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

PITJIISDAY EVENING, MAY 15, 1845.

and amount petition the court; or if the court ex
officio interferes for the purpose, the insolvent may
be called upon to give a statement of his circum-
steeces, and the court will then determine whether,
regard being had to the position of the insolvent. and
his family, any, and if any, what payment shall he
made by he insolvent in respect to his former iiebili-
ties. By this regulation the honest but unfortunate
debtor will be left unfettered to pursue his avocations
fur the benefit of himself and his fetidly ; but if an
ample inheritance should devolve on him, if large
legacies should be bequeathed to him, if a full tide of
prosperity from any quarter should set in upon him,
then, and not till then, will he be required to do by
the court, if not done spontaneously, what every
man, actuated by right feeling, would do of his own
accord.
But the dishonest insolvent who upon inquiry shall
be placed in the fourth class, that of fraudulent insol •
vents, or (if a trader) that of fraudulent bankrupts,
will no longer find that while depriving a man of his
property by that which comes within the technical
description of larceny, is highly penal, depriving him
of much more important amounts by swindling,
passes with impunity. An insolvent even of this de-
scription will be under the protection of the court, so
as to be at full liberty to place himself in a course of
honest industry, but will be obliged to submit yearly
statements of his proceedings to the court, showing
whether, after every reasonable allowance for his sup-
port and that of his family, after affording him every
encouragement in his efforts to redeem his character,
something, and what, shall be done in the way of re-
paration to those whom his misconduct has injured.
By the present bankrupt laws, no such favourable
opportunity for restoration of character, as is provided
in other countries, is open to the English bankrupt.
In the case of gross fraud, the only punishment that
can be awarded is to withhold the certificate for a
time, or to refuse it altogether ; to send an offender out
of court with an incapacity to hold any property, or
receive the benefit of any exertions which he may
make. The uncertificated bankrupt can neither be
assisted by his friends, nor enter into business for him-
self; he is, moreover, constituted a pest and a trap, to
whom, if persons, however ignorant of his position,
entrust any property, that property is immediately
liable to be seized upon, and wholly absorbad for the
benefit of the creditors under his bankruptcy. In
contrast with this plan stands the proposed system of
encouraging an insolvent to exert himself to redeem
his character, and to repair,Jf prosperity should attend
his labonys, to some extent, the losses which he has
occasioned.
It is, besides, proposed that certain disabilities
should attach to the dishonest insolvent, such as dis-
qualification from being in any list of voters, or on
any burgess roll, or acting as justice of the peace, or
executor or trustee, or in cases of deeper culpability
from acting as attorney, solicitor, or notary, or factor,
or salesman, while in cases of directly criminal con-
duct, as embezzlement, fraudulent conveyances, &c.,
the delinquent is to be liable to imprisonment by the
court ; and in cases of more flagrant delinquency to
ex officio prosecution before a criminal tribunal.
The certificate of the assignee, &c., as to which class
of insolvents the debtor belongs to, is to be subject to
appeal to the court, either by the insolvent, or by any
creditor for more than 20/., and the court to have

power to overrule s;11 certificate. The court is also,
on the consideration of special circumstances, to have
power to mitigate any of the disabilities, &c., by spe-
cial order, stating the causes of such relaxation.
The remaining provisions of the Bill embrace the
amendment of the law, in respect to the property of
persons dying insolvent, of fraudulent preferences, of
gifts made by an insolvent, of marshalling claims on
an insolvent's estate, under the three heads of privi-
leged credits, unprivileged credits, and postponed
credits ; altering, among other things, the law which
at present virtually makes the creditors of an in-
solvent who has defrauded the Crown, pay the pe-
nalties which his misconduct has incurred, of liens,
of reputed ownerships, and of warrants of attorney
and cognovits.
It is also proposed to empower the Court of In-
solvency to take cognizance of disputed partnership
accounts ; in respect of which there is at present
no remedy except by filing a bill in equity, a tedious
and expensive process, wholly inapplicable to small
traders, and attended with ruinous expense and delay
in concerns of greater magnitude ; and which remedy,
imperfect as it is;can only be obtained upon a disso-
lution of partnership.
These various regulations are all classed under dis-
tinct heads, so that reference is easy to any point on
which information is required.
Such appear to ba the general provisions of a sys-
tem. substituting for laws, which at present are a
reproach to our jurisprudence, a series of regulations
calculated to improve the remedy of the creditor, and
at the same time to ameliorate the condition of the
unfortunate debtor, and to make it the interest both
of debtors and creditors to act in conformity with the
principle of equity and justice.

