The Sun.
London, England, 1842-11-03 00:00:00

PARIS ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

SITTING OF OCT. 24.—One of the first papers
read in this sitting was by M. de Romanet, on the
means of improving the resources of the French pea-
santry. It has been frequently remarked with sur-
prise by persons unacquainted with the circumstances,
that the French, although possessing rich pasturage
and all the other apparent means of operation, should
be tributary to Switzerland, England, and other
countries, for the better sorts of cheese consumed in
France. Why, it is asked, should they go to Eng-
land for Cheshire cheese, and to Switzerland for
Gruyere ? The answer is because in France property
is so divided and sub-divided that there are no
dairies on the extensive scale required for carry-
ing on this branch of rural manufacture with success.
But it will be again asked—lf the divisions of pro-
perty are so numerous in France, are they not equally,
or even more so, in Switzerland, and yet the cheese-
trade is a continued source of wealth in that country ?
This question brings us precisely to the main point of
M. de Romanet's paper. In Switzerland, until of
late years, the making of Gruyere cheese was limited
to a few wealthy persons; for as it was necessary, for
Ithe quality of the article, that the cheeses should be
I very large, and that the milk should be coagulated on
the day of its being taken from the cow, it was only
by keeping a very large number of cows that the maim-
facture of Gruyere cheese could be carried on. The
owner of one, two, or three cows, was therefore,
unable to profit by the demand for this particular
kind of cheese in foreign countries. At length, how-
ever, an ingenious mode of enabling the poor pea-
santry to compete with the more wealthy, was hit
upon. It was proposed to establish a cheese-dairy
upon a joint-stock principle ; to keep an account of
the quantity of milk delivered by each person, and
to apportion the profits arising from the sale of the
cheese to the different contributors, according to the
amount of their contributions. The idea was carried
into execution, and has become general in Switzerland.
M. de Romanet proposes that the plan should be tried
in France. It could not fail to be successful, for how
many peasants are there keeping only one cow who
are unable to dispose of the milk to advantage ? In
this way, a constant and regular market could be se-
cured, and the dairy-keeper, to whose care would be
entrusted the interests of the mass of contributors,
would be able to give the fullest extension to the ar-
rangements which are necessary in order to compete
successfully with the wealthy agriculturist.
The reading of this paper was followed by one of a
curious nature connected with the food of herbivo-
rous animals. The author, M. Dumas, says he
has ascertained that the quantity of fat in
animals, in a healthy state, does not depend, as
has been generally supposed, upon some pecu-
liar process in the digestion, but upon the quan-
tity of fatty matter contained in the food that is
eaten. In order to establish a theory so absolute, and,
as many will think, so unreasonable, M. Dumas has
given an account to the Academy of several practical
experiments. He begins by stating that, on an ana-
lysis of hay and maize, or Indian corn, he found the
former yield 2 per cent. of fatty matter, and the latter
9 per cent. Herbivorous animals, says M. Dumas,
always make less fat than the amount of the fat
contained in their food, but the milch cow furnishes
a larger quantity than any other animal, and the
quantity of butter that she supplies would, if weighed,
be found equivalent to that contained in her
food. M. Liebig, who has written on this subject,
denies that the maize contains any portion of fatty
matter. He states that having given to a goose,
weighing four pounds, 36 pounds of maize, the ani-
mal grew to the weight of nine pounds, and when
killed furnished three pounds and a half of grease.
All this he contends was the result of digestion, the
food having no fatty matter ; but without adopting
the theory of M. Dumas, which indeed appears to us
to be a very strange one, it is impossible not to be
struck with the opportunity that M. Liebig's experi-
ment affords to M. Dumas to establish his theory in
his own way. M. Liebig says that there is no fatty
substance in maize, and consequently that as a goose,
after eating 36 pounds of it, acquired three pounds and
a half of fat, the result was .due to the mysterious ope-
ration of the digestion, and not to the food. N. Du-
mas, on the contrary, contends that in maize there is
nine per cext of fatty matter. Nine per cent. upon
thirty-six pounds, and an allowance for the quantity
of fat upon the goose when it weighed only four
pounds, would give something like the quantity which
M, Dumas says exists in the food in question.
A communication was made to the Academy of an
animal of the rat species, until lately unknown, having
been found alive on the summit of the Faulhoon
Mountain, in Switzerland, which is 2,683 metres
above the level of the sea. M. Martins' who dis-
covered this animal, and who has several specimens
preserved in spirits, has given to it the name of arvicola
nivalis. According to M. Hugi, an animal of this
kind was seen upon the Strahleck, at the height of
3,150 metres above the level of the sea.

