The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-04 00:00:00

there would probably be produced a `pressure from with-
out' which no Government would be able to resist. Those
who have proposed or supported measures which are in their
nature destructive to the interests of British industry, or
who, disapproving of those measures, had not the courage to
oppose them, will bear the entire and exclusive aSponsibility
of the result. The intense and intolerable miserrwhich all
the productive classes would suffer under a generikapplica-
tiou of free trade might, as a natural, if not a necessary con-
sequence, produce a social revolution, and the rights of pri-
vate (property in land, which already are openly assailed,
might then be openly attacked, and property of every de-
scription might afterwards become the object of spoliation.
" I am, Sir, your faithful servant,
STANHOPE."

TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE.
DIVIDENDS DECLARED.
G. E. Jackson, Birmingham, dealer in iron—second and
final div. of 50., on Friday, Dec. 5, or any subsequent Fri-
day, at Mr. Whitmore's, Birmingham.
T. Smallwood, Birmingham, grocer—third and final div. of
ls. 3 d., on Friday, Dec. 5, or any subsequent Friday, at
Mr. Whitmore's, Birmingham.
W. Menzies, Gloucester, draper—first div. of 55., on Mon-
day, Dec. 8, or any subsequent Monday, at Mr. Miller's,
DristoL
DIVIDENDS.
Dec. 23, J. T. 'Amid, Birmingham, laceman—Dec. 23, E.
M. Marks, Mortimer-street, Cavendish-square, and Stanhope-
street, Regent's-park, upholsterer—Dec. 23, T. W. Wells,
Devonshire-street, Portland-place, merchant—Dec. 23, A.
Bower, Basford, Staffordshire, and of Manchester, banker—
Dec. 23, J. Schofield, Greenacre's-moor, and Oldham, grocer
—Dec. 23, J. Sugden, Springfield and Huddersfield, fancy
cloth manufacturer—Dec. 23, T. Boddy, Leeds, mahogany
and timber merchant—Dec. 23, 11. Warburton, Manchester,
joiner and builder—Dec. 23, Sir R. Graham, . and J. Rail-
ton, and J. Young, London and Manchester, merchants.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
Calvert and Procter, Bradford, smiths.—C. Husband and
Co., Kingston-upon Hull, shipbrokers.—P. Nsuens and L.
Fonseca, Bread-street, perfumers.—Haines, Ward, and Son,
West Bromwich, Sul tiordshire, gezeral agents; as far as re-
gards G. Haines.—Thomas and Pritchard, Oxton and Rock-
ferry, Cheshire, joiners.—B. Baker and F. Martin, Alderman-
bury, commission agents.—J. Morris and W. Gray, Man-
chester, sharebrokers.—Bullen and llignett, Liverpool, to-
bacco manufacturers.—Oak Farm Iron and Coal Company,
Oak Farm, Staffordshire; as far as regards Sir J. R. Glynne,
Lord Lyttelton, the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, and C.
Townshend.—T. Haigh and Co., Sheffield, brass casters.—
Yates and Co., Great Bolton, grocers.—England and Hella-
well, Huddersfield, attorneys.—J. Riches and H. N. Deering,
Carey-street, Lincoln's Inn, law stationers.—Bowman and
Paine, Tallington, Lincolnshire, millers.—J. Bloor and R. A.
Hackett, Tutbury, Staflbrdshire, tanners.—T. and W. H.
Griffin, Holywell-street, Shoreditch, wine-merchants.—Ash-
worth and Cartwright, Manchester, manufacturers.—Perry
and Powis, Stoke-upon-Trent, ironmongers.—W. Cripps, A.
Large, W. Wright, and W. Lottimer, .New York and Not-
tingham.—Slack, Willifer, and Slack, Manchester, filtering
machine manufacturers.
CERTIFICATE to be granted, unless cause be shown to the
contrary on the day of meeting.
Dec. 23, B. Hornby, Hoylake, Cheshire, innkeeper.
CERTIFICATES to be granted by the Court of Review, un-
less cause be shown to the contrary on or before Dec. 23.
J. Giles, Headless-Brass, near Redditch, Worcestershire,
publican.—R. Buckler, Putsea' grocer.—J. C. Kemp, Liver-
pool, merchant.—M. Murphy, Shrewsbury, haberdasher.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
Andrew Fraser, late of Inverness, grocer, Dec. 6 and 26, at
12 o'clock, at the chambers of Mr. Belford, Inverness.
D. Young, Dunkeld, merchant, Dec. 8 and 29, at 1 o'clock,
at the chambers of Mr. Seaton, Dunkeld.
Charles James Baucks, Edinburgh and Glasgow, iron-
monger and ship-broker, Dec. 8 and Jan. 8, at 2 o'clock, at
the Royal Exchange Cofee-house, Edinburgh.
Thomas Trench, Edinburgh,
,wood merchant, Dec. 8 and
29, at 2 o'clock, at the chambers of Mr. Peddie, Edinburgh.