SINGULAR CASE OF CONCEALED

PREGNANCY.
Yesterday afternoon Mr. Wakley, M.P., held an inquest
at the New Rosemary Branch, Shepherdess Cottage, New
North-road, Islington, on the body of Elizabeth Field,
aged twenty-one. The inquest excited much interest in
the neighbourhood, and was held in consequence of a
report that the deceased had been brutally treated by her
paramour, that her accouchenaent had been prematurely
caused by medicine, and that her medical attendant was
not a regular practitioner. Mary Anne Field, the
mother of deceased, stated that her daughter, who was a
spinster, worked of fringe making at Mr. Watson's, Fore-
street. On Thursday she left home in the morning for
Mr. Watson's in excellent health, and was brought home
in a cab very ill in the afternoon. She complained of a
pain in her side. Witness suspected she was pregnant
and in labour, which she denied. Mr. Hamilton, a sur-
geon, was sent for, who said that her swollen appearance
arose from wind, and ordered her to be bathed with poppy
heads, and also prescribed medicine. He repeated his
visit in the evening, accompanied by Mr. Dow, who also
prescribed for her. She continued to get worse until last
Thursday night, when she suddenly gave birth to a still-
born child. About half.past three o'clock on Saturday
morning she said she was sleepy, and closed her eyes,
and shortly afterwards expired without a groan. Mrs.
Watson deposed that when deceased came to work
on Thursday she was very ill, and that she at-
tributed her illness to a kick she received from the man
with whom she lived, on the previous Sunday, and of
whose cruel treatment she had constantly before com-
plained. Witness, suspecting that she was near her con-
finement, had her conveyed home in a cab. Mrs. Field,
on being recalled, said she never had the slightest idea of
her daughter's pregnancy until Thursday, and was not
convinced of it until the child was suddenly born. Mr.
James C. Dow, Doulan -road, Islington, was a graduate
of St. Andrew's, but had not an English diploma. He
accompanied Mr. Hamilton, who was not a practitioner,
but had finished his studies, to deceased's lodgings, on
Thursday night. She was then in extreme danger, but
evinced no symptoms of approaching parturition. She
complained of a pain in her side, and suffered from
a palpitation of the heart and a difficulty of
breathing, which almost suffocated her. He bled
her, and prescribed sulphate of magnesia, tartaric emetic
digitalis, calomel and opium. He attended her on Fri-
day and Saturday, but ascertained that, contrary to his
orders, rum had been given her, which threw her back.
lie wa; suddenly summoned to attend her at ten o'clock
when he found that she had given
sev, n months' child. Having at •
he left her comparatively comfort-
able,bot lnr tdliedt
but was informed on the next morning that she died
Saturday
o ai
lesit.ill
-aibgtoihtrstn:
during the night. Mr. Bateman, surgeon, 6, Islington-
green, performed a post modem examination, and found
that she died of an inflammation of the pleura and lungs.
Nothing could have saved her life. Her medical treat-
ment was most excellent. Mr. Dow said that the narrow
crowded room in which deceased died was most un-
wholesome. He found one person lying at her feet, and
another at her side. Several persons expressed their
horror at the small size of the room, which was most
wretchedly ventilated, and was occupied by several indi-
viduals. Verdict—" Natural death."

RAILWAY CirMMITTEES.
(YESTERDAY.)

Gro V.
NOTTINGHAM AND LINCOLN EXTENSION LINE.
( Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
The other clauses proposed by the promoters were agreed
to seriatim.
Mr. HILL then, for the Corporation of Nottingham, pro-
posed the insertion of certain clauses to protect their interests,
which were all, with some verbal alterations, also agreed to.
Mr. HILL said that he had also, on the part of the Navi-
gation Company, to propose the insertion .of several clauses,
but first he shoulii call several witnesses to show the injury
which would be done to the interests of those persons who
used the canal by the narrowing of the water-way and
towing path, and the lowering of the headway orthe bridges.
Four or five witnesses were then called to support this
view, and
Mr. HILL then proposed a clause retaining. the present
width of the canal and towing-path, and the height of head-
way. 11 feet 6 inches, instead of 10 feet 6 inches, as proposed
by the Railway Company.
Mr. AUSTIN replied.
The CtrattntAN said that the Committee were of opinion
that 11 feet should be the headway of the bridges, and that
the span proposed by
the Railway Company should be
adopted.
The Committee then adjourned till twelve to-morrow.

