The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-10 00:00:00

munication between the two Boards should take place.
The meeang on the sth did take place, and the deci-
',ion to which.onr Board carne will appear by. the letter which
the secretary would read, and which would inform them that
the Brighton Board had come to the conclusion that the
prdeeedings of the Croydon Board were illegal, and that
the Brighton Board would submit some other proposi-
tions to them, and that if they found anything to object
Lto in them, the Brighton Board would re-consider them.
Mlle propositions as then made would not be read, as they
were printed for the use of the Shareholders. Before reading
the letter which required the attendance of the six gentlemen
of the Croydon Board, he would remark that the letter was
not the act of the Brighton Board, it was written under the
direction of the joint committee. It was signed by the secre-
tary in his usual manner. Mr. Wilkinson relies very
much on the fact that the Croydon committee had
broken up at the time the letter was written, and
as this is what they would have done if they had
not found the members of the Croydon com-
mittee, I conclude, from that circumstance, that there was

some misunderstarrding between the two Boards, as it was
understood that each Board should sit until it received some
communication from the other Board, and, notwithstanding
that agreement, the Croydon Board broke up without re-
ceiving any communication from the Brighton. The next
letter is one from the Croydon Board, telling the names of
the gentlemen appointed to sit on the joint committee, and
requesting that an early appointment of the Brighton dele-
gates should take place. That letter was received on the same
day that our letter was written. Mr. Wilkinson said that it
was written before the meeting of the Croydon committee,
and there does not appear to be any reason to doubt that
assertion. We cannot, however, attempt to judge, as we do
not possess the faculty of clairvoyance. That letter also
declined the proposition offered by the Brighton Company,
and offered to receive any other terms that could be proposed.
After that letter nothing was done until the two Boards met
on the 17th, and I will not notice much of the proceedings
that took place, as I am sorry to say that many angry
expressions were used on both sides. The gentlemen of the
Croydon Company began by taking the South-Western
agreement, which agreement I will not enter into now, as
NIL Parsons, who follows me, will speak on it in a more able
manner. The Croydon gentlemen threatened to go to our
constituents to annul that agreement, and afterwards asked
for a copy of it. I told them that it was not in my power to
give them a copy, but I would submit their request to the
Board. I then proposed that the agreement should be re-
ferred to the joint committee for consideration, but this
they also declined. I then said that I did not think

that any arrangement they could make would necessarily
clash with their interests. I said that I hoped that the
Brighton Company, the Croydon Company, the South-
Western Company, and the Portsmouth Company, would all
be parties to an agreement that would be advan-
tageous to them all.—(Hear, hear.) I believe that such
an arrangement can be effected—(Cries of " Hear, hear")—
and that arrangement, I may say, has made con-
siderable progress during the consideration of the
question of amalgamation. The Croydon people are
not, as yet, parties to our agreement with the
South-Western Company, but they insisted on an
amalgamation between the Croydon, Brighton, and Ports-
mouth Companies, as the only terms they would accept.—
(A Voice, "No such thing.") I will ask Mr. Wilkin-
son not to . interrupt me. _ 1...d0 not make the as-
.

sertion unadrisedly, and I will appeal to the gen-
tlemen present whether my statement is not correct.
A. counter resolution was made on the part of the Croydon
Company, which it was unnecessary to read, as it would be
found in the right column of the paper. [The document
referred to was a printed paper, which was distributed through

the room, containing the terms of both Companies for effect-
ing the amalgamation; and the paragraph alluded to the
management of the affairs of the two Companies pending the
amalgamation, which has alreadybeen laid before the public.]
The case really rested upon a comparison of these two pro-
positions, and if you will compare these you will find that on
our part they are quite reasonable ; and if any objection
could be offered it should be on our side. We have to urge that
the propositions on the other side are impracticable, and, con-
sequently, could not be carried into effect. There was no diffe-
rence as to the appointment of the number of directors to
constitute a joint committee, which we proposed to be ten, and
the Croydon Company twelve, of which we suggested that
rive should be nominated by each Board, while the
Croydon Company contended that there should
be six.—(Hear, hear.) This was an immaterial point.
But in the third paragraph of the paper (the document al-