of the treaties themselves. He followed up this argument by
prote,ting that they were not within the criminal jurisdiction
of the British empire ; and concluded by arguing, that ad-
mitting they had committed an offence against the law of
nations, it was of much less importance than the crime of
murder.
Sir JOSEPH DODSON then replied on the part of the Crown.
He said it was contended on the other ride, that because the
Felicidade had not slaves on board at the time she arrived
off the coast of Africa she was not liable to be deemed and
dealt with as a pirate, but if their Lordships would
refer to an Act of Parliament which had been much
quoted in the course of the inquiry, they would find
this was not the case. The Act was the 7th and Bth Geo. IV.
which, together with the treaty itself to which it had rela-
tion, declared that after the expiration of three years after
the ratification of a treaty, which had just previously been
entered into between this country and the Brazils, it should
not be lawful for the subjects of the Emperor of
Brazil to be engaged in carrying on the slave-
trade, tinder any pretence, or in any way whatsoever.
Their Lordships would observe the terms of the treaty and
the Act under any circumstances or in any manner whatsover.
He should maintain, then, that under their provisions these
parties were pirates, and Lieutenant Stupart was quite justified
in deeming them as such, and directing their capture accord-
ingly. By the first article of the convention of W 22, British
cruisers were empowered to seize Brazilian vessels
that might be suspected of having been or being engaged in
the slave—trade, and take them into a British port for ex-
amination. If, upon that examination, the vessel was found
to be a slaver, and to have had slaves on boards she was
liable to condemnation; and if it were only on this ground
alone, he should contend that Lieutenant Stupart was justi
fled in capturing the Felicidade for the purpose of exami-
nation. It was urged, however, on the other side, that the
capture was not made in accordance with the instructions is-
sued to the Royal Navy under the treaties ; but it must be re-
membered that these instructions were altered when the
convention of 1830 was agreed to, and for his part he thought
the seizure in question in no way violated them. He ad-
mitted that this country had no right to punish these pri-
soners as pirates at all, but it had the right of capturing a
vessel suspected to be engaged in the slave-trade for exami-
nation, and if the crew of such vessel committed an offence
after such capture, they rendered themselves amenable to
the laws of this country. That was the case here, and
therefore he contended that this country, having a right to
capture, and the capture itself having been properly effected,
the prisoners had laid themselves open to the vengeance of the
English laws by the murder of Mr. Palmer subsequent to
the seizure of the Felicidade. In a time of war it often
occurred that neutral vessels were captured, but he had yet
to learn that the crews of those vessels, following out the
argument of his Learned Friend on the other side, had
right to disregard the privileges of the British flag, and
murder the whole or any of their captors to recover their
vessel. It was objected that the Echo was not captured by
a Lieutenant in her Majesty's Royal Navy, or by a vessel
having certain instructions on board. Now be should con-
tend that the Echo was captured by a jolt'-boat of the
Wasp, acting under the directions of Lieutenant Stupart,
commander of the Wasp, but before the capture could be
made by the jolly-boat, the Echo struck, and how it could
be objected that this was not a capture effected by a vessel
in the Royal Navy, he could not for the life of him under-
stand; but of this he was confident, that the mode in
which the Echo was captured could be no justification
for the murder of Mr. Palmer. lie submitted, in
conclusion, that both the Echo and the Felicidade
were lawfully captured by a British vessel in the
Royal Navy, and being then under the control of the British
flag, any offence committed on board of either, whether by
an Englishman or a Brazilian, against the municipal law of
England, rendered the offender liable to be dealt with and
punished by those laws.
Dr. ADAMS replied, reminding the Court that his Learned
Friend, throughout the whole of his address,had been contend-
ing that the country had a general right of visitation. Now
he maintained, that in a time of peace it had not, except by
especial contract entered into with a foreign nation whose
vessels were to be searched, and unless the conditions of
that compact were strictly complied with, no right of visi-
tation existed. That was the case in this instance, and he
humbly submitted that their Lordships' decision ought to be
in favour of the prisoners.
Dr. HARDING also replied, and the Court adjourned shortly
after five o'clock.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 3.

Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL and a
Special Jury.)
CLARKE v. DUNSFORD.

This was an action for crim. con., which was part heard
yesterday, and in which the defendant is a medical man, in
partnership with the plaintiff's brother.
The Attorney-General and Mr. Sergeant Talfourd were for
the plaintiff, and Sir Thomas Wilde and Mr. Sergeant Chan-
nell for the defendant. The Attorney-General stated the
case.

The evidence on the part of the plaintiff wasaafollows:—

Elizabeth Jones—Was servant to the plaintiff in the year
1842, and afterwards in 1844, when they resided at Bristol.
During the first period of service she knew the defendant as
being the partner of Mr. Henry Clarke, the plaintiff's bro-
ther. He used often to visit Mr. and Mrs. Clarke, she thought
as a medical man. During the second period he TM a con-
stant visitor, and generally came when plaintiff was out. He
always used to go up stairs by himself, which no other
visitor ever did. He used to let himself out, which was
also unusual. When other visitors were going, the bell was
always rung for her (witness) to show them out. She re-
membered his calling on the 6th of June, 1844. On that oc-
casion he was shown into the library, and Mrs. Clarke met
him there. After they had been together a little while
witness heard the door either locked or bolted, and the win-
dow-blind pulled down. This excited her suspicions, and she
went into the pantry, which was under the library, where
she got upon the dresser to listen to what was going on in
the room above. She heard the noise of feet, as if some one
was walking towards the sofa, and then a noise, as if two
persons were on the sofa. She then called to Elizabeth
Hertford, her fellow-servant, who did not come to her imme-
diately, and when she did come the noise had ceased. Soon
after this witness heard the door unlocked, and, almost at
the same moment, Mr. Clarke came home.
Elizabeth Hertford and Esther Bevan, fellow-servants of
the former witness, gave evidence as to the suspicions which
had been excited in their minds by various circumstances.
The witness Bevan spoke to having heard the defendant,
when in the room with Mrs. Clarke. say " If I do love you
better than any other woman that is no reason why you
should talk about it. You tell me to be cautious, and you
say things which excite people's suspicions." After this she
heard him kiss her.

Mr. Henry Clarke, the plaintiff's brother, spoke to a con-
versation subsequent to the commencement of this action, in
which defendant said, " Joseph and Potiphar's wife has been
acted over to the life ;" and added, that five words from him
would have ruined Mrs. Clarke.

