The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-02 00:00:00

, 4
THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENJNO, DECEMBER 2, 1845."

THE FRENCH PRESS AND THE

CORN QUESTION.
La Presse of Thursday observes. that "the circular
of the Minister of Commerce on the state !of the corn
crops in France and in Europe has been made the sub-
ject of the commentaries of the entire press. The jour-
nals opposed to our views on the subject rely on it as an
argument in favour of the do-nothing system of the Go-
vernment, whatever may be the circumstances which are
likely to occur, and trust that we shall join them in re-
storing confidence to the public. Certainly, when we
roused the attention of Government, we did nothing
(whatever may be said) to excite the anxiety of the
population relative to the means of existence—the
first of all interests as regards them as well as our-
selves. We know no more miserable, no more blame-
able party tactic than that which consists in agitating
the mass of the population, as a Legitimist journal does
this morning. by affirming that the people are not sure
of having sufficient to *at to the end of the year,' and
that the Government is taking no measures of relief.
But between alarming public opinion and lulling it to
sleep, there is a medium, which consists in warn-
ing the public and the Government, and that is the
course which we have followed. We shall continue to
pursue that course, because, though there exists no
danger of the people wanting bread this year, there is
danger that they may pay dear for it for the advantage
of foreigners ; and, on the other hand, we must prepare
for the chances of the next harvest. Moreover, if our
language could produce any injury, our adver-
saries are sufficiently numerous and sufficiently
noisy to confute our arguments. We confess we are
far from finding in the circular of the Minister of Com-
merce that assurance which he wishes to convey against
the inconvenience of exportation to foreign countries.
All his calculations and all his arguments may be
summed up in these words—the harvest is sufficiently
abundant. We have never denied that fact ; but we
added, it is sufficient if we keep it for ourselves, but it
will not be sufficient if we suffer a great part to
be exported. In vain have we examined the circular
of the Minister of Commerce for a reply to this
argument, but it contains none. Our opponents rely
upon the calculations of the Minister of Commerce to
refute our arguments. But there is no cause for their
exultation, if we examine the conclusions of the circular.
The Minister demonstrates that only 26 depart-
ments have this year produced an overplus of corn,
that e$ departments have produced sufficient for
their consumption; and that in 32 departments there
exists a deficiency. Now for the potato crop. It
is deficient in 36 departments, in only 11 is it su-
perior to a fair average crop, and in 37 departments it is
equal. The last harvest, however, is still sufficient for the
melts of the population, but it does not promise a golden
age; and the Minister was right in concluding that the har-
vest of 1845 is inferior to that of an ordinary year. But
the circular insinuates thatforeign countries will requireno
corn from us, because they can find sufficient elsewhere.
England will want no corn, her bonding stores and the en-
trepots in the Black Sea are overflowing with corn, and
wheat is selling at a low price in the countries where it is
produced. Let us not delude ourselves. The reserve in the
entrepots is limited, and not more than sufficient for
the demand from England. The moderate price at
which wheat is selling in England is owing to the
speculators who fill those entrepots, and who are wait-
ing for a rise in price, and a reduction in the import
duties. The low price in the foreign markets is owing
to causes not connected with abundance. We are told
that the price of wheat is only 13r. the hectolitre at
Odessa, Yes; but, unfortunately, there are three
answers to this argument which it is endeavoured to
establish on that fact—first, to the price of 13f. you
must add the freight, which, to Marseilles alone, is sf.
or tif.; in the APPO place, to what amount will this lef.
rise when all the nations who want wheat will arrive at
the market of Odessa ? and, in fine, is it known
whether Odessa can supply wheat to Europe ? Is
it ;swell whet is the amount of the fabulous
abundance attributed to Odessa? Lot us make a single
reflection. If the market of Odessa could thus supply
all Europe in years of scarcity, how would it dispose
of its wheat in years of abundance. Would it cast
its porn into the Black Sea ? We are not more reas-
sured, we confess, by the peeeent price of wheat com-
pared with that of the preceding years. The aver.
age price of the hectolitre of wheat for all France
was but 21f. 4c. on the 15th of October, says the
Minieterfe circular, yes ; but at the same period
last year was but 18f. oe,p. This is a ponsith I*-
able difference, and it is in rain to explain it by the aps
prehension satiated amongst the population —an apprehen-
sion which did not exist at the period when those ave-
rages were struck. Neither is this difference explained
by the consideration that the price of wheat usually
risen at this season of the year, since that argument ap-
plies a:I much tp the }TV 1844 as to the year 1845. It
is further to bp remarked, that in the northern depart-
-eeetneeethat le, in the departments where the super-
- ----en _exists.-the place has risen ; and this is a
abundans - fads"
most conclusive •
'
The Echo Agriel^le,
•
dressed by the Minister e. F
after
Ap tirbli
e os
iht ioi ge theto the circular,
p r e f
prefects
circular, in many respects, agrees w _ _
use
•of the departments, on the Thisation
i'zsti,ttiobisl,eorvionsf—orm"
wo hare ourselves collected. If France could freely
the resources offered by her own crops and those
werlaiichenfotrreeigs:randeer reoogunlisaormlyption deposits in the §outh -
secured, and the prices would not trulyeyd wee-
would be amply
sure. But if the Minister Las apprecinted
the different resources of France, we %re of opinion that