THE PRINCESS AUGUSTA.—It is expected that the
marriage of her Royal Highness the Princess Augusta
of Cambridge, with his Royal Highness the Heredi-
tary Grand Duke of Mecklenburgh Strelitz, will he
solemnised very shortly. Ile: Majesty's consent to
the nuptials having been obtained in due form at the
Privy Council yesterday, the necessary state document
has had the Great Seal of England attached to it.
Lady Seymour arrived in town this morning, having,
had a splendid passage in the General Steam Naviga-
tion Company's steam-ship Wilberforce, Captain John
Stranack, of only eighteen hours, from Antwerp.
The Wilberforce left 131ackwall again this morning,
with Sir Peregrine Maitland and family on board.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 2.
(Before the ICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)
BUSINESS OF THE COURT.
Ills lloNoun, in the course of the day, inquired of
the gentlemen of the bar whether there were many
motions for hearing, as, in that case, he would take
only unopposed petitions to-morrow (this day), and
would afterwards proceed with the seal.
Mr. BETHE LL observed that there were several mo-
tions to be made, but he did not think any pressed.
Mr. ANDERnox said that he had one motion which
it was necessary the Court should dispose of as early
as possible.
Mr. WAKEFIELD observed that his friends, Mr.
Bethell and llr. Stuart, together with himself, after.
much consideration on the subject, had come to the
conclusion that it would be far better for the suitors
and all parties interested, that the Court should pro-
ceed regularly each day with the appointed business,
and if any particular case pressed a special application
might be made for it to be heard.
After some short discussion it was determined that
the Court should proceed with the hearing of petitions
to-morrow (this day), and that after the unopposed
ones were disposed of, Mr. Anderdon should make
the motion that pressed.
The Court disposed of several other motions, and
rose shortly before four o'clock.
(Before Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.
IN RE THE EARL OF STRATHMORE.

Mr. LOVATT applied to the Court to have the pub-
lication in this cause stand enlarged till the plaintiff,
the Earl of Strathmore, had put in an answer to a bill
of discovery, filed by Lady Glamis, the defendant, in
order to aid her in her defence in those suits pending
between her Ladyship and Lord Strathmore.
His HONOUR thought that, under all the circum-
stances of the case, the bill having been filed in the
year 1838, and put to issue in 1841, and an order to
enlarge the publication having been already made in
the present year, he thought the delay would be too
great to justify he Court in making the order applied
for, unless some arrangement should be made in re-
ference to the other case of Gibbon v. Strathmore,
which had been referred to. If such an arrangement
could not be made he must refuse the motion with
costs.

Mr. LOVATT—No arrangement of the sort, I be.
lieve, can be made.
His HONOUR—I must therefore refuse the motion.

COURT of EXCHEQUER, Nov. 2.
WRIGHT s'. MAULS AND OTHERS.
This was an action of tresspass for false imprison-
ment brought against the defendants, who were the
three Commissioners of Bankruptcy at Leeds, by the
plaintiff, who was an attorney's clerk. The case was
tried at the York Assizes betbra Lord Chief Justice
Denman, who gave it as his opinion that an action
could not lie against the defendants for the manner in
Ns hich they bad discharged what they considered to
be their duty in the case. His Lordship, however,
said he should leave it to the Jury to say what the
amount of damages might to. be in case it should be
afterwards decided tinit the arrest of the plaintiff had
been illegal. The Jury found that the plaintiff was
entitled to no damages, even in that ease, much to the
0.1111450 of akiloot every one.

