The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-25 00:00:00

TEM SUN, LONDON-, WEDNESDAI EVENING, JUNE 25, mit

•••••••••••...... _ .
patiY,E orl d.) whole capital of that Company, the atmospheric line
includ .?d, was 1A200,0031. ; the last dividend was Os., the'av,rage
. divide ail Gs. on the whole of the paid.:up capital. The cost of the
locomotive powe; was Is. 6p. per mile, and the rates and taxes
2/. '2E4. 4d. per mile.
Tb a Committee then adjourned till to.morrow at twelvd. '

GROUP X.
craivirazinGz AND LINCOLN LINE.

'Mr. Robert Hubbard, editor a the Smillifield Reporter, was the
that witness ca'led this day at the sitting of the Committee. He
produced returns of the number of sheep, cows, and other live
stc ck brought to' Smithfield market frem the various breeding
counties, in each year, for the last fourteen years. It had been
his business for that time to attend that market regularly, and make
tho se returns (Jr the information of. the public through h:s paper,
and certainly not with any view to forwarding the Cambridge
and Lincoln. Railway scheme, or giving evidence upon
it, or for any other. Witness had also had
means of ascertaining the quantity of slaughtered
meat brought to the principal London markets in a year,
namely, the Newgate and Leadenhall markets. The average was
absut 130 carcases of beet; 1,200 of mutton in each week, from
Yorkshire and Scotland; but in the present year this number had
been greatly exceeded, the number of sheep being 3,000 in one
week, of which 1,000 came from Lincolnshire.
Cross.examined by Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE—There was no fat
stock brought to the Islington market. That market has been
closed about six years. Has seen a good many lean beasts at the
ers there, about five or six years ago, as many as 300
Had taken care to get his information as to the arrivals of, stock
at market, from the salesmen and the drovers elso ; is quite
sure of that. Did not apply to all of the drovers. Does not know
many of them by name.
By Mr. LANE—One of the parties who had been engaged in
snaking out the traffic tables with Mr Parkes was next examined,
and he corroborated that gentleman's evidence generally. His cross.
examination did not elicit any evidence of importance
The witness was not cross.examined at any length, and when
his evidence had concluded the Committee adjourned.

House. This was the ~t;cinpt to cart-) narrow
gatfge in the north of.. Enghtild—he woul-1 not
which-was the )-r_st gang. ---pilher broad-or narrow wollid

do very well, but he thought the opinion of the hest i-
Deers should be tak n upon thepeint, which was the best
gauge before it came into g' ral operation, so that a
uniform pract'ce might be adopted. The Committee
could likewise report where • tee line of demarcation
could best be placed, so that both gauges might not.be
mixed, which would subject the conve' ante of goods and
passengers to great delay, expense, danger, -and incon-
venience. In the eastern c.enitie,, in Kent, Surrey, and
Sussex, the narrow gauge prevailed, and were they to
introduce the broad gauge into those districts ? •
Mr. MARK 'PHILLIPS seconded the motion. lie
had felt great difficulty in deciding on • the question
which was yesterday before the II Luse.. The C; emniteee
on the Bills which had been before the House yesterday
had been called upon to decide t h;• question of the gauges.
Incidentally it was a most embarrassing subject fur a
Committee to have to decide apo, and the Committee
ought not to be held -te have denied in favour of the
broad gauge against the narrow, -when the question
enly caine before therri incidentally, an f they bad merely
decided that ore line of railway was better adapted
to the requirements of a •eartieular district
than anether. It would he a matter for great regret if
that should he considered to have decided the question
of gauges. It appeared to him that the motion of his
Hon. Friend- for a Commissien to examine the cetes!ioe
was a most a ise one. They %stinted something to guide
them in the consideration of this important question.
He did not think that a Committee of the lleu,e of •
Cot:amens was .a proper tribunal fur its censidera-ien—
a Cemndsrlien would be a much better one. Great
inconvenience would arise from the admixture f gangts
in the .Midland Counties, and for that reason he had
voted in favour of the narrow gauge line to Rugby.
• He considered the question a meet embarrassieg one to
be left to the decision either of Committee s or of the
House, anti it was highly desirable, therefore, that the
proposed commission of inquiry should be appointed.
Sir G. CLERK would not obj• et to the -appointment
of, the preposed commission, because the question had
now assumed so mucll importance, that it was become
abselutely necessary that it should be submitted to the
decision of some tribunal, the decision of which would
carry weight with the country. There was one
point, hey.vev, r, kid] he would whsh to sul,m4 to the
censiderstion of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, who had
brought- fore ard the motion, and that was whether it
would not to xpedient to withdraw that part of the re-
solution which directed the commission to consider how
far it may be practicable to reduce all the
geuges to one uniform gauge. • That part .of
the resolution was calculated to
,produce unne-
cessary. alarm. liowever desirable it might hare
been at first to ha •::: had all the railways laid dean upon
one uniform _gauge he believed, that now it woul:t be
impracticable. It would be impossible to oblige a COM..
piny who had led down their, either. upon the 7 foot
or on the. 4 foot Si inch gauge to adopt now the other
• gouge or seme intermediate gauge between the two.
It was not necessary to prefer the adoption of one gauge
more than the ether, and, in fact, it was at present im-
possible to say that it would be expedient, considering
the vast number of railways that were now in progress,
to lay .down any definite law on t:.e. subject. the
gauges on existing railway s. were to be changed, it would
necessarily lead to an alteration in the structure of wag-
gons and carriages, and thus an increasing expense
would be entailed on the various railway companies. lie
,did not consuter that the superiority of one gauge over
another was after all a matter of very great importance,
He should liave 'no objection Whatever to the proposition
of .the Gentleman, if it was considered how far it
night be practicable to re-organise existing railways.
Mr. S. WORTLEY quite agreed with his lion.
Frieed and also with the Right Hoe. Baronet, that this
question had, in efikt, been already settled. The enor-
mous expense that would be entailed on the country by
changing existing guages, and the general inconvenience
that would result would induce him to leave the
matter as it now stood. He trusted also that the
llonournble Member for Stockport would not persist in
the terms of the motion of which he had given notice,
but would be satisfied with the question as it had been
already decided. He trusted, however, that as the ap-
portunity had been afforded for further inquiry into the
prinCiple of the belied and narrow gauges some general
pito fer the public convenience should be definitely
adopted before the construction of any futu: e railway was
coinmenc. d

