The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-29 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, MARCH 29, 1842.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.
GREAT MARLOW.

The Committee met again yesterday morning at eleven.
The sitting Member is still in a minority of one.
The vote of John Davis was objected to by Mr. Austin
on the ground of non-occupation and want of value.
It was proved that the house out of which Davis re-
gistered consisted of three rooms, two of which were let
to lodgers, and the third was used by his mother.
He himself resided with his family about five miles
from Marlow ; but he occasionally slept in the room oc-
cupied by his mother, and the furniture in it belonged to
him. The premises were valued at 111., but he had let
a yard for 11. 12s. a-year.
The Committee decided that the vote was a good one.:
In the course of the day a long discussion arose be-
tween Counsel as to the admissibility of the evidence of
a witness, who had bet a pot of porter that Sir William
Clayton would be declared to be duly returned. The
Committee, after deliberating for some time with closed
doors, declared that the witness might be examined.

to satisfy the commissioners, he will pay his tax
still privately, and there is an end. Should be he
suspected of returning less than the truth, a suspicion
that can very rarely arise where the per centage is so
small, and where, except in the case of very rich
men, so little can be gained by fraud, he will be sub-
ject to a surcharge, always privately communicated ;
and if he resist that, he will have an opportunity of
showing his grounds of objection in a private investi-
gation before commissioners, for whose' conduct the
Government must be, of course, responsible. Is there
much reason to apprehend insult in the?

MEETING AT SUNDERLAND.
(From the Sunderland Northern Times.)
On Saturday, a very numerous and most influential
meeting was held in the Exchange, Sunderland, to take
into consideration the rates of duty imposed by the new
tariff, on the importation of foreign and colonial timber
into this country. These duties are, naturally, a matter
of the deepest interest to this town, as Sunderland, in
amount of tonnage, is the fourth, and, in shipbuilding,
the first port in the kingdom. A requisition was pre-
sented to the Mayor, Sir Hedworth Williamson, Bart.,
by whom the meeting was called.
The MAYOR having taken the chair,
JOHN SPENCE, Esq. (an extensive timber merchant,
both at this port and Stockton), after expatiating on
the impolicy of Sir Robert Peel's plan in throwing the
carrying trade into the hands of foreigners, moved a
resolution condemnatory of the alteration in these timber
duties, of which he hoped the meeting would approve.
J. CHARLETON, Esq. (an extensive timber merchant),
seconded the resolution proposed by Mr. Spence.
HENRY TANNER, Esq., shipowner, &c.—l do think.
that although this measure may cause a little inconve-
nience at first, it will ultimately be productive of great
good. lam very glad that deals are to be charged
duty, when imported in the same manner as timber, ac-
cording to their cubic contents, because it will cause a
demand for a great deal of labour in this country, and
this is what we are in want of at present. Gentlemen,
I should never think of denying the great importance of
the carrying trade, and I should wish to forward it in
every possible way, but I regret to state that, of
late years, a very great proportion of the timber brought
into Liverpool and Glasgow has been brought by ships
built in America. These vessels occasion the greatest
evils, not only by the unfair competition into which we
are thus forced, the timber of which they are built
being untaxed, but also by their inducing_your men to
run away, when, from the scarcity of seamen there, you
are forced to pay exorbitant sums to inferior men to
navigate your vessels home. This is a heavy evil, and
one which is yearly increasing, as every shipowner who
hears me will, lam sure, admit, to our great loss and
detriment. These vessels have for the last few years
brought to Liverpool and Glasgow two-thirds of what
we ought to have been bringing. Now, for the present
year, we can expect no material change in the position of
shipping ; but the fact is, that the present depressed state
of that interest is attributable principally to over-pro-
duction, and a very great quantity of the materiel for
this over-production has been brought over by these
identical ships to our ruin.—(Hear, hear.) I think I
shall be borne out by parties in trade, in saying that
hemp is dearer than when it was subject to a high duty.
I think, then, gentlemen, we have nothing to fear from
the loss of the American trade, because the timber from
our colonies mist still be in extensive demand. and be-
cause the Baltic timber will be so little cheaper ; and
though there may be a very great loss for one or two
years, and though I admit the very great depression
which exists, we must endure the temporary evil in the
hope that ultimate good will be the result.—(Applause.)
Under these circumstances, I beg to move as an amend-
ment---" That this meeting declines to interfere with the
duties proposed by the Government on the importation
of foreign and colonial timber."
W. ORD, Esq., seconded the amendment, proposed by
Mr. Tanner, and said : I come here, gentlemen, as the
advocate of the British shipowner—(hear)—and I do
think that, after giving a full consideration to the new
tariff, the shipowner has a right to be satisfied with the
rates of duty on the importation of timber proposed by
Sir Robert Peel. Who, he said, are the principal movers
in this opposition to the new duties ? A few large
houses in the ports of Liverpool and Glasgow, who are
extensive proprietors of Canadian-built vessels, brought
into this country without paying a shilling duty ; and it
is from these parties—parties interested in colonial pro-
perty—that Mr. Spence's statement emanates. Gentle-
med, by the operation of the new tariff; these untaxed
Canadian vessels will no longer enjoy the advantages
which they have hitherto possessed over us.
J. J. WRIGHT, Esq., took the same view as Mr.
Tanner.