Maria Withers examined—ls sister to a Mrs. Needes, who
keeps a lodging-house, No. 17, Norfolk-street, Bath.
In July, 1844, her sister left Bath for a time, leaving the
house in her care. During her sister's absence, a gentle-
man called upon her, and represented that he was secretly
married, that he wished it to remain a secret, and that he
wanted lodgings in Bath. He called himself Mr. Lisle.
After this she wrote to her sister about it, and on receiving
an answer, she desired her nephew, a lad named Kinchen, to
write to Mr. Lisle, to tell him that his terms were
accepted. She knew his address, which was at the
British and Foreign Hotel, Hanover- square, London, from a
. . . .

. .
letter which she had received from him. (This letter was
produced in Court, but the part which contained the address
bad been cut away.) After this Mr. Lisle came several
times to sleep at her sister's house. He used to come at
night and remain till the next evening. On sash occasion
he said, in the morning, that he expected Mrs. Lisle, and a
lady came at about ten o'clock. She remained each time till
four, when she went away alone, and at about nine he went
away also. He never slept there two successive nights.
They met there four times.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Dec. 3.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FONBLANQUE.)
IN RE CAROLINE BARRETT.
This insolvent, who was a married woman, and teacher of
music at Oxford, came up for her final order. The case was
rather of a singular character. It appeared on the first ap-
plication for protection, that the insolvent was confined in
the county gaol for her separate debts, and some delay oc-
curred in granting her protection, in consequence of her
accouchment whilst in custody. Her husband had also peti-
tioned the Court, but his case was adjourned until the present
insolvent could come forward to make a disclosure
of her affairs. It then appeared that she was en-
titled to property which she valued at about 4,0001. ;
the affairs, however, were in Chancery, but under
a decree of that Court she had an allowance of
100/. per annum, and after the decree she married, making a
settlement of the whole of the amount on her husband, as
trustee on behalf of any issue. They had themselves lived
on the allowance, without providing for the payment of the
debts, and both husband and wife were arrested. It was
argued that the allowance must be considered to fall to the
husband, who became liable for the debts of his wife con-
tracted before marriage, and that the wife was not en-
titled to come up to claim the benefit of the Act.
The Learned Commissioner, however, held that if the
insolvent could not be relieved from prison, she
ought not to have been placed there. She was
taken in execution as a trader, and as a trader she was en-
titled to come up ; he should, therefore, grant the interim
order and protection, on her agreeing to do all in her power
to legalize the application of her property in expectancy to
the liquidation of her debts, but a difficulty arose, as it was
held to be clear she could not make such a transfer as would
legally vest the property in the official assignee, and even
then it would be necessary to file another supple-
mental bill of revisor, to make all persons interested
parties, although a bill had been recently filed,
and matters were about being brought to a close after twenty
years' litigation. It was thereupon proposed that 301. of the
income should be set apart if the trusts of the deed of settle-
ment could be set aside so far, and the decision was postponed
until the exact nature and extent of the proprrty and trusts
of the settlement could be ascertained, and legal opinion could
be taken, as there were no precedents.
The insolvent bad not handed in part of the documents till
this morning, and they were very lengthy.
The opposition, however, was withdrawn, the Learned
Commissioner granting the final order, on condition that the
insolvent should enter into an assignment and pay 301. a-year

Mrs. Needs, and George Kinchen, her nephew, corroborated
the above statement. The three witnesses had seen Mr.
Dunsford and Mrs. Clarke at Bath, and identified them as the
lady and gentleman whom they had known as Mr. and Mrs.
Lisle. The servant of the house was also examined, and
said that on one occasion Mr. Lisle had not slept there the
night before, and the bed was not disturbed during the time
he and Mrs. Lisle slept there. On the three other
occasions he had slept there, and the bed had been left un-
made by his wish, so that it was tumbled before Mrs. Lisle
came, and she could not say whether it had been used while
she was there. This witness had also identified the defen-

SECONDARIES' COURT, Dec. 3.
(Before Mr. Secondary Parr Ea.)

MATTHEWS V. IRISH, SEN.
This was an action brought to recover the sum of 9/. lle.
for goods sold and delivered. The plaintiff is a wire-worker
and metal dealer in Crooked lane, City, and the defendant is
a sadler in Clement's-lane, City. The defendant pleaded that
he was never indebted.
. _ . .

YVF
From the evidence for the plaintiff it appeared that in
November last the defendant and G. J. Irish, the elder, gave
an order for some goods, which were supplied at the time and
afterwards. Only one witness, however, could identify the
defendant, and he said that he knew the defendant well, but
there was such a strong resemblance between the father and
son that they were not easily known apart, but he had seen
defendant' several times, and he always promised to pay.
For the defendant, however, his son was called, who swore
that he had dealt with Mr. Matthews, the husband of
the plaintiff fur ten yer.re--his father did not, a 9 he was a
sadler, carrying on business in llolborn, and did not want
such goods. Moreover, he gave up business in 1841,although
he was continually in Holborn, or at witness's, who was a dig
sinker, in Clement's-lane, and assisted either, but had no
share in the business.
The accuracy of the witness was questioned as to the iden-
tity, but he swore positively, although notice had been given
in 'the early part of the proceedings' that they were ening the
wrong Party, and defendants son admitted the debt.
The SECONDARY said that it did not matter whose burliness
it was, it depended on who ordered the goods; and it was
clear that, after the last account was settled, goods were
ordered by a person sworn to as the defendant.
The jury stopped the summing up, and said they were
satisfied, and gate a verdict fur the plaintiff fur the amount
claimed.
This was the only ease possessing the slightest iutarest.

