The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENI

the American wars. He begged now briefly to compare the
affairs of India under the administration of Lord Wellesley, with
the present position of affairs there. He found that in 1797
the Indian debt was 17,059,000/.' in 1805, the close of Lord We-
llesley's administration, it had increased to 31,638,0001.
( Hear, hear.) In 1805 and 1806 the charges alone exceeded
the revenue by 157,000/. But then you must inquire at what
rate he was obliged to borrow for the Government. In 1801 he
paid 114 per cent. ; in 1802, 8 per cent. ; 1803, 8 per cent. ;
1804, 8 per cent.; and in 1805, 9 per cent. In 1805 the debt was
about double the revenue. The whole debt in 1839 was 31,987/.,
or only a few millions more than in the administration of Lord
Wellesley, whilst the revenue had increased from 15,000,0001.
to 20,000,000/.—(Hear, hear.) But now the Indian Govern-
ment had a loan open, and they were borrowing at the rate of
five per cent.—( Hear, hear.) He did not hesitate to tell the
House that five per cent. in India was not so high as three per
cent. in England; so that the Government of India, in this
dreadful state of depression—so much depressed, indeed, that
an income tax must be imposed on the people of England—can
have a loan open at the rate of three per vent. There were
two banks in Calcutta who were discounting, one at eight
and the other at ten per cent., whilst the Indian Government
could borrow at three per cent. That did not look as if the Indian
finances were in so depressed a state. There was another cir-
cumstance which he might mention, which was, that during the
time of Lord Wellesley's administration, the wages of the sepoys
and sol tiers were often a year in arrears, and now he was happy
to say there was not a servant of the Government who was not
paid up regularly every month, and yet they were obliged to
lay an income tax upon their own shoulders to relieve this Go-
vernment.—( Hear, hear.) He was aware that the expendi-
ture in India must exceed the revenue, otherwise there would
be no occasion for a loan being open. But it happened now
that the affairs of the Government were peculiarly favoerable.
He had endeavoured to contrast the affairs of India under the
administration of Lord Wellesley, with the present time; and
he should now say a few words relative to the loss of life in Aff-
ghanistan ; and this he should observe was not more than had
occurred on a former occasion, when the Government did not
deem it necessary to interfere. He referred to the Burmese
war, and he apprehended that in a financial point of view, it did
not matter whether men died by the sword or by other means.
—('‘ Oh, oh," from the Ministers.) He apprehended not in a
financial point of view.—( Hear, hear.) From a report of
Major Tullock's which he held in his hand, it would appear
that during the first year of the Burmese war ninety-six men
died in action, and 1,215 by famine and other causes; he
thought, in fact, that the numerical loss of life during the two
years of the Burmese war was greater than that which has
occurred in Affghanistan ; yet the Government did not think
it neceasary then to impose an income tax.--(Hear, hear.) In
his (Mr. Mangles') humble opinion, the resources of India
were such, that if well governed, it would be able
amply to support itself.—( Hear, hear.) The saving which
might be effected, if the interest which was at present paid on
the debt of India were reduced, would be sufficient to support
the army in India. Now, with regard to the regiments which
were about to be sent to India. The Noble Lord said that
there were six new regiments about to be sent to India ; of
these, however, he must say that two regiments were in the
place of those that were in China, and another was gone to
replace those unfortunate men who had ceased to exist; so that,
in fact, there were only three new regiments which they could
be called on to consider as requiring additional funds. He
thought that the Right Hon. Gentleman had over-rated the
fears to be entertained from the Mahomedan Powers. tie
should have recollected that their energies were broken before
they assumed the reins of power, and that much was
to be expected from the Hindoo population, who detested
the Mahomedans from a recollection of their former cruelties.
As he did not think any danger was to be apprehended from
the Mahomedan empire, so neither did he think any fear could
justly be entertained as to the efficiency of the "native army.
Our empire in India, he believed, to be based on a sense of our
truthfulness in the minds of the natives, and he believed that
nothing could shake its stability.—( Hear, hear, hear. )
In 1816, an insurrection broke out in India, in a loca-
lity where the whole of the population was Mahommedan.
Many murders of British subjects were committed ; yet, not-
withstanding the immense force which was opposed to them,
the British forces repulsed the Mahomedans with immense
loss. An insurrection in Benares was accompanied with very
similar results. Under these circumstances, he did not think
it necessary to raise so much money by such hateful means
for the relief of India; all the information was not yet before
the House, and until it was produced he could not consent to
the levying of an income tax.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. VERNON HARCOURT said he should vote for the
present measure, inasmuch as it did not rest in the least on
the present position of India, though the Gallant Captain had
only brought his statement down to 1809. The circumstances
in which they stood were these. The Right Hon. Baronet
proposed the income tax quite independently of the finances of
India.—(Hear.) That must be evident to all who had
listened to the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet on that
subject. With respect to India, he must say that from first to last
he had viewed the recent extension of our empire in. India
with horror and detestation.--( Hear, hear.) He thought they
were led into the Affghan war by an insane idea of protecting
Asia from Russian power ; whereas in fact, the Affghans them-
selves would have been a barrier against the advance of that
power. So long as they remained on the other side of
the Indus no disasters were likely to occur ; but the ease was
far otherwise when we overstepped that frontier.—.(Hear,
hear.) With respect to America, our position was entirely
different. It would be necessary to maintain a strong force in
Canada, because that country was riot equally pro-
tected—it was more open to the, attack of Russia..
If they attempted to carry on war in China and Asia, to
colonise Australia, and send expeditions to Africa, they must
expect to pay heavy bills on these accounts. With respect to
the tariff and the income tax, it was evident that, even though
no alteration had been made in the tariff, a large sum would be
required for the service of the country. The question was,
would an income tax, such as was proposed, be the best means
of meeting the deficiency ? and he thought that the Ho-
nourable Member for Bolton had, last night, proved
that to take two millions of the people by means of indirect tax-
ation was not the same as taking the same amount by the
mode proposed by the Government. He recollected that, in
1816, when he had but one constituent--(Laughter)—he was
asked by the Duke of Newcastle to vote against the income
tax, but being against his conscientious convictions to do so,
he said that he would rather accept the Chiltern Hundreds.
But the Duke of Newcastle told him that he had made the same
request of all his Members—(Laughter) —and that he need
be under no apprehension on the subject, because half of his
Members—(Laughter)—were going to vote in favour of the
tax, and half of them were going to vote against it.--
( Continued laughter.) He now had the honour to re-
present a constituency of three thousand persons, who were
as independent as any constituency in the kingdom,
and h,- had not heard a word from them objecting to the tax.
—( Hear, hear.) No tax was good in itself ; but he questioned
whether the necessity of the tax being established, the same
sum that was required to meet the necessities of the country
could be raised by any means so efficiently and so conveniently
as by the plan of an income tax. That tax would not be
burdensome to those classes of the community who were
least of all able to bear it. —(Hear, hear.) He would only say
a few words more with respect to what had been so eloquently
put forth by the Bight Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Dun-
garvon, on the subject of the oath which was required of the
parties paying the tax. He thought that if an affirmation in-
stead of an oath were required it would answer as well, and
while the produce of the income tax would not be thereby di-
minished, the feelings of &respectable portion of the community
would be consulted.—(Cheers.) He begged, in conclusion,
to state that he would cordially support the measure of the
Government with respect to the income tax.—(Cheers.)
Mr. C. BULLER said he was extremely obliged to the
House for the very long time they had allowed him to occupy
its attention on the last occasion ; he should not trouble them
by repeating any of the objections that he felt to the tax itself;
he should only beg leave to remark that, from all that had oc-
curred since, those objections were forced on him even with
greater strength than he had felt them before. In the first
place they had since heard language from the Right Hon.
Baronet which appeared to him peculiarly ominous as to the
duration of this tax.—( Hear, hear.) When the Right Hon.
Baronet first proposed this tax, he spoke of it as one which
was to he unpopular for three years, and but barely hinted at
the probability of its being continued for a longer period.—
( Hear, hear.) But a few nights ago the Right Hon. Baronet
who really could not appreciate the force of his own manner
so well as Gentlemen who heard him, spoke'of it not only as a
tax to be imposed for three years, but spoke of five fears as
the probable period of its duration ; and what had alarmed
him still more, he did not say that the tax would be termi-
nated even at the end of five years.--( Hear, hear.) At the
end of that time he intimated that the subject would be taken
into the gravest consideration of her Majesty's Government,
and according to the state of public feeling, and the feeling
of her Majesty's Government, the tax would be dealt with.
These were not the precise words, but such was the impres-
sion he had derived from them. He must say, that in spate of
all that Gentlemen on the other side had said about the unani-