(Group F.)
LONDON, WORCESTER, AND SOUTH STAFFORD-
SHIRE RAILWAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. WCONNELL examined by Mr. Sergeant WRANG-
LIAM.—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 transhipmeut
guage, many persons being separated from their friends
for the remedying passengers, from the break of
who happen to get into the carriage first. Every plan
of this difficulty was open to great
objection.
Cross-examined by Mr. Cocanumr.—Was acquainted
with the Birmingham station, There is a large staff of
porters at that station, but not for the purpose of trans
ferring 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
opiniQn that the broad gauge engine would be of great
advantage. He had altered that opinion, inasmuch as
subsequent experiments on other lines prove its in-
adequacy.
Mr. W. Bass examined by Mr. llmmtvano—ls agent
to the Messrs. Pickfurd, 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 from Bristol to Gloucester are, oils,
loather, 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 with Mr. Jones, one of the Directors of
the Gloucester line. He oppssed 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 coming from Torbay to Bristol, which is
conveyed 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 a
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 traffic
between Bristol and Gloucester. Various claims had
been laid against the Gloucester Cumpany 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.
—(Lapghter.) 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 WRANGTIA3I
manager of the Manchester and Leeds Railway
Company. The principal traffic on that railway was
wool and manufactured goods. Bristol wa3 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 through 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. Gd. 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 wero 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'eloek 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 Lavington, Wilts, to restrain him from making
or selling any clod-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 Prins 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 for the defence.

The action was brought to recover compensation in
damages for the 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 llungerford-market. He
became unsuccessful in this latter occupation, and was
obliged to give it up, and as he had a largo 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 acquaintance 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 following 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
r‘gard to the fact of the plaintiff having appeared upon
the boards of some two or three theatres, 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 explana-
tions upon that subject, and that no change in his 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 llumphreys, and another named
Phillip:, 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-

illation was given.
Evidence was also given to prove that the defendant,
besides his establishment, had received more than 5,000/.
at his father's death, and had other prop !rty worth about
6001. a year. . .

This'sva3 the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Cocxnunri addressed the jury for the defence,
and called

George Metcalfe, who said—l ain 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 oc-
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 if 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 ol' opiniou 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. After 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 Penman finally permitted a
cross-examination to proceed upon this footing, and
afterwards allowed the attorney himself to enter the
box, and state from the paper 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 Phillips.
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 93. 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.
MANSION-HO USE.

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. Jane
Foster.
Mr. Humphreys, who attended for the complainant,
stated that he believed that Mr. Smith was not impli-
cated in the transaction in such 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 had 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, Aske-
street, Hoxton, and was a widow. She had lived in
Sydney-square, and a Mr. Fitzgerald lodged with her
there. She was requested by Zr. 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 101. 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 mo 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 bona 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 was 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 5/. 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
after wards consented to take it. The bill given by Mr.
Fitzgerald was payable by instalments of 10/. 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. Ile 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. HUNPHRETS-Of what occupation is Mr. Fitz-
gerald ? Witness—Lie is of no occupation that lam