dant and Mrs. Clarke.
Joseph Hail, a police-officer at Bath, had, taken the four
last witnesses to Mr. Dunsfurd's and Mr. Clarke's house, in
order to identify the persons. On etating his object to the
defendant, the latter said, " What is done cannot be
helped."
At the close of the case for the plaintiff;
Sir T. WILDE, fur the defendant, submitted that there was
no material evidence in INliddlenex.
Mr. Justice CitEsswELL said that it was not a point on
which he could stop the case from going to the jury.
The Learned GENTLEMAN then addressed the jury at
considerable length, contending that there was no direct
evidence of adultery. He (Sir Thomas Wilde) would
not contend that there was no improper familiarities
between the defendant and the plaintiff's wife, but he
thought there was no proof that they had gratified their
illicit affection by the last act of crime. The Learned
Counsel having referred to the principal points of the evi-
dence in support of this view,
Mr. Justice CRESWELL summed up, and
The jury, after retiring and consulting for about half an
hour, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 5,000/.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, Dec. 3.
THE PIRACY AND MURDER CASE.

SURREY SESSIONS.
,
(Before Mr. Pucmr. and a full Bench of Magistrates.)
STREET ROBSIERY.--Ann Callaghan aged 22, stood in-
dicted for feloniously stealing from the person of Mr. Thomas
Walkins a valuable silver watch, his property.
The prosecutor stated that on the night of the 18th of the
last month, between the hours of ten and eleven o'clock,
while passing along the Borough-road, he was accosted by
the prisoner, who followed him to the Surrey Theatre, when
she came in front of him, and giving a sort of twich round
close to his parson, ran away and joined a man, who stood
about twenty yards off. lier manner and the fact of her
running away caused his suspicion and induced him to
examine his pocket, when he found that his watch was
gone. Two policemen came up at the instant, and he in-
formed them of what had taken place. The police and he
inetautly went in pursuit of the prisoner and the man,
and soon came up with them, when the prisoner denied all
knowledge of the watch, and declared she had never seen
him. Both she and the man were, however, taken to the
station-house, and upon being searched the watch was found
in her bosom.
The prisoner made no defence, but merely threw herself
upon the mercy of the Court.
The CHAIRMAN briefly summed up, and the jury, without
hesitation, found the prisoner Guilty.
The CHAIRMAN called constable 84 M into the box,
and asked him if the prisoner was known to him, or the
police?
The witness replied that she was. That she had been
summarily convicted and sent to Brixton for robbing a man
of his watch. That she was the associate of the worst de-
scription of thieves in the district, and that the man who
had been taken with her was an expert and well-known
thief.
The CHAIRMAN sentenced the prisoner to ten years' trans-
portation, and she was removed from the bar, bellowing at
the top of her voice, and uttering the most frightful oaths
against the chairman, prosecutor, &c. As her voice became
sufficiently faint, the chairman called Mr. Welkin, the pro-
secutor, into the box, who, in reply to his questions, said he
had told the inspector that the prisoner had joined the man
who had been taken with her a short distance from where
she had committed the robbery, and they both ran away to-
gether. The Chairman, upon hearing this, observed that in
his opinion the evidence was sufficiently strong to show a
participation in the robbery, and he was utterly at a loss to
understand why the inspector should have, under the
cumstances, and more particularly as he was known to the
police as a practised thief, taken it upon himself to discharge
him, and not take him before a magistrate to let him deal
with the case. Ile, the Chairman, was of opinion that the
man should still be taken up and brought before the magis-
trate, and the constable would have the sanction of the
Court in doing so.

The majority of the Judges of the Courts of Queen's Bench,
Common Pleas, and Exchequer, assembled this morning in
Sergeants' Inn, for the purpose of hearing the arguments of
civilians against the conviction in the case of piracy and
murder which was tried before Mr. Baron Platt, at the last
Exeter assizes.

Sir Joseph Dodson, Dr. Melvin, and Mr. Godson, Q.C.,
appeared fur the Crown, and Dr. Adams, Dr. Harding, Ser-
geant Manning, and Mr. Denison, for the prisoners.
Dr. ADAMS opened the argument, and contended, in the
first instance, that the prisoners had been guilty of no act of
piracy. Piracy was particularly defined in the various trea-
ties between this country and the Brazilian Government, as
well as in several Acts of Parliament confirming those trea-
ties; but he was sure these prisoners had done nothing which
could justify their being charged with the offence of
piracy, within the meaning of those Acts and
treaties, and therefore he was prepared to urge that the Feli-
cidade was wrongfully seized. But supposing the prisoners
had been guilty of the offence of piracy, the seizure of the
Felicidade, he maintained, had not been captured in ac-
cordance with the provisions of the Acts of Parliament, con-
forming to the instructions issued to the Royal Navy, under the
treaties which existed between this country and the Brazils.
Those Acts and instructions required that the capture should
not be made by an officer in the Royal Navy of less rank
than a lieutenant, but here the capture had been made by
the Echo, which was only under the command of a midship-
man. The Echo, however, it was said, must be considered
in the light of a tender or a jolly boat of the Wasp, which
was under the command of a lieutenant in the Royal Navy,
namely, Lieutenant Stupart. Now, upon the former occa-
sion, a case was cited to their Lordships which wholly
disposed of this point; but he could assure their
Lordships that there were many subsequent cases
upon the point. There was, for instance, the case of
the Jepliarina, in Hazle's Reports, which clearly established
that a tender or jolly-boat, commanded by a Lieutenant, could
not make a capture, or participate in the advantages of a
capture of this sort. Well, then, he said these parties were
justified, by the law of nations, in taking the steps they did
to regain their ship, and obtain their liberty. He denied
that they had concocted a plot to murder all the English on
board the Felicidade, but they did concert a plan to take all
necessary steps to recover their vessel, and they had a per-
fect right to do so. In carrying out that plan a conflict en-
sued, and this alleged murder took place. But this act did
not render them accountable to the English laws, because
the Felicidade, having been wrongfully seized, was still a
Brazilian vessel, sailing under the Brazilian flag,
and they committed the act without any malice
prepense, but simply to carry out a plan for re-
covering that winch' had been taken from them in
violation of the law of nations. That point, then, being dis-
posed of, the next question for him to consider was, whether
these parties had committed any offence against the peace of
her Majesty. Now it could not be an offeence against the
peace of the British Sovereign, because it was not committed
on board a British vessel, or within the jurisdiction of the
Court of Admiralty; and he should dismiss this part of his
argument without further comment or remark. In conclu-
sion, he submitted to their Lordships that these parties had
been wrongfully captured and detained, and the steps they
took to recover their liberty was justified by the law of
nations, and by no means prohibited by the treaty between
this country and the Brazils.
Dr. 11/atm:to followed on the same side. He contended
that the prisoners had been guilty of no offence against the
law of nations, not even supposing they had actually been
engaged in the slave-trade, because slave trading was net
piracy, nor was it contrary to the law of nations. He next
submitted to their Lordships that they had been guilty of no
offence under or by reason of the treaties existing
between
England and the Brazils, and therefore they were illegally
and yrrougfdly captured; in fact, captured in direct violation