mite with which this tax would-be entertained,. that he (Mr.
Buller) had received such communications as to the feeling
existing in the country against it, that he was convinced when
it came into operation the people would feel it to be as odious
as it had been felt to be in former times. He was convinced
that there would be a constant assault going on against this
portion of the revenue, that there would be a constant agita-
tion kept up, which would not cease till it had been successful.
He therefore repeated that it was with great alarm that he saw
a step taken which, instead of giving security to the finances
of the country, would place a large portion of the
revenue in an uncertain position, and would therefore operate
with danger to the public credit of the country. In entering
on the arguments that had been brought forward on this sub-
ject, he knew that he was entering into that wide field in which
the House had expatiated without much profit or advantage.
He could not see the exact logical application of the arguments
that had been so frequently used on the other side. Thus
when we say that this tax is inquisitorial, you say, Oh ! are you
not ping to war in Affghanistan ?—( Rear, hear.) When we
say the tax is unjust, you say how can that be, when there is
a great war in China ?—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) If we
bay this is a bad time to put on such a tax, we are immediately
saluted with a taunt of having taken off the post office tax.—
(Hear, hear.) Whenever these arguments were used,
however absurd or irrelevant they might be, Hon. Gentlemen
opposite were always ready to cheer them—( Hear, hear)—on
whatever grounds they might be offered. Now let them see
how these arguments would tell the other way. Suppose it
happens to be as you say—suppose there were really any sense
in what you say—(Hear, hear, and laughter)— supposing these
to he fair arguments, how would they bear on his particular
case ? Suppose, individually, with regard to himself, it was
wholly his fault that the country was brought into its present
condition ; suppose it could he said that ho had taken away from
the revenue of the country, that he had caused the increase of
the expenditure, did it follow that, to repair the disaster,
he ought to have recourse to moans that would injure
the people, and put on a tax which he considered
thoroughly bad and mischievous ? Such arguments could only
tell in an assembly constituted like that House, where a great
deal more weight was attached to party hits than to solid argu-
ments of justice or policy.—( Hear, hear.) Now after all these
arguments and recriminations—were they such as Hon. Gentle-
men opposite had the peculiar right to use—wire they not such
arguments as hit them, as well as those on this side of the
House 2—( Hear, hear.) On the subject of the Chinese war
they had a long debate two years ago, and those who defended
the policy of the Government never heard of these difficulties.
The matters in dispute were not attributable to party, but arose
from the policy that had been pursued five years before,
when, contrary to the judgment of many who warned them
of the consequences, they had opened the China trade, when
the same parties told them they would be compelled to come
into the conditions required by the Chinese Government.
Then they were told of their expenditure having been in-
creased by the affairs of Canada. He (Mr. Buller) might use
this argument against either side, for he had voted against the
policy of the Government with regard to Canada; but how did
the arguments apply to Gentlemen on the other side ? What
portion of the policy of the Government that brought on the
disturbances was discussed, in which the votes of Gentlemen
opposite did not help to swell the majority ? Did they not aid
in carrying the measures of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord
Stanley), who was then Secretary of the Colonies,
and whose deportment towards Canada was so conciliatory,
that one of the causes of the quarrel with the English Govern-
ment was the tone and language used by the Noble Lord in
one of his despatches.—(Cheers.) Then there was an Hon.
Gentleman last night—a facetious county Member—facetious
after the manner of the county Members—(great laughter)—
who said that one of the legacies left by the late Government
to their successors, was the disputed boundary question with
the United States of America. Why, he should have thought
that Hon. Gentleman, if not from his information, at least
from his respectable age, would have known that he was put.

Ling the saddle on the wrong horse. Let him introduce him
to a member of the Governmenf he supported, the present
Chancellor of the Exchequer. Let him present to him in that
Right Hon. Gentleman the distinguished negotiator of the,
Treaty of Ghent,by whose negotiation, after a long contest with
the negotiators on behalf of America, they did secure to this
country the right of passage to British vessels through
an impassable branch of the St. Lawrence.—( Hear, hear.) It
was the wording of this treaty that had caused the whole of the
disputes about the boundary question; it was that Right Hon.
Gentleman to whose care the settlement of this dispute
was then committed, who might, in 1816, before
the territory was abandoned to any one, have settled
the dispute easily, but whose carelessness or mistakes had en-
! tailed on his successors and their successors the difficulties of
the negotiation to which he (Mr. Buller) confessed he hardly
saw the probability of a satisfactory result. The only prospect
of a satisfactory result arose, he felt bound to say, from the
interference of the Noble Lord to whom the negotiation was
now entrusted, who he trusted would conduct it in such a
spirit he hoped would prove successful, not only in this ques-
tion, but with regard to the other difficulties that had since
arisen in their disputes with the United States. Then
lion. Gentlemen opposite told them that it was all their
fault that there was any bad blood between them and France.
They were lavish in the approbation they bestowed on the
condemnation the lion. Member for Bolton had thrown out on
the Syrian expedition. But the Hon. Member for Bolton was
consistent in his condemnation ; he had always disapproved of
the policy of that expedition. But which of the Honourable
Gentlemen opposite had disapproved of that policy ?—( Hear.)
They knew also that it was the party press of the opposite side
that had excited the people of France more than any other
party. It was the press of the party opposite that bad the
most unequivocally approved of the treaty of the 15th of
June. —( Hear, hear.) Again, on the war in Affghanistan they
had referred to the predictions of the Duke of Wellington,
who, like Cassandra, had foretold that the war would only lead
to danger and difficulty. He gave the Duke of Wellington
credit for his sagacity, but those on the other side had not
heeded the warnings of the Cassandra even of their own tide.
—( Hear, hear.) Who were those who gave a deliberate no-
tice of a motion to inquire into this matter, and then, fright-
ened by the success of that war, had abandoned the motion,
and by that silence gave more than approval to that policy ?
( Hear, hear.) Let any Gentleman say that he was now better
informed, and that now the event had happened, they had said
all along that it would happen, he should in that case compli-
ment them, as he had had occasion to compliment the Hon.
Member for Pembroke on that retrospective foresight which
enabled him to say they ought net to have done any-
thing that had afterwards turned out unfortunately.
Some Hon. Gentlemen apposite deserved to be classed among
those reasoners of whom it was said that events were their
only masters. With respect to the charges brought against the
late Government about reduction of taxation, during the, 11
years in which Hon. Gentlemen now on the Ministerial
benches were in opposition, he (Mr. Buller) never heard but
of two instances—one in the case of Prince Albert, in which
they saved the country 20,0001. a year, and another in the
matters of the scanty grant to Maynooth, which they
voted against.—( Hear, hear.) These were the only
matters in which Hon. Gentlemen opposite interfered with
the estimates at all, except indeed that they used to come down
when the Army Estimates were voted, and military man after
military man used to hold forth on the necessity of increasing
the grants to the army, In like manner, when the Navy Es-
timates were being voted, Tory naval officers used to declaim
upon the disgraceful deficiency in the sums granted for
the use of the • navy. Let them not take credit to
themselves, then, for lessening the estimates, when,
on the contrary, they always increased them. The
charge against the late Government
was, that they
created the deficiency in the revenue by an undue reduction
of taxation. Why, in the case of the repeal of the house tax,
when there was a million and a half of income removed, the
Right Hon. Boronet voted in favour of its removal. There
was one point, on which he observed Gentlemen opposite made
something more than a mere accusation. They said that the
reduction of the Post-office revenue was a great blow to the
late Ministry, yet they allowed the majorities, obtained by those
then in power, to swell from 10 and 20 to 100. The pre-
sent Postmaster-General voted in favour of the re-
duction of that tax. He would only make one re-
mark more on this subject. Even if the charge
could be brought against the late Government, that
they had caused the deficit by the reduction of the revenue,
after all it would be no very serious charge against them ; for,
let them remember, if the accusation were just, the deficit was
occasioned merely by the taking off of taxes. If those taxes
were such as ought to be kept on, why Ministers might put
them on again.—(Ministerial cries of " Oh, oh.") He did
not understand that cry. They had the majority, and it was,
therefore, in their power to do it, and they might as well put
on the taxes he alluded to, as the taxes which Hon. Gentle-
men said they ought not to impose. Did they charge the late
Government with crippling the trade of the country rendering
it impoverished and unable to bear taxation ? Did they accuse
them of having increased the expense of the country ?
No. They accused them simply with taking off taxa-
tion, which they themselves could not summon up courage
to put on. There was one topic introduced to these
debates, upon which he would beg to trouble the House for a
few moments, because of the tone taken by Members of the Go-
vernment on .this occasion, which he never remembered to have
seen taken by the Members of au. former Government,
but which he had often heard imputed to Members com-
posing the Opposition—he meant the system on the part of
the Government of depreciating the resources of the country.
Mush had been said about the disasters in Affghanistan ;
more had been said on that subject than was decorous on
an occasion like the present. It seemed to him, if they were
agreed that this disaster was as great as they said, their
great and serious sorrow would be rather more silent than
it was, and it did not betoken much sympathy with the
friends of the sufferers to come forward and talk of the
matter in the House of Commons. If they had any
respect for the bones of these brave men that now lay
unburied on the mountains of India, it did not seem
to be evinced in their using them as materials for party war-
fare.—(Hear, hear.) He knew the way in which Hon.
Gentlemen on the other side misrepresented what was said on
this occasion. On last night he saw with great pain the Noble
Lord the Secretary for the Colonies misstate what had been
said by the Right Hon. the Member for Edinburgh. But it
was at least satisfactory, that the Noble Lord, who was a man of
honour and good feeling, amply and fully retracted it. But
there was no retractation of the cheer by.which the misstatement
had been accompanied—a cheer which was the most
discreditable he had ever heard. He (Mr. B.) observed that
the Right Hon. Baronet was very sensitive when they talk of
the country having suffered greatly in the Walcheren expedi-
tion. The Right Hon. Baronet, indeed, seemed to take that
expedition under his especial protection. In 1810 a motion
was made condemning that expedition, mid amongst those who
voted in favour of that ex pedit on, and contended that it was wisely
conducted and managed, was the Right Honourable Baronet
opposite. After having thus supported that expedition, the
Right Hon. Baronet ought to be lenient in the case of Affghan-
istan. Another subject was touched upon by the Hon. Gen-
tleman who had just spoken. When the Right Hon. Baronet
first brought forward this subject, he alluded to the deficiency
in the Indian revenue. On Friday last the Right Hon.
Baronet brought forward the subject much more prominently.
The deficiency was assumed at five millions, and they con-
sidered that this country ought to make up the Indian defi-
ciency. The Right Honourable Baronet certainly said
England was not to make up the Indian deficiency;
if not, then what was the use of bringing it forward?
If England was not to make up the Indian deficiency, let it be
left out of the debate it had nothing to do with the income
tax. When he heard the matter first alluded to, he thought
from the manner in which it was brought forward by the Right
Hon. Baronet, that it was a more forcible argument than it
really was. In the country where people might not be ac-
quainted with Indian affairs, when they saw the statements
made on this matter, they would exclaim—" a deficit in the
revenue of India! Whoever heard of such a thing. How
great must be the rapacity of those Whigs, that the wealth of
India could not suffice for it.--( Hear, hear, and laughter.
After this, they must cut off the head of little John."
A deficiency in Indian finance had hitherto been the general
rule. The expenses exceeding the revenue, was a late and
rare exception, owing to Lord William Bentinek, whom the
party opposite always taunted for his economy. Had any Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer eeer dwelt before upon an Indian de-
ficit, as a ground for taxing the people of England ? The defi-
ciencies in the Indian revenue were, for the five years ending
1814, 104.000/. ; for those ending 1819, 107,0001. ; for the
five ending in 1824, 27,000/. ; and, in 1829, 2,878,0001. Now,
it was a curious coincidence, that in the year 1830, when
there was such an Indian deficit, the present Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, then filling thesame office which he now held, consented
to take off the beer tax, which brought in an income of 3,000,000/.
He quitted this subject of alluding to the arguments previously
used in that debate, because it seemed to him that there was a
fair question to be discussed in the resolutions of the Noble
Lord, the Member for London. He (the Noble Lord) has
certainly deviated from the usual practice of opposition. He
had deviated from the course adopted by the Right Hon.
Baronet when in opposition last year, who, when the Noble
Lord's budget was brought forward, opposed it, but brought
forward none of his own; who explained what ought to be
done, but refused to say what he would do. The Noble Lord
took a less prudent course, but he (Mr. Buller) thought
it a more satisfactory one to the country, because it
was more manly and straightforward, and one which
would redound more to party interest of the Noble
Lord. The Noble Lord the Secretary of the Colonies
had told them that there were some points on which they
agreed. They were agreed in the opinion that there was a
deficiency, which ought to be supplied by fresh taxation.
They were agreed also, but it was a new discovery by Gen-
' tlemen opposite, that the trade, commerce, and manufactures
of this country were languishing, and required the intervention
of the Legislature to rettoret hem. It was satisfactory to find
that this was admitted by the Government, and that they
were about to act upon it. Now they had two courses pro-
posed. The Right Hon. Baronet proposed to meet the de-
ficiency in the revenue by plans which imposed taxation, and
which carried out the principles of free trade more or less.
Both were taxing plans. The Right Hon. Baronet proposed
to get his means for the expenditure of the country, and for
his free trade experiment, by a very large amount of di-
rect taxation in its most oppressive form.--( Hear, hear.)
He proposed to deal with the great monopolies, bykeeping
them up, and as a commencement, the Corn-law Bill had been
sent to the House of Lords. He proposed in his tariff to deal
very rigorously with all the minor and least protected monopo-
lies. Were all in the course proposed by the Noble Lord?
To attack the great monopolies, to get from them relief, and
the means of meeting the exigencies of the country—these 1
were the characteristics of the two clans, and he asked which
was superior? The Gallant Colonel, the Member for Brecon,
had favoured them with a very marvellous, lucid, and arith-
metic account of the persons upon whom the proposed tax
would fall. He said the tax on sugar would fall in a
greater degree than an income tax—he forgot to say that
the tax on sugar, as- proposed by the Noble Lord,
would diminish the price—he forgot tp mention that while
the income tax would be borne by only 200,000 persons,
it must materially injure the persons who depended on
the capital employed by those 200,000 persons. The
Noble Lord's lean, instead of increasing the burdens, would
have very sensibly diminished them. \Vas this plan, after all,
likely to give relief to the manufactures and commerce of the
country; Vhe relief of those who were consumers:? What were
the changes proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet? The peo.
ple of this country were not consumers of copper and tin eres,
or the various other articles mentioned in his tariff ' • but every
man consumed bread and sugar. The relief which the Noble
Lord would have given on the articles of bread and sugar, would
have come home to every man. It had been urged that the income
tax would confer a great benefit on the working classes; but they
must recollect that the object in taxing the middle classes was
to keep up the worst taxes pressing on the working classes—
taxes on bread, on sugar, and the common necessaries of life.
—( Hear, hear.) The Gallant Member for Brecon told them
in emphatic language of a pledge which he had given to his
constituents. He would, he had told them, he never would
consent to a tax on bread for the sake of public revenue. It
would have been far better if lie had finished that sentence and
have told the people of Brecon that he never could consent to
a tax on bread for the revenue of other persons besides the
State. If he (Mr. Buller) might he allowed to diverge into a
rather curious question—( Laughter) —he merelywished to argue
it for the benefit of Gentlemen opposite—he felt he was touching
on delicate ground, hut he hoped the House would hear him
to his conclusion—he would ask the representatives of the
protective interest which of the two plans would protect their
interests on the whole ? It appeared to him that the Right
Hon. Baronet had done great injustice to the protective in-
terest. He (Mr. Buller) was not insensible to the arguments
used on the other side of the House, that free trade was not