aware of. I was given to understand that he was co
nected with the press. He said so. 1 have no know-
n-
ler of that fact. My opinion is that he is not
con-
nected with the press.
The witness here requested to state that he had be-
come acquainted with Mr. Fitzgerald in Ireland, when
that gentleman was canvassing for the establishment of
a newspaper ; and that Mr. Fitzgerald had proposed to
him a partnership in the affair, which proposal was
jested. He added that the complainant had besoug re-
ht
his interference with Mr. Fitzgerald to settle the buil
nes,:, and he was sure that the note for 501. referred
to the furniture, and every other claim which she might
have had upon the defendant.
Mr. Michael Rafferty, a medical student, residing at
No. 35, Arundel-street, Strand, stated that he WAS pre-
sent when Mr. Fitzgerald said in the complainant
presence that he had given to her a 50/. bill and
10./
in cash for the furniture, and anyl other claims 101.
10
she might have upon him. The complainant intimated
something about a claim for breach of promise of 1° I.i
risge, but witness understood that: the bill and d
begg:.
with
eW
el
O:
were given in liquidation of all claims. She ha,
of him for God's sake to get her an arrangement WI
Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Humphreys—You say you resided in the
very
house in which the complainant's furniture wee. rol
what furniture is there now ? Witness-1 can't saY., ?
Mr. Humphreys—Are all the rooms fished d.
Witness—No. The kitchen is furnished, and it be
room is furnished.
Mr. Humphreys—Do you know to what business 141%
Fitzgerald belongs ? Witness—l do not. pro'
The defendant stated that he had paid lg. under Pdis.
test upon the seizure of the furniture which was
ll,„
posed of to him by Mr. Fitzgerald, to whom he e,...
tamed not the slightest doubt the goods belong t°
ed. ;0
Fitzgerald had, in fact, several times applied , vto
upon this subject, and had stated, that he was going
establish a newspaper, and that immediate Parne: the
indispensable. Mr. Fitzgerald asked him 100/. err s,
furniture, but he refused to give more than 751. °r.
and that sum had been agreed upon,
had
paid to
weo
Fitzgerald, so that he (defendant) had paid 74 rbeaa
as the 15/. under the protest. The furniture ha issued
sold by him too, and an attachment had been
from the Mayor's CoUrt. ;Lachine°
Mr. Humphreys—lt is very easy to get aus
issued from the Mayor's Court. e wbetbei
The LORD MAYOR asked the coinplain -
°in for 5°14
Ca not thepla i
nlOO/4note, N
she had any idea of taking Mr. Fitzgerald..s;s he- ? The
vaser . after ti.-
oThe Solicitor for Mr. -Smith 'submitted, Bbl
The
evidence which had been heard, it would he,'elion its
to look upon Mr. Fitzgerald in any other ligu" se gr.
,PmayymLeonrtd.for, her ftw..tare
~..
,f coal
the owner of the furniture, and that
Smith was justified in the course he had parstle the
,es to ,
The LoRD MAYOR—We cannot shut our e.l Doan.
fact, that it is quite impossible that the eauiP Which
could have given, for this bill of 501., furniture
was worth in all robabil't 150/
' Y • bill AO givee
Sir Joil Paean—We
N
Siuilli
for something else.gr
The Loan MAYOR—Our decision is, that'o.
must give back the furniture to the coniPlabiaal sgshisfr
The Solicitor to Mr. Smith—We shall aife
the decision, my Lord. decide
Oil'
t ob.
F Th t INS
-....e —ORD —AYOR—Very Well We ...-- '
must have her furniture. .
..