Mr. KNOWLES now moved for a new trial, on the
ground that the apprehension of the plaintiff had been
illegal, and that he was consequently entitled to da-
mages for false imprisonment.
The COURT however, was of opinion that the arrest
of the plaintiff was legal, inasmuch as he did not appear
as a witness when called upon in obedience to the first
summons of the Commissioners.
The rule, was, therefore, refused.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nov. 2.
The Court was occupied up to two o'clock in hear-
ing applications for bail, of which there were thirty-
two country and four town cases ; none presented any
public interest.

IN RE HENRY CHARD, ALIAS HENRY LEE ALLEYNE.
The insolvent in this case was a person who, some
short time since, occupied a considerable portion of
the public attention, in conjunction with, a criminal
information in the Queen's Bench, arising out of cer-
tain slanderous expressions towards him and his al-
leged sister, who became the wife of Mr. Dempster
Hemming, the eminent banker, of Caldecot Hall,
Warwickshire, under rather peculiar circumstances.
It appeared that in 1836 he became bankrupt, and
not giving a satisfactory account of his property, and
refusing to answer certain interrogatories, was in
consequence' refused his certificate, and committed by
the presiding Commissioner to Lancaster Castle,
where he remained until June, 1837, when he pe-
titioned the Court, and was discharged, owing at the
time debts to the amount of 10,0001. Up to this time
he was known as Henry Chard, but then assumed the
name of Henry Lee Alleyne ; set up a splendid
establishment, with a large retinue of servants, horses,
carriages, &c., in Warwickshire, and it was then and
there the singular courtship commenced between Mr.
Dempster Hemming and the insolvent's sister. It
was ascertained some time back by the creditors, from
whose immediate power he was released in 1837, that
at the present time the Leicester and Warwickshire
Banking Company were indebted to him in the sum
of 10,0001., and that he had instituted legal proceed-
ings against them for its recovery; also, that a
gentleman, name.' Needham, was indebted to him for
3,0001. On a former day, Mr. Cook moved for a rule,
calling on those debtors of Alleyne not to pay down
the money to him, and also requiring him to show
cause why he should not, according to the provisions
of the 89th section of the Act, pay over to the assig-
nees the sum of 10,000/.
Mr. WOODROFFE, on behalf of the insolvent, ap-
peared now to show cause, and handed in a number
of voluminous affidavits and other documents.

Mr. COOKM, for the assignees, requested a postpone-
ment of the case until he should have tithe to read
over these documents.

The COURT acceded to the request, previous notice
of the day for hearing being given.
It was stated in Court, by those most likely to be
well informed, that Mr. David Pollock, the brother of
the Attorney-General, was to be the successor of
Commissioner Bowen.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

SENTENCES AND OTHER SESSIONAL

RESULTS.

At the termination of the sessions yesterday a
number of prisoners were brought up to receive the
judgment of the Court, and some who had been adju-
dicated upon instanter, came up to have their sentences
commuted. The following is a list of the sentences
and final adjudications :
Transported for Life—Alfred Lewes, Robt. Spring
Snell.
For Fifteen Years—George Hawkins, W. Elston,
Robert Fletcher, Henry Passenger, Henry Cox.
For Fourteen Years—W. Lone, J. Smith, J. C.
Bell (afterwards commuted to ten years).
For Ten Years—M. Goutley, E. Brocknell, M.
Murray, W. Walker, E. Grover, J. B. Carter, Louisa
Grange, W. Edwards, George Moulden, J. Collins,
Benjamin Smith, J. Maxwell, T. Matthews, H. John-
son, Henry Griffin, W. Carley, Thomas Welch, J.
Smith, J. Kelly, Mary Angus.
For Seven Years—T. Buckingham, R. Sinefield,
T. Robinson, J. Rolston, Henry Smith, R. Boynett,
Ann Newman, W. Ingram, Nathaniel Marskill, W.
Buckland, F. Buckland, P. Mackay, W. Castle, R.
Lennon, J. Jones, J. Worrall, J. Thompson, Boncer
Hiam, W. Hawkins, W. Othen, W. Butes. J. Otzen,
T. Birch, W. Cooke, C. Mason, H. Drew, Thomas
Smith, H. Ward, H. Price, G. Shore, W, Russell,
J. Bayliss.
Imprisonment and Hard Labour in the House of
Correction :
For Two Years—W. Jones.