,Mr. BARING quite agreed in what had fallen from
the Honourable Gentleman who has just sat doWn, es-
pecially that which was contained in -the latter part of
his observatious. He confessed that he was very un-
willing to interfere with the public convenience to the
extent to which this alteration from ~he railway gauge
would lead. lie would admit that it was a
great principle, and one that ought to be decided be-
lore any other railway was formed.
Mr. RICARDO thought certainly, before any Of the
earthworks of new railways were begun, it was necessary
to ascertain %%hat the gauge should be. Willi great
resp..ct for the. Hen. Gentleman and the Right lion.
Baron( t, he must say that the object to be attained was
the permute nt advantage of the country. Whmev, r
might be the result, great inconvenience must be ex-
perienced wherever the two gauges sh...eld meet ; and it
was absolutely re cessary that some rule should be
adopted for avoiding the great impediment which was
daily felt from the uncertainty in which the question
was now left.

Lord G. SOMERSET was willing to conc,de the
motion of the Lion. Member for Stockport, and trusted
the Commission would arrive at such a conclusion as to
wake it reasoni.b.c fur them. toj•all upon all future rail-
ways' to adopt one particular gauge•. _ _

Str, WAIID w..s. glad Gov—et-11in ent had conceded the
tnotion of his llon. Friend, ta-causit he thought it was
highly desirable that the question of gaugr, setting aside
the contest betwet n the two rival Companies, should be
'referred to an impartial tribunal, whose decision should
'guide the m !Or the future. In his opinion, neither the
bread nor the narrow gauge was a security against acci-
dents, nor did he think sped had any thing to do with
it. for trains had travelled at the rate of 60 tulles an hour
wit tout accident or inconvenience, while the majority of
'the accidents which had already taken place, had occur-
red to what were t‘rmi-d slow trains.

Mr. SHAW thought that if any Gentleman would
take the trouble of reading over the evidence taken be-
fore the Committee, a hien was commonly called " The
Broad G4uge Committee," h.! would find greatditliculty in
arriving at any certain conclusion,—(Hear, I ear.) He
believed that 111 ! " gu }go"
of live feet three
inches, which was ad,pt. d in Irel old, would be the
be=t as a uniform guage.—(llear, ar.) He thought
the inquiry was worthy the attention of the Govern•
went.—(llear.) ;le hop. d they would undertake it, and
carry it on lai.oriously.—(Ht ar, and a laugh.)
Mr. HAY I EH could not anticipate any advantage
from the inquiry, but on the contrary thought that it
would 1. ad to great inconvenience.
Mr. COBDEN said, in explanation, that the object of
the imptiry was not to find a new guage, but to establish
some uniform p:-iliciple.
The motion was then agreed to.
Lord NEWRY presented a petition from the county
of Down, complaining uf the expenses that were in-
curred in building union workhoust s in Ireland, and
praying that a remedy might be applied to the evil.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented a petition,
signed by the
merchants and manufacturers of Manchester, praying
the House to address the Crown fur the purpose of
having the treaty entered into by the Government 01
Buenos Ayres to give free access to the River Plata
enforced.