m0rma..........."""""...-
---------
EARLY CLOSING OF Slie.n....rte°(grceifo:usbisrgt.h.beee)ilii
—.0.--- f taking
A public meeting, called for the purpose ° esest
some steps to procure the abolition of the Pr.,,
system of late business hours, so o
prevalent tihr°"„e's
B Agr
out the metropolis, was held last night at floret
Concert Rooms, Mortimer-street, Cavesdi4vs3
Dr. Epps in the chair ate Jed; :
.
The meeting was very respectably ---. v beiev
considerable number of well-dressed ladles
present. of the
The CHAIRMAN, in opening the business
meeting, said that he was sure that all who " villics
i that room must feel that this was a eallseisto oae
called for thei- warmest sympathy. It most. 0,1
which appealed to their kindest and OOP"
feelings, for it only asked that they, theY
do that justice to others, whieu was DOe
would wish extended to thentselves• fie eons °`
admirer of legislative interference in clues if tile
thisT kind, and he was very certain, that eyes
legislature of this country passed an Aet tid be set
uniting the hours of labour, that Act WOll tea 10 0
aside by those persons who were most
doing. Their legislature should therefore he ~.` oies°
lightened public mind of the count* and th.e..usgbieb
sure of success would be in that degree onlY• %a bl
they acted on that mind by
mental /16,..,5tea1•
continually holding up to their this
.100 the
baneful effects which resulted from this vas
,ta,
He would leave to the gentlemteos
gwivh: ridevitsbiiicejb
dress the meeting after him,
statement of their proceedin and the success
cs/i4)11
hawwnaoOdduu
iladh alreadyefrforma
rsrmuuls
ttaef trusted
foattendedotmhreatttha
tsehtti here eagmfootfe:
:: sat
hen 'txde
he
et irgytr s t h e
the Secretary to report the history of
alrealoicb
the , Joe,
The SECRETARY then entered ri°iehrnaaitticiso s 4., of -
statementabridgment
Generalrise,Associationprogress,ofand
a,ostfehset.hsfeoalolhnaoec,
fallacy
fotfhebussaiyniensgs:
tssnllatilthujen:reipoiellot-'
rexvgppfmvurseareir e necessary, because people col'
1 gentlemen afterwardssea tb.
address 0101ne
hoursbmt iyl
meeting, and the following resolutiona were et
mously agreed to : st rcs-ti
_ " That the meeting views with the eleePe.4 0 bs-sid
the present protracted system of laterht-phriteii
ness, as having a tendency to imp t"- aged IP 'r,
and mental energies of those who are engeoplole
same,co eriv a b yielding
iwei tbheonuteotfi
benefit."
advancing gb
rtahnech interest
oftradoef the esst e°ll4
the 1
r tb°
„.., ts 0 0
" That in order to facilitate the just
veri; to rellitioo,
who are engaged in the laudable odes' ~ reso to
theth grievance contemplated in the firstwith Bpd 0
deissirmabeleetianngobp
jleeccl7 itself to co.opers? 000
assist them to the utmost of its power ln
for -his
Thanks having been voted to the Cam, the
able andimpartial conduct in the Chair'