G, APRIL 13, 1F42

entirely unaccompanied by disadvantages ; they could net err-
tainly change the old habit for free trade without doing harm
to some one. But he did say that the protective interests had
a right to demand that if they were injured by free trade, they
should be relieved by free trade. Let them apply their free trade
principles fully and justly. If they came to the corkcutter, the
shoemaker, or the lion. Gentlemen's 01111 constituents, or to his
(Mr. Buller) own constituency, who depended on copper, they
came to them and called on those men to give up a little pro-
tection, which was, after all, their sole means of subsistence,
they had: a :ight to turn round and say to Hon. Gentlemen in
that House, " Let us all start fairly from the same point, and
let you begin by abolishing all monopoly."—(hear, hear.) The
Right Hon. Baronet was very eloquent upon a subject on which
he (Mr. Buller) agreed with him, and objected to an entirely
free trade in corn on account of the peculiar burdens upon land.
But did he think of the peculiar burdens upon the manufac-
turing interest in this country ? Did lie recollect the peculiar
burdens to which they were subject, of paying a large tax
upon bread, for the benefit, not of the State, but fur the bene-
fit of the landlords? They ought, in his opinion, to start by
bringing down the great monopolies which pressed upon the
country. He would ask Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who be-
longed to the favoured interest—the age icultural intsrest—an
interest which, however bad might be the opinion which they
entertained of the Members on his side of the House, he could
assure them he did no: wish to see stripped of any portion of
its influence in the country—( Hear, hear)—he would ask
them in what way would a sincere supporter of their
interests go to work in introducing the principles of free trade ?
It appeared to him (Mr. Buller) that he would have first
taken from them that protection which was the most assailed;
that protection which was the most odious to their country-
men, and against which the greatest force of public opinion
had been brought to bear. Now, what was the protection
against which the country most loudly cried? Why, unques-
tionably., the one great giant grievance was the protective
duty that raised the price of the material of the bread which
the people used. They might care about other things, but
it was bread that animated the Anti-corn-law League ; it
was bread that stimulated the cry of the Anti-corn-law
League ; it was cheap bread they asked for, it was not cheap
meat, and most certainly it was not cheap oats they asked
for the country. 'I he Right Hon. Baronet had diminished
the protection to the agricultural interest on those points in
which public opinion did not assail them. He had diminished
greatly, it had been complained, the protection to barley and
oats; he had diminished the protection to butcher's meat; he
had diminished the protection to British timber, and to other
articles on which the agriculturists greatly deprecated any
change. But he would put it to Right Hon. Gentlemen op-
posite, whether they thought that, by diminishing all that protec-
tion, the Right Hon. Baronet had at all diminished the feeling
against the protection which remained untouched ; or whether
it was likely that next year, or the year after, they would find
the resistance to the Corn-laws at all diminished, or the anxiety
decreased for their removal. He said that the fate of that
monopoly would be decided in one way or another; and it seemed
to him that the Right Hen. Baronet had not taken the best or
most humane course upen the subject ; while he admitted that
he had taken the most effectual means of ensuring a continued
agitation of the question. He could also assure the Right
Hon. Baronet that he should have his unfaltering support in
all the improvements which he proposed in the tariff.—
( Ironical cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He was sorry to
perceive that the Right Hon. Bart. did not take the offer of his
support with that feeling of gratitude ho might have expected.
But he would tell the Right Hon. Baronet that gra'itude was a
feeling which grew with emergencies; and he believed that after
a few nights' debates upon the tariff, the Right lion. Baronet
would see more reason to be grateful to the Members on his
( Mr. Buller's) aide of the house. There was one topic to
Which he wished to call the attention of the House—a topic
alluded to by the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies.
The Noble Lord did not enter into minutia' with regard to
the plan of his Noble Friend the Member for London, but dis-
posed of it at once by calling it a " scouted and condemned
plan." The Noble Lord said that it had been condemned at
the last General Election. He rejoiced at the Noble Lord's
judicial phraseology—he rejoiced at his having used the word
condemned," because it led him to ask by what means it had
been condemned ; or by what fake evidence was innocence ever
put to death ?—( Hear, hear.) Was it a fair trial that the
budget of the late Government had at the hustings ? Did not
Gentlemen exclaim against it, exaggerating all its defects,
while tkey lauded to the skies the determination of the Right
Hon. Baronet to resist to the death any alteration in the
articles upon which it touched? The Noble Lord,
to whom he did not mean any disrespect, would
excuse him for saying that the budget of the late Govern-
ment had been condemned upon very suspic:ous evidence.
The trial of the budget had taken place in Lancashire. (An
Hon. Member on the Opposition hench was understood to
say that it took place equally in other parts of the country. )
But it also took place in Lancashire. The Noble Lord had
said that it took place at the General Election, and there was
an election in Lancashire, as well as elsewhere. What was the
evidence against the budget of the late Government brought
forward in Lancashire ? The Noble Lord, whose statements
were likely to attract the greatest attention from his rank, his
character, and his station—the Noble Lord had come forward
and told the elector; of Lancashire that he knew of a place
called Tamboff, in Russia—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear,' and
laughter in the Opposition benches)—and that in that country
—he believed about half the size of Yorkshire—in that country
called Tamboff, there were grown no less than 38,000,000 of
quarters of wheat—(hear, hear)—a quantity twice as great as
that consumed in the whole British islands.—( Hear, hear.)
He told them that the wheat was excessively cheap in that
wonderful country—that it could be sent to St. Petersburgh,
and sold there for 13s. 4d. a quarter.—( Hear, hear.) When
the Noble Lord had made that statement, the electors wham
he addressed knew nothing of the subject, and felt no doubt
that the Noble Lord should be better acquainted with the sub-
ject than they were. He believed, by the by, that the Noble
Lord had taken his statement from the Right Hon. Baronet,
who was the first person that mentioned the subject in that
House.—( Hear, hear, and laughter ) If the Noble Lord could
be taken in by that story of Tamboff, was it wonderful that the
poor electors of Lancashire should be taken in by it ? He had
no doubt, however, but the Noble Lord had been unintention-
ally led into the mistake. He believed that the evidence
upon which the budget of the late Government had been con-
demned elsewhere was equally swpiciotts. Government after
Government had told the farmers throughout the coun-
try that they, having been up in London, knew all
that the Right Honourable Baronet was about to do.
They said they knew he ( Sir R. Peel) would not alter one
letter of the Corn-laws; if he did they would throw their
weight in the scale and turn him out instantly.—( Laughter
and Cheers.) Those Gentlemen now sat opposite, with their
unredeomr d pledges, and cheered the assurance that the budget
of the late Government was condemned at the late election.