ready mentioned)—there was a substnlial difference. Now, it
must be evident to you that we have claimed no advantage
over the Croydon Company in consequence of our larger
capital. But the Croydon company had made an addition
to that positron, namely, that no greater number of votes
should be tendered on either side than the members present
on the other side. Now, how was it to be determined which
of the gentlemen should retire from his p,,st ? We must take,
first, the vote as to which should be excluded, should
there be an excess of the representatives of one of the Com-
panie. It does not provide that no greater number of one
should be present, but merely that no greater number of
votes should be present. Now this is impracticable. To
the fourth paragraph there was no objection, it being the
same on both sides ; but to the fifth—namely, as to the
jurisdiction of that committee, there was a most important

difference on our side. [The proposition referred to by the
Chairman was to this effect, that all matters relating to
new projects or engagements, or the raising of new capital,
be left to the said committee for consideration; and

the alteration proposed wag, that all other matters
except those should be left to the committee, with-
out reference to the Board for confirmation.] Now, we wish
to have the decision of this committee submitted to the

Board, which would be composed of equal numbers of both
Companies. We do also require that in any resolutions that
may be adopted by the proposed committee, we shall
have some little voice.—(Hear, hear.) Without this
how could could your Directors carry on the business
of the Company, or delegate the transacting
the whole of the affairs of the Company? There would be no
lifficalty in delegating power to Directors on the part of the
Croydon Board, but such is not the case with us. The
vacancies that might occur on their Board could be filled up
by them without delay, while it would be necessary for us to
. .

call a general meeting, by the votes of which alone this appoint-
ment of our representatives could be effected, for we have no
legal power to act otherwise. The sixth proposition (to the
effect that the Boards be limited on the passing of the Act
fit amalgamating the two Companies, and that the united
Board be gradually reduced, by resignation or other-
wise, to ten in number) had been objected to by
the Croydon Company. He would not dwell on
this. The last objection that had been made was
respecting the branches—namely, to Bognor, Littlehamp-
ton, Steyning, Newhaven, Eastbourne, Hailsham East
w Grinstead, al Dorking, to Reigate. They would find that
Wandsworth was not included in this. The Croydon Corn.
pang had no interest in any of these lines, except that
from Dorking to Reigate; therefore we had no wish to
give them a voice in these matters. Upon these
your Company felt themselves bound to differ. [The Chair-
man here directed the Secretary to read the correspondence
that had taken place on these as well as the other matters
mentioned in his speech, which have already been
'iven in extenso in our report of the meeting of the Croydon
(,ompany on Tuesday last.] With respect to the Great
Kent Atmospheric Railway, there was one thing which was
entitled to notice, that was the condition that was made,
to the effect that, if the undertaking did not succeed,
that no more than ten shillings a share should be demanded
from the Shareholders. We have no hesitation in laying
before you the agreement between the Croydon Company
and the Portsmouth Company. It does not appear to
ho perfect, for it does not appear to have the consent of the
Portsmouth Company, for if it had been otherwise, how
could that Company seek for an independent access to
London ? Now, the fact is, as it would seem, that the Ports-

mouth Company merely wanted to use the Croydon line until
they could better themselves.
The SECRETARY here read, according to the direction of the
Chairman, the various letters that passed between the secre-
taries of the two Companies with reference to this point, and
also as regarded the suggestion of Mr. Burchill to open the.
agreement between the London and Brighton and South-
Western Companies.
The CHAIRMAN resumed—At the very time when Mr.
Du-chill was waiting for an interview with their Board, who
had actually prepared a letter to effect the amalgamation.
In the statement that had been made by the Chairman of the
Croydon Company, that letter had been put earlier in the
eries, but they had assigned it its proper place.
Mr. WILKINSON wished to know whether that was the last
letter?
The CHAIRMAN said that it was.
Mr. WILKINSON—Then we have never seen it.
The CHAIRMAN—No, you have not ; it is the previous one.
The SECRETARY then read a letter of the 24th November,
stating that the Brighton Board could not concur in calling
the proposed meeting, deprecating the system of threatening
and dictation adopted by the Croydon Board, and regretting
that the spirit displayed by the two Boards was not reci-
procal. The answer of the Croydon Board te, that letter
was also read, denying, on their part, the use
of thrsats or dictation, but stating the determination of the
Croydon Board to call the Proprietors of both Companies
together, at the same time expressing their desire to keep
up that friendly feeling that had hitherto existed between
the two Companies. Several other letters were also read,
after which,
The CHAIRMAN stated that he believed that that com-