he has not sufficiently considered the wants of Ilse
countries which surround us, and particularly England.
It is certain that the latter will be obliged to import
largely, and she has already made considerable pur-
chases in our entrepot at Marseilles, where
anti coin
vessels
n•
afiur afford
taorr
returniro ingwreiat
ht neuumrgboeerss,
al at dean
rivz idtuheceodal freight. u
censebeyn tlyntreOt willred no
,
to
be f
pre-
sentedsoureesnee,
bet the r
availablee to FeaAs respects the northern entrepots, Dantzic and
that eead:a
Ilaniburgh, they are rather within the domain of Eng-
land than ours; but the quantity of grain they contain
is far from being adequate to the wants of Enghsed.
The prices, moreover, are very high; and the countries
which usually supply them have produced too little to
hold out a hope that the stock will increase or the
prices diminish Holland, it is true, is abundantly fur-
nished; but those resources will rather serve to feed
Germany and Belgium than provide for the wants of
England. The Mediterranean and the United States
are accordingly the only two points upon which Eng-
land can rely, and there we shall necessarily compete
with her. It is consequently probable that the English
merchants will apply to our departments of Brittany, to
which .they have of late sent large orders, and where the
people have already manifested apprehensions on that
account, which deserve to fix the attention of the Go-
vernment. Several journals have intimated that the
French Administration should adopt exceptional meta"
sures to the effect of preventing further exportation.
The question is difficult, and the Minister of Agriculture
and Commerce appears little inclined to recur to such
means. The future will tell if he was right. Under
existing circumstances the Minister gives wise instruc-
tions to the administrators of the departments. It is
certain that the free circulation of grain is the
surest mode of insuring the general supply, and
that any impediments in the way of the internal
trade would be attended with the most fatal re-
sults for certain localities. We trust, moreover,
that before proclaiming the adequacy of our corn
legislation to provide against all the inconveniences of a
considerable exportation, our Ministry has ascer-
tained whether England herself would net have re-
course to exceptional measures. This is a point of the
highest importance ; for if the Reformers should attain
their end at the ether side of the Channel, we shall evi-
dently be the first to feel the effects of that change in
the English legislation, and it would be the height of
imprudence not to have foreseen it."
The Commerce publishes the following letter, dated St.
Mato, the 17th inst. :—" This morning a manuscript no-
tice, posted at the corner of the vegetable market, invited
the people to repair to the houses of M. llovins, mayor of
the city, and of M. Louis Blaize, a former deputy, and re-
commended them to set fire to the dwellings of those two
honourable citizens. The cause of this invitation is the
ever increasing dearness of bread, and particularly the
export of black corn to foreign countries. Yesterday a
company of the 71st Regiment of the line set out in all
haste for Dinan, where a numerous assemblage inter-
cepted the passage of ships on the Rance bycasting enor-
mous blocks of stone into the canal. The gendarmerie
and the troops which left our town having been found
inadequate to quell the riot, and two gendarmes of Dinan
having been severely wounded by stones, it was found
necessary to send hastily for reinforcements. Two com-
panies of the line were summoned from St. Briene, and
we learn that a battery of artillery has been dispatched
from Rennes.
P.S.—At the moment of closing my letter I learn
that the riot has re-commenced, and that the inhabitants
of Broons, of Beckerel, and oven of St. Maio, have joined
the rioters of Dinan. A respectable merchant named
Paul Robert, is said to have bad his arm broken, and to
have received some severe contusions. The authorities,
however, are sufficiently stroug to cause property to be
respected, and some arrests have been made by order of
the King's Attorney-General, who has displayed much
zeal during these disturbances. The same excitement
prevails on the entire coast of Lower Brittany, black
corn being the only resource of the poor when the potato
crop fails."
The Courrier Francais publishes the following letter
from Manheim, dated the Bth inst.:—" The uneasiness
which has been manifested on the subject of the even-
tuality of a dearth of corn and of potatoes during the
winter, has excited the entire solicitude of the autho-
rities, and given rise to a most minute inquiry. The
information collected has enabled the Municipal Council
and the Chamber of Commerce to publish a report,
which will much contribute to tranquilise the country.
The conclusions of the report are-1. That it cannot be
advantageous to purchase corn at the present high
price, because the Object proposed could not be attained—
that of furnishing bread on cheap terms to the labouring
classes. 2. That the present high price of corn does not
arise from a deficiently, but from the apprehension caused
by the reports of speculators and forestallers. Many pro-
prietors, adds the report, have their entire produce on
hand, The purchases of porn for Alsace and Se iteer-
land have ceased in Germany—first, because corn ie
cheaper in those countries ; and because their supplies
are sufficient. The potato crop has been a fair average,
and the accounts of the potato disease are exaggerated.
Corn in many parts of Germany is cheaper than here,
and large quantities of American flour are on their pas-
. sage to this country. It is from those facts that the
Ortamber Af cemmerce and the Municipal Council have
determined to reject every preposel tending to prohibit
the export of grain, and that they proiOse to krant to
the importers of American flour a premium consisting
in the return of part of the import duty."

A dopntation from Ashton had an interview with Sir
Robert ?gel yesterdaf, Whis official residence in Down!.
ing-street,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEE.VS BENCH, Dee. 1.