The MAYon put the amendment, which was carried,
unanimously and the meeting broke up.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BO W-STREET.

No case of the slightest interest came before the Court
during the morning.

CLERKENWELL.

John Evans, a raged ill-favoured, middle-aged man
was charged on suspicion of stealing a horse, the pro-
perty of John Nicholls.

li.om the evidence it appeared that the prosecutor left
the horse :in a field at his residence, Chalk-farm, on
Saturday evening last. Sunday morning the horse
was missing, and he could find no trace of him, although
he made a long and diligent search.
About six this morning the prisoner took the horse to
a horse slaughterer, named Hatcheler, living in Cow-
cross, and offered to sell him for two pounds_ Hatcheler
asked him where he got the animal. The prisoner re-
plied that he belonged to a farmer name Kous, at Sal-
ford. Hatcheler, suspecting the veracity of the state-
ment, seeing that the horse was worth treble the money
he asked for him, called a policeman and gave him in
custody, and the Magistrate committed him.
UNION-HALL.

William Pace was charged with stealing a bay mare,
the property of James Thomas. The prisoner is a horse
clipper ; and, on Thursday last, the complainant, a
tradesman in Lambeth-walk, went into a public-house in
that neighbourhood, and seeing a man there whom he
previously knew, desired him to take the bay mare out
of the stable, and go and sell it at Smithfield market.
The prisoner, overhearing the conversation, went di.
rectly to the complainant's stable, and taking the mare
out, went and sold it to a horse dealer, and converted the
money to his own use. He was afterwards taken into
custody drunk, and a portion of the money for which he
sold the horse found in his possession.—Committed.
Robert Dell was charged with breaking into the house
of his uncle, and stealing several articles.
The complainant stated that on the preceding night
the prisoner broke into his house and stole several
articles of ironmongery, with which he was in the act of
leaving the premises, when he was stopped by a police-
man, and the property found in his possession. The
uncle added, that the prisoner being his nephew he did
not wish to prosecute, but hoped that he would go to sea.
The prisoner having consented to enter her Majesty's
service, he was therefore given up to his uncle.