pleted the series of the correspondence that had taken place.
The Proprietors would perceive that in what they had now
concluded the Directors and himself had passed over many,
matters of irritation—(Hear, hear)—and he trusted that if
ever the Proprietors entertained any doubt whatever ai to the
good faith of their Directors, those doubts had been
removed.—(Hear.) He thought also that the Proprietors
would see that their Directors had pursued a most concilia-
tory spirit, and that in their anxiety to give effect to their
wishes expressed at the last meeting, they had carried con-
cession as far as they could consistently with a due
regard to the interests of those parties whom they
represented.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Chairman) thought
that he bad shown that there was no foutadaton whatever for

full and explicit confidence of the Proprietors was all the
Directors looked to as their recompense and reward—(Hear,
hear)—and when they lost that, when the confidence of the
Proprietors in them was in the slightest degree impaired, it
was the bounden duty of the Directors to remove all obsta-
cles to the Proprietors having such a board as they may
think best calculated to secure their interests.—(Hear, hear.)
In conclusion, the Directors and himself asked the Proprietors
to sink all matters of difference, and as they gave a hearty
vote in favour of amalgamation, so they would give an equal
hearty vote in favour of the motion he (the Chairman) had
now the honour to submit for the adoption of the meeting
" That this meeting adopt as their ultimatum the proposal
made by their Board to the Croydon Railway Company
on the sth day of November last, and that in
the event of its not being accepted, it will
become expedient to call another meeting of the Company,
with a view to rescind the proposal of amalgamation, passed
on the 6th of November last."—( Hear.)

General MooDY seconded the Motion:
Mr. WisitAw considered that it would be better, before
the discussion on the. motion was proceeded with, that the
meeting should be put in possession of what the agreement
with the SoUth-Western Company was. The Chairman had
stated that Mr. Parsons, one of the Directors, had some state-
ment to make on that subject.
Mr. PARSONS then proceeded at some length to detail the
motives that had induced the Directors of the Brighton
Company to enter into the agreement with the South-Western
Company, observing that that agreement would be beneficial
to the Brighton Proprietors, but whether it was good or bad,
having been entered into, it ought to be adhered to. The real
question for the consideration of the meeting was, not whether
there should be an amalgamation between the Brighton and
Croydon lines, but whether there should be an amalgamation
between that and the Portsmouth. He, for one, wished to see
the amalgamation between the Brighton and Croy lines
effected, but he could not consent to it if it was to be carried
out upon princip!es that would materially injure the former.—
( Hear, hear.) He was convinced that in all the Brighton
Board had done they had the public good and the
interests of their Proprietors at heart.—(Hear, hear.)
The Brighton Directors might be alleged to have intended
to have made a monopoly of the traffic in this direction.
The whole matter of the agreement turns upon the Ports-
mouth Atmospheric Company. Mr. Parsons, as a Brighton
Director, was opposed to amalgamation with that Company.
It has been said that that Company is intended for the ser-
vice of the public, and the Brighton Company have op-
posed it. But the report of the Board of Trade
is just a running commentary on the agreement
between the Brighton and Great Western. The character of
the Portsmouth line is stated by the Board of Trade when
they say the cost is far beyond any proportion with the ex
pected returns. Through fourteen miles of the line the gra-
dient is one in eighty, and for the next sixteen miles it is
one in 100. If amalgamation with it is to be entered into,
there will be an opposition line to the Brighton Company,
proposed between Guildford and Chichester, the two princi-
pal towns in that district. The consequence woull be reta-
liation and disadvantage. _ .

Mr. WILKINSON, Chairman of the Croydon Company, said
that he and the Croydon Company asked to see the agree-
ment spoken of and could not. He further begged to say
that they had never made an amalgamation with the Ports-
mouth Company a condition of amalgamation with the
Brighton Company. (Mr. Parsons—" He has said it would
be a consequence.") The fact is, and there is nothing
more, that the Croydon Directors are many of them Directors
of the Portsmouth Company, and what passed between them
and the Brighton Company at the Board was merely that
they intended, if the Bill for the Portsmouth Company were
carried, to amalgamate the Croydon line with it, and the
Brighton Company might join them if they wished.
There had been taunts thrown out because they
were Portsmouth Directors, but there was no necessity for
their having anything to do with the Portsmouth line un-
less they chose. Indeed he thought that the Portsmouth
line was the grand attraction to the Brighton Directors to
think of amalgamation with the Croydon line that
thereby they might secure the traffic of the district.
He said that the meeting was about to be pressed to an ulti-
matum on the amalgamation with the Croydon Company, but
he begged to remind them that that was not the method of
obtaining that amalgamation, which he could not but think
they deserved.
. . . _