HEATH V. HAGAR AND OTHERS.
This was an action for trespass, and one which created a
great deal of laughter while it continued, by reason of the
exhibition made by the defendants, who acted as their own
counsel, and, in consequence, gave a practical illustration of
the proverb that " he who acts as his own counsel has a fool
for his client." It appeared that plaintiff was a hairdresser,
occupying a shop in Great St. Andrew's-street, St. Giles's ;
his son had been acting as his foreman, but left him, and a
man named Box subsequently acted in that capacity. The
defendant, who was the landlord, entered the premises, and
sought to take possession, conceiving that plaintiff's son,
whom he looked upon as his tenant, had " deserted."
Plaintiff's son then went, with some assistants, in March
last, to remove the defendants, whom he looked upon as
trespassers, and thereupon a row ensued.
Mr. Hagar, sen., having been called upon by the Court to
put any questions he pleased to the witnesses, he pro-
ceeded to do so; but when the reply was in the negative, he
invariably said, "Yes, I did ;" "Yes, you did ;" " no, I was
not," &c.
The Ccurta reminded the defendant that he was not to
give evidence, but to confine himself to asking questions.
Mr. Box, sen.' a diminutive gentleman, whose tout ensemble
presented a rather dusky appearance, declared to the Court
that "it was all a' conspie-racy' against him by fifteen per-
sons, at half-a-crown a head."
A witness, named Mickey Daly, having been called, de-
clared that he went to the place on the occasion to
assist Mr. Heath. In answer to Mr. Hagar, he said he
went there for no purpose but to sea justice done, and was
not to be paid. He did not go there to box Mr. Box, but
to see that Mr. Box boxed nobody else. He saw Mr.
Heath produce a paper to Mr. Box, sen., whereupon Mr.
Box, jun., boxed Mr. Heath, and snapped the paper, of
which act Mr. Hagar expressed his approval by exclaiming,
" That's right, Box, turn all them d—d blackguards out."
Mr. Hagar's son denied that his respectable parent
used that language, and disputed the veracity of
a great deal more besides that had been deposed
to. The polics•were called in to lull the storm, which 'they
did, by withdrawing some of the elements that had created it,
to wit, Mr. Daly and another, and accommodated them with
a temporary lodging in one of the apartments at the station ;
from thence limy paid a morning visit to a justice of the
peace, from whom, after a short conversation, they took their
departure, upon an understanding highly agreeable to them-
selves.
The jury found for the plaintiff—Damages, 40s.
SALVAGE..--HORNE V. BYPORD.
It appeared from the statement of counsel in this case,
which was an action taken by the plaintiff for the recovery
of 26/., for work and labour done for the defendant, the de-
fendant was the owner of vessels, in which he
was in the habit of getting up cargoes of sfiah
for the London market. In February last one of his vessels,
the Princess Victoria, was coming up with a cargo of fish fur
the Billingsgate-market, when a squall coming on she was
upset in Gallion's reach; and sunk, when, unfortunately,
three of defendant's sons, and one of the crew, were drowned.
Plaintiff was employed by defendant to raise the vessel, as he
is what is called an "under waterman." The operation was
rather a difficult and expensive one, particularly in winter;
the vessel was sunk in 22 feet water at low water, near a
place called "Du Val's house," or as the witness called it,
"The Devil's house." Seven men were employed, and the
vessel was raised after a good deal of labour and a valuable
rope-having been broken. The cargo was sold by defendant,
but he refused to pay plaintiff's demand, 26/., and offered
51., but had now paid 121. into Court.
Captain Fisher, harbour-master, was called in, and said ha
had considered well the whole case of the sinking and sal-
vage. It would have been a fair price to charge 21/. for rais-
ing the vessel and taking out the fish. The weather was
very rough, wind north-west, which should be taken into
consideration.
Mr. CLARKSON, for the defence, said the present was a
most distressing case, as he was informed. The defendant, a
poor Barking fisherman, had gone, as his business led him, to
sea in his hatch-boat, to fetch from the sea-going smacks a
cargo of fish. His boat was only 18 tons burden, and his
remuneration for taking the ship to Billingsgate was from
11. to 255. only. When coming up a violent gust of wind
stick the boat. Two of his sons were washed overboard and
Lust, the third being below at the time was drowned there, and
went down with the boat in deep water. A fourth man, Leach,
crawled along the bowsprit as the boat went down and took
the water, where he remained till picked up by a passing
lighter. Horne passed the lighter, and was asked to tell
the defendant that the boat had gone down and his sons
were lost, which Horne did, and engaged to raise the boat
for hitn its cheap as if he were his brother. Having no
proper crew, ropes, barge, or kedges, he was obliged to bor-
row them, and then he knew so little of his business, that
seven men were omployed for three days doing what might
have been done in a tide, and that was the only reason or
colour for a demand of 211, The witnesses in the case for the
plaintlff were here so many different plaintiffs, as it were
syting Byford, and swearing in their own case. It was said
the fish had been saved, cleaned, and brought to market, and
fetched a good price. If that had been true, the defendant
had no interest in that ; he was only a carrier, and had lost
his freight ; but so far from that being so, the owner lost
60,.bv the fish becoming stale and not reaching Billingsgate
till Saturday afternoon, two days too late. The case was
rendered harder by the plaintiff suing out a writ against the
defendant the very day that the letter of demand—a demand
general and undefined--.specifying no sum, actually reached
the poor fisherman in the midst of his suffeiings for his ag-
gravated losses.
Aftef 4 great deal of conflicting evidence for the defence
had teen adduced,
Lord DENMAN summed up. He regretted that the at-
torney here employed for the plaintiff should have issued the
strit so hastily, as if a poor man who had experienced so
heavy a loss both in pocket sad in his feelings in consequence
of the heavy bereavement suffered through the loss of his
children, ought to make his mind up as to the amount to be
pia far the salvage es soon as demanded. In leaving the
We to the jury, he begged to observe that the payment of
121, into Court aught not to be taken as an admission by the
defendant Oat rao mach was tine, The question of the
amount due for the werk and labour done was still quite
open to the jury, notwithstanding the defendant' had
,paid
into CIII4IA §lllll be thought enough to cover all that might,
upon the 441; be Owed and VIVVC(I4 So as not to be in-
volved in unnecessary expense.
After rptiring fur SIN hours; the jury returned A verdict for
the plaintiff—Damegisa