William flurgess, a little boy, identified the prisoner
as the person who decoyed his brother away,
The property was produced by Mn Kirkwood's shop:
maul who Stated that it was pledged by a Woman,
The articles stolen in five other cases were produced
by the last witness, who identified the prisoner as having
pledged them.
The prisoner wait conoitted for ttial on six charges,
and the Magistrate told Mtn that he must abandon all
hope of remaining in this country:
INCREAM Or DEstrrtitiosh---Plikatoetit fteya ah tjid
Irishwoman of miserable appearance, was charged with
having created a disturbance at the Refuge for the
Houseless Poor, in Playhouse-yard, Whitecross-street.
Thomas Smith, a porter in the establishment, stated ,
that shortly after 12 o'clock on the preceding night the
prisoner applied for admission, in a state of drunkenness,
and on being told that the place was quite full, there not
being room for even a single additional inmate, the pri-
soner began abusing him in the grossest language, and
positively refused to go away. He endeavoured to re-
move her from the door, but the prisoner seized hold of
the bell-handle, and pulled at it with so much violence
that she broke the wire, upon which she was given into
embody.
In answer to questions from the Magistrate, the
witness said that the number of unfortunate be-
ings who were admitted into the house on the
preceding night was 530, although the place afforded
proper accommodation for only 400. The poor creatures
were allowed half a pound of bread every morning, and
the same quantity at night, and Divine Service was per-
formed every Sunday by a clergyman who attended for
the purpose.
Hayward, a constable of the court said, that he knew
the prisoner, who was an inveterate drunkard, and had
been convicted of felony.
The prisoner was committed to the House of Correc-
tion for seven days.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
CORK, March 23.
(Before Baron LEPROY and a Special Jury.)
CRIM. CON.—RAWKES V. PENROSE.

