be bad be'
come acquainted with Mr. Fitzgerald in Ireland, when,
that gentleman was canvassing for the establishment °
°`
a newspaper ; and that Mr. Fitzgerald had proposed
him a partnership in the affair, which proposal was
ue ..ht
re.
jetted. He added that the complainant had beso
his Mr. gerald to settle the bust:
ness,interf and heerence was sure Fitz that the note for 501. refer
to the furniture, and every other claim which she °light
have had uon the defendant. at
r. Michael Rafferty, a medical student, residing
No. 35, Arundel-street, Strand, stated that he was pre,7
sent when Mr. Fitzgerald said in the complainanotl
presence that he had given to her a 501. bill and el, h'
in cash for the furniture, and anyi other claims wi't`cd
she might have upon him. The complainant
inticn
something about a claim for breach of promise of miallti
a
riage, but witness understood that: the bill and the
were given in liquidation of all claims. She had begg.rh
of him for God's sake to get her an arrangement t'
Mr. Fitzgerald. they very
Mr. Huinphreys—You say you resided in
whousehat in
ur
niture itshtchecomplainant's
ri furniture we't .
a)
Mr. Humphreys—Are all the rooms "filen is be:dd7.
Witness--No. The kitchen is furnished, and
room is furnished.
Mr. Humphreys—Do you know to what business
Fitzgerald belongs ? Witness—l do not. to'
The defendant stated that he had paid 15/. under pdie
tot upon the seizure of the furniture which Tv4s
posed of to him by Mr. Fitzgerald, to whom be enivtor.
Wined not the slightest doubt the goods belonged. him
Fitzgerald had, in fact, several times applied to to
upon this subject, and had stated, that he veto
r'ssbe.
Ass
establish a newspaper, and that immediate me"-
pay the
indispensable. Mr. Fitzgerald asked him 10/. ihrrr
furniture, but he refused to give more than 75,1 too
and that sum had been agreed upon, and Pi" to
well
Fitzgerald, so that he (defendant) bad paid 751.
a" as well
as the 151. under the protest. The furniture 75b ad
sold by him too, and an attachment had been iflitt
from the
Mr. Mor's Court. ea bnient
Humphreys--It is very easy to get an al-- c
issued from the Mayor's Court. tkier
4:110 LORD MAYOR asked the complainant °beet*,
she had any idea of taking Mr. Fitzgerald 's bill for The
and the 10/. note, as payment for her furniture
r ?
.omplainant—Never, my Lord. t after the
The Solicitor for Mr. -Smith submitted, tbareie ssibhe
evidence which had been heard, it would be 'te°6o 19
to look upon Mr. Fitzgerald in any other light efe.
the owner of the furniture, and that of ceu_er
Smith was justified in the course he had pursue`" to tbo
The LORD MAYOR—We cannot shut our eYe9eheeatit
fact, that it is quite impossible that the ec'n3t' Weld'
could have given, for this bill cf 50/, furniture
was worth in all probability 150/. eiretz
Sir JOAN PIRIE—We consider that that bill Was
for something else. Sfeith
The LORD MAYOR—Our decision is, that t.
.
must give back the furniture to the omP 13'n— ogen_at
'
The Solicitor to Mr. Smith—We shall aPpe
the decision, my Lord.
The LORD MAYOR—Very well. We decide that 513°
must have her furniture.

EARLY CLOSING OF SHOP°.
431.• r tfi
A public meeting, called for the purpose w
some steps to procure the aboltion Of the Pr- Or
systemo of late business hours, so prevalent thronvig
Cuotuctehietmßetoroouplosl,isi‘iwo-arstihmeeldr-slatrsteetn,iglit at la rove
I)r.T hEeppmseientitulgie chair. cavendish-6"Li
.
rldr" log
was very respectably
considerable number of well-dressed ladies bel
pr Theesent.