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 1.
(Sittings qt. Nisi 1364%104e Mr, Justice CANSSAVZLI, and a
(Ammon Jury,)
NORTH V, NE4VaIIrAD.
This was an action for breach of- contract, the defendant
being alleged to have neglected to supply to the plaintiff's
wool-carding manufactory, in the Borough road, Southwark,
41, sunAktinp quantity of steam power, according to his contract.
M. Sorgeot Whqtrf W4s corn-
ducted the plaintiff's et Vt. Sergeqnt. *Pyles ap-
peared for the defendant.
After bearing several witnesses on both aides, the jury
having deliberated a short time, found fl verdict for the plain-
tiff—Damages, 1001.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
NEW COURT.
(Before 3ir, Commissioner &mom.)
Mary Fowler, 85, a woman of repulsive appearance, was
indicted for that she on the 26th of November did make an
assault on Hannah Connor, an,d with a chopper inflicted a
wound on her forehead with intent to do her some grievous
bodily harm.
Mr, Platt Poildncted the prosecution, and Mr. Huddlestene
appeared for the defence,
I Hannah Connor stated that she is the wife of a shoe-
maker, residing at 19, Half-moon-street, aishopsgate-street.
She resides in the same room with her father, mother,
Sister, and husband. The prisoner lived in the room
tinder them. On the evening of Wednesday, the 26th, her
fathey sent her down stairs to fetch some water. Just as she
ad got the water she heard 4 noise ill thp yarch and ran nu
Stairs without shutting the door.. Her bathes asked lter if
she had shut it, and when she told him that she had not he
-went down stairs for the purpose of shutting it. The prisoner
/net hira in the passage, and became abusive, saying the door
was left open for tho purpose of annoyin4 her, Her
Mother then came down, and some words passed
between her and the prisoner, but they were separated.
The prisoner was then standing at her own room-door, and
She mid tO witness, "ICome here." Witness went up to her,
And when she cause Within reach the prisoner drew a small
chopper from behind her, and struck her 611 the forehead. The
blow was so violent that it knocked her down and rendered
er insensible. When she came to herself she found that
her insensible. When she came to herself she found that
he had received a serious wound on the forehead, and was
etwer.ld with blood, Witness had not spoken to her in any
way which could annoyhar,
By Mr. HUDDLESTONE—There had been a great many
bomplaints made by the landlord that the back door of the
house had been left.open, to the annoyance of all the lodgers
' on the ground floor, Witness put a stone against it to keep
it open. She laughed loudly when ;she got up stairs, but it
was in consequence of something that her father said, and
which did not refer to her leaving the door open. When her
mother went down and spoke to the prisoner there were
very angry words used, but no blows passed before the pri-
soner strueli. her. Pnetis clot ITlnclnber anything after that,
as she was quite insensible,
John Goodchild, the father of the last witness, stated that
On the evening of Wednesday last, he sent his daughter down
to fetch some water. She came running upstairs immediately
after, as if frightened. He asked her if she had shut the
door, and she said that she had not. Ho then went down
himself to shut the door, and the prisoner came out of her
room and became very abusive. After some words had
passed she took a chopper from behind her dress and struck
his daughter on the forehead. The blow rendered her insen-
sible, and tho wound inflicted bled to an alarming extent.
By Mr. HuninEsToste,--There had been no fighting or
scratching before the blow was inflicted,
Benjamin Catmouth, a police-constable, proved that he
took the prisoner into custody. There were from 60 to 70
people round the door, and there was a great disturbance.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. HUDDLESTONE then addressed the jury at some length
In defence, end Palled
Timothy Ryan, the landlord of the house in which the
parties lodged. He stated that the family of the Connors
and Goodchild were very noisy, and that they beat the pri-
soner, who, in defending herself, accidentally struck the
as the
pro-
secutrix with a chopper which she had in her hand.
The jury returned a verdict " guilty Pr coMilluil
nedt e nhceer,
'assault.'
Mr. Commissioner BULLOCK, in passing sentence, said that
a i nHs
et ther cri prosecutor,nie ass
um ed a sa
verysh e
phb4aasdds
appearance,t4.eiceonmieinn tensd
he hoped that the prisoner would indulge in no further bad
feelingt
omercy.
instrument with which the injury was inflicted mizot
caused her death, The court; hgwever, taking all cir-
cumstances into consideration, Would
which was that she be imprisoned and kept to hard labour
for three calendar months.

