The Sun.
London, England, 1845-01-27 00:00:00

UNIVERSITY INTELLIGENCE.

OXFORD, JAN. 23.—This day a Congregation was
holden, when the following degrees were conferred :
Doctor in Divinity—Rev. Richard Briscoe, Fellow of
Jesus College.
Masters of Art—J. Lea, of Worcester College, Rev.
J. G. Brine (Fellow), Rev. J. Bellamy (Fellow), H.
Harris, of St. John's College ; Rev. R. A. Stroud, of
Wadham College ; Rev. F. Murray, and R. B. Lyons, of
Christ Church ; Rev. Hugh Pigot, Rev. Edward Pedder,
and G. J. Piccope, of Brasenose College ; W. Popham,
and Rev. G. G. Hayter, of Oriel College ; S. W. Wayte
(Fellow), of Trinity College ' • J. M. Griesley, of St.
Mary Hall ; W. H. Awdry, of Magdalen Hall ; Rev. J.
Mason, of New Inn Hall.
Bachelors of Art--C. S. Fortescue (Student), of Christ
Church, Grand Compounder ; H. T. Whateley (Stu-
dent), G.D.Engleheart (Student), R. Lawson (Student),
of Christ Church ; B. Bevan, of Christ Church, Grand
Compounder ; J. E. Tweed, of Christ Church ; G.
Hughes, of Oriel College ; W. E. Jones, of Jesus Col-
lege ; H. J. Coleridge, of Trinity College ; 11. D. Hil-
ton, G. F. Tiley, and F. 0. Giffard, of St. John's Col-
lege ; W. C. Hibbert, of Balliol College ; F. W. Smith,
of Magdalen Hall ; W. Farrer, of New Inn llall.
The Regius Professor of Hebrew (Dr. Pusey) intends
to continue his lectures on the Psalms on Mondays,
Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, at nine o'clock, to
begin on the 27th inst.
Two elementary classes will commence on the 27th
and 28th instant.
The Regius Professor of Medicine (Dr. Kidd) will
commence his lectures on anatomy, &c., on Wednesday,
the 29th instant, at two o'clock.
The Professor of Anglo-Saxon will continue his lec-
tures on Thursdays and Saturdays.
The Professor of Political Economy proposes to read
three lectures, on Monday, the 27th, and two following
days, at two o'clock.
The number of candidates for responsions is 100.
The Professor of Chemistry (Dr. Doubeny) will comma
mence his course of lectures at the Laboratory, ou Tues-
day evening, the 28th, at eight o'clock.
The Reader in Mineralogy (Dr. Buckland) will com-
mence his lectures on Tuesday next, at two o'clock.
OXFORD, JAN. 24.—At a meeting of the Heads of
Houses, held yesterday afternoon, it was resolved to
withdraw the New Statute, or Test, that was intended to
be submitted to Convocation. The other proceedings,
relative to Mr. Ward, as proposed to be settled by Con-
vocation, on February the 13th, remain unaltered.
CAMBRIDGE, JAN. 24.—At a Congregation just held,
the following degrees were conferred :
Honorary M.A.—The Hon. J. Gifford, Emmanuel
College; the Hon. W. Cecil Spring Rice, Trinity College.
B.A.—Henry Newport, Pembroke College ; John
Taylor, St. John's College.