HARDBY said he was pushed, by all that had hap-
pened, to the conclusion that a little more
good spirit and patience would do much for a happy result.
He would to very reluctantly pressed to decide at the pre-
sent meeting to an ultimatum. A resolution of amalgama-
tion had already been passed. He wished much to consider
what were the means of continuing the negotiation
which was to be so abruptly terminated.—(Hear.)
The interests of the Brighton and the Croydon lines
he believed to be identical. Much he feared might
be attributed to the temper of the two Boards. An ultima-
tum at the present meeting would be treating the other
Company much worse than had been complained of. He
would suggest an adjournment of the present meeting
for a short time, and the previous adoption of a
resolution to the effect that the Company were
friendly to the consideration of an amalgamation,
should it be necessary. Should the Boards feel so, he would
suggest that a small committee of the Proprietary should be
called, to consist of three exclusive Proprietors of the Brighton
Company and three of the Croydon Company. He even felt
inclined, if the meeting were agreeable, to put his suggestions
into the form of a resolution.

Mr. GRANTHAM rose to say that the gauntlet of contention
had been thrown down by the Chairman of the other Com-
pany. He had brought forward a budget of faults, which he
laid to the account of the Brighton Directors. Mr. Grantham
said he had always been opposed to amalgamation with the
Portsmouth Company, and was now ten times more so. An
amalgamation with that Company was a necessary consequence
of amalgamation with the Croydon line. The atmospheric prin-
ciple is not yet sufficiently tested. The Brighton Company
would, therefore, be saddled with the expenses of the experi-
ments. Ho sat down with expressing his opposition to
amalgamation.
The CHAIRMAN of the Croydon Company begged to deny
that he had ever gone into the Brighton Board-room using
threats and intimidation.—(Great confusion.)
The CHAIRMAN of the Brighton Company would say, with
the Directors by him, that the distinct recollection on their
mind was, that Mr. Wilkinson had used threats.

Mr. TAYLOR said that an amalgamation with the Croydon
Company appeared at the last meet.ng desirable. He had heard
nothing at the present meeting to make it less desirable now, and
it might yet appear to be for the advantage of the om-
pany to amalgamate with the Direct Portsmouth Com-
pany. In setting about discussing the advantages of
amalgamation with the Portsmouth Company, he was inter-
rupted by the Chairman, who begged him to keep to the
question. It had been contended that the contract with the
South-Western entered into must bind them, were it advan•
tageous or not but he would say, however strange it might
seem to oppose such a doctrine, that in a kind of property
which is continually changing hands the Proprietors could
not be bound by what was done by previous acts
of the Proprietary.—(Hi-sea.) None but legal bonds could
bind them.—(Hisses, which continued till he moved as an
amendment—" That the two Boards continue to consider
the proposal of the amalgamation.")
Mr. KERCIIE seconded it. He thought it would be a
reflection on the Croydon Company to pass the resolution
proposed to them. He hoped they would still insist on an
amalgamation. He was amazed that the Croydon Directors
had not been allowed to read the contract between the
Brighton and the South-Western Companies without con-
dition. (The Chairman begged to say condition was neces-
sary to guard against mischief) He thought, then, there
was nothing between them—nothing to overcime.
Mr. LEVI begged the Directors would not press the resolu-
tion.

Mr. BARROW had entire confidence in the Directors ; and
he believed the terms offered in the resolutions to the Croy-
don Directors were reasonable, but he hoped there was still a
middle position and course. Neutral persons called in
would not be able to effect much if the Directors failed. He
thought the Croydon Directors were anxious for an amalga-
mation. There might be a misunderstanding on the part of
both of the Chairmen. He begged, therefore, to submit
whether it would not meet the Directors' views to adjourn
the meeting, and to continue the negotiation between the
two Companies.
Mr. HENDEMON said there were substantial points of
difference between them, and therefore the Proprietors had
bee a called together to say what they should do. One of
these points was amalgamation with the Portsmouth Com-
pany. This had not been made an express condition, but
he knew the effect of statements—support would begin and
amalgamation would ensue. Another point was that in re-
ference to the South-Western line; that point had not been
started previous to the threat of calling the meeting.
It had been a mere makeway. But the great point was
what control the Croydon Board would have over the affairs
of the Brighton line. Mr. Wilkinson first proposed that the
Croydon Board should have the whole control of the two
lines. He mentioned particularly Steyning. What, he
asked, had ➢lr. Wilkinson to do with that as a Croydon
proprietor? He (Mr. Henderson) thought the Wandsworth
line should be a sine qud non. They had lost that already in
Parliament, but he expressed hopes of yet obtaining it. He
said, before sitting down, it had to be decided who were reason-
able, and what they were to do.
Mr. CASTLE SMITH moved, as an amendment, " That the
Brighton Company do invite the Croydon Company to re-
consider the proposals made to them on the sth of Novem-
ber last, with a view to amalgamation."
Mr. COY seconded it.