separated.
TAErIC°. ;,
Duke
t aii
ile 0 f
50N NEWMARKET, leAaclibK,
fcErTiourvrytvaNry'sl.l( 7 814
Sweepstakes)
aSfPORTING INTELb fVsslllalvlb
olds; lit"gs bos )
the ru-nifnllßedford'ssous
totheeach,
forM.
lgbop.
oadnt Lastber
,t
bh
yr el, milesvc o o fi .
:13,., ....t. : .
‘.l. ro. . .
...................
04.51 e
Lord_anlieter's.c by Beiram, out of AtearY''''ltdo theirgob
V rote 11
The Beiram. colt brokepdaoci,a;nataWdOVfOrtbre?..rrold, 85. nn/., P.
fillies, Bst 41b. T.Y.C. The winner et:strides f t7lb•el3.
Lord Orford'sa
Mr. Francis's b
Sct.D I 1
(5 Subs.)
~.(Nat) 2 2
•• ..
..
by the Grand P 1 e Capt°3ll 5 got
Little Finch .................... 3
Mr. Roger '
n';3.c by Bentleout et. ..-. toieg°' the $°J
lAvil6ri e. rtleof at4r s:
ItOthanerdgs
to the cords; he:a Finch, 3to 1 agst St.nyfaty col woe° '
Emma
the colt
fmavaodueritthee
truhtbenbnalltietdhP:lel/dtlifforAe°l-wv-'4vitb°lll,o(ll.
gelding and ags 'no' t° tart la 0°
cleverly by a length, and claimed, . declaem, 14
The Suffolk Stakes
of 15 sous each,;„ (52 I
added. Last mileand half of ."'" .
withtLthoerdm,
a -(0) 5
whom declared.) u. ~. .......... F 0,911) 5
Minotaur, 5
Mr. Pa n '
Sir J.. 1 e s Queen Mab, 6 yrs, 'lst s`:' cob 3 Yre' . lit
, ~ ... r•
Duke awley's the Bishop of Raiford s , ....... •Ar, Jo
of Bedford's Prologue, 3 yrs sst 51e .... t pbsc7,edfory
The follow'also started,- b'ut were o°i..e of .'' 4
Salvin's lawthorn,Aliceinf ._ , mb.,....Diy, _doh ~
Lochinvar, 5 vrs 7sta
aged, ?,,%'e,s j.hellly. Pret+
dlil
na7gnl boo.u.llr.tf. r. 0.. of
. Emmat't
-1. le
je-7:511t91::71j. l'ul:el r. -..i.di 'la:.
,‘'.11151.‘, itlyy:q el l.l il;
7st 11 ' 1 b—Mr. Death's Misde 1, 6 Ire, vote' ''t of ,alr
Young 51b—Lor ber, on.c poa-
-5 yrs, 6st 131b—Mr. 1-lov;e's cby Ratcatt.ency.'s Ott Illine•
quoise, 4 vrs, fist 111b--Lord George 13°1/"1"s10' -t ' 1
4 yrs, Est 31b—and Lord Exeter 's Deodars --.to 1 se/ te ,
Betting-5 to 4 agst Alice Ilawthorn, "eedfsto lof
logue, 7 to 1 agst Wee Pet, 7 to 1 agst Clusod 1°
KaghsotrTashseanC.obl,vBotoo
blyagvast,o"lieonugntgoL.ochiaireirdf,
so.
it.otior.) I
Handicap Plate of 50/. for three yren.° (orbits .. ..., $
rsei
Duke of Rutland's Welbeck, 4 yrs, 7st 8'" .. ••• .. •• ,0,
Mr. T. B. Charlton's Ruff, 3 yrs, sst 71b •• ... .„,••••tc:3o,
Mr. Phillimore's Skeleton, 4 yrs, st 41b •;;;;;;Pehe6,4-10'4
The following also started :-lir. Wicrie r„oP,IV
Est 81b—Mr. Newton's Sister to Ma 'Li', t• 6 to
Francis's Seven's the Main, 4 yrs, 6st-1-41b. yeits • 4./
bf, by Redshank out of Lava, 3 yrs, Js Woo ~
Sister to Ma Mie, and 5 to 2 agst Skeleton.
our
Two other races were not, run When toile.
made up. 20•51315.tyte.'"
MANCHESTER RACES.-- ea
Plate of 50/., the second receives 10 WS. 51 5
and a distance. , nivod) 1 9
Mr. Robinson's Wasp, aged, Bst 81b ...(11-ef.
.... ...• 9 cic
Nr. Dawson's Montgomerie, 3 yrs, 71)
....... ~.."
Lord Stanley's Ambition, 4 yrs, Bst Ile ......
cl v
6 d
Won by a length,
the Wif
BrBros• chose, foe
Di
rO. On
Charlesthe l ltAh
sipnrsety. „ inof y :r0 le Lira - Ku,
re.r e:r sg e , f 0
ocio
000
On the 11th inst at Farnborough v le- .44* fro
~
Rev. C. NV. Holbech, of a son. IS P'
0
Warren, of a daughter.
On the 14th inst., at West-green, Totteehll '
0 '4 the
.ar.tivt.rFP. ' „, ptooto Jet(
On the 12th inst., of
Ceelt plolit4 fife
late Colonel Cookson, of Neashant /Du,' oton t"1 . ,
ii•rilig
Charlotte, second daughter of Charles P 4 • e
Harley-street. to Itfarlii°
At Sydney, Robert Shadfortb Es(l., ~/
third daughter of Captain Ilollinwor ,
' tb 11.."- T.
# 10clies'
N Paramaribo, Wes" dot
On the 10th of March, at ' 0011°D
Beazley, Esq.
On the 22d of April, at Malta, v.. 4 ii- on. ere
~tor,+
daughter of the late Major-General the cis DP-
otbi
On the 3d inst., at Dresden, Charles Fran
rq, rlotte -TAaile'Ple'lletti.,
~,, 'atoll° 0,
of Sunbury, Middlesex. relict of t"" f 1"
On the Bth inst., Mary Raikes, reli t.ter 0
Raikes, Esq., of St. Petersburgb. fart cletlg' got'
On the Bth inst., Frances Elise, the ' he sl.le°
Calvert, Esq., of Ilunsdon, Llerts. „,:inlico, tjig
On the 10th inst., in Ebury-strot, A . ffod'
J tlO'r ' hire'
tram, Esq. st. 4 0 eprops
On the 12th inst., at Alpha-ple2
Rev. G. Moultrie, Vicar of CleoburY °rtioler,
y rs,4c bl
yBoot osms
closed

10VP1'10/
000 so. -
• •
London: Printed and Published bl ofliceogaoo4
No. 112, Strand, Printer, eat The au- ili the
w-
Strand, in the Precinct of the WO
1845'
Middlesex, Wednesday. May 14, •