A petit on was then presented against the abolition of
tests in the Scotch universities.
Sir It. PEEL said that he presented a petition the
other niglit in favour of the colleges about to be insti-
tuted in Ireland, which he stand to be from London. It
was not from L-andon, is came from Dublin.
LUNATIC PAUPERS BILL.
This Bill p7l,ted thmugh Committee. The Report
was brouL;ht on and received, and ordered to be printed.

Member for Perth would withdraw his cppoition, and
Alt least allow the report of the Bil to be brought up.
Alit HOME DRUMMOND was understomi to a.,.r•nt,
and the report was aceorilirigly brought up. The Home
then went into Committee on the Bill, and on the third
effuse lit ing read,

Mr. Gig-S ON CRAIG rose to address the House, but
from the exe2ssire noise in the Housc, and the low tone
of the Hon. Member, his remarks were wholly inaudible
in the gallery.

„ .. .
TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZErI"I'E.--
DIVIDENDS DECLARED.
L. C. Lecosne, merchant, Fenchurch-buildines, Fenehurch-
, srreet—first div. of ls. itr&d. in the pound, any 'Wednesday, at
1 the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman-street.
R. Almond, coal dealer, Orreil, Lancashire—second div. of
53. in the pound, June 26, and any following Thursday, at
the office of Mr. Cazenoce, Liverpool.
.1. Johnson, merchant, Liverpool—first div. of 3d. in the
ground, June 26, and any following Thursday, at the office of
Sir. CazPnove, Liverpool.
T. Wilson and W. Wilson, merchants, Liverpool—div. of
4s. 20. in the proud. June 25, and any following Wednesday,
at the office of Mr. Morgan, Liverpool.
J. Ilake, edge tool manufacturer, Sunderland—first div. of
103. in the pound, June 25, and any following Wednesday,
at the office of Sir. Waklrty, New castle-upon- Tyne.
I. Hagg, Colchester—first div. of 4s. 6d. in the pound,
June 25, and any following Wednesday, at the office of Mr.
Belcher, Coleman-street. .
W. Atty. ater, dyer, Devonshire-street, Queen-square—first
div. of Is. in the pound, June 25, and any following Wednes.
day, at the office of Mr. Belcher, Coleman-street.
T. Wasson, builder, Liverpool-read—first and final div. of
I ?id. in the pound, June 25, and any followne Wednesday, at
the office o• Mr. Follett, Strnbrook.court, Ita-inglial;-street.
V— Oxborrnw, pawnbroker, Stockport—r:iv. of 20s. in the
pound, June 25, and any following lVerlncsday, at the office of
Sir. Follett, Sambrook-court. Ba.inghall street.
1)1 VIDENDS.
At the Court of Bankruptcy. Basinghall-street.
W. Wii'd.ams, wheelwright, Gondburst, Kent, July 15, at
eleven—G. Barron, builder, Davies-street, Berkeley-square,
July 21, at elev.n -J. Stevens and R. 11. W. Drummond.
road contrnctors, Mile-end, July 21, at twelve.
In the Country. .
•
J. Hill and I'. Hill, merchants, Wisbeach St. Peter's, Isle of
Ely, July 16, at eleven, at the Birmintham District Court—
J. Lamb and T. Lamb. enrv'ineers, Kidder minster, July 16, at
one, at the Birmingham District Court—W. B. Briddick,
dea'er in iron, Durham, July 16, at half-past eleven, at the
Ns•vveastle-upon-Tyne District Court—J. Briddick, bookseller,
Durham, July 16, at half-past one, at the Newcastle-upon-
Tyne District Court—W. Carr and J. C. Carr, merehants,
Sunderland, July 16, at half-past twelve, at the N. vveastle-
upon-Ty ne District Court—C. Martin, lir en-draper. Durham,
July 16, at eleven, at the Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court
—J. Risdan, bookseller, Exeter, July 17. at one, at the Exeter
District Court—E. Pritchard, wire merchant, Liverpool, July
18, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court—R. Abram,
merchant, Liverpool, July IS, at twelve, at the Liverpel Dis-
trict Court—E. E. Robinson, grocer, Wolverhampton, July
18, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court.
CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the