He (Mr. B.) did not mean anything personal against Lin-
coln ; but it had put itself forward, and when one panted to
dignify the agricultural interest he must naturally refer to Lin-
coln.---( licar and laughter.) But look east, north, south, and
west, and you would find the same promises producing
the same results. But if the budget of the late Go-
vernment were to be tried let there be a full trial
and ample evidence. Let us see now whether the farmer
would, if he had a free choice, rather take the Bs. duty, or
the tariff, income tax, and Corn-law of the present Govern-
ment. Let us wait also until the tariff has been fully dis- •
cussed—until the Poor-law had been fully discussed—until
they should see whether, notwithstanding all the promises of
their supporters at the hustings, the Government would dis-
credit itself by abandoning the course it took in opposition--
a step of which he would do them the justice to say,
especially the Right Honourable Member for Pembroke,
they showed not the slightest indication. Let us
see whether the supporters of the Government would be as
pliant on the Poor-law as they had been on the Corn-law, not- '
withstanding all the execrations that were heard at the elec-
tions of the system that would shut up men in hostiles and
separate them from their wives, surrendering the poor to the
mercies of three Devil Kings. We should then have a better
mode of dealing with Gentlemen who, while they said the Go-
vernment were condemned last. June, were yet willing to give
conscientious votes against their convictions.—(Cheers and
laughter.) He (Mr. B.) wished to close with a few testa-
mentary words. The Hon. Member for Nottinghamshire en-
tertained the House with an account of the will of the late
Ministry, but that was a spurious document he read from. The
fact was, his ( Mr. B.'s) Noble and Right lion. Friends, find-
ing their Ministry about to close, thus spoke for the ei,untry—
(" Hear," and laughter)—" We cannot do as much as we
wish for you, but you must remember how much we have al-
ready done. To you, electors of England, we have given the
elective franchise, which you have used against us.--( Cheers. )
To you, Roman Catholics of Ireland, and Dissenters of Eng-
land, we have given religious equality and freedom.—( Cheers. )
To you, negroes of the West Indies, we have given personal
freedom (for surely it was through the triumph of
the liberal party this measure was effected.) To you, inhabitants
of every town in Great Britain, we have given the enjoyment
of municipal privileges, and a freedom from the disgrace anti
corruption of your own Boroughs. —(Cheers.) We now be-
queath you commercial freedom, and a cheapening of the neces-
saries of life. We may be reproached for not having effected
this already, still we leave you the right and the means of en-
fot eing it. Faction and selfishness may oppose you, but truth
and justice will carry you on. And for this our last will and
testament, we appoint as executors our late implacable oppo-
nents.—(Cheers.) To those we leave the duty, when they
shall have the power of grappling with prejudices. They will
now proceed to carry out the plans they formerly obstructed,
and above all, they will have to vindicate the characters and
memories of those, whom in their ten years of oppo:it ion, they
had unscrupulously and unsparingly delamed."—( Cheers. )
Mr. BORTH WICK proceeded to defend the measure of
the Right Hon. Baronet. It was most important that British
supremacy should be maintained in India. British force in
that country ought to be indomitable, and British wisdom
ought not to be out-manceuvred. What difference
could it make, whether additional troops were re-
quired for China or for Affghanistan ? An income tax
was necessary to make good the deficiencies which had
been left by the late Government, and to maintain I

our national superiority, and as the representative of an inde-
pendent constituency—( A laugh)—he should vote in support
of the Govsrnment proporition.—( The lion. Member was here
met with loud cries of " Divide," and " Adjourn," from both
sides of the House.) After vainly attempting for some time to
obtain a hearing, he concluded by Illoving, amidst great inter-
ruption, that the debate should then be adjourned.
The question of the adjournment having then been put,
strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no dir,sion took
place.

On our return to the gallery, we found
Mr. BORTHWICK. on his legs. The Hon. Member said,
no treatment which he ever had, or ever might meet with
from that side of the House, would affect his vote. lie

hoped that the experience of some years proved that his con-
duct was based on something more staple than their approba-
ttou, and as long as he had a seat in the House he should con-

tinuc to prove that ; but Its would tell them that though his
vote would not. be influenced in that house, yet his conduct
would be in consequence of the manner in which he had been
treated. With respect to the measure before the House, if,
in the present state of affairs, instead of calling upon them for
:3 per cent., the Right Hon. Baronet had called upon them for
:30 per cent.—( Great laughter.) Hon. Gentleman might
laugh, hut, he believed, there Was not any amount of sacrifice
which this country was not prepared to submit to, when her
honour called upon her to do so. Viewing the income tax iii
connexion with the Corn-law, and the declaration made by the
Right lion. Baronet, that he wished for a moderate Govern-
ment, he did not desire to see any Government in its stead,
having in it any of the elements of the French Revolution of
1830. It was this revolution, and those which had taken
place in other countries, which produced the commercial distress
of the country. They paid 700,0001. on account of the tariff; they
said that the Corn-law had produced all the distress. He could
not help thinking that the agricultural interest was badly
treated, when he saw 700,0001. or 800,0001. given them as a
kir d of bonus for the alteration in the Corn-laws. Ile depre-

cated all suppositions that because persons represented
an agricultural constituency, they would on that ac-
count vote for the benefit of particular classes, and
not for the general interests of the community. He
did not fully approve of the propositions of the Right Hon.
Baronet, because his sympathies were exclusively with agri-
culture, but because he believed that agriculture was the base
on which rested the stability of the Throne and the Monarchy,
and the prosperity of the manufacturing and commercial inte-
rests themselves. Ile looked with considerable jealousy on the
measures of the Right lion. Baronet ; but they had the me-
rit, in their immedsdiate effects, of being calculated to remeav
the evils that pressed on the country. All other measures that
had been proposed had been deficient is this respect. In this
stage of the measure he should give Isis vote for the Right
Hon. Baronet.

An Hot:. Alzatisrit. whose name we cculd not learn,
moved the Adjournment of the Debate.
I On the question being pnt,
Sir R. PEEL said he could not help expressing his opinioi
that the House was in a condition to pronounce an opinion on
this question. There had been four nights' debate on the re-
; solution, and three nights on the report, and he hoped the sub,
' jet had now been sufficiently debated to enable the House to
; come to a fair division to-morrow, and that leave would :be
given to bring in the Bill. He hoped, as they should have to
' diicuss the tariff as well as the income tax, and the revision
of taxation on the raw materials and elements of manufactures,
that the House would feel that he was justified in not
' making any proposal of the tariff tall some decision
was come to on the income tax. He hoped that
the gentlemen who had given notices of motions for to-morrow
evening would, from a sense of public necessity, permit the
renewal of the debate at an early hour, so that the House
might come to the conclusion of the debate to. morrow.
AIrarIASTERMAN regretted that the debate had been
; adjourned, and no decision come to. There was a great
stagnation in all branches of commerce. If Hon. Gentlemen
around him were aware of the inconvenience, they would have
I sat to a little later hour. It was most detrimental to the com-
; mercial interest that the House should separate without a
division. . .

Sir W. JAMES coincided with the opinion expressed by the
Hon. Member for the City of London.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had wished that the debate
should have been closed that evening. He was not aware of
what was intended to be done by the Gentlemen who had
_
given notice of resolutions, but with respect to his resolution
lie had no doubt that the debate would close to-morrow. He
thought too that those Gentlemen who had Bills for considera.
thin would not object to the debate taking place at an early
part of the evening.
Mr. MARK PHILIPS thought that the House ought to
be afforded ample time to consider the income tax, inasmuch
as it had been a question that had only been recently proposed
to the House, and that the Right Hon. Baronet had taken five
months to consider the propriety of proposing it.
Sir 11. PEEL did not object to the House taking ample time
to discuss the question of the income tax, bet he thought
that they ought to devote more than two hours and
a half to it of a night. He (Sir Robert Peel) had
moved the Order of the Day at eight o;clock, at which
time there were not more than forty-eight Members present.
He would do Hon. Members opposite the justice to admit that
there were quite as many present of their party as of his own,
but still the debate did not commence until two hours after the
Order of the Day had been read.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that if Right Hon. Gentle-
men opposite would speak earlier in the evening, that
would have a great effect in bringing.the debate to a close.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had acted
on the principle propounded by the Noble Lord, inasmuch as
he had spoken immediately after the Noble Lord had sat
down in the early part of the evening.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned at One o'Clock.