Mr. Jesrsusts opened the pleadings. This was an ac-
tion taken by the plaintiff; John Hawkes, against the
defendant, Samuel Devonshire Penrose. The declara-
tion contained a count of trespass for the seduction of
plaintiff's wife by the defendant. Damages were laid at
10,000/. The defendant had suffered judgment to go by
default, and therefore it would rest with a Jury of the
Sheriff of the county of Cork to assess the amount of
damages.
The Right Hon. D. R. PICOT stated the case. He
said—Gentleman of the Jury, my client, Mr. Hawkes, is
yet in early manhood ; the defendant is somewhat his
junior, though not much. The young lady upon whore
-Mr. Hawkes first fixed his affections was a very young
girl when he married her, and she is still a youthful
woman ; and I shall just briefly state to you the cir-
cumstances under which their connection commenced,
and to which their ,attachment led—the enjoyment that
followed their marriage ; and then it will be for you
to form some estimate of the extent of the injury my
client had sustained, and for which he now asks repara-
tion. Mr. Hawkes, before he attained his majority, was
left a moderate but competent fortune—competent at
least in reference to the circle in which he moved.
Ancient I believe his family is—respectable it was and
is. They resided in the neigbourhoood of a place called
IsTettleville, in which neighbourhood there also resided a
gentleman who had long been intimate with Mr.
Hawkes's family, and who, upon the approach of my
client to manhood was the father of an interesting family,
and amongst others, of the lady who subsequently be-
came the wife of the plaintiff. Mr. Hawkes and she
contracted an early acquaintance. They knew each other
for years—had become possessed of a thorough knowledge
of each other's tempers, habits, and inclinations. In the
year 1829, when Mr. Hawkes was then only 20 years of
age, and thisyoung lady,Fanny, only sixteen or seventeen,
a mutual attachmenthad sprung up between them, which
was sanctioned by their parents, and it was agreed that
they should be wedded, and wedded they accordingly were
in the year 1829. Mr. Hawkes was at that time the
absolute owner of a property amounting to about 1,1001.
a year, and when he was about to be married he settled
upon this lady who was to be his future wife, an annuity
of nearly one-third of his whole property. They were
married in November, 1829, and immediately took up
their residence at his mansion at Kilcrea, where they
continued to reside until the occurrence of the transac-
tion which has led to this proceeding. Mr. Hawkes re-
sided at his house at Kilcrea for eleven years after his
marriage, in the enjoyment of uninterrupted domestic
fel:city. During that period his wife bore him three
children, the eldest of whom at the time of the unhappy
event I am about to detail to you was about eleven years
old. It will be proved to you by the evidence that the
attachment on the part of Mr. Hawkes for his wife was
of the very strongest and warmest nature. Gentlemen,
when I was first engaged in this case, I asked for any
letters that might have passed bet Ween Mr. Hawkes and
his wife during those temporary separations which fre-
quently takeplace between husband and wife, and during
which, the letters that pass between them would in-
dicate the terms of cordiality, 'or the contrary, upon
which they live ; but what was my surprise when I was
told there were none ? I asked why, and what think
you, gentlemen, was the reply ? It was this, and it will
be proved to you in evidence that, for the eleven years
that Mr. Hawkes and his lady were married, up to the
time of this most deplorable transaction, she had not six
times slept away from her husband. That, gentlemen,
at once accounts for the absence of the correspondence
I looked for. Gentlemen of the jury, I will now introduce
to you another person, and tell you how it is that the de-
fendant in this action has given rise to the complaint
which I am now laying before you. Mr. Samuel Penrose,
the defendant, resided in the neighbourhood of Mr.
Hawkes, and was his near relative. They were cousins-
german. Their residences were within half a mile of
each other. From their earliest infancy the strictest
intimacy subsisted between the plaintiff and defen-
dant ; they were the early playmates of each other, and
their fathers were close and fast friends. It will ap-
pear in evidence that the intimacy and friendship
subsisting, between my client and. the defendant was
much more like that of members of the same family than
friends of the same social circle. If there is a being on
this earth wham Mr. Hawkes could suppose incapable, by
whom he would say it was impossible could be inflicted
this deadly wound on his peace and home, that indivi-
dual was Mr. Penrose ; and let me here frankly and
candidly say, that in all the conduct of Mr. Penrose, ex-
cept in this unhappy invasion of my client's happiness,
not the slightest cause on his part had been given to
create a different sentiment in the mind of Mr. Hawkes.
At what time the attempt was first made by the defen-
dant to accomplish the ruin of this lady's virtue my un-
happy client does not know, and one of the miseries of
this case is that the man whose happiness has thus been
blasted cannot tell when his confidence was first abused
—when it was that it was first broken—when the man
warmly confided in first became false. Therefore you
see, gentlemen, I am not in a position to say
when the defendant commenced his assaults on this
lady's virtue ; but that they must have had
their beginning in some period of the year 1840
there is too great reason to believe. Gentlemen, I be-
lieve I need hardly tell you, that nothing short of actual
demonstration of guilt would have been received as
proof by a man who had been so attached to his wife,
and so confiding in his friend ; and when the elopement
was no longer matter of dispute or doubt, Mr.Hawkes was
not only unaware of the loss of his wife's purity and at-
tachment, but it absolutely came like a thunderbolt upon
him when he heard that she had eloped, and who was
the adulterer. And yet we are in this position, that we
know not but at the very time Mr. Penrose was the visit-
ing and cherished guest and tried friend of Mr. Hawkes,
while he was, day after day, receivedwith all the warmth
of friendship, he was poisoning the virtue of this lady,
and seducing her affections from her husband. It will
appear in evidence, that in the year 1840 the defendant
was observed to be in Mr. Hawkes's house during that
gentleman's temporary absence ; to retire from the
house, not by the front door, but by a back entrance, at
a time that my client was expected home, and to re-
appear again at the front door. and then salute the
plaintiff and his lads-, as if that was their first meet-
ing and salutation of the morning. That circumstance
alone proves that while every confidence was reposed in
the defendant by my client, his seduction of his wife
was not a deliberate or a solitary act, but a series of
them—plain to every one who now hears my statement,
that at the very time when the defendant was most
trusted and confided in by my client, he was carrying
on a clandestine intercourse with his wife. Some time
in the year 1840, Mr. George Hawkes was out enjoying
the sports of the field, and received a gun shot wound,
and the defendant was staying at Kilcrea at the time,
and I very much fear that it is but too probable he took
occasion of his friend's absence and sufferings to alienate
I his wife's affections and seduce her virtue. About the
month of May, 1841, the guilty pair appear to have
made up their minds to elope. In that month Mrs.
Hawkes intimated to her husband that she was
about to take advantage of an invitation she had
received from her husband's brother to spend some
time with him in Cavan, and she decided upon
going there. Mr. Hawkes was then about going to
Kerry, and it was arranged that his wife should pro-
ceed with his brother to Cavan, and at the expiration of
his visit to Kerry he would go to meet her. The de-
fendant, having been previously apprised of Mrs.
Hawkes's arrangements for this journey, proceeded at
the very same time to Dublin, where he had resolved to
await her arrival. On the 7th of May, 1841, she and
her husband's brother arrived in Dublin, and stopped at
Morrison's Hotel. Upon their arrival there, she com-
plained of being fatigued, requested her companion to
amuse himself in any way he pleased for the evening-,
and that she would go to bed, and the young gentleman
accordingly went to the theatre. On his return to the
hotel, he found that Mrs. Hawkes had left—that a gen-
tleman had called for her during his absence—that she
went out with him, taking with her whatever luggage she
had brought, and without leaving any explanation
whatever of the cause of her departure. Mr. H. Hawkes
was not aware that the defendant was in Dublin, and,
therefore, he was totally unable to say what had become
of the lady. However, he at once wrote to his brother an
announcement of what had happened, and it was very
shortly afterwards ascertained that the defendant had gone.
to Dublin .upon the very evening of the departure of
Mrs. Hawkes for that city—that this meeting had been
preconcocted and arranged between them, and that they
had, in fact, eloped to England. To England they
went, and there they delayed for some time. What
further proceedings followed it is now totally unneces-
cessary for me to detail, because the defendant has suf-
fered judgment to go by default, and has admitted the act
of adultery, and therefore, all that is legally necessary
to state should now be laid before you. Gentlemen of
the Jury, whatever amount of reparation you may award
will be inadequate to the wound inflicted ; no compen-
sation that you can give will make reparation for it—
money cannot repair the injury to the feelings of one
whose happiness has been destroyed for ever. But, Gentle-
men, though you cannot measure the amount of compensa-