The CHAIRMAN being called on for his opinion on the amend-
ment, said, after the very extensive correspondence, he had no
hope of gaining anything unless they went to the Croydon
Company with something ultimate. But for the moderate
terms of the Croydon Board at their last meeting, he had no
hope but of meeting the Proprietors to ask them to rescind
the resolution giving them instruction to consider amalga-
mation, as they had been unable on any terms to effect it.
On account of that meeting, however, he hoped they had yet
cue opportunity, and but one, of offering terms.
The last amendment moved was put by the Chairman to
the meeting. It fell to the ground without a vote.
That moved by Mr. Taylor was then put, when only 13
voted in favour of it.

the allegations that had been made, that the Board of Di-
rectors of the Brighton Company had refused to meet the
Directors of the Croydon Company in equal numbers—(Hear,
hear)—to discuss such questions as might arise numbers-(Hear,
the Act of Amalgamation had passed.—(Hear, hear.)
Nay, they had the authority of Mr. Wilkinson
for saying that it was so. The Directors of the
Brighton Company did not object to the Croydon
Directors seeing their agreement with the South-Western
Company. All that they required was that they should not
make use of it to the detriment of the Brighton
Company or without their consent.—( Hear' hear.) As
regarded the policy to be pursued with respect to
the Portsmouth line there could be no doubt that that
f9rmed grave matter eor consideration by the Brighton Pro-
prietors, but that constituted no part of the amalgamation—it
only comprehended questions beset with difficulties.—( Hear.)
It was for the Proprietors to say whether the course that had
been pursued by their Directors met with their approbation,
arid received the sanction of their mature judgment, and in
order that the Proprietors present might come to an un-
biassed judgment, and act only upon what they heard that
day, the Directors had neither solicited or sought for a single
proxy.—( Hear, hear.) It was therefore open to the Proprie-
tors present to come to any decision that they thought
right. They might, if they pleased, declare that the
fair and equitable proposal on the part of tie Brighton
iiirectors having been rejected by the Croydon Board, the
amalgamation was at an end ; of that there could be no doubt.
—(Hear, hear.) It was clear that the resolution to amal-
gamate was sub;ect to certain details, and if they
could not be acceded to, it was open to the
Proprietors of the Brighton line to declare all at; an end.—
fh!leirari)rhoeparri.4 rs Thesh oDirectors, t kattveevxe
extreme
elinveer were
course,unw i ing
because,that
looking to the fair and reasonable views manifested by the
body of Croydon Proprietors at the meeting of Tuesday last,
they were of opinion that one more effort might be made to
settle the details of amalgamation; and they advised the
Proprietors to adopt their proposal of the sth of November
last as their ultimatum. Anything short of that would leave
it doubtful whether the Proprietors approved of
the course adopted by their Directors or not.hen
He could assure the Proprietors that the labours and
responsibility placed upon the Board of Directors far
exceeded anything which they had anticipated w
they took office ; they had, however, the satisfaction
of knowing that their exertions had been of advan-
ta,,,,re to the Company, because they had been repeatedly
and cordially acknowledged by the Proprietors. The

The original motion was then carried by a very large ma-
jority.
The thanks of the meeting were then voted to the Chair-
man, and immediately after adjourned.

LLOYD'S SHIPPING.

EAST INDIA SHIPPING.