For One Year—William Smith, Mary King, R.
Phillips, Mary Harriel, C. Escott, W. Kidd, J. Brown,
Elizabeth Edwards, M. Hassey, W. Watson, William
Smith, George Smith (30), George Smith (19), R.
Nicholson, Mary King, Mary Cleale, W. Tasker, J.
Powell, Amelia King, J. Avey, Sarah Dyson, F.
Kirby.
For Nine Months--William Whitbread, J. 1111-
den, J. Hastev, W. Fowkes.
For Six Months—Thomas Bowie, J. Taylor, J.
Thomas, J. Holloway, Mary Jones, W. Bays, A.
Clark, Jacob Wall, J. Morgan, J. 'Welch, E. Atherey,
H. Bayliss, A. Griffiths, Catherine Donovan, D. Pio-
mals Piani, William Spark, •Mary A. White, W.
Martin, Mary Dudmau, Mary Thomas, R. Elcomb,
Elizabeth Trigg, T. Warman, T. Bartholomew, J.
Wrigglesworth, J. Union, J. Watkins, Sarah San-
ders, J. Foley, W. Shoebell.
For Four Months—A. Allen, F. Wild, Jane
Kitchen, Maria Mulbigh, Margaret Trot, Ann Moore,
T. Beaumont, G. Palmer, Ant. Smith, Thos. Anly,
W. Swallow, J. Heskett, Mary A. Clark.
For Three Months—Hannah Chapman, Sarah Nash,
Mary A. Cleland, Mary Crawford, Elizabeth Davis,
Eliz. Powell, Sarah Beeman, J. Brown, N. Hudnott,
E. Cannon, Agnes King, Cath. llanney, J. Morgan,
W. Gardner, J. Page, Jas. Duke, E. Brown, T. Rus-
sell, T. Elsey, W. Payne, W. Waite, Saml. Bridges,
Eliza Williams, J. Morgan, J. Bagwell, Ann Stevens.
For Two Months—Alice Walker, Mary Smith,
Ells. Blake, J. Stannard, J. Rolston, D. Donovan,
Geo. Bishop, J. Brown, Susan Smith.
Imprisonment for six weeks, 2 ; one month, 2 ;
fourteen days and under, 13 ; privately whipped and
discharged, 2; judgments respited upon, 9; acquitted
and detained, 1; remanded and traversed to next ses-
sion, 5; bills ignored by the Grand Jury, 9 ; ac-
quitted by the Petit Jury, 58 ;,discharged, 5 ; entered
into recognisances, 2 ; discharged fur want of prose-
cution, 7.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.

John Sly, who had for some considerable time been
a waiter at the North and South American Coffee-
house, was brought before Mr. Alderman Wilson,
charged with having plundered his employer, Mr.
Markwell, the present owner of that establishment.
The evidence exposed a desperate system of robbery.
Mr. Chadwick Jones, the barrister, stated for the
prosecution, that Mr. Markwell, who was also pro-
prietor of Long's Hotel in Bond-street, had become
master of the North and South American .Coffee-
house, formerly kept by Mr. Davis, and continued the
prisoner, and a lad named Chesterton, who had been
in the service of the former landlord in the house,
the one as waiter, the other as billiard-marker. In
consequence of a robbery which had been committed,
the prisoner, of whom some suspicion was entertained,
was discharged, and, as appeared from disclosures
subsequently made, he induced Chesterton to aid him
in plundering the house. By the activity and vigi-
lance of the City police, the whole plan was discovered.
Mr.' William Markwell, son of the proprietor of the
North and South American Coffee-house,, stated that
his father entered into possession of the premises on
the 24th of February, and the prisoner and the boy
named Chesterton were transferred to the new owner,
cawonasffd
esdel-eehp 0
spot
listnee
dtitaseh
ehroeeun,
stwee entered, In
plaunJndudleytrheledastco,asfthhfie-fbtbyoxar,poowufhntidchshe,
odd shillings. In the October following, the bar was
broken open again, and stripped of all the plate that
could be found in it.