ADJOURNED INQUEST AT ROE-
HAMPTON.
The inquest en the supposed victim of Good was resumed
yesterday before Mr. Carter, the Coroner, at the Angel Inn,
Roehampton. The room was again crowded, and the greatest
excitement prevailed. The first witness called was
Sergeant Palmer, who stated—My name is Samuel Palmer;
1 am a police-constable, 6 V. On the night of Wednesday, the
6th inat., I was told, a little before 11 o'clock, by constable 192
V, that a murder had been committed. In consequence of the
information I received I went to Mr. Shiers premises in Putney
Park-lane. When I got there I found Mr. Houghton his son,
and a young man named Speed. They showed me the trunk
of a female in one of the stalls of the stable—the fourth stall.
Mr. Bicknell came immediately afterwards, and we proceeded
to search the stable for the remaining parts of the body, seeing
that it had been mutilated. The first, place searched was the
adjoining stall, in which 1 discovered a mattress and two blankets
concealed under some straw. The mattress was very much
stained, but apparently not with blood ; 1 think it must
have been with urine. It appeared quite dry. I felt it to as-
certain. It was one entire stain right through, both sides being
alike. Thought it had not been recently done. The next
place I went to was the harness-room. From the stench I
discovered there, I went towards the fire-place, and found seve-
ral small portions of bone among the cinders. There was
nothing in the fire-place but the cinders and portions of bone.
I now recollect that the fire was laid. There were two pieces
of wood, some coals, and some straw, ready to be lighted. The
ashes were under these materials. I searched the cinders, and
found several small pieces of bone in a calcined state. ( They
were here produced.) They have been broken in pieces since.
They appeared to have been in a fire. I took them to the
doctor's.
CORONER—Was the stench very great?
Witness—lt was quite enough to make me suspect that the
missing portions of the body had been burnt. I then went up
to Mr. Shiel's house, and searched the coachman's room there.
The room was pointed out to me. There were two cupboards
in the room, which I could not open at that time, and I did
not find anything which concerned the present inquiry. I told
the gentleman I would come next morning, and it I could not
find the key I would break the doors open. Upon returning to the
harness-room I saw some keys lying on a table, and thinking they
most likely belonged to the coachman, and that one would tit the
cupboard I took them, and proceeded to the house in company
with Mr. Inspector Busain. None of the keys would fit, and
we broke the cupboards open. They did not contain anything
relating to this question. There were some coats and waist-
coats, which I examined carefully, but there were no marks or
stains upon them. I remained in the stable, and the keys
either fell out of my pocket, or 1 laid them on the corn
bin. Some of them were tied together by the cord or watch-
guard (by which they all tied now), and some of them were
loose on the table ; but all lay together. The keys have not been
owned to my knowledge.
By a Juror—When you found those keys did you examine
them to ascertain whether there were any marks of blood upon
them ? Palmer—No, Sir, I did not.
Did you see any marks upon them?—No I did not.
Are you sure some of them were loose?—To the best of my
belief.

Robert Tee, constable of the parish of Putney, was called.

From information I received I went to the premises ot 111 r.
Shiel, in Putney-park-lane. I saw the remains of a body, and
since the inquiry on Friday, I have been in possession ot those
remains, and I have had the key of the stable in my pos.
session. I produce the bunch of keys (alluded to by the
last witness). I found them on the corn bin on Friday
evening last. They were as von see them now—all
together. John Houghton and the little boy went in
with me when 1 found them. 1 made a very diligent
search of the premises. I have examined the cesspool,
the water-tanks, and the manure heaps in the stable-yard.
I have not found anything pertaining to this inquiry. I have
not found any portion ot the body, nor anything in any way
relating to this inquiry.
CORONER—You searched the dung-heaps, in accordance
with my directions, did you not ? Witness—l did, Sir.
CORONER—What were you going to say about Houghton
and the keys? Witness—lt was Houghton that directed my
attention to them.

Sergeant Palmer recalled—The keys produced are the same
which I took from the harness-room, with which to try the cup-
board doors in the coachman's room.

By the Jury—l had the keys from Thursday morning until
Friday morning. lem sure the keys produced are the same
which I found in the harness-roam.
Hobert Tee recalled—Houghton might have seen the keys
by looking through the window of the stable opposite that to
which the remains lay.
Josiah Tye, police constable 199 V.—On 'Wednesday even-
ing 1 was on reserve in the station-house, when a person came
and said that a body was lying at Mr. Shiel's, in Putney Park.
lane. I went there, and on arriving I found Constable Gardi-
ner there, and the remains of the body of a woman lying in one
of the stalls of the stable, on Mr. Shiers premises. I took Mr.
Shiel's pony and rode off to give information to Mr. Superin-
tendent Bicknell. When I got. to Wandsworth I found that
Mr. Bicknell had gone, and I returned to Mr. Shiel's. I found
Ithat in the harness-roam there was a disagreeable smell, nod
on examining the grate I discovered two pieces of skull-
bone underneath the cinders. ( The pieces of bone were pro-
duced.) I did not know that they were skull-bones at first,
but on finding them 1 took them to a medical gentleman, who
said they were pieces of skull-bone. This morning I was in
Mr. Shiel's yard at about half-past eight, and went toward
the four-wheeled chaise in the coach-house, and upon opening
the lid of the seat-box I discovered that there was a very strong
stench. It came to my nose like a steam. On further exami-
nation, I observed a small piece of flesh on the edge of the out-
side of the lid : from this circumstance I suppose that the en.
trails of the body have been taken away in this box.
[The box smelt so strongly as to be quite offensive to tie
jurors when it was placed near them.]
The witness resumed—l said the other day to Houghton,
" This is a shocking thing." Houghton said, " Yes, it is ;
knew Good to be a very bad man, but I did not think he was
quite so bad as that either." I replied, "If you knew that he
was a bad man, why did you keep his company ?" He
answered, " I had reasons for doing it." " What were they ?"
I again asked; Houghton shrugged up his shoulders, and said,
" It I had not kept in with him, he would have murdered me."
The conclusion 1 draw from this conversation is, that he had
some knowledge of the body being there.
Mr. Inspector Husain next called—From information I re-
ceived I went to Mr. Shiel's about a quarter before 11 o'clock
on Wednesday night, and was directed to make a diligent
search. I saw the body ; I found a box in the harness-room,
o hich was locked, and I broke it open ; in it I found a small
quantity of black tea—rather more than an ounce—wrapped up
in paper. There was no mark of blood on the paper. The
other things in the box were some articles of wearing
apparel and a few books. The wearing apparel con-
sisted of sonic linen and a waistcoat, which were all
clear.. I then searched a drawer in the table underneath
the window of the harness-room, and in that I found a knife,
Wiich I now produce. It is a clasp, or " self-defence " knife.
It appeared to have been recently sharpened, and on the handle
are marks of what I believe to be blood. Standing in the
chimney corner, on the right-hand side of the fire place, I
found this axe' the edge of which, and also the poll, are
smeared with blood.

The knife and the axe were handed round to the Jury.
The knife, when opened was about nine inches long ; and the
axe was a full-sized one. The marks alleged by the Inspector
to be those of blood were very indistinct.
CORONER—Can you undertake to say that these marks on
the axe are the marks of blood ? Witness—l believe them to be
marks of blood. Over a line which was hanging across the
harness-room, I found the handkerchief which I now produce.
On showing it to the woman in South-street, Manchester-
square, she identified it as having belonged to the woman Jane
Jones. There arc marks of blood upon it. Over a saddle-hag
I found two pieces of a woman's flannel petticoat, which had
evidently formed part of the same garment, and had been torn
asunder with violence. I also found two pieces apparently of an-
other garment, both are spattered with blood. ('I appeared to
be portions of a calico chemise.) On oneportion are two holes,
which had evidently been cut with a sharp instrument. In the fire-
place I found some calcined bones, which have been shown to a
medical gentleman. I showed them to Mr. Shillito and also
to Mr Ridge. I found the pint glass bottle, which 1 produce.
It appeared to have contained milk. Assisted by Mr. Ridge, I
found on the following day other portions of bone in the fire-
place. The keys were also found in the table-drawer. I ex-
amined the body after it had been washed—since the Jury saw
it. It was brought out into a stronger light to be examined. I
pressed up the skin of the neck near where the incision had
been made, and in doing so I discovered, on the right side, a
small mole not much larger titan a pin's head.
By the COKONER—I have ordered a search to be made
over the premises, but no portion of the bode has been dis-
covered, except the pieces of bone which have been produced.
Mrs. Jane Brown was next called—l am a married woman,
living at IS, South-street, Manchester-square, in the parish of
Marylebone. My husband, John Brown, is a green -grocer. I
knew a person named Good. I have heard him called Daniel
Good. I knew him to be in service as coachman. I did

not know the name of the gentleman until lately, but
believed he lived in this neighbourhood. I knew Good
as the husband of the female who took the h2dging. at

my house. I was told that he was her husband. He used to
come and see her, and she has passed as his wife latterly. She
took the lodging in the name of Jane Jones, and passed by
that name until she represented that she was married. She
was in the lodgings six months or more before she told me
that she was married to Good. He frequently came to
see her; three or four times a week. lie drove up to
the house, but did not remain longer than a few
minutes at a time. He latterly came in a phaeton.
I have no knowledge of the female at the present