Arrivals—Maria, Stephenson, from Bengal, off Brighton,
sailed July 19, St. Helena October 21; Princess Royal,
Hoodless, from Bengal, at Liverpool, sailed Aug. 24, St. He-
lena Oct. 26 ; Eleanor, Hasless, from Mauritius, in the
Downs, sailed Sept. 16 ; Brechin Castle, Barclay, from Ben-
gal, in the St. Katherine's Dock, sailed July 21, St. Helena
Oct. 21; Olinda, Taylor, from Bengal, in the Downs, sailed
June 26, Mauritius -Aug. 30; Anne and Jane, Smith, from
Bengal, at Liverpool, sailed Aug. 20.
Arrivals at St. Helena—Legeira, Oct. 13, prize to the
Penelope—Thomas Henry, 14th, from Calcutta, and sailed
15th to London; Cadet, 15th, from Portsmouth, and sailed
18th to the Cape; Marmion, from Madras; Lena, from
Ichaboe; Cacique steamer, prize to the Penelope; Tom
Cringle and Cassandra, 16th, from Ichaboe; Mary Stewart,
from Saldanha Bay; Malvina, 17th, from Batavia, and
sailed to Hamburgh ; Louisa Munro, from Ceylon and Cape,
and sailed 18th to London ; Jane Catherine, from Madras,
and sailed 20th to London ; Dream 18th, from coast of
Africa; Melville, 17th, from Madras and Mauritius,
passed to London; Chilena, 19th, from Singapore, and
sailed 20th to Liverpool ; Inchirman, 19th, from Bom-
bay; Hampton, 20th, from the Cape; Arrow, from
Zanzibar, and sailed 22d to London; Lucinda, 21st, from
Bombay, and sailed to Liverpool; Westmoreland, from
coast of Africa; Nereide, from the Cape, and sailed 22d to
London ; Clara, from Bombay, and sailed 22d to London ;
Hope, 22d, from Calcutta, and sailed 24th to Liverpool ;
Galatea, from Algoa Bay, and sailed 22d to London ; Rad-
land, from coast of Africa, and sailed 25th to Liverpc ; Lady
Flora Hastings, from coast of Africa; Nautilus, from
Madras, and sailed 22d to London; Ino, from Madras, and
sailed 24th to Liverpool ; Antilla, from Calcutta, and sailed
24th to Liverpool ; Egerie (French frigate), from Bourbon ;
Birman and Scourfield, from Calcutta; Robert Clive, from
London ; Caribbean, 23d, from Mauritius ; H.M.S. Larne,
from coast of Africa; William Wright, 24th, from Cape,
and sailed 25th to London ; Senator, from Calcutta;
Clipper, from the Cape.

TILE SUN, LONDON WEDNESDAY EVENING DECEMBER 10, 1845.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

TIIE THAMES, SOUTHEND,AND NORTHERN AND EASTERN
JUNCTION RAILWAY COMPANY.—Yesterday Mr. Char-
nock, the barrister, appeared before Alderman Gibbs for
the purpose of applying for a summons calling upon the
Secretary of the Thames, Southend, and Northern and
Eastern Railway Company, to answer for having in-
serted the name of Mr. Richard Garde, a member of the
bar, in the prospectus of the Company, as one of the
Provisional Committee, without that gentleman's know-
ledge or consent
Mr. Charnock said he applied for the summons under
the 7th and Bth of Victoria, cap. 110. His client was a
gentleman who happened never to have had anything at
all to do with railway speculations, so that the proceed-
ings he had to complain of naturally excited the utmost
surprise and indignation. No authority had ever been
given by him to use his name in any Railway Company,
and the first intimation that he received that he was a
Provisional Committeeman was the following docu-
ment :

" The Thames, Southend, and Northern and Eastern
Junction Railway Company.
" am desired by the Committee of Manage-
ment to inform you that 100 shares have been reserved
in this undertaking for each gentleman of the Provisional
Committee.

" You nre, therefore, requested to insert in the ac-
companying form the Humber of shares you wish to be
allotted to you not exceeding 100.
" I am also desired to inform you that the Managing
Committee have fixed Saturday, the Bth of Nov( tuber
next, as the last day upon which the deposits on any
shares you may require can be received.—l remain, Sir,
your very obedient servant,
" ANDREW ELLISON,
" Company's Temporary Offices, 53, Combat
London.
" Dated the 30th October, 1845." _

The letter inclosed the fullow•ieg printed form:—
" To the Managing Committee of the Thames, South-
end, and Northern and Eastern Junction Railway
Company.
" Gentlemen,—l request that you will allot me
shares in the above undertaking, and I hereby und,rtake
to accept the same,!and to pay the deposits thereon, and
to sign the necessary deeds, when called upon to do so.