CHAIRMAN, in opening the business °
meeting, said that he was sure that all who werebicb
n.that room must feel that this was a cause *roe
called for thei- warmest
sympathy.
which appealed to their kindest and 111°5" :00"
feelings, for it only asked that they shoo
do that justice to others, which po
would wish extended to thensselves. ,W;fps of
admirer of legislative interference in clues"—if the
thisi kind, and he was very certain that oven „-troo
ii.egislature of this country passed an Act to-nlua
asidening the hours of labour, that Act would:in so
_o by those persons who were most intereste",,e en'
_d. lug. Their legislature should therefore he the
ht
lightened public mind of the country, and
sure which
of success would be in that degree only, by
ethey acted on that mind by agitation, the
ontinually hoiding up to their mental vision
sto.
banefulHe
effects which resulted from this ela scl•
e would leave to the gentlemen wile /s°Lidetairlb
dress the meeting after him, to give assvvlPe-
statement of their proceedings, and the suee oa
had already attended them ; ad first he sholnuwwletp
the Secretary to report the history. of tea 1
and he trusted that the good they had alre'al hica
would form a foretaste of the greater grpell)
would result from their after exertions.--(v,",trsean
The SECRETARY then entered into a le".0 f tir
statement of the rise, progress, and presPee'si.;
London General Association of all Trades, for
yo-uerxposing thsnetsfleoanlollnaeecnry. of the saying, that
abridgmentb of the hours of business, god on- esem
uerreehan.gseeecessary, id not m 1
pre
because people coo
tb.
ht
h Severalrsw
addred api.
afterwards esse
To to

meeting, and the following resolutions W
mously agreed to : t Oft,
" That the meeting views with the deePesin bog 1
the present protracted system of late hell" basics
ness, as having a tendency to impair thee!), fii the
er'
and mental energies of those who are Ogg .„010Y
same, without advancing the interest of the ". tco
ge
or yielding to any one branch of trade the le'
ceivable benefit." of thl
" That in order to facilitate the just eff°4l..o rem,
who are engaged in the laudable endeavour :501
the grievance contemplated in the firs tion(' 0
athssisistmteheetmingtoptlhedeguetsmiotssetlf to. co-operateinle orido
of its power
desirable an object." for
an
Thanks having been voted to the Chairrt nieetipg
able and impartial conduct in the cbair, toe
separated.
vii§lCS. .
SPORTING INTELLIG.---csoo-0, ib
NEWMARKET, WEDItlf-91:41' .108° ')
Sweepstakes of 50 sevs. each, for fouryear of ; 017 Vin) 1
and fillies Bst 51b. Last three miles of .13•C's4bin5°11/ 3,
Duke of Bedford's Panther, by Liverpool ...... (...
.A.l 0.
Lord Exeter's c by Beiram, out of Amaryllises ....................
Panther waited to the Ab. M. bottom, Nree 0:4)0;
the running at a good pace, and won easy by '''' frotn,h' 000
The Beiram colt broke down two or three strided9,B4,,insc.
Sweepstakes of 10 soya each, for three-yearS4l far 'vv..'
fillies, Bst 41b. T.Y.C. The winner to be sol° 1
ColosnSeul Subs.) (Nat)
Little Finch ................................
...... 1
........... I.''' julia.' 4
1
Mr. Rogers's St. Domino
Lord Orford's cby the (grand Duke out 0 I, On 6
Mr. Francis's b g by Slane out of the Captain
Mr. Maraon'a c by Bentley out of Emma ....... 7...t.0 1•51Snal:,
6 to 4 on Finch, 3 to 1 agst St. DOlllitle, i,_ ths_.,„ooof
Emma colt, and 4 to 1 agst- Lord Orford's c°';o3cr gllia.
gelding and the colt made the running to the op lo Poe
ct'Tvol
heh‘eet,
eirslereltytahcbocoyl
kroctal others
let;
earnsktgcieltlseho
os,efaidaiio withur favourite
t e them,tithen
a‘nydenttheiya foot,
it,..0
vlitb Of
,i•aeCl." subs''
swoya: Celaaer sd.ft, " (31; rel 14
I
added. Last mile and a half of B.C. ' (Pt) g
Mrl'.l7yndee'scl(.3;eiede•?) Mab, 6 yrs, 7st 51b ...;_•-,4'„,.r..5, . 7.14 9,1011.2
Sir J. Hawley's the Bishop of Romford's Co°, ''''' ''../P..