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDIIALL.
Charles Crook, who was lately committed for having, in
conjunction with a person named Habbijam, stolen a number
of 51. Bank of England notes, and changing them at various
places (the same being stolen or lost) , was brought up, for
the ninth time, before Alderman Wood.
The particulars of the case are these :—A Miss Byfield
came into the City for the purpose of getting a cheque cashed,
which she did, and received the change, principally in 51.
notes. She made a few purchases on the way home, and on
her arrival there missed her money. On the same and next
day it apeared that Crook and Ilabbijam had changed them
at a number of public-houses in the neighbourhood of Lam-
beth. Crook alone was taken into custody, and afterwards,
on account of his confession, Habbijam was also apprehended.
Previous to the latter's apprehension, Crook had sent to his
father and brother, to request them to call on Habbijam, and
a person named Ridger, residing in Lion-street, Old Kent.
rvAd, nd tell them he wa• in custody, which they did; Awl

THE SUN, LONDON, TiIURSDAY MORNING. DECEMBER 4 1845.

Mr. Games, solicitor, was employed to defend him (Crook)
by Habbijam. After a number of investigations had taken
place Crook was committed, and Habbijam held to bail, him-
self in 200/. and two sureties of 100/. each. On being called
last week at Guildhall he was not forthcoming, and, after
some discussion, it was found that Habbijam was bound to
appear at the Old Bailey, and not at Guildhall.
Mr. Hubbard, for the prosecutrix, now stated that, accord-
ing to the suggestion of the worthy Alderman at the last ex-
amination, an indictment had been preferred against Habbi-
jam. When the details were laid before Mr. Clarkson, he
applied at the Central Criminal Court for Crook to be admitted
as evidence against Habbijam, which application was imme-
diately granted. Habbijam was then called, and not an-
swering, his recognisance's were estreated, leaving the case
open for the purpose of giving the officers an opportunity
of finding Habbijam. There was at present but very little
chance of apprehending Habbijam, in consequence of his dis-
posing of everything he owned and absconling. He could
now prove that Habbijam was a returned convict, having
been transported for life some years ago for issuing forged
notes, and had only come back to this country about four
years since.
Alderman Woon said lie did not think it was quite so long.
Mr. Hubbard, in continuation, said that the exertions
which had been used would be of great benefit to the public,
as they had been enabled to break up a regular establish-
meld of first-rate thieves, He now wished to mention what
he considered as a most serious affair. It appeared that
when Crook was first taken into custody lie immediately sent
to his family, asking them to go to Habbijam and Ridger, of
the Old Kenteroad, and let them know he was in prison.
They called first on Habbijam, who went with them to Mr.
Games, the solicitor, and to Ridger. While at the latter
place Mrs. Ridger put her head out of the window, and said
words to the effect that if they wanted to know anything
about the notes Habbijam knew all about them, and could
give them information. The most extraordinary thing was,
that this woman, who might have given material evidence,
was, within three days of the circumstance above-men-
tioned, dead and buried, and the husband bad absconded,
leaving not the slightest trace of where be was to be found.
Under these circumstances, there was a case of strong sus-
picion that the poor woman had met with foul play.
Alderman Woon—But the proper mode would be, I think,
to communicate with the coroner on the subject.
Mr. Hubbard said he wished to remark that during the
inquiries being made, they had discovered, as part of the
system of robberies carried on, a new feature, which was to
dress a young child, about twelve or fourteen years of age,
genteelly, and place him near the banking-houses, to watch
when any parties came out, to follow them, and when they
attempted to purchase anything, after giving the informa-
tion:necessary to his companions, ha went up by the side of
the individuals and lifted theirpockets while they were emp-
tied. Miss Byfield, when she was making her purchases,
now recollected that a genteel youth of this description stood
by her side.
Alderman Woon said it reminded him of the old system
of the crow in Elizabeth's time, when the figure of a woman
was placed in a room with a number of belle and pockets,
and the pupils were obliged to take various articles out with-
out making the bells sound. This had been practiied in the
City within the last six months.
Mr. Hubbard said that he now intended to ask that Crook
should be liberated on bail to appear at the next sessions,
and if Habbijam was not apprehended before to appear at the
following sessions.
Alderman WOOD said that as he had been admitted as evi-
dence against Habbijam at the Central Criminal Court, he
ought to be admitted to bail, which should be himself in 200/.
and two sureties of 100/. each. At the same time he thought
Mr. Hubbard ought to communicate with the coroner re-
' specting the death of Mrs. Ridger.
Mr. Hubbard said he thought that would be the best
course.
The required bail being forthcoming, Crook was liberated.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
John Hume, No. 10, Norfolk-street, described in the police-
sheet as a gentleman, was brought before Mr. Maltby,
charged with having assaulted police-sergeant Park, E 5.
The constable said he saw the defendant knock down a
woman in Tottenham-court-road, about twelve o'clock the
previous night. lie went up and asked the woman if she
was desirous of giving her unmanly asssailant into custody.
The woman replied in the affirmative, and witness proceeded
to lay hold of the defendant, when the defendant kicked him
more than once, and caused great pain and injury.
The defendant denied that he load intended to kick the
constable in the manner described. He only put up his
knee to push the constable from him.
Mr. MALTBY sent the defendant to hard labour for one
month.
A man, assuming the name of Warner, but whose real
name is Edwards, was charged with obtaining money from
Earl Howe under false pretences.
A footman, in Lord Howe's establishment, said the de-
fendant called at his Lordship's house in South Audley-
street, stating that his name was Warner, and that he called
for an answer to a paper, which he had left a day or two
previously for his Lordship. The paper was a begging peti-
tion, which his Lordship had ascertained to be signed with
fictitious signatures, and acting under the advice of his
solicitor, Mr. Thyme, his Lordship directed that a police-
constable should be in waiting, when the prisoner came for
an answer, and that a sovereign should be handed to the
prisoner, in order to make the case complete. Witness
handed the money to the prisoner, and then called police-
sergeant Wlaall, who was in an inner room. The constable
came forward and took the defendant into custody.
The defendant had a quantity of books with him, and the
following letter, which is genuine :