" Member of the Provisional Committee."
Perceiving that there was a secretary to the Company
which had thus adopted him as one of their Provisional
Committee, Mr. Garde determined to call as soon as
possible at the offices at Cornhill, to rectify the error,
by a complete denial of all knowledge of the Company.
Upon calling at No. 53, Cornhill, he found that a re-
markable bustle was stirred up, and a great ostentation
of business seemed to move the establishment. He
mentioned that he was desirous of speaking to the
secretary, but he was informed that Mr. Elli-
son was not to be seen ; that he was, in fact,
in the country. He then said he wished to
see somebody with whom he might communicate upon
a subject connected with the Company, and he was
then addressed by one of the clerks, to whom he stated
the nature of his business. He requested that the
secretary would take his name out of the prospectus, as
he had nothing whatever to do with the Company, and
had never sanctioned the use of his name as a member
of the Provisional Committee. His request was com-
pl►ed with by the clerk with whom he communicated in
his presence, and 1 e left the house in the belief that there
would be no repetition of the circumstance, and, of
course, that nobody would consider him to be in a posi-
tion to which he had never laid any claim. He was mis-
taken. On the Bth of November he received the follow-
ing letter by post:—
" The Thames, Southend, and Northern and Eastern

Junction Railway Company.
"53, Cornbill, Nov. 8, 1815,

"Sir,—Your attendance is requested at a meeting to
be held at the Company's office on Monday next, the
10th instant, at twelve o'clock precisely, to take into
consideration the proceedings of the Company.
" I am, your obedient servant,
" A. STOW (for Mr. Russell).

" R Garde, Esq , Middle Temple."
Mr. Garde supposed that some gentleman of his name
must be connected with these speculations, in which
he had never had the ambition to be involved, and that
the error would, in all probability, correct itself. The
matter, however, was followed up most industriously,
and on the sth of December he received the following
agreeable communication :
" 21, Cork-street, Bond-street, Dec. 50845.

" Sir,—Mr.Russell, of Gray's Inn-square, solicitor to
the Thames, Southern, Northern, and Eastern Junction
Railway, having informed us that you are responsible,
as a member of the Committee, for the expenses in-
curred in bringing forward the above-named line of rail-
way, and having referred us to you for the paymznt of
our account for surveying, amounting to 1.0841. l2=. 9d.,
as we are much in need of the amount, we have to re-
quest your early attention to a settlement of the same.
" We are, Sir, your most obedient servants,
" COPE and EALES.

" To Richard Garde, Esq., Middle Temple."
Now, it w•buld be a difficult thing to find any case in
the history of railways, extraordinary as that history
was, to compare with the proceedings so briefly de.
scribed. Here was a gentleman, who had no connexion
on earth with any railway, dragged in as a Provisional
Committeeman. He had never written for or accepted
a share; he had gone to the concern and denied all
knowledge of it; and down came a demand upon him to
the amount of I,OOOL

Alderman GIBBS—What course did he them pursuel

Mr. Charnock—l-Ie wrote the following letter next
day to Messrs. Cope and Eales:—
" 12, Portland- place, Clapham-road,
" Nine o'clock, Saturday, Dec. 6, 1845.
" Gentlemen,—ln reply to your letter of the sth of
this month, and which I only received this morning, I
beg to inform you that neither Mr. Russell, nor any
other person, had any authority from me to insert my
name in the prospectus of the Thames and Southend
Railway, &e. My name was inserted without my
knowledge, and when I discovered that such an unwar-
rantable liberty had been taken with my name, and
such an imposition attempted to be practiced on the
public, I called at the office and ordered my name to be
taken out, and which one of the clerks did in my
presence.
" As there is not any other Richard Garde, a member
of the Temple, but myself, it is quite evident, from your
letter, as well as Mr. Russell's statement to you, that I
am the person meant in the prospectus, and not Mr.
Garde, of Stephen's-green, who is the person meant as
the Director of the Manchester and Birmingham
Railway.
" I, therefore, am of opinion, with some of my friends,
that I am now in a position to bring the parties to jus-
tice, and shall, therefore, early on Monday next, take
the preliminary steps, before the Lord Mayor, against
Mr. , &c.—l have the honour to remain,
" Gentlemen, your obedient humble servant,
" RICHARD GARDE.