OFFICIAL LIST OF THE SENTENCES AT THE V,PNTIIATI
CRPIINAL COURT you pm navnanrn sEssioNs.
Sentence of Death was recorded against Charles
Carter, for a nameless offence.
To ho transported for Life—William Carney, Wil-
liam Beard, James Dixon.
For Fifteen Years—William Lewis, Benjamin Barnett,
For Fourteen Years—AdolelAP and
John Willium9,
For Twelve Years—William Anderson, Charles Gibbs.
For Ten Yaars—George Gamble, James Lane, Charles
Mitchell, John Grogan, James I,owe,
John Murphy, Pant Cooper, John ford, Francis Cope,
Elizabeth Langley, Isaac Jessop, Anne Burns, William
Benbow.
For Seven Years—Robert Williams, Frances Payne,
JaanreyK Cc isccotetr, D4la,iiecilwA4rtcircesotinian,
fie,
Boys, Caroline Bay,
Susannah New, Wolff
m
Tieikner, John Evans.
The following were ordered to be kept to hard labour
fob the periods specified :
For Eighteen Months—Henry Timpson, Thomas
,Joyce, John Leaden, Stephen Prescott, Eliaa Herbert,
Catherine Jefforys, Mary Anne Browne.

For Twelve Months—John Coleman, John Pearce,
John Preston, George Collins, Charles Bunn, George
Bracton, alias Baxter, William Jones, Thomas Wright,
William Cooper, Thomas Ticer, Robert Baxter, James
Filer, Catherine Hackett, George White, alias Black-
man, Sarah Saunders, Charles Phillips.
For Nine Months—John Jones, Charles Thomas
Knight, Charles Barrom, John Hammond, • James
Pantry, Mary Anne Sullivan, Thomas Coltman, Wil-
liam Prior, Mary Baker, Caroline Williams.
For Six Months—Thomas Owen, Richard Aldridge,
Thomas Durrell Wrench, Frederick Dean, Thomas
Kebble, James Woodward, Joseph Miers; Frederick
Pearson, Joseph Brown, Richard Martin, Martha Lynd-
ham, Robert White, Charles Grey, Allan Williamson,
J. Dobbins, T. Callen(lar, Francis Nicholls, Anne
Gardner, Jane Cribb, Daniel Dodson, John Brown, 'Ro-
bert Waywood.
For Four Months—John Cronin, Richard Green,
Margaret Macdonald, Charles Kingstone' James Catlin,
William Hemmings, Barnett Worrow, William Hyde,
Elizabeth Blackenbury, Richard Mills.
For Three Months—William Janes, James Collins,
William Agrar, Lewis Benjamin, Robert Lead, James
Sait, John Williams, George Iloughton, Mary Fowler,
Anne Ham-esworth, Mary Drake, Henry Smith, JOhn
Marshall, Andrew Dark, John Whitehead, Joseph
Burton, William Winn, Thomas Barefield, Thomas
Dodd, William Johnson, John Gomm, William Alex-
ander,
George Booty, Rachael Venton, Thomas Watson,
George Reed, James Mann, Frederick Davis, Eliza
Russell, Mary Anne Johnson, Mrs. Hamilton, James
Harper.
Some other persons were sentenced to shorter periods
of imprisonment, varying from one week to two days
in Newgate.
The following prisoners were acquitted by the petty
jury :—John Roberts, Robert Adlington, William Pike,
Edward Powell, Thomas Gould, Edward Smith, Charles
Elam, Thomas Jones, Mary Smith, Samuel Wyndham
Jones, William Beckett, alias Michael Dering, Richard
Turley, James Jefferys, Michael Crawley, John Brown,
Jane Scott, George Jevers, Joseph Marrs, Ellen
Quinne, Edwin Andrews, alias Edward Bragg, Mary
Crawley, George Messenger, Thomas Howard, James
Jones, Henry James, John Bushell, Henry Smith, Fre-
derick Morrison, Jatrtea Lockington, John Brett, Moses
Hakal, Hannah Davis, Nicholas Popert, William Hal!,
Robert Davis, David Cheery, Henry Clark, Mark Gla-
zier, John Rasberry, Reuben Wiles,. William King,
Edward Jones, Thomas Gomett, Emanuel Todd, Charles
Lee, Jeremiah Sheen, John Matthews, Patrick Bryan,
Robert Doolan, Margaret Kelly, Eliza White, Mary
Anne Curtis, John Horrobin. _

There were only eight bills ignored by the grand jury.
The Court, at its rising, adjoured to . Monday, the
sth December.

SURREY SESSIONS.

Yesterday,the adjourned sessions was held, at the Court-
house, Newington, before Mr. Puckle, Chairman, and a
full bench of magistrates. The calendar contains the
names of forty-five prisoners for trial for felonies, besides
twelve for misdemeanour.