Mr. Jones asked whether wine and spirits had not
been missed ?. Witness stated that the wine and lip',
rits were continually disappearing, and nobody could
tell how it went. The prisoner was discharged a
fortnight after the first robbery, but Chesterton re.
mained in the service of the house until within the last
fortnight. Witness consulted with the Superintendent
of the City Police upon the subject, and it was then
satisfactorily ascertained that Sly and Chesterton had
been in the habit of committing robberies in the
house, and that the former prevailed upon the latter
to continue the system of plunder after Sly's dis-
missal.

John Chesterton was then called. He stated that
he at that time resided under the care; but not as a
prisoner, of a City police officer. He had been turned
over to Mr. Markwell's employment along with the
prisoner. and they slept in the same room. Witness
frequently saw bottles of wine and spirits in different
parts of the establishment in the possession of the
prisoner.
Mr. Jones—Did he show you how to get into the
bar and get the key of the cellar ? Witness—He did,
and how to take wine and spirits, and I used to help
him to them; and I drank the wine and spirits with
him too.

Mr. Jones—How long did this sort of wink go on?
Witness—For a long time. He used to bring up
wine first in tumblers, but afterwards he brought it
up in bottles. Another young man used to driuk
with ur.
Mr. Jones—Dil you see Sly soon after he was dis-
charged from his situation ? Witness—l saw him
next day, and he asked me to get him some wine, and
told me how to get into the bar and procure the key
of the cellar. I did as he told me, and I brought him
three bottles of wine. I was to meet him at the side
of the Bank betwem Ai* and seven in the morning.
I afterwards brought him seven bladders of sherry
alzd two of brandy; mid he told me he sold the int/to j

a person at the west-end-of the town, and he gave me
10s., and said he owed me 1/.
Mr. Jones—About the time of the last robbery in
the bar of the house had you any communication with
him ? Witness—l saw him at the burner of Finch-
lane, and he asked me to let him into the house at
night, but I told him I would not. In our conversa-
tions he said all he was afraid of was a policeman
whom ho named, and another person whom he also
named, and he said if they should split it would be
all up.
W. H. Wollen, a City policeman, said he searched
the prisoner's lodging at No. 23, Charing-cross, in
the presence of Mr. W. Markwell and another, and
in a drawer in the prisoner's sister's room he found
seven glasses he produced.
John Blundell, also a City policeman, stated that he
accompanied the prisoner from the Compter to the
Mansion-house, and the prisoner, without being ques-
tioned, said he did not care if and would
split, as they could not hurt him, and it was quite
time the party was broken up.
Mr. Mark well, upon examining the tumblers, said
he believed them to be his father's property, but there
were no marks upon them.
A waiter in the establishment also said he believed
that the tumblers were his master's property. A great
number of glasses had been lost at the house.
Mr. G. Smith, of Conduit-street, Regent-street,
believed that he had sold some of the tumblers pro-
duced to Mr. Markwell, but he could not, of course,
swear to their identity.
Mr. Jones submitted that there was evidence enough
to justify the committal of the prisoner for trial, and
stated that he was convinced the testimony would be
greatly strengthened before the trial.
Alderman WILSON agreed that there was evidence
enough to commit upon, and accordingly committed
the prisoner to Newgate for trial.
The prisoner appeared to think lightly of the charge
against him.
UNION-HALL.