;ime. A little boy resided with her—his name was Daniel;
•he passed the boy for her son-in-law; and I understood from
Good himself, that the lad was his son. I last caw the female
on Sunday, 3d April ; 1 heard her lock her door, come down,
and go out at the private door. I saw her walk past the front
of the house. I had a side view of her. She was in my sigl.t
for aborit three minutes. I had an opportunity during that
time of noticing her dress. She wore a blue silk bonnet, .a
dark print gown, a dark shawl (the pattern a black ground
with Rowers), and black boots. This was between the hours
of two and three o'clock in the af,ernoon. She was then about
leaving the house.
Collo/sea—Have you any knowledge of the purpose for
which she was leaving the house at that time? Witness—God
knows, Sir ! I did not speak to her.
CORONER—Was any one with her at the time ?—No one.
Had yon seen Good on that day ?—No.
Have you any reason to suppose that she has returned to your
lodgings from that time to the present ?—I ha -e not.
And whether she may be dead or alive von don't know ?—I
do not. The little boy left the house before his mother, as I
thought, to-go to school. He returned the following day, ac-
companied by his father, Daniel Good. I don't knot how it
was that he did not come home on Sunday night. I don't
know that the little boy was in the habit of visiting his fathet
withcut the female. He was not in the habit of sleeping from
home, at least to my knowledge, but lie slept out the previous
Sunday.
CORONER—How long had the female lived with you alto.
gether ?—About three years last October, altogether. ,
Had she been in the habit of sleeping out ?—No, not to my
knowledge. But on the Sunday previously to the. 3d April
she went out, and was from home that night. She did not
sleep from home on any night before that to my know-
ledge. On the morning of the Monday, before he came back
with the boy, Good called at my house, and in answer
to a question trom me, he told me the female was gone. I
don't recollect whether he called her his wife, or whether in
speaking of her lie designated her at all. I asked why she had
gone without telling me ? He replied that she had gone to a
place to keep a lodge at a gentleman's house, and weule not re.
turn. He had told me a fortnight b; tore that she was going
to keep a lodge, but did not tell me where. lie said he
was himself going to a fresh place, but did not saw
when. He said he had come for the purpose of taking
away her things—the wangle and bed. She kept a mangle,
and took in linen for the purpose of mangling it. I raid I was
surprised at her leaving. He made me very little answer. I
had no reason for disbelieving his story. He had paid the
rent a fortnight previously, and told me he did not know
how soon she might have occasion to go. I never had
any conversation with the female on the subject after
Good spoke to me about her leaving. I only saw her
two or three times afterwards. She was not in the habit of
talking much. I did not " dispute " the matter as she had
said once on a former occasion that she wished to go into
service. The bonnet now- produced I have seen before. It
was shown me last Saturday. I have seen the neckerchief
also. 1 could swear to them to the best of my knowledge. I
have seen the bonnet worn. I think I have also seen the
neckerchief, but could not so positively swear to that.
have no doubt in my own mind that the bonnet produced is
that which was worn by the woman Jane Jones when she last
left my house on Sunday the 3d April. The neckerchief is
also similar to one which I have seen her wear. The gown
produced was shown me at the same time. 1 know it well;
it belonged to Mrs. Good, or Jane Jones. She was
called Mrs. Good by every one in the house after she
told me she was married. She had a padlock fastening
on her door. There was another lock on the door, but she
generally used the padlock. I cannot identify either of the key.
produced as belonging to her door; but 1 think I have seen tlat
guard with which the keys are tied together round her neck. 1.
could swear that I have seen her wear one similar in make and
colour. I could not say whether she had a watch or note
but I have seen a key attached to it. Good told me hi
had purchased a pair of boots for her, the day he paid rei
the rent. That was last Monday fortnight. He was in tie.
shop when he told me tha'. I cannot swear to or identify thd
Loots. 1 have not seen the body of the female into whole'
death we are now inquiring. There was no circumstasee
which I could identity her particularly. She was a person ell
very " close habits." I have no knowledge of her being prekt
nant. She never said anything to me, or to any one else to mt
knowledge, to induce me to believe that she was.
CORONER—On what apparent terms did this man anti
woman live? Witness—l had never heard any quarrel.
CORONER—Did you ever see anything to lead you to believe
that any animosity existed between them ? Witness—No ; oe
the contrary he always appeared very kind to her. Have yore
any knowledge that she ever bore a child ?—No, I have not.
What aged woman was she?—l cannot say positively, but
think she was about forty. She was a woman of middle stature,
about five feet two inches ; she was not stout, she was a neat
little woman. I think her eyes were dark. Her skin was not
dark, but not very fair. I never saw any mark on her body cie
throat by which I could identify her.
CORONER—When did you last see Good? Witness—On
Tuesday night, when he said he had come to town with kis
family to a ball, and he went to his wife's room, which wits
on the kitchen floor. I don't know how long he remained
there.
CORONER—What did you say? Witness—l inquired how
Mrs. Good was, and he told me he had not seen her that day,
I did not inquire more particularly, for I was offended at her
leaving without telling me. The mangle and bed are still is
the room. Since Tuesday night I have not seen Mrs. Geed.
Mary Anne Clarke, of No. 18, South-street, Manchester.
square. My husband is a tailor. I lodge in Mr. Brown's
house. I knew Mrs. Good. She resided in the front kitchen,
where she worked a mangle, and occasionally took in washing.
Daniel Good, a little boy, lived with her, as son-in-law, but he
called her mother. I know the bonnet on the table, for it was
made by me about a year and a half ago. lam not a bonnet-.
maker, but 1 made this because Mrs. Good asked me. I have
no doubt that it is Mrs. Good's bonnet. I have seen her wear
a 0-own of exactly the same pattern as that on the table.
;own
you ever seen any particular mark on het
person ? Witness—l have not. I never saw her stripped, be
I think I could identify her hair. I think, however, I have
seen a mole on her neck, which I should know again. She
used to wear a handkerchief on her neck in the morning of than
same pattern as the piece now on the table. I saw her last
about ten o'clock in the morning on Sunday week. She came
into the back-yard for water; she appeared in goad health. f
never saw anything in her appearance to make me think she walk
pregnant ; but I have heard that she told another lodger, about
Three months since, that she was pregnant. However, she
afterwards contradicted it. She told me in the winter that she;
had a bad face, which she attributed in some degree to her
feelings on account of bad language which her busband had
used to her.
Sarah Young, of 99, Earl-street, an old woman, said that ow
Sunday week Mrs. Good asked her to take the little boy home
cr ith her to sleep for that night, fur that she was going to e.e
her husband, and was afraid to take the child with her, as she
dreaded Good might massacre her, because the boy called her
mother. She said she hoped it might pour with rain to pre.
vent her going out to her husband, as she did not know what
he meant, or was up to. Witness took the boy home that
night. Mrs. Good she had not seen since.
Mrs. Elizabeth Christie—l lodge with Mrs. Brown. I knee,
Mrs. Good and her little son-in-law. I,saw her last on Sunday
the 3d of April, at 11.1 at noon. She stood at the door of keg
room, and asked if I thought it world rain. I said we might
hare showers. She then said she had been sent for to go out,
but else was not to bring the little boy with her, and she was in
distress where to put him. She put her hands together, and
said, " I hope it will pour with rain the whole of the aterno in."
She did not saw where she was going, but I surmised she was
going to see her husband. I can swear that the bonnet and
shawl were her's., and the gown I believe to have been her's. I
saw Good on the following Tuesday night, at about halt-past
10 o'clock, when he came into his wife's room. He said, My
little boy is in the country with his mother; but he did not
state the cause of her absence. In the beginning of March
she said, I thought some time ago I was in the family way, but
now I know for certain lam not. I thought she was too old to
have a child, but I said nothing. Good seemed to be kind to
her. On going away he used to say, Good bye, my dear;
take care of yourself.
Lavender Layton, a confectioner at Putney ; knows Daniel
Good, and saw him last Sunday evening se'nnight near Ham-
mersmith-bridge, in company with a woman, whom he intro.
duced as his sister. The female evidently desired not to be
seen. Her bonnet was something like that now on the table.
Mrs. Hester, of Peake's-bridge, near Putney. Knew Good.
He brought a woman with him last Sundry week, whom he
called his sister •in-law. They- stayee to tea. She had on a
purple bonnet, though some might call it a blue bonnet. I
then said something disagreeable has taken place between you
and Susan Butcher; and, addressing his sister-in-law, I slid,
" You know Susan Butcher ?" She said, "No ; who is
she ?" I said, " She was living with her father at
Woolwich, where he was a shipwright." The sister. '
in-law seemed very much hurt, and asked Good who this
girl was. He said a friend of his. The stranger then ob-
served to me that she plainly saw Good wished to change the
subject, and she said she had a great charge against him, on se-
count of his little boy. Good tiew into a s age, and hurried her
off. I invited her to come and spend this day with me, and she
promised. She seemed very much hurt about Susan Butcher.
Ihe bonnet produced is that she had on. On Tuesday morn-
ing, Good came to my house with his little boy, and wanted
me to take care of him. I said I could net, as 1 was going to
London. I returned at half-past eight, and the little boy was
there. I have not seen Good since. The boy slept in the
house that night with my children.
Mr. Browne, landlord of the Coach and Horses, Barnes, knew
Good personally, and. served him and a female with gin and
water on Sunday evening week. He said she was his sister;
she said nothing but smiled. _ _ _

Constable 2:1 V, met a female with Good going towards
Mr. Shiers, late on Sunday evening; they appeared to have
been quarrelling.
_ _ _