"June 26, 184.5.
" The Duke of Wellington hag received Mr. Edwards's
letter of the 25th instant.
" The Duke has no recollection of having seen Mr. Ed-
wards at Weimer Castle. He is not aware that bobs in want
of glass ware. He has no reason to be dissatisfied with the
tradesmen of whom he is in the habit of purchasing glass."
The defendant, who said he was a glass-blower, was re-
manded for further inquiry.
QUEEN-SQUARE.
James Caleerhouse, a well-dressed young man, was charged
with a very violent and unprovoked assault upon John Knight,
a tradesman, living in Old Pie-street, Westminster.
Complainant was shutting up his shop on the previous
night, when he heard some girls, who were standing a short
distance from him, say they would have a lark, and in a
minute or two afterwards defendant, who was in company
with them, came up to complainant, and, without the slightest
provocation, struck him a violent blow on the mouth with a
stick, which knocked him down. The fellow then ran off
but was pursued and taken into custody.
Defendant, in answer to the charge, said that the shop-
keeper struck him first. He, however, did not call anybody
in support of his assertion.
Defendant was fined 3/., and in default of payment com-
mitted for one month to Tothill-fields Bridewell.
CLERK EN WELL.
Six youths were placed at the bar, charged by the autho-
rities of St. Pancras parish with tearing up their clothes,
and refractory conduct in the workhouse, on Saturday last.
The prisoners were tried at the Old Bailey, on an indict-
ment for burglary in the workhouse, but acquitted ; they sub-
sequently went to the workhouse, and were admitted. On
Monday they combined together to disturb the establish-
ment, and their conduct was of the most violent description,
and they then forced their way out of the house.
The prisoners, in their defence, said they applied for their
discharge, but it was refused them.
Mr. Pitt, clerk to the directors of the poor, said the pri-
soners did apply for their discharge, and it was refused
until they were taken befor the board en Tuesday or Friday
next.
The prisoners were sent to the House of Correction, with
hard labour, for 14 days each; the Magistrate informing
them that if brought there again they would be committed
for six weeks.
WORSHIP-STREET.
On Tuesday twelve men, named William Smith, Mark West
Philip Hamilton, Alfred Hoppe, James Hoare, John Clifford
Samuel Wilkins, Leonard Just, William Warwick, Jams
Fleming, William Ghost, and Edward Martin, were placed at
the bar, before Mr. Bingham, charged with having unlawfully
engaged in the promotion of a dog-fight at the house of a man
named Wilmot, in Christopher-street, Bethnal-green. All
the prisoners belonged to the lowest class of society, with the
exception of Martin, Wilkins, and Just, the former of whom
was described as the captain of a Battersea steamer, and the
two latter as master watchmakers.
Mr. BINGItAM strongly animadverted upon the gross and
brutalising tendency of such practices, so totally at variance
with the proper attributes of true courage, and ordered
Smith, West, and Hamilton to pay a fine of 105. each, or be
imprisoned for a fortnight in the House of Correction ' • and
all the other prisoners were fined ss. each, or seven days
imprisonment.

night, I saw the master cut Rambert, who was chief
officer of the ship. He cut him with a cutlass on his
head, in several places. Rambert was at the time
on the quarter-deck of the Tory. Rambert was in handcuffs
at the time. This was, I think, before twelve o'clock at
night. After twelve o'clock the master locked me in double
irons in the mizen top. He was quite sober at the time. He
stabbed me in several places over the body and on my head.
With the loss of blood and pain I lay for some time senseless
on the mizen-top. About four o'clock in the morning, as
near as I can guess, I saw the captain running about the
quarter deck after Rambert with a cutlass in his hand.
Before that, Rambert bad been in the mizen-top, and showed
me his head, which was cut open in several places. He was
not t hen handcuffed. At the time after when I saw the Cap-
tain chase Rambert about the quarter• deck, the latter jumped