Yesterday Mr. Crisp, who attended professionally
for Robert Lindsay Craufurd, the claimant of a Scotch
peerage, when he was brought to this Court on the
alleged charge of returning from transportation,
waited on Mr. Cottingham relative to some proceed-
ings which had been adopted against that individual
since he had been taken into custody and removed to
Ireland. Mr. Crisp reminded the Magistrate of the
different occasions on which Mr.
.Craufurd was
brought before him on the charge of returning from
transportation, until he was at length discharged by
him for want of the necessary proof to establish his
identity. Since then, however, Mr. Craufurd had
been subjected to very great persecution. He was
again taken into custody about three weeks ago,
dragged away from his wife and family in Lambeth,
and on a warrant brought over from Ireland, backed
at this Court, he was taken to that country. The
only evidence adduced in support of the charge against
Mr. Craufurd was that of a person named Lamb, who
identified him as having seen him on board the Essex
hulk at King town, previously to his transportation.
If such was the fact that Mr. Craufurd had been
sentenced to banishment, how was it known to
the witness that the sentence bad not been com-
muted ? But upon the bare testimony of the
person alluded to, he (Mr. Crisp) considered that
it was a great hardship for his client to be re-
moved from this country, where all his witnesses
were present, and taken to Ireland, particularly as
Lamb was over here, and might be called on his
trial. The Magistrate who backed the warrant in
this country had no alternative, and Mr. Craufurd
was taken away. He (Mr. Crisp), since then, had
a copy of the depositions taken in Dublin transmitted
to him, upon which Mr. Craufurd was committed for
trial, and the only evidence implicating him in the
alleged charge was that of Lamb, who, as before
stated, had, according to his account, only seen him
on board a certain hulk, preparatory to his transporta-
tion. If Mr. Craufurd had been committed here, his
trial would have taken place at an early period, in-
stead of which, he is now doomed to remain in gaol
until the next Spring Assizes before he is tried. With
respect to the alleged charge of Mr. Craufurd having
returned from transportation, he (Mr. Crisp) was
satisfied there was not the slightest grounds, and that
it was a vile conspiracy got up against him in order,
if possible, to get rid of him out of this country, so
that he should not be in a condition to prosecute his
claim to the Craufurd peerage. Shortly before Mr.
Craufurd was taken into custody the second time,
persons had called on him in Lambeth, and made a
proposition that if he admitted being the husband of
a certain woman, no steps would be taken in refe-
rence to the alleged accusation against him; in fact,
the man had been persecuted in every way possible,
anti when Lamb was brought forward to identify
Mr. Craufurd, a policeman of the L division pointed
that individual out to Lamb, instead of letting the
latter person select him out from others, as ought to
have been done, under the particular circumstances of
the case.
Mr. COTTINGIIAM said, that it appeared to him to
be a hardship oil the accused person to be taken to
Ireland. He recollected his having been brought be-
fore him on the alleged charge of returning from trans-
portation, and being remanded from time to time, until
at length, finding that there. was no evidence pro-
duced to sustain the charge, he discharged him. Since
then, it appeared by the depositions, a Mr. Lamb had
come forward and identified the accused. This per-
son, it was said, had come to town for the purpose,
and as he was on the spot, the trial, if allowed to have
taken place here, would give the accused an opportu-
nity of bringing all his witnesses forward to rebut the
charge, if he was in a condition to do so.
Mr. Crisp said that that was the object Mr. Crau-
furd's friends had in view. They were anxious his
trial should take place in this country, where his wit-
nesses could attend, instead of his being put to the
great expense of sending for them from Ireland, his
present resources being very limited.
Mr. COTTINOHAM said that an application to the
Queen's Bench on the subject might be attended with
success, or if not, to the Government ; and that, in
the event of Mr. Craufurd's acquittal, he would then
have an opportunity of retaliating upon those persons
who were said to have entered into a conspiracy
against him, and had trumped up the charge upon
which he was committed for trial.