contrary, on the day herein-mentioned.
W. J. Taylor, grocer, High-street, Camden-town, Ju'y 16
—J. Brain, copper plate dealer, Winchester-place, Pentouville.
July 16—W. Westrup and T. M. Cocksedge; millers, New
Crane, Shadwell, July 16 —T. Johnson, sen., and W. Johnson,
bankers, Romford, July I6—A. H. Chambers, sen.. banker,
New Bond-street, July 16—R. Barker, druggist, Manchester,
July 16—J. Gerrard, cotton spinner, Marsden, Yorkshire;
July I7—M. Humphries, joiner, Manchester, July -17—W.•
Gadsby, jun., joiner, Manchester, July 18---J. Livinvonond
T. Buttam, plumbers, Manchester, July lii----Tr Alillward.
Meting' amshile, July 15—B. Webb, cheesemonger, South-
wark, July 15—R. G. Ward and J. Perry; meat sale: ens
Newgate-street, July 15—J. Weightman, whartinger, North-
ampton, July 15—T. S. Dodd, innkeeper, Liverpool, July 15
—E. E. Robinson, grocer, Wolverhampton, July 15—J. W.
Sprague, grocer, Poole, Dorsetshire, July 15—G. Robinson,
surgeon, Huddersfield, July 15.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
A. Willis, J. S. Willis, H. 11. Willis, and A. Willis, jun.,
merchants, Crosby-square, City—A. Willis, J. S. Willis, and
H. H. Willis, insurance brokers, Crosby-square, City—:J.
Leach, sen.. J. Leach, and J. Leach, jun.. worsted mann-
facturers, Bingley, Yorkshire —W. Elstotr and J. 'Lidatone,
builders, Old Bailey—J. Davies and J. •Fallosys, cotton waste
spinners, Stockport—S. Bath and P. J. Bolton, coal mer-
chants, High-street, Wapping—S. Holdsworth •and W. R.
Milner, surgeons, Wakefield—A. C. Harris and T. Bell, mer-
chants, Alexandria—T. Hunter and C. Smith, tea dealers,
Bishopwearmouth—H. Raine and R. Scholes, plumbers, Bury,
Lancashire—W. Halliday and Rhodes, worsted spinners, Heck-
mondwike—J. Turner and C. Turner, leather sellers, Church-
street, Bethnal-green—E. Withinshaw and J. Withinshaw,
leather dealers, Shelton, Staffordshire—C. •,Colledge and S.
Henningham, engravers, Warwick—G. Sangster and J. F.
Melliss, cotton factors, Queen-street, Cheipside—E. Mere-
dith and C. Parker, linen drapers, Liverpool—C. Bedells and
W. Bedells, manufacturers of elastic and vt oven fabrics, Leicester •
—E. W. Coulborn and R. 0. Coulborn, fustian manufacturers,
Manchester—R. Barlow and B. Edwards, ironmasters, Wrex-
ham, Denbighshire—J. Taylor and 'F. Taylor, gold beaters,
Kirby-street, Hatton•garden—R. Dehenhatu and A. A. De-
benham. drapers, Upper Clapton—D. Gill and T. Wainwright,
iron founders, Leeds—J. Brittain and D. Smales, hop mer-
chants, Hull.

SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
J. Young, merchant, Leith, June 30 and July 21, at one,
at the chambers of Mr. Wilson, Leith.
J. Stenhowe, brewer, Dunfermline, June 30 and July 21,
at twelve, at the Spire Hotel, Dunfermline.
A. Whamond, grocer, Dun,lee, July 1 and 22, at three, at
the British Hotel, Dundee.

COWES? I. W., JUNE, 24.—A public meeting of
the landowners and rate-payers of the Isle of Wight has been
called by the Deputy- Sheriff of the island, to be holden at the
Guildhall, Newport, on Thursday next, at three o'clock, which, It
is expected, will be numerously attended, as the proposers of the
railway, it is expected, will state their plans, and try to gain the
islanders over to them. Her Majesty leases Osborne, with her
suite, at two o'clock to-morrow.

Ijoa STEALING.—The Commons' Committee on
the Dog-stealing Prevention Bill is fixed for Wednesday text
(this day). The Bill has been printed, and we really see
nothing in its various clauses to prevent lion. Members attend-
ing in their places, and giving it their support by a majority
that may have its influence on the Upper House. —John Bul2.
The clauses, we hope, will be of such a nature as to check the
system of extortion; for whether we be threatened by a mis-
creant, and 'r the avowal of stealing our dogs or defaming our
characters, money is the object.