over board, on the larboard-quarter side.
Mr. 13nopertir —How near was the captain to Rambert at
the time he jumped over ? The witness—About four yards
distant, with the cutlass in his hand. The ship was then
running before the wind, with the sails square. We did not
lower any boat to pick the chief officer up, nor was there any
thingat all thrown over to him. The ship was lulled too a
little, and then kept the weather course again. There were
several on deck at the time besides the captain, but I did not
notice the female passengers. We saw a ship shortly after,
but I cannot say whether it was the same day.
Mary Blewitt was next called, and said—l reside at No.
23, Albany-street. I was a passenger on board the ship Tory.
I remember three of the men being in irons in some part of
the rigging. I was in the cabin as a cabin passenger for the
first fortnight. I was afterwards in the half-deck, a little
more forward, but not left of the poop. On the 26th of Septette •
ber, I believe, about three or four o'clock, I heard Captain
Johnstone demand that the mate be found and brought,
wherever he was, to him. Barry Yelverton was the one who
found him, and brought him to the captain. I was then
looking on, of which Captain Johnstone was not aware. He
had a pistol in his left hand, and a cutlass in the other.
I believe the pistol was loaded, for Captain Johnstone
always ordered them to bring his pistol loaded.
The captain struck Rambert right and left, on the head first,
and afterwards on the body. Rambert had no arms, but his
hands were free. During the time Captain Johnstone was
striking him he begged for mercy and to spare him.
Captain Johnstone replied, " Oh, you overgrown monster—
you cowardly brute !" and with that he cut him with his
cutlass. Rambert said " Ask the sailors, Captain Johnstone,
if I ever said a word against you," on which the captain
seemed to get more enraged, and struck at him snore vio-
lently than he did the time before. "Go on your knees," he
said, which Rambert did, and then, after calling him an
" overgrown monster," he struck hint severely with the
cutlass. Rambert exclaimed, "0, my God ! 0, my
God ! I ant killed." With that he dropped on one
side, and said "Oh !" when Captain Johnstone sent
for the irons. After that the carpenter came and put the
irons on the monkey-hatch on the half-deck. Rambert
was bleeding so at the time that I could not see the figures.
Rambert asked the boy Slack to bring something to tie
his head up. The boy said he had nothing. During that
time I believe the captain retired into his cabin for refresh-
ments. Captain Johnstone had not made many minutes'
delay when he came up again, and went up into the mizen
mast-top, where the man, Stephen Cone, was in irons. He
struck at Cone in the most violent manner, so violent that
I heard the blows from where I had been looking on.
I could not see what the captain struck with, only
that he went up with a cutlass ire his hand.
With that I cried out, "My God, my God! if that is
Stephen Cone, he will kill hint." I said this to Mrs. Thomp-
son. That was the first time I spoke while the captain had
been striking Rambert. With that Rambert heard my voice,
and said, " Mrs. Blewitt, I am dying, give me a handkerchief
to tie my head up, lam bleeding to death." I replied, " I
am in that state I am not fit to move; I am so exhausted
and faint." With this Rambert said, "He is coming down
again,he will kill me. omy God! omy God !" To that I
made no reply. As Capt. Johnstone was coming towards Ram-
bert, he said, " Where is the overgrown monster," or " where
is the overgrown brute," but I cannot say which. With that
he said to the carpenter, " Where is he," and then ordered
Rambert to be taken away to the main hatch. I remarked to
Mrs. Thompson, " What is to be done, there will be an end
to us all this night." After this, I believe the captain was
forward with some of the men, and I heard as far as I can
recollect that Rambert was to be taken out of irons.
Directly after that I heard a rush on the poop. There was a
boat on the poop. I saw Rambert trying to make his escape
between the end of the boat and the companion. Julian was
on the poop at the time, with a musket and a bayonet on the
top of it. I saw Julian presenting the bayonet towards
Rambert. With that I heard the captain crying out,
" Where is he? where is he?" "He is gone overboard,"
said Julian. The captain answered, " The b—, I shall
have half of them overboard before sunset to-day." The
next words I heard were Captain Johnstone calling a boy
and ordering a glass of grog for all hands, but I do not know
whether all the crew were there. I was so ex-
hausted and faint that I lay down and observed no
further, only I was in hopes there might be peace. I may
further state, though I paid my passage to London, I was
treated very unkindly by Captain Johnstone, and had to come
ashore at Deal. The reason of this was that I was
called on the 7th of last month by the captain into his cabin.
The boy Slack came to me, and said, "The captain wants
you." I exclaimed "Oh, my God! does he want me to
kill me ?" I went into the cabin, and saw the captain with
Barry Yelverton, French, and Spence. Mrs. Thompson,
seeing me so excited, came to accompany me down. Cap-
tain Johnstone said, " I have called you to intimate that I
intend to put you in irons the rest of the voyage ;" and fur-
ther said, " You are going to be hung at the Old Bailey." He
said, "Is not that it, French ?" and the latter replied " Yes,
I believe it is, sir." I made answer, " lam willing to die, Capt.
Johnstone, fur anything I have done in the ship." I then
said, " Captain Johnstone, may I say a word or two. I em-
barked in your ship the 14th of last May, and I never heard
any man during the whole period, up till now, say a wrong
word against you or the ship. If there is a man that can say
I have ever said a wrong word against you, Captain John-
stone. or the ship either, let him come and say it. Did you
ever hear me, French? French answered, " No, Mrs Blewitt,
I never did, except that time when you had to mix flour with
salt water to make cakes, and frying them in the galley."
French afterwards said to me, "'This is a bad case, Mrs.
Blewitt;" and I answered, " It is so; why don'tyougo andtalk
to the captain." I called Mr Spence and asked him if I had ever
stated anything against Captain Johnstone or the ship ?"
" No, Mrs. Blewitt, I never did," he answered. At that time
I never expected to come out of the cabin alive, I was in
such dread and fear. With that I called on Barry Yelver-
ton, and asked him a similar question ; and he replied,
" No, Mrs. Blewitt, except hearing you say, A man's a man
for a' that ;' but what you meant by it I cannot say."
" I might have said the words," I replied, " but I have no
recollection. To tell you the truth, Captain Johnstone," I said,
turning to him, "Itis a word of my father's. " Captain
Johnstone kept still, and said nothing. I was then allowed
to leave the cabin. I felt very bad at the time, and I believe
that Captain Johnstone observed it, for he ordered me a glass
of wine.
Catherine Thompson followed in examination, and said—
, She lived in Sidney-street, Baker-street. She was a passen-
ger in the ship Tory. She saw Captain Johnstone during
the voyage cut Rainbert with a sword. On one occasion she
saw Rambert with his body cut and mangled in a dreadful
manner. She heard Rambert jump overboard, but did not
see him. At that time she heard the captain say, "It was
a good thing, and that he ought to have been there long
before."
James Glover recalled and examined respecting the death
of Rambert—He recollected Rambert dining with the captain
the day before his death. They seemed then to
be on good terms. He was not aware of
anything particular that day on board the ship.
About 7 o'clock at night he was called into the cabin
by the captain to give him a little brandy and water. Wit-
ness then saw the mate on his knees, praying for the captain
to forgive him. He continued in the captain's cabin in the
same position, the captain standing over him with his sword
in his hand. Witness did not observe that Rambert was
then wounded. Witness was going in and out of the
cabin till 12 o'clock, and always found Rambert kneeling,
and the captain standing over him with the sword. The
captain said several times that he had given Rambert hie
life twice. At 12 o'clock the captain went out of the cabin, but
previous to his going out, he asked Mr. Spence, Barry Yelverton,
and witness, if he (the captain) should forgive Mr. Rambert.
Witness did not hear Yelverton speak, but Spence an-
swered he would leave that to him. Witness did not know
of anything that Rambert had done. After the captain went
out the mate slept on deck, when Yelverton and witness
weresent in search of him. That was about halfan hour after.
Witness went out and saw him in the mainstays. He
called him several times, but, received no answer. On in-
forming the captain of this they were again sent to being
Rambert down. They could not find him, on which the
captain went on deck, and sent French after him. Ram-
bert was not brought again into the cabin, and witness did
not see him afterwards.
Thomas Lee said that he was one crew of the
and was put in irons along with Stephen Cone.
Witness was placed in the maintop.' He saw Rambert come
up to the maintop on the day referred to by the previous
witness, but he had no wounds on him then. He tried to
get the shackle off witness's neck. Witness heard Captain
Johnstone singing out for him, on which he went down
the mainstay. The next thing the witness heard
the captain say was, " You overgrown son of a b—,
I have pardoned von three times ; I will have
your 111'e now." Ho then chased Rambert round the decks,
and the blood was flowing from his thighs as he was jumping
up the poop ladder. The captain was following him with a
sword, on which he jumped overboard. David Johnson
let go the helm for a moment, and the sails fluttered for a
moment. The captain cried, "Lay to helm," and the ship
took its regular course. Several other answers were given
by the witness in corroboration of the evidence of Stephen
Cone, and to the effect that he (witness) had also been cut
by Capt. Johnstone, when in irons, on the head, hands, mid
shoulders, but the foregoing were the main points adduced.