Mr: George Royal examined.—l am landlord of the King's
Head, Roehampton. I knew a person named Daniel Good,
who was coachman to Mr. Shiel, of Putney Park-lane. I last
saw him on Monday the 4th of April, but I saw him on the
previoui evening. On Sunday the 3d of April he entered my
house with a female; he came into what I term my middle
parlour, and he called for a glass of gin and water. There
were not many versos% in my house when they came in, but
several customers entered while they were sitting there, which
was nearly half an hour. The female appeared to be about
thirty, but I did not notice her dress. He appeared to be kind
towards her, and no angry words passed between them while
they were at my house. He pressed her to drink, but she
seemed (a be reluctant to take it. After the other persons
that I have spoken of came into my house, the female said she
could not bear the tobacco smoke, and they removed into
another room. They left my house together at about half-past
eight o'clock. I have not seen the female since, that lam

aware of. I have seen the remains, but I cannot say they are
those of the female I saw with Gcod.
Sergeant Parry, of the It d:vision, identified the bonnet,
shawl, and other articles proved to have been worn by 31rs.
Good, as having been given to him by Lydia Susannah Botcher,
a young woman residing with her father at No. 13, Charlotte-
place, Woolwich. Witness got them from her on Thursday.
Lydia Susannah Butcher exatnined.—Said she was generally
a servant, but lived now with her father in Woolwich. lam a
single woman. The article* on the table were given to me on
Wednesday by Dlr. Good, as a gift. Ile came between three
and four in the afternoon: We had been acquainted for some
time. lie was very kind to me, and used to come to see tne as
a suitor where I lived. When he brought the things, he wanted
me to put the bonnet on and go with him to Greenwich. Ile
had told me a considerable time before that he had to ,give me
some things which belonged to his wife, who had died. I eon.
sewed and went with him to Greenwich, taking with me my
little sister, but she got out at the Hallway House to Green-.
wicb. I got out by the New Cross turnpike, and we went into
a public-house there. We had a loan of gin and water; and
his little boy, who also castle with him in the chaise, was there.
After staying about half au hour we came out, and Go :d, with
his boy, got into the chaise, and wished me "Good sight," and
drove off. I then went home.
The ConosEa.—Had yon any idea when he gave you those
things to whom they belonged? Witness—No, had not the
slightest. Never saw Good write, and do not think he coold
write. I have received two letters from Good, one of which
I know was written for him. I have heard him say he could
not write.

Tilt` CORONER—It, is necestary That I shculd know how far
your intimacy with this man has been carried. Witness—l
have more than once called to see Good, and once stopped
all night in the harness-room at Mr. Shell's stables. That
was alter I left my service at Wimbledon, about a fort-
night since. I was to have met him on that night at
Putney, bat missed him, and then suet him about eight
o'clock in Putney Perk-lane. It was so late that I could
not go home. I slept by myself. Good did not sleep
with me. I slept on a mattress and a blanket. W4en laid

down Good went out and locked me in as I requested. The
next day I went home by the steam-boat from Putney. That
was the only time I slept there. I have been once into the
stable with Good when young Houghton, the gardener's son,
was present. I took the steamboat close to Putney-bridge.
Good took me on board with my luggage, and after that he
left me. At London-bridge I was put on board a Woolwich
steamer, which put me on shore at Charlton Pier.
By the CORONER—Good has offered me marriage, but I
refused him at first. On one occasion we were talking about
religion, and I said I should not like to marry a Catholic, when
he said, " Nor he either." He had told me before he gave me
the things that his wife had died about five years ago of a de-
cline, and I therefore thought nothing of his offering the things.
By the Jury—The boy was holding the horse when he
brought the things in, and the bonnet was in a band-box, but
they were open on the table and a chair in the room when the
boy came in to tea. The boy said nothing in my presence
about his mother, but while in the chaise Good told the boy he
must call me mother, as his aunt had gone into the country.
Tht boy made no observation to it, but called me mother, and
asked me to request his father to let him drive. I did not
know who Good meant when he said " his aunt." Did not
know if the boy was Good's son. He told me he had a son,
but he did not say where he lived. The articles produced are
the same I gave to the police. They bear a mark I put upon
them.

pubes to the centre of the sternum or breast-bone ; and to the
left of that bone the last ribs are separated from their attach.
ments. The body was also cut across from the centre above
the hip, all round, so that it only required the separation of the
vertebrae to divide it into two halves, which cut appears to ter-
minate at the junction of the last dorsal with the first lumbar
vertebrw. The whole of the intestines are removed. The dia-
phragm is ruptured above the situation of the liver. The lungs
and heart in their proper places in the thorax or chest unin-
jured. I removed them, and found them perfectly healthy, and
returned them to their proper places. There was a small clot
of blood in the ascending aorta, but none in the cavities'of
the heart itself. From the descending aorta being com-
pletely removed with the intestines, there was no blood
in the abdominal cavity. The legs were taken off by first
cutting the flesh, turning the body round to effect this, and
then extending the limb and chopping the femur or thigh
bone from the inner side, below or just at the termination
of the great trochanter, which terminates the neck of that
bone, leaving the heads of the bones in the sockets. I judge
of this by the bone being cut through and smooth on its
upper side, and the under side broken and rough. Both are
severed in the same way. The body is in good condition, and
plump and fresh, with no tendency at present to decomposition.
From certain appearances I should be inclined to think that the
individual was at the time of her decease at least four or five
months enciente. Ido not think that she ever had a child.
From the discovery of a quantity of charred or calcined bones
found in the harness room, there is no doubt that the head and
limbs of a human being have been burned, as parts of these
can be clearly made out, and it is probable the intestines have
been disposed of in the same way, as they can no where be
found. There was no tendency to disease either in the heart or
lungs; and I am of opinion she was in good health at the time
of her death. There was no blood remaining in her body.
By the CORONER—From the absence of blood I think that
the dismemberment of the body, and the separation of the head
from the body and limbs, took place immediately upon death.
I cannot say the actual cause of death, but I am inclined to say
she had met a violent death.
Mr. Allen, assistant to Messrs. Shilleto, surgeons, of Putney,
gave similar testimony.
The CORONER said that although so near the termination of
their labours, the inquiry had better be adjourned.
The Jury agreeing with the Coroner, the inquest was, at
midnight, adjourned till two o'clock this day.