Previously to the trial of prisoners the Court pro-
ceeded to Le transaction of county business, during
which the reports of the visiting justices of the different
gaols of the county, as well as those of the officers at-
tached to them, were read. The surgeon's report of the
House of Correction at Brixton gave some curious de-
tails with respect to the operation of the work on the
treadmill on prisoners. It stated that of fourty-four male
prisoners, working on the treadwheel, who had been
more than three months in prison,: twenty-four
had lost in weight, varying from 11b. to 221bs ; fifteen
had gained, varying from 11b. to 251b5., and five re-
mained the same as on their admission. That of those
who had lost in weight, one man only had suffered in
health, and he had been a butcher by trade, and accus-
tomed to very generous diet before coming into prison.
The surgeon further reported that the cells on the
ground tier, being all paved, were very damp during
wet weather, to which, and the use of so much gruel in
the dietary, he attributed in a•great measure the preva-
lence of diarrhoea and dysentery. Owing to the
above suggestion, the visiting justices had caused one
cell to be boarded as an experiment, and therefore re •
commend the Court to authorise them to have the rest
of the cells boarded in a similar manner. During the
past year the number of prisoners admitted into Brixton
gaol amounted to 2,315, viz.—children under twelve
years of age, 50; above twelve and under fourteen, 125;
above fourteen and under seventeen, 586. Two-thirds
of the prisoners had not attained the age of manhood—
a proportion, as the report mentioned, fearful, and attri-
butable to imperfect education in the general acceptation
of the term.

The reports having been confirmed, the Court then
proceeded to the trial of prisoners.
A person of gentleman-like appearance, who refused
to give his name, and was entered in the calendar as
thirty-orie years of age, was indicted for stealing a horse
and chaise, value 40 guineas, the property of William
Botwright, a livery-stable-keeper, at Yarmouth.
From the evidence, which was entered into at consi-
derable length, it appeared that on the Bth ult. the pri-
soner called at the prosecutor's livery stables in Yar-
mouth, and describing himself as a woollen merchant,
hired a horse and gig to take him to Lowestoft, saying that
he should be back the same afternoon. Prosecutor, be-
lieving the statement, entrusted the horse and chaise to the
prisoner, of whom he heard nothing afterwards until the
13th. On that day prosecutor received an intimation
that the prisoner was in custody at Farnham, in Surrey,
and on repairing there it was found the prisoner had
called upon a man named Newell in that town, who,
amongst other avocations followed that of constable, and
offered to dispose of the gig and harness to him. Newell
having previously seen the Hue and Cry, in which was
inserted an account of the robbery and a description of
the offender, on narrowly observing the prisoner sus-
pected he was the man, and accordingly took him into
custody, and, as previously described, acquainted the
prosecutor, who proceedel. to Farnham and identified
the prisoner, as well as his horse and chaise.
Mr. CHARNOCK, who defended the prisoner, accounted
for the ckcumstance of the young scan not giving his
name was not with a view as to concealment of his
name, for he had not been in custody before ; but was
done solely for the purpose of sparing the feelings of
his family, which was highly respectable, the disgrace
such an occurrence was calculated to inflict on them.
'That he (the Learned Counsel) was instructed the pri-
soner had no intention of stealing the horse and gig, and
that the conversion of the property had not been proved,
He was, therefore, entitled to an acquittal. He then
cited cases to prove the accuracy of his posqion,
The CHAIRMAN, on snmnAng up the evidence, re-
marked upon the facts of the prisoner having offered the
gig and harness for sale to Newell, which was pretty
confirmatory of what his intention was when he hired
them of prosecutor.
The jury hat"; 'onsulted for a short time, returned
a yer4ipfp f 4iity.—Sentence deferred.
No other cases tried in the course of the day were per.
sessed of interer.t,

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

Mr. Chapple, a newspaper agent in the City, applied
to the Lord Mayor for a summons, calling upon the
directors, or secretary, or provisional committee of
one of the railroad speculations, to answer the charge of
having refused to pay back some money which he (the
applicant) had deposited in the hands of the London
Joint-Stook Bank to the account of the speculation.
The LORD MAYOR said he had heard a great deal
about the refusal of directors to pay back de-
posits after they found it was impossible for them to
go to l'arliament in the ensuing session, and he should
be happy to exercise whatever power he might have to
serve parties who were inconvenienced by the dishonest
detention of their money. His Lordship desired to
know whether the company was broken up.
Mr. Chapple said he had paid 841. at the London
Joint-Stock Bank upon a letter of allotment for forty
shares. Soon after he had paid that money, he received
a letter stating that the directors would be satisfied with
ten shillings a share instead of two guineas, and subse-
quently he had learned that the company had suspended
their operations, but on applying for his money, he was
not only refused that, but even the scrip had not been
forthcoming. The directors seemed to him to be disposed
to gain some advantage from the project at all events,
for without any rational pretext they persevered in hold-
ing his property.
The I4OAD MAYOR.—I shall certainly do all I can
to assist you. I shall grant a summons, and try •;,fiat
can be done to prevent the consequences of such an evil
to my fellow•citizens.