A STRANGE and PAINFUL STORY.
(From the Leicester Chronicle.)
It were better to acquit twelve guilty men than
hang one who is innocent. Such is the general
seeling that pervades society. And the principle that
is herein involved applies, though with less force, to
the punishment of crimes less serious in character
than murder. It is applicable, indeed, to every in-
stance of the kind that may arise. Even in a
case of orchard robbing, it would be unjust
to chastise the wrong urchin. Nor is it simply
as an act of injustice towards an innocent
person that the infliction of an undeserved pe-
nalty is to he deplored—its prejudicial influence in
weakening popular respect for the laws is equally, if
not more injurious. In the case we are about to in•
troduce to the notice of our readers, we are afraid
that this painful and mischievous mistake has been
committed. We are indebted for the facts to a trust-
worthy correspondent. They are as follow :
Samuel Chambers, a servant of Mr. Benjamin
Walker, of Worthington, was convicted at the last
Leicestershire Midsummer Quarter Sessions of having
"maliciously caused water to be conveyed into a mine,
with intent thereby to delay the working thereof."
The prosecution was commenced under the 7th and
Bth Geo. IV., cap. 30, sec. 6. The evidence of the
prisoner's master, two colliers, and the prosecutor's
brother, was brought forward for the prosecution.
The prisoner made a brief statement in defence,
but had not the assistance of counsel ; he was found
guilty, and sentenced to seven years' transportation
—the severest punishment the law could inflict. The
prisoner's conduct was considered to have been so
bad, the counsel for the prosecution stated that the
coal-masters in the neighbourhood had jointly sus-
tained the charge of the proceedings against him,
being determined to press the matter severely, as a
warning to all persons disposed to act similarly at any
future time. The consequences were likely to have
been dangerous in the extreme, it was said, several
lives having been risked by the prisoner's malice.
The court also commented upon the serious nature of
the offence.
While, however, the prisoner remained in the gaol,
the constable of Awsworth, in Nottingharnshire,came
over to Leicester on purpose to see him ; and having,
during his stay here, obtained an interview with the
Rev. John Brown, the vicar of St. Mary's, gave such
particulars of the prisoner's former life as made it a
matter of wonder that such a man should suddenly
have become so vicious as he was represented to be.
It was determined that some inquiries should be made
into the case, not only by examination of parties
residing in Leicester, but also at Lount—
the place where the crime was alleged to
have been committed. It was ascertained that Cham-
bers is a native of Awsworth, in Nottinghamshire,
and was in the employ of Mr. Wakefield, coal-owner,
of that neighbourhood for fourteen years. He passed
thence into the employ of Messrs. Barber and Walker,
of Watnall ; and these two were the only services he
had had prior to his engagement with the prosecutor.
The highest testimonials as to his character, while
with these gentlemen, have already been given. When
Chambers was in the employment of Messrs. Barber
and \\Talker, the prosecutor, wanting an engineer at
his colliery at Lount, his kinsman, Mr. Mark
Richards, who resides at Awsworth, and knows the
prisoner well, applied to the prisoner to leave his
situation and enter into the service of the prosecutor.
He was engaged at a salary of a guinea per week,
house-rent and coal included, and removed from
Awsworth to Lount with his family.
Some time after he had been at Lount, his wages
were lowered to 18s. per week ; and this, coupled
with other circumstances, determined him to leave
the place. He accordingly gave Mr. Walker three
months' notice of his intention to quit his service.
This is now admitted by Mr. Walker; but the re-
port of the trial states that the prisoner received, in-
stead of gave, the three months' notice to quit. This
alleged dismissal from his master's service is put for-
ward as the motive for the prisoner's malice. The
prisoner's wife has made a declaration, under the
statute, that the first notice to quit was given by the
prisoner himself; and Mr. Walker, on being asked
whether this was so, has admitted it to be true.
The prisoner having given notice to leave in three
months, was served wi.h notice to quit in one month.
This he was perfectly ready to do, and would have
done, could he have had his wages settled. Some de-
lay, however, took place in this, and he was compelled
to remain at Lount for a time ; but his furniture and
effects were packed up in open day, and his wife and
family removed back again to Awsworth, to the very
house from which Mr. Mark Richards had engaged
them.
The prisoner remained at Lount until the 22d of
May (which was long after the notice given by the
master had expired), and then, having had his wages
paid to within eleven shillings, he determined to re-
main no longer. Relinquishing the eleven shillings
(which remain unpaid to this day) he returned to
Aws worth—was immediately re-engaged at the works
he had quitted to enter the prosecutor's service—and
there remained for twelve days, without molestation,