The witness, who appeared a decent young woman, was then
led out of the room.
The Next witness examined was the boy Daniel Good, St)
years of age, who, having in a most clear and sensible manner
answered the questions put to him by the Coroner as to the
nature and sanctity of an oath, was sworn. He then stated, I
Itave been brought up to attend the Church of England service.
I am 10 years of age. I think my father is alive. His name
;s Daniel Good. He is coachman in the service of Mr. Shiel,
of Putney Park-lane, and has been so, I think, about two years
and four months. I did not live with him, but at 18, South-
street, Manchester-square, with my mother. Illy father told
sne she was my aunt. She called herself my mother. I don't
know that I have ever heard her call my father her husband.
Father • used to come to South-street once or twice a•-week.
Sometimes father used to come about six o'clock in the morn-
;_ng when'mother was in bed, when he would gat into bed too,
and stay about half an hour. He would then get up and go
back to Putney. I have not seen my mother since last Sunday
week. It was about one o'clock in the day when I came home
to South-street from Baker-street Chapel. After dinner I
went back to school, and left mother at home, and I have not
seen her since. Mother told me, when I went out, to go to
sleep at No. 99, East-street, because she was going out, and go-
,hg to Putney Park-lane. She told me father said she should
lot bring me with her. She said it was by his order. Did
rot see my father on that Sunday, but saw him the next day.
He sent for me from school, and I found him at home in
South-street. He told me at once that my mother had gone
Ato service, and that I should not see her before six months.
After I got there my father did not stay above ten minutes,
tilien he took me to his master's house in Putney Park••lane. I
Jul not see my mother there or anything belonging to her on
hat day. I slept in the house that. night, and went to bed
a'hout ten o'clock. We rode to Putney in an omnibus, and got
;here about nine o'clock. On Tuesday night I slept at Priest
ridge, at Mrs. Phillips's (Mrs. Hester's). On Wednesday I
'vitt with my father to Woolwich, where I had tea. We went
tp .Wool wich in a chaise. Did not see my father do anything
there. We had tea at a house No. 15, but I de not know
qv: name of the place. he went there to see some one. He
lid a small box with a bonnet in it. The box was covered by
a.liandkerchief, but I saw there was a bonnet in it in the
4astiSts.
e The CORONER—Do you know what colour the bonnet was.
liYas it black, red. brown, green, or blue ?
Bey—lt was a blue one. I have seen my mother wear it. I
lave known it ever since she first had it. I knew directly that
it-.was my mother's bonnet. Father had also a small bundle in
altvhite handkerchief; the contents I did not see. He took the
bundle and bonnet into the house at Woolwich, and I saw him
Ave them to a woman he knew there, as well as many other
things. I saw some of them were apples and pears,
That is what I meant by other things. My father, I,
the fetnale, and a girl had tea together. While in the
Aorn there I saw the bonnet. Those things were left
there when my father and I came away. We then returned to
li'litney in the chaise. The woman who took tea with us came
if
,the chaise as far as the railway (New Cross). Father and
*lie; female then got out and went into the public-house, and
ipMained there about half an hour. We then left and came
to Putney. The female left us at the public-house. We got
'}tome to Putney about nine o'clock. Before we got to Put-
Pzi we stopped at Wandsworth, and my father went into a
4flesep. It was a kind of tailor's shop. He bought a pair
01. breeches, and put them into the chaise under where I sat.
'Did not see him with anything else. He put nothing but the
breeches under my seat as I saw. When we got to Putney I
wissta.ken to the stables. Father was there too, attending to the
pony; after that, as we were leaving the stables, and going up
tS'the house, a policeman came. He charged my father with
ha4ing stolen a pair of trousers, and asked leave to search the
stables. During the search in the stables they found a dead
bisAly. I was with them. I saw the body, and thought it was a
prga • I could not recognise it. My father then ran out of the
st4sles and locked us all in. I have not seen my father from
that time to this. Mother, when she went out from home,
asmerally wore a blue bonnet. The one produced is my mo-
istw s. is the same bonnet 1 saw on Wednesday in the
sliaise and at Woolwich. The dress produced is my mother's.
I know it by the stuff and the way it is made. 1 also know the
aittern and colour. I have also seen her wear gloves like those
rhduced. I have also seen her have such a neckerchief as
t *produced, and I believe the boots to be my mother's also.
'l'4 witness then identified the keys before produced to be his
t,enther's property. One unlocked the padlock of her room
mar, another her money-box, and the guard chain I have fre-
inently seen her wear.
elhe public, including the reporters for the press, were ex-
ItMed from the room, and were kept out for nearly an hour.
While so excluded Mr. Royal was recalled. r)lr. Reeks, the
shiliord, was next called in, and after him a female named
at'etch, who was in the room full half-an-hour. On the public
eihig re-admitted, the Jury retired for about ten minutes, and
a their return (eight o'clock),
"The CORONER. said the reason of the order having been
riven for the room to be cleared, and even the gentlemen of
be,press excluded, was, that it was feared the publication of
shea evidence then entered into might tend to frustrate the
course of justice, and defeat the apprehension of the supposed
.ausderer.
John Houghton, second gardener to Mr. Shiell, was then
•xamined, atter having been cautioned by the Coroner not to
snsierr any question which he considered might criminate
imself. He then stated—l live on Mr. Shiel's premises,
irsnard Lodge, Putney Park-lane. My father is head gar-
aner, and lives in the farm-yard. I occupy a room over the
stables. 'There are four rooms on the floor that is over the
+Wee and the harness room. I slept in the room next to
fr,niel Good, who was coachman in the same service, and
opt at ':r. Shiel's residence. On the night of Wednesday
st I was at my father's house, which is about fifty yards from
14 stables, and had been there about a quarter of an hour
hen my sister came in with a little boy, who was the son
Daniel Good. The boy was crying, and he stated that
IT father had run away, and he was anxious to know where
is aunt lived. I immediately went to see what was the
-flatter, my fa:her having stopped so long.. I went to the
fable on the right hand in the yard, in which are three stalls,
a loose stall, and a loose box. I then saw my father and a
policeman standing there. Assistance was sent for to look
after Daniel Good, for stealing a pair of trousers from Mr. Col-
lirtgbourne. They did not tell me of the discovery of the body,
thinking it would not be a proper thing to tell me, but about
twelve o'cloesk my father told me of it. I saw the body. I had
a slight eempse of it. I did not know the person. I remained
with ttse constable during the night in the stable. I have
seen tie body several times since. lam sure Ido not know
the body. It has every appearance of being the body of a
female. I have no knowledge more than the utterest stranger
as to who put the body there. lam quite ignorant of it. I
have no reason to suspect how the body came there. I have been
in toe stable., but never had any concern in any kind of secrets
whatever. Ido not know of Good being in the habit of having
:emales in the stables, but I have heard him down at all hours
of the night repeatedly. I mean in the harness-room. I
have enown him to have tea with foma es there once or twice.
Never knew Good to have females to sleep there. I have
seen Susan Butcher there at tea with Good. Cannot say
when I last saw her there. It is more than a month ago.
Good told me he had lost his wife five sears ago, and that his
sister had the care of his boy at the west end of the town. I
have seers the person he called his sister three times, once in
London, and twice at the stables at Roehampton. Last Sun-
day fortirght I saw her there in the afternoon, and on the
Monday morning following, about ten o'clock, I saw her pass-
big dawn the lane towards Putney. She was alone, bad a blue
bonnet on, and a bundle with her. Did not know where she
a;etit. That, on my oath, was the last time I saw that female.
I say it to my soul—to my heart. Whether the body that
was found is the body of that female I can't say, as there are no
features. On the Tuesday morning Good told me he had a
'lie to dry the harness, and I saw smoke issuing from the harness-
. oom chimney. I went to bed on those nights perfectly sober.
CORONER—What description of character was Good, and
slat was his general conduct?
Witness—He had never a good character, and no one would
-est him much. He was a kind of a swindler. lam not in
a; of Good, that is to say, bodily fear. I sleep very sound
-.act heavily. I can't say how the body came there. Good had
ale access to the stables. He always kept the key himself,
id ever since he came into the service, if he only went into
to harness-room he would lock the stable-door. Good had
stays to be in at ten o'clock, but after that he could get out on
.e sly. I have no suspicion of any one but Good having put
e body there. Good could neither read nor write.
Wm. M'Evoy examined,—l live at No. 2, Laundry-yard,
`restminster, and am a pavior. On Thursday morning,
ayat three minutes past six o'clock, I was in the Poultry.
lam a man came up to one of my comrades and spoke to him
Irish, and he then said in English he wanted a direction
titten. Ile then asked me, and I agreed to do it. We went
the Three Tuns in Coleman-street, and the man called for
quartern of gin and a sheet paper. I then began the letter.
l)e, one produced is my handwriting. The letter is as fol.-
, ea:— " April 7, 1842.
"My dear Sir,—l take the liberty of writing these: few
• es to you, ]toping that you will take care of my destitute
v. I took him out of the Norwood school, and I have kept
m in South-street. I took tea last night at No. 13, Char-
:te-place, Cozy's-fields. I became acquainted with Susan
utcher since Christmas last. There is 71. 10s. due to me,
ud I hope you will turn it to the account of my destitute boy.
ant a single man since I buried my dear wife, five years the
-Ith of January last. I went to Mrs. Giles's, No. 6, Brum-
.e-11-row, Clapham. She wanted me to leave my boy with
•er for a week, but I would rather not. You will find two
~.arkets and a mattress in the stable which Susan Butcher and
• e slept on. I was a Roman Catholic until I became ac-
,uainted with Susan Butcher, and she was the cause of all my
ta,uble and misfortune. There is 2s. 6d. due for the man, •
lid 11(1. turnpike, and Is. 6d. turnpike. Sir, you will hear
t more. God bless you all. There is ss. sd. expenses to
'.:r s. Allen, which that be left to my little boy, and I put my.
alt in you that you will excuse me for leaving you these few
• tys. Mrs. Williams first, I think got my boy into the school.
:son' Butcher will go to London She was to come up next
Lek for the mangle, at 18, South-street."
"lhe'witness, who had been nearly an hour in deciphering
is oa n handwriting, as far as the laicise, here gave up the job,'
.)cing unable to get further.
Examination resumed—The direction is " Mr. Shiel, Esq.,
TiGehamiaori, Surrey." The man, when I had finished writing
the letter, told inc to put the name of " Daniel Good" to it.
The man was dressed in a dack green plaid cloak, drab knee
breeshi•s and gaiters, a pair of low shoes, and, I believe, an
NI ben the letter was folded, and I had
oil-skin over his hat.
put sir a duplieste the
man gave me, he took a wafer and closed
'
it up. That is all know.
Deeter Benjamin Bulge, of Putney, examined—By order
of
the Coroner I have examined uody in question. 1 found
the head cut off between the third and fourth vertebrse* The
arms from the shoulders.
The. right cut partly with a
!mire, as the shallow socket or glenoid cavity
Also the caa cavity of the scapula is
distinctly seen, and the cartilage is u
coid prootas of the scapula, with a Ipliortien of tendon of the
brachialis muscle. But the separation beyond this must have
been done by a chopper or hatchet, as the ceher project-
ing bone of the scapula or shoulder bone, which forms
the upper part of the joint of the acromion
_process, is
broken off with a part of the clavicle or collar-bone. The
la ft arm seem: to have been taken less trouble with, as the
head and neck of the scapula, the glenoid cavity, the acro-
mion, and caracoid processes, as well as one-third of the cla-
vicle, ale broken off, and the body of the scapula itself much
splintered. The trunk is cut up from the left side from the

fIREAT BIRMINGHAM MEETING
kJII THE MIDDLE & WORKING CLASSES UNITED,
. .

Birmingham is itself again ! Ten Thousand Persons affirm d.
the principles of the COMPLETE SUFFRAGE UNION,
at the Town Hall, on Monday Evening.
A FULL REPORT, with Comments, will appear in
THE BRITISH STATESMAN
Of SATTEDAY and SUNDAY NEXT.
The Largest Paper published, 12 folio pages, price sd.
Orders received by all Newsmen.
Office, 170, Fleet• street, London.

Now ready, i■ one volume, priee 2s. 6d. (post free 6d. extra),
_HORACE WALPOLE'S OWN CATA-
LOGUE of STRAWBERRY-HILL, copied verba-
tim from the original Edition, printed at his private press at
Strawberry-hill, describing every object of interest and attrac-
tion in this most unrivalled Collection. extendinz over 120
large quarto pages of type and paper, with the Author's own
Notes and Anecdotes. N.B. No other cateogue,.though sold
at 125., is genuine.
London: E. Smith, No. 6, Wellington-street, Strand ; and
W. Strange, 21, Paternoster-row.

THE WEATHER.—NOON, APRIL 13.
ROYAL GALLERY OF SCIENCE, ADELAIDE-STREEI.
Thermometer... 42 Highest 43 j Lowest 34
Barometer 30.05.—Wind N.E.--Freezing Point .22 Deg.

HIGH W ATEIt AT LONDON BRIDGE THIS DAY.
Morning...—. 7 minutes after 3, I Evening ..... 23 minutes after

- • 4.,4`
gt, 1.4 • ,
; L,4,*.x.arik-ng
- ~„

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING. APRIL 13, 1842.