kicked at.the side of the neck. Complainant, however,
kept his hold of the defendant, and the defendant, find-
ing he was unable to release himself, got one of com-
plainant's finger's into his mouth and bit it severely.
Complainant, after a hard struggle. secured the defend-
ant and lodged him in the station hou e.
The defendant said he would prov that the charge
was unfounded. The facts re th se:--He was en-,

gaged in the service of a railwal corn )any, and on Sun-
day night had gone with the plane, &c., and had suc-
ceeded in lodging them at the office of the Board of
Trade, at Whitehall, a few mii utes before twelve, and
when on his way home to Crown-street, he passed a
public-house, before the door of which some persons and
the complainant were drinking. He was hustled as he
attempted to pass, and on turning to remonstrate he was
told to go on by the constable. He immediately
replied that he should have to serve complainant
as he had served many other constables before—namely,
report him, upon which the complainant, saying he
would have the first "pull," caughr, hold of him with

the intention of taking him into custody. Be ran away
towards his own house followed by the constable. When
at the door the constable seized him by the throat, and
hold him in that way throughout the whole time of the
struggle, which lasted some minutes. The constable
threw him down and nearly strangled him, and con-
trived to break furniture and glass, by which his hand
bad become wounded. He believed the constable hais a
spite against him, because he had made it his business
to report to the Commissioners several instances of mis-
conduct on the part of constables.
A female, who opened the door for tils, defendant, said
the defendant did not resist at all—the constable alone
was violent.

The constable declared that the whole of the defence
was untrue. He had been struck merely because he in-
terfered to prevent a breach of the peace, provoked by
the defendant's wanton abuse of two strangers in the
street. He was determined to do his duty, and he had
sustained the injuries he had described in consequence.
The inspector said the constable's fingers had ugly
wounds on them, as if done by some person's teeth. The
constable had been obliged to have surgical as'istance.
'Mr. HARDWICK said the constable's story appeared
consistent, and there was nothing in the evidence of the
witness for the defendant that contradicted it. If con-

stables in the exercise of their duty, and in their at-
tempts to preserve the public peace, were not protected
by the law, the result would be that they would be dis-
inclined to "act in cases where they might be exposed to
ill-treatment. For the assault on the constable the de-
fendant must be imprisoned twenty. one days.
The defendant begged the Magistrate to inflict a fine,
but he declined to alter his decision.
MARYLEBONE.

SHAMEFUL OUTRAGE ON A LADY AND HER HUSBAND,

,Mr.. George Whitley, who._ described himself as a

" gentleman," residing at No. 40, Handress-street,
Ramsgate, was charged before Mr. Rawlinson with
assault and other misconduct, preferred against him by
Mr. John Anthony and Mrs. Elizabeth Anthony, his
wife, the former a merchant, living at No. 19, Hannett's-
crescent, Islington.
. .

Mr. Anthony stated that on the previous night, about
eleven o'clock, he called a cab, near Albany-street, to
convey him and Mrs. Anthony home ; but as he deemed
the fare which was demanded, viz., 3s. 6c1., to be very
exorbitant, he objected to engage with the driver, and
desired his wife to remain at the corner of the street

while he went for another cab. On returning towards
the spot where he had left Mrs. Anthony, she ran
up to him exclaiming, " Oh, I am glad you are
come,- for I have been infamously insulted by a gen-
tleman, who had another person with him at the time."
Mr. Anthony added that he and his wife walked on
with the intention of going. as far as Tottenham-
court road, where they would be sure of meeting with a
conveyance, and as they were passing along the New-
road, Mrs. Anthony observed the defendant, of whom
she complained, and another, smoking cigars in a to-
bacco-shop. Mr. Anthony went into the shop, and said
to the defendant—" You have insulted my wife very
grossly, and I wish to know what you mean by such
behaviour ?" when he told me he was a great fighter,
that he had been engaged in many duels, and signified
that he should like to fight a duel with me. As I was
standing on the pavement near to the kerb, he rushed
out to me, and laying hold of my cloak, dragged me into
the shop, when he put himself into a fighting attitude,
and struck me.
Mr. RAWLINSON—Is Mrs., Anthony here ? Mr. An-
thony—She is, Sir.
Mrs. Anthony stated that while her husband was
gone to look for a cab, leaving her for a few moments
by herself, defendant all of a sudden caught her round
the waist, and on her repulsing him he called her

abusive names. She mentioned his conduct to her bus•
band, and pointed him out in the cigar shop, as Mr. An.
thony had stated.
Mr. IlawuNscx—Did the companion of defendan
do or say anything offensive to you ? Mrs. Anthony—
No, Sir.