without any attempt at concealment, and without any
idea that he could he charged with any crime. The
prosecutor, however, being angry at the prisoner hav-
ing left him so abruptly, consulted an attorney as to
whether he could not be punished for so doing; and
as it happened that by the prisoner's departure the
engine necessary to pump out the water was ne-
glected, and the water in the mine had risen from
natural causes so as to stop the works, it was thought
by the magistrates at Ashby-de-la-Zouch that this
was an offence within the Statute 7 and 8 Geo. IV.,
c. 30., sec. 6. ; so the prisoner, instead of being
punished for leaving his work, was committed for
maliciously causing water to be conveyed into a mine !
But it may be asked how it happened that a man
like this was suffered to be undefended, or at least
tried without witnesses having been called to speak to
his charncter? Surely that would have saved im
from the severest punishment the law could inflict ?
How negligent on the part of his friends, to permit
it to he stated at the trial that he had " absconded
after committing the crime !"—that he had secretly
sent away his wife and family ! when it would seem
that, so far from absconding, his family had removed
in open day—gone back to the very house they had
come from originally—were living under the very eye
of the gentleman by whom the prisoner was engaged
for the prosecutor, and that the prisoner, instead of
being dismissed from the prosecutor's service, was so
determined to quit it, that he actually gave up eleven
shillings to the prosecutor, sooner than stay any
longer with him !
So esteemed was the prisoner by the whole village
where, with the exception of two years spent at Lount,
he had lived all his life, that a subscription was im-
mediately commenced to defend him. So agitated
was the whole community, also, that Mr. Mark
Richards himself started off to see the prosecutor, and
ascertain from him what crime Chambers could be
charged with. The r: port he brought back was such
as to make many of the prisoner's friends believe that
he was quite safe, and that no harm would happen to
him if he were not defended, As, however, some of
the persons in Awsworth were not quite satisfied with
this, the prisoner's wife went over to the prosecutor,
on the Sunday preceding the trial, with a letter from
the Rev. Mr. Lund (the vicar of Awsworth and
the chaplain of the Nottingham prison) to know what
was intended to be done. At this interview, on the
Monday preceding the trial, the prisoner's wife states
that the prosecutor told her it would be throwing
money away to employ counsel ; that if' it were left to
him (the prosecutor) no harm would happen ; that she
had nothing to do but to send the prisoner a clean
shirt and a testimonial as to his character. The poor
woman returned to Awsworth ; and, by the advice of
the clergyman, relied on the assurance of the prose-
cutor. For this reason no one was employed to de-
fend the prisoner. The next intimation was, that her
husband hael been sentenced to transportation !
Unlucky was it, indeed, for the prisoner, that he
was not defended. The clerk to the justices who
committed him for trial, and the counsel for the pro-
secution, now admit that the conviction of the pri-
soner was, in point of law, utterly illegal ; and the
Solicitor-General, whose opinion has been taken on
the point, asserts that the prisoner could not be legally
convicted in any way—that the statute under which
he was indicted, viz., for " maliciously conveying
water into a mine," does not apply to a case like his,
which, at the utmost, was neglecting to pump the water
out of the mine.
It was hoped that this opinion, coupled with a pe-
tition from his native village, might save the unhappy
man from transportation : the original case and opinion,
with a petition from the inhabitants of Awsworth,
couched in the strongest terms, were accordingly sent
to the dome-office. It was signed by eighteen per-
sons who had known him for ten years and upwards;
twenty-four who had known him for twenty years
and upwards; and thirteen who had known him all
his life. A separate testimonial from the clergyman
(in whose Sunday-school
prisoner had been a teacher)
was also forwardedit was hoped to this, and
the Solicitor-General'sland opinion, some attention would
be paid. In this, however, the petitioners were dis-
appointed.
An impression was then found to exist that, if the
prisoner were legally innocent, he had been guilty of
a great moral crime. It was, therefore, determined
by some parties to proceed to Lount, and
m
in-
quiries on the spot. It was supposed, up to that tim
that considerable mischief had really been done to
Mr. Walker's mine ; and that the lives of the work-
men had really been put in jeopardy. It was be-
lieved too, that owing to the indignation which might
naturally be felt there against the prisoner, some
little difficulty might be experienced in obtaining
anything favourable to him. But so far from this
having been the case, the person inquiring at Lount
met with a universal expression of sympathy in favour
of the prisoner; and when the amount of damage
which the prosecutor had sustained was inquired after,
the very idea of any damage having been sustained,
beyond the temporary stoppage of the works, was