NATIONAL DEFENCES.—The recent experiments
with a one-gun battery, in the Woolwich Marshes, recom-
mended to be made by a board of officers appointed to con-
sider and suggest the best mode of constructing defences
for the coasts of Great Britain, having been completed, and
the result being highly satisfactory, batteries on the same
principle will be erected at Sheerness, Portsmouth, Ply-
mouth, Pembroke, and other places on the coasts of the
island. A great number of traversing platforms, 16 feet long,
to be fixed by pivots to the masonry of the embrasures, are
in progress of construction at the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich,
and some idea of the quantity of work now performed in
the carriage department, where it is stated that about five or
six years ago, only about 100 hands were employed in that
branch, that there are now between 350 to 360 men employed,
aided by many new improvements in machinery, equal to the
work of a great number of hands. The contractors for timber
for the Royal Arsenal have not been able to supply the extra
demand for seasoned timber, in consequence of the great
and unanticipated const.mption, and the dock-yards have
been had recourse to. Xumber3 of large guns have been
forwarded to Jersey and other exposed islands, and to the
Cape of Good Hope, and other colonial possessions, and the
greatest activity.prevails to strengthen every place at home
and abroad, for securing them in the event of being attacked.
A number of the block ships, heavily armed, will soon be
ready for their respective stliitions, and add greatly to the
defence of the coast.
_MELANCHOLY Sutotnr.—On Tuesday forenoon Mr.
William Carter held an inquest at the Dorset Arms Tavern,
Clapham New-road, on the body of Mr. Samuel Clearson,
aged fifty-eight years, a gentleman of independent fortune,
recently residing at No. 8, Holland-place, Clapham-road.
The deceased formerly held a situation of 9001. per annum in
the Bank of England, but for som.e years past had been suf-
fering from asthma, for which lie )had been under the care of
Mr. Young, surgeon, of Kennington-lane. His mind had
been in a deranged state for a considerable period, conse-
ueetly lie had attendance night and day. On the night of
Friday last deceased laid down by the side of his wife, and
during her sleep he proceeded to the staircase, and suspended
himself to the banisters by a silk handkerchief, where he
was subsequently discovered in a state of nudity, life being
quite extinct. The jury returned a. verdict, " That the de-
ceased destroyed his own life, being at the time in a state of
temporary mental derangement."
Such is the excitement in railway matters (says
the correspondent of the Glasgow Argus), that a gentleman
being suddenly asked by a friend who met him, " How do
you do ?" replied "