The election for the county of Edinburgh is fixed
for today, when Sir John Hope, Bart,, of Pinkie House, will, it is
expected, be returned without opposition in the room of Mr.
Ramsay.

LAW INTE L LIG ENC E.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER. June 24.

;Nisi Prins Sittings, before the Loan CHIEF BARON ancr;Special
Jury.)
LACY V. BUNN.

This was an action by Mr. W. Licy, the comedian, to recover
damages from Mr. Bunn, the lessee of Covent-garden Theatre, for
the breach of an engagement under which the defendant undertook
to permit the plaintiff to perform the principal parts in light comedy,
and the plaintiff' undertook to enact those characters at Covent.
garden Theatre during the season of 1843.
Mr. M&RTIN (with vhom were Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Saun.
ders) opened the plaintiff's case. The real question that was to
be submitted to the jury was, whether the part of Ferdinand, in
The Tempest, was light comedy or not, and ridiculous as this ques-
tion might seem in the first instance, it became in this case one of
importance to the members of the theatrical profession, and espe-
cially to the plaintiff. Mr. Lacy had undertaken an engagement
at Covent-garden at a very small salary (we understood lit. a week)
with the understanding that he was only to be called upon to per-
form the principal parts in light comedy. The engagement
was entered into on the 9th of December, 1842, but Mr. Burin
did not begin to perform on his own account until January
in the next year. Mr. Charles Kemble resigned the manage.
went early in ascember, and from that time until Christmas, .
the performers acted for their own pri.fit and at their own
risk ; but in January, 1843. Mr, Buhn's management com-
menced. The first part performed by Mr. Lacy, under his agree.
ment with Mr. Bunn, was a character in a piece called The High-
wayman, written by Mr. Morton, a dramatic author of reputa-
tion. The plaintiff was next called upon to perform Ferdinand in
The Tempest, which he declined, upon the ground that it was not
a character within the terms of his engagement. Mr. Bunn in-
sisted that the character of Ferdinand fell within the description
of light comedy, and upon this misunderstanding refused to suffer
Mr. Lacy to complete his engagement. The consequence of this
was, that Mr. Lacy not only lost his salary for the season, but also
was deprived of the advantage of being admitted upon the
' Theatrical Fund, which he would have been entitled to had he
completed a second engagement at Covent garden. In support of
the plaintiff's case it was proposed to call many performers of great
eminence, who would give their opinion as to wh wet e properly ca.led
"light comedy" parts. If the jury had visited the theatres occa.
sionally, they were probably not Lnacquainted with the characters
of Charles Surface, in the School for Scandal, Captain Absolute,
in the Rivals, and Lord Trinket, in the Hunchback. these
were properly described as " light comedy." Characters of this
description were usually performed at the great theatres by Mr.
Jones, Mr. Charles Mathews, Mr. Vining, and Mr. Wrench.
Some of these gentlemen would be called before the jury,
to state whether such a part as that of Ferdinand fell within
the range of their line of characters. There were in every theatre
a class of characters which properly fell to the "juvenile tra-
gedian " and the " walking gentleman. "—(A laugh.) Ferdinand,
he understood, war always performed either by the juvenile tra.
gedian or the walking gentleman, and the only exception to this
rule was in the case of Mr. Charles Kemble, who belonged to a
gifted family, and was himself a performer of great versatility.
The Learned Counsel then read Arie:'s description of Ferdinand,
and other passages from The Tempest, to show that Ferdinand was
a grave and serious character, and not one well adapted to a light
comedian.

Before the plaintiff's witnesses were called, Mr. Jsavts, who
appeared fur the defendant, appeared to the Lard Chief Bsron to
say if he did not think this cause would be better disposed of else-
where, though by so doing he felt he was somewhat marring the
amusement of the Court and the puklic.

The Loan CHIEF BARON certainly doubted if this was the fittest
place or the fittest tribunal for deciding whether Ferdinand was
light or heavy comedy. He did not know how it was to be proved
to the jury, unless Mr. Martin produced one performer who would
enaet the part in the most lugubrious tones, whilst another would
perform it with the greatest vivacity, and then the jury might judge
which was nearest to nature.—(Laughter.)
Mr. MARTIN said the plaintiff was most anxious to adopt any
suggestion from the Lord Chief Baron, and it was finally agreed
(apparently much to the disappointment of a crowded Court),
that the case should be referred to a gentleman at the bar, on the
usual terms.