tion, it is for you to consider the extent of guilt committed
.the amount of happiness blasted—what more we would
elaim it is impossible for you to give. Gentlemen, the
amount of the defendant's property shall be shown to
you.l< Understand it is a fee-simple estate, unencum-
ered by a debt, and yielding about 1,000/. He lived.
peon a scale of expenditure compatible with a gentleman'
in the receipt gentlemanan
hiA 11104118 were sultableto his pos.: as
._
of aii asv and independent income,
the
tit ample and adequate fortune. Gentlemen, this-
ease that We are prepared to lay before you, and I have
no doubt as to the result of What We shall obtain at
your hands.
Several witnesses were then examined, whose testi-
mony did not materially differ from the statement of
counsel. One of the witnesses admitted that there were
rumours of an improper intimacy between plaintiff's wife
and defendant six months previous to the elopement.
Mr. BENNETT spoke to evidence. He (Mr. Bennett) did
not know that he need say much to the jury. This was
a case that depended upon evidence, and not upon law-
yers. The act of the defendant had been described by
Mr. Pigot as an act of unhappy indiscretion or a " yield-
ing to temptation," and he (Mr. Bennett) believed that
to be the truth. The ages of the parties he had
being enabled to ascertain from the witnesses were these,
that the plaintiff was now about thirty-five, and his wife
somewhat about the same age, and the defendant twenty-
six. This unfortunate occurrence took place about a
year age—so that then the plaintiff was about 25 years
old. It, appeared that he lived on familiar terms with
the lady, and that they had been thrown a good deal
together, and left much in each other's society, until,
unfortunately for him, he at length yielded to a tempta-
tion that his nature no longer withstood, and he should
pay the consequences of it. But when the jury were
about to estimate the amount of damages they should in-
flict upon him, they should be actuated by no vindictive
feeling; but to ask themselves, with a proper sense of
justice, what amount of damages they would give. He
(Mr. Bennett) would not give any evidence in th it-case ;he
should, therefore, depend on the evidence before him, and
the jury; and therefore he called upon the jury to be
careful that justice alone directed their verdict, and in
this case justice should be exercised with the coldness
of ice. He sought not to save his client from damages ;
but he hoped he would not be visited with damages to
an immoderate or unjust amount. He hoped to see the
jury extend to him that heavenly mercy which they all
hoped for in common ; but whatever their verdict
should be, he would bow with respect and submission to it.
Baron LEFROY charged the Jury. He said the case,
as it now stood, was one so perfectly for the consider-
ation of the Jury—was one so totally divested. of all
legal subtleties, that it would not be necessary for him
to detain the jury with any observations upon it. There
could be no doubt, if the jury believed the evidence, that
the plaintiff was in some measure accessory to hii own mis-
fortune ; and if they did believe that, it ought to lessen the
amount of damages. It was alleged that he had been
warned of rumours. Another ground relied on by the
defendant's counsel was, that the defendant was not the
seducer, but the seduced. The only point they had be-
fore them on that was, that she sent her brother-in-law
to the theatre on the night of her elopeMent. If the
Jury believed that, it should go in mitigation of damages,
for her loss could not be so great to her husband as if
her character was irreproachable. The only remaining
topic with which he had to trouble the 'Jury was the
amount of damages. Probably they thought they should
give suitable damages ; but he should greatly violate his
duty if he did not tell the Jury that the damages should
not be extravagant.