T

ridiculed. It was asserted that it is a very common
occurrence for the water to rise in the male, either
when the slack to work the engine has failed, or the
engineer has been employed on other work. This had
happened thrice after the prisoner had been convicted;
and so far from any attempt having been made
to punish the engineer as a criminal, the work-
men, who had lost a day by the works being stopped,
talked of fining the engineer in .ss. worth of ale !
More than this—the engineer had declared that he
would submit to no such fine. He had no slack, he
said, and it was no fault of his that the water rose in
the mine.

Mr. Mason, an inkeeper at Lount, has stated that
on the very morning Chambers left the place, and
before it was known he had quitted the prosecutor's
service he (Mr. Mason) heard the machine-man at
the colliery (Joseph Walker, a cousin of the prose-
cutor) talking of the water having risen. Mr. Mason
heard him say "that it was not Samuel's fault (mean-
ing the prisoner). There was no slack to work
the engine with." It is in fact declared
throughout the village, that the real crime
of the prisoner was, that he chose to leave
Mr. Walker's service. But it may be said
that the prisoner put the lives of his fellow men in
jeopardy. Hear what one of these very men says.
He has signed a declaration—that he and his fellow-
workman went down freely, and of their own accord,
although he (the declarant) knew that the water was
rising ; that he never saw any danger, nor does he
believe that there was any; and that he would freely
go down into the pit under the same circumstances
as happened that morning. The constable of Lount,
too, unsolicited, sent a written statement of what he
witnessed that morning. He declares that the men
continued working in the pit long after they had
been let down by the prisoner, and that when the
water rose so high as to stop the works, he saw the
men come up out of the pit. This was about six
o'clock in the morning. These men (who it must be
remembered) were alleged to have been in imminent
danger of their lives, directly they came up, began to
talk about having a sup to drink, and were all merry
and cheerful together.
A petition in favour of the prisoner has been signed
by 134 of the men and women of Lount and its vici-
nity—who are people employed in the mines, includ-
ing the men, and the wives of the men, whose lives
are said to have been put in jeopardy ! Amongst
other statements, they bear the highest testimony to
the prisoner's character; they say that they remember
the circumstance of the water rising in the mine, and
Chambers leaving the prosecutor's service ; but these
people declare that when they heard subsequently of
Chambers being in custody they were at a" loss to con-
ceive what crime he could be charged with. Yet this
is the man whose conduct Mr. Macaulay described as
being so bad that the coal-masters generally had sus-
tained the prosecution against him ! These petitioners
all declare that the stoppage of the mine, owing to the
engine not being worked, is a matter of eomien oc-
currence. They say, further, that they have heard
the sentence with surprise and grief, and they beg
leave humbly to represent that, owing to the
said Samuel Chambers having been undefended at
the trial, his case was entirely misunderstood, and a
degree of guilt has been supposed to attach to him,
which is, as they submit, totally undeserved. They
conclude by referring to the opinion of the Solicitor-
General as to the illegal conviction of the prisoner,
and they pray that mercy may be extended to him,
as they believe him to be wholly innocent of the crime
imputed to him.
It may be asked whether this petition has been
forwarded to the Home-office ? The reply is, No.
Four petitions have already been presented. The
opinion of the Solicitor-General as to the illegality of
the conviction has also been sent, and has been re-
turned—unheeded.
We leave the public to form their own conclusions
relative to the treatment of the unfortunate and in-
jured man who is the subject of the above simple
story. It is enough for us to add, that although the
poor fellow has been declared, by competent judges,
both legally and morally innocent of the crime
laid to his charge, he was sent to Van Diemen's
Land in August last. He left behind him an aged
mother, a forlorn wife, and five little children. For
seven years he is banished from his country as an
outcast—to herd with the vilest of the vile—arid those
who were dependent upon him for a subsistence may,
for aught we know to the contrary, be left wholly
destitute. This is a crushing calamity for any one to
endure, but most of all for innocent people.

THE YARMOUTH MURDER,
FURTHER PARTICULARS.

The case of the late Yarmouth murder does not
cease to perplex those who are connected with the
administration of justice in this place. The precautions
that have been taken, the great exertions which have
been made, and the many reports which have been in
circulation, if they do not prove unavailing and false,
are far from having led to those satisfactory results
that are so desirable in a case of this sort. Royal,
Hall, and Mapes have been committed as principals,
but as the facts and circumstances of their alibis be-
come investigated, doubts arise at every step, as to their
having any part in the affair, and even Yarham's guilt
has not been so much confirmed as reports proclaim.
It is not true that in a note to his wife he com-
municated anything of importance. These are
fabrications, as is also the report that Mapes
had confessed. There is even a doubt as to whe-
ther the stains said to be on the panel of the
boards, where Yarham's coat hung, be those
of blood at all. Indeed it has been examined
by several intelligent persons, and chemists
of reputation, who pronounce it not to be blood ; the
private proceedings, therefore, of the magistrates
have produced only idle conjectures, false reports, and
injurious consequences. The prisoners will probably
remain in Yarmouth gaol till the Assizes, and then
they will be brought to Norwich for trial.
There is, however, reason to suppose that two per-
sons at least have been connected with the affair. The
watchman on duty about that part of the Denes
where the money was found, speaks to seeing two
persons distinctly, shortly before one o'clock, on a
small hillock of sand, beneath which the bag was em-
bedded. He says he saw them together by the light
of the sky in the back ground, and that he went round
to the spot he expected they would come to, in order
to turn his light upon them, but he saw no more of
them. The footmarks at this place were said by Mrs.
Deck to correspond with the shoes of Mapes, but it is
altogether impossible to speak with accuracy to the
impre,sions of the small nails in the sand, and thst
after fourteen hours. The footsteps exactly corres-
pond with the shoes of Yarham, but there is no
person at present found who saw him out that night.
—Norfolk News.