Mr. Thomas Bradley, 13, Lloyd's-row, Clerkenwell,
deposed to his having witnessed the assault upon Mr.
Anthony ; it was a deliberate blew, and he was struck
upon the cheek. Witness further said that the defendant
did all in his power to provoke Mr. Anthony to strike
him, and that a number of persons who had collected
together cried out, " Shame !" upon seeing the assault.
Defendant talked about duelling, and insisted up -a
having Mr. Anthony's card. The latter acted 7.th a
great deal of forbearance throughout.
Church, 326 S, also proved the assault . all that he
heard Mr. Anthony say to defendant vve;s, that be ought
if he was a gentleman to have knew better.
Defendant, when called upoi; to answer the charge,
entered into a long statement. 'setting forth that he was an
Irish gentleman educated for the bar, and that next month
he was going to bring out a magazine, which would advo-
cate the rights of the people. He was arm-in-arm with his
friend, when he (the latter), on a female passing along, said
" What a very tall lady." He (defendant) then said,
" Yes ; she is tall enough for one of the pillars of the
new Houses of Parliament." He denied having seen her
' face or laid hands on her at all, and asserted that while
he was quietly smoking a cigar Mr. Anthony flew at
him in the shop and called him a -- blackguard, a
rascal, and a scoundrel, for insulting his (Mr. Anthony's)
wife. Defendant told him he was under a mistake, when
he became very violent, and threatened to knock him
down, at the same time putting his hand up to his (de-
fendant's) face. He (defendant) admitted having asked
Mr. Anthony for his card, and also to laying hold of his
cloak; and demanding an apology.
Mr. Joseph Conway (the companion of the accused)
corroborated the above statement, and said that he saw
Mr. Anthony hold his fiat to defendant, who then,
of course, retaliated, but merely hit his (Mr. Anthony's)
lip.
RawLisisosr (to defendant)—The charges against
you, which I consider proved, call for the severest pu-
nishment which I can inflict upon you. You behave in a
most gross manner to tim unprotected woman in the
street, and because her husband feels it very properly
his duty to resent it in terms that you don't approve of,
you give him a blow. For each of these two assaults
you are find 51.
Mr. Bradley here stated that .lefendant, at the station-
house, said, " I shall meet you about town, in one of my
walks, and I'll mark you for this."
In addition to 10/., the amount of the penalties, de-
fendant was, in consequence of what had been stated by
Mr. Bradley, ordered to enter into his own recognizance
in 1001. for his keeping the peace for the next twelve
months,
Mr. Anthony, shortly after the case was disposed of,
made an application to the Magistrete with the view of
getting the fines reduced, but Mr. Rawlinson expressed
his intention of abiding by the decision he had given.—
The money was paid.
WANDSWORTH.

Absalom Martin, a bricklayer's labourer, employed on
the works of the Richmond Railway, was charged with
stealing a piece of a deal plank, the property of the con-
tractors of the above line of railway.
Police-constable Langton, 36 V, stated that about
twelve o'clock that day he stopped the prisoner in the
Mill-causeway, Wandsworth, in consequence of seeing
him secrete a piece of wood in the folds of a greP!: coal
that he was carrying. The prisoner was tb:en coming
from the Richmond Railway works, which he was
engaged, and witness asked him why he had taken the
wood; he said he did not se,L any harm in taking a little
bit of firewood.
Mr. Hear.; —.ling the contractor, identified the wood
As 11'...; property ; it was the end of a plank, and had his
private mark on it. The value of the property stolen
was very trifling, not more thane fourpence; but if he
permitted those offences to be passed over, the men
would next cut up the planks to make firweood of.
Mr. BURRELL said he was well aware that contractors
and large builders were plundered to a great extent in
this way, and it was necessary in such cases to inflict a
severe punishment. Was the prisoner known?
Mr. Butter, the sub•contrscto.r for the brick work,
said that he had only engaged the man five days, and
therefore knew little of him.
Police-constable Daley, 127 V, said he had known the
prisoner for many years, and never knew of his being in
custody before.
Mr. BURRELL, in consequence of receiving so good a
character, fined the prisoner ss. only, or in default seven
days.

A WOMAN with FOUR HUSBANDS !

SINGULAR CASE.
(From the Liverpool Albion.)
On Saturday a young woman, of handsome cast of coun-
tenance and flippant tongue, who gave her name Margaret
Daly, was brought before dr. Rushton on a charge of having
married four husbands, all of whom are said to be living.
The first and second husbands appeared in court, and eyed
each other closely from the seats in front of the witness-box.
The third and fourth husbands were nowhere. The novelty
of the case excited great interest, and occasionally consider-
able merriment. The prisoner did not seem in the slightest
degree abashed.
Thomas Conlan, an elderly Irishman, was the first witness.
He deposed that he was the prisoner's father, and that he
was at present living in Salthouse-lane. " I was present,"
said he, "at the marriage of the prisoner, Kitty, to a man of
the name of Murray; but Murray, yer honour, was married
at the time to another woman, and none of our family, the
family of the Conlans, were aware of it. Kitty and he were
married in Dublin, in the month of September, 1838."
. .

Mr. Rusliton—Do you recollect where the ceremony took
place? Witness—Well, it was in .a church, yer honour, but
I'm hanged if I recollect the name of it.—(Laughter.)

Prisoner—lt was in St. Michael's Church, father; the
parish church.
Witness—You are quite right, Kitty, so it was. Murray
and herself lived together for a short time in Liverpool after
the marriage ; and then he sent for the wife he married eleven
years ago, and then, begar, he had the two wives with him in
the house.—(Loud laughter.) Him and them went away,
when they came back to Liverpool again he banished Kitty
away from him. He banished her last Easter Sunday, of all
days in the year, and then, !Jew, he took another old woman
to live with him.—(Continued laughter.)
Mr. Rushton—What! another?
Prisoner—Another; and the old woman has since poisoned
herself.

Witness—Yes, she poisoned herself a fortnight ago.
Mr. Rushton—lf Marray was married to another woman