The Jury retired at a quarter to eight o'clock.
The Counsel at both sides consented that the Registrar
should receive the verdict, and his Lordship retired.
The Jury, at ten o'clock, brought in a verdict of 2,0001.
damages, and 6d. costs.

HOME ClRCUlT.—Kingston, March 28.
The Commission for the county of Surrey was opened
this day. The c•ilender of prisoners is not very heavy,
but there are already nearly 70 causes set down for trial,
and the business will last until the end of the week, if,
indeed, it can be so soon disposed of.
Both Courts will commence this morning at ten
o'clock. Baron Gurney will sit in the Crown Court, and
Baron Alderson at Nisi Prius.

OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Hereford, March 25.

CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL.)
William. Seale was indicted for stealing from George
Coleman, Esq., of Dilwyn, a. bee-hive, his .property.
Mr. W. H. Cooke conducted the case for the Crown ;
the prisoner was defended by Mr. Carrington.
It appeared that the hive was stolen from Mr. Cole-
man's premises on the sth March, and was found on the
16th, in the prisoner's garden. The prosecutor iden-
tified it by some marks which had • accidentally been
made OR the straw.

Upon the hive being produced in Court for the -pur-
pose of identification, some consternation and no little
amusement were occasioned, lest the angry tenants
should emerge from their frail receptacle, and wreak
" indignant vengeance " upon the assembled Bar
and Jury. The Counsel for the prosecution displayed
considerable 'ingenuity in his endeavours to foil
the eager curiosity of the Jury, who manifested
much anxiety to inspect the marks by which it
was said the hive could be known, but all his objections
were over-ruled, and the article in question was accord-
ingly borne by the constable (who evidently showed no
relish for the task) in a white linen cloth to the Jury-
box. Strong symptoms of disapprobation were audible
from within, which increased to an angry murmur when
one juryman bolder than the rest commenced•unpinning
the outward covering. Several sapient suggestions were
advanced as to the means by which the ends of justice
should be satisfied, but none of them proved feasible.
Amongst others it was proposed by a Learned Counsel
to obtain a special order from the Court as the only pro-
bable means of enforcing the wishes of the Jury, and
obedience on the part of the unruly bees ; but as it is
generally known that the Judges are very reluctant to
direct any proceedings to be taken which they have no
legal power to enforce, this course was also abandoned,
and consequently the prisoner, much to his astonishment
and delight, was acquitted, there being no -proof cf the
identity of the stolen hive

NORTHERN ClRCUlT—Liverpool, March 25.
The assizes for the southern division of the county
commenced here to-day, their Lordships having after
Divine service proceeded to the Courts, where they took
their seats for despatch of business at about half-past
one o'clock. Mr. Justice Parke presided on the criminal
side, and Mr. Baron Rolfe on the civil. The calendar is
not very heavy in point of numbers, there being but
67 cases, in which are implicated 98 prisoners. Of
these, 34 stand charged with offences relating to the
coin. There are, however, five charged with murder,
six with rape, six with robbery, twelve with burglary,
9 with manslaughter, and 3 with cutting and wounding.