Duke of Bedford's Prologue, 3 yrs, sst 51b ....... •I;c.eortil,
The following also started, but were „OtkeP of °v.-6 fri
Salvin's Alice Hawthorn, aged, gat 91b---,-I},,n-0,. ssalh 98;
Minotaur, 5 yrs, Bst 711; Mr. Howe's 11-,',,,°- gvel4,"
7st 111b—Mr. Death's Misdeal, 6 yrs, 75t.,„;,‘,"-rr's ''„--f v„,%; •
Young Lochinvar, 5 yrs, 7st 51h—Lord -E--1..0i1t -00f—
-5 yrs, Est 131b—Mr. I-lowe's cby Ratcatch4,oo6t ~b, ..
quoise, 4 yrs, Est 111b—Lord George Bentinna :14 ot 4; re:
4 yrs, 6st 31b—and Lord Exeter's Deodara, ,10 1 obli t,'
Betting-5 to 4 agst Alice Hawthorn, ° 0 7,1517, Isr
logue, 7to 1 agst Wee Pet, 7 to 1 agst Queedlo 0
latisiotr'afshseanC.ob,ll,Brotno
blyagtwstoYleonughsLochinvar, all •
F., t •
• Id 3'e" bolts" ' 9
llandicap Plate of 50/. for three yrs 0 tAibita ~ 6 "
Duke of Rutland's Welbeck, 4 yrs, 7st Sib ( " ....".:
Mr. T. B. Charlton's Ruff, 3 yrs, sst 71b ........ . .... ..6,145',
Mr. Phillimore's Skeleton, 4 yrs 7st 41b .....................
The following also started :—Mr. Wiggle 5 yre,du oie,.°l
6st 81b—Mr. Newton's Sister to Ma Mie',, ir. % ,6.-
Francis's Seven's the Main, 4 yrs, 6st--an',:ib. 6 t.„°,i
_,..,
b f, by Redshank out of Lava, 3 vrs, sst• ' you 6_,,an. IP-
Sister to Ma Mie, and 5 to 2 agst Skeleton.
to pa
Two other races were not, run When' 0 '
edr ilia
made up. yr,,Esnalr' o
MANCHESTER RACES.---` --gots, '- 1
Plate of 50/., the second receives 10 sous.
$ 9
and a distance. 003) 1 g •
Mr. Robinson's Wasp, aged, Bst 81b •••(11-* ...•• dr
Mr. Dawsou's Montgomerie, 3 yrs, 7st ........
...
Lord Stanley's Ambition, 4 yrs, Bst Ilb ... : ..... .••
Won by
the BIRTHS. fibs
Chelsea,
On the 11th inst., in Markham-square, 0
slag
Mr. Charles Aspre f
y, tv.e, tb eig
On the 1 lth inst., at Farnborough Vicar b. Fral)
i*
Rev.Holbech, of a son. hanb
On the 14th inst., at West-green, Totten
Warren, of a daughter. of the
a length, cleverly
_0 ..
0.4 ,
MA.R.Ii/ED. Esq., son j ii,
On the 12th inst., Christopher Cookson, 410, n.L',54., 0
late Colonel Cookson, of Neasham Hall, Du' Ellie,
Esq"'
late
Charlotte, second daughter a Charles Ilea°
Harley-street. o 106°111.
At Sydney, Robert Shadforth, Esq., t N.
third daughter of Captain Hollinworth, E. fr.
, Doi'
LIE D. Wes-
., vest
On the 10th of March, at Paramaribo,
01l
pone' iiziea•
Beazley, Esq. Charlotte ,ere F 0 044
On the 22d of April, at Malta, Cbalion. ariael'
daughter of the late Major-General the
ra
_,is 0 ,
On the 3d inst., at Dresden, Charles F 'l'
late Toot"
of Sunbury, Middlesex. of the of S'
On the Bth inst., Mary Raikes, relict
, tighter
Raikes, Esq., of St. Petersburgh• infant
us— got'
On the Bth inst., Frances Elise, the
phittle6
Calvert, Esq., of Hunsdon, Herts. ~iirojeo,‘----
'the
On the loth inst., in Ebury-street, r
~,, woe;
tram, Esq. , St. J°"Ze'rroPv-e. •
On the 12th inst., at Alpha-Pace' raffle, '
Rev. G. .Moultrie, Vicar of Cleobury Mo .., 0(
r '4wlg
------
IWO „0. 1
of
fifll
Loudon : Printed and Published by -- afacet,opty
Strand, in the Precinct of the Save.),
No. 112, Strand, Printer. at The Sys in- the '
Bliddleseg, Wednesday, MAY 14, 1844. •