" Messrs. Cope and Eales."
The name of Mr. Garde had been introduced in the
prospectus with this high-sounding epithet—" one of
the Directors of the Manchester and Birmingham Rail-
way." In such a case as had been rkpresented. it was
presumed that it was the province of the Chief Magis-
trate, or his representative, to interpose, and the Learned
Counsel confidently repeated that a summons should be
issued.

Alderman Gums said that no paper had been exhi-
bited to him from which it appeared that the name of
Mr. Garde had been used. Had Mr. (harnock
prospectus of the Company, in which prospectus the name
was inserted under the head of the Provisional Com-
mittee ? _ _

Mr. Charnock said he had no document of the kind,
but he had no doubt that he should be able to procure
one: He submitted that, upon the mere statement he
had made, a magistrate would be sanctioned in granting
a summons to the secretary.
Alderman GIBBS said he considered it to be necessary
that Mr. Charnock should produce the document to
which he had referred, before a magistrate could be jus-
tified in issuing a summons under the Act of Victoria.
Mr. Charnock—We shall endeavour to procure what
you think necessary. Mr. Garde is determined to do all
in his power to obtain satisfaction for so extraordinary
an outrage, and he believes this course to be the most
likely to accomplish that object, as well as to do public
justice.
Mr. Garde—l feel greatly annoyed at the whole busi-
ness. lam not a man of fortune or property, and it
would appear from the advertisement that I connived at
passing myself off as a person of unlimited means. I
am anxious, amongst other things, that it should appear
that I have not endeavoured to favour an imposition.
GUILDHALL.
William Giddings, of the City police, was brought
before Alderman Hunter, charged with being drunk
while on duty, and insubordinate when at the station-
house.

Mr. Joseph Boyd, inspector of the second division of
City police, stated that while at the station house on
Saturday morning, Sergeant Bain came and reported
that the prisoner was in liquor on his beat, and unfit to
do his duty. lie at first refused to come to the station,
but eventually did so. He (witness) told him that he
was suspended, and had better go to bed, but he refused,
and wanted to go out again; at last he became so vio-
lent that he was obliged to be locked up. His case had
been laid before the Commissioner of Police, who di-
rected him to be taken before the magistrates, in conse-
quence of repeated acts of misconduct on the part of the
prisoner.
Sergeant Bain stated that about a quarter past twelve
o'clock on Friday night he observed the prisoner drink-
ing with a girl of the town, and partly intoxicated. This
was in Angel-court. Skinner-street. About one o'clock
he again went round, and found the prisoner still drink-
ing with the same female. A third time he went round
and found him intoxicated and incapable of doing his
duty.
Alderman HUNTER said that this being the second
case within these few days of the police being neglectful
of their duty, he should send the prisoner for seven
days to prison.
BO W-STREET.
Mrs. Jane Cook, the wife of a tailor residing in Far-
ringdon-street, appeared on a summons before Mr. Tyvy-
ford to answer a complaint preferred against her by a
young man, named Bond, for having assaulted him
under the following singular circumstances :
The complainant stated that he resided at 21, Regent-
villas, Avenue-road, Regent's-park, and is a private
gentleman. On Monday last, about one o'clock, he was
corning out of the Insolvent Debtors' Court,:in Portugal-
street, accompanied by a tipstaff from the Queen's Bench
Prison, and being told previous to his coming dowE stairs
that the defendant was waiting to speak to him, he sent
down word there was no use in her seeing him on the
matter she came about, as they could come to no agree-
ment. Shortly after, on his getting to a room on the
first floor, defendant flow at him, and having kicked him
behind, struck him also with her fist, for which she was
taken into custody, but being in the custody of
.the tip.

staff, he had no opportunity of following up the charge,
as he was compelled to return to the Queen's Bench
Prison instead of attending at the station-house in the
character of a complainant.
Mark Bond, a teacher of languages, and brother of the
complainant, having confirmed the foregoing statement.
The complainant said, in answer to the Court, that the
defendant's husband agreed to accept of 10s. in the
pound on an account that was between them, and for
which a receipt was given in full, which seemed not to
have satisfied the defendant, who persevered in insisting
that a balance was still duo.

Mr. TWYFORD inquired how the complainant was
enabled to attend, if he was still a prisoner in the Queen's
Bench ?

The comulainant's brother replied that he had been
discharged in the morning, and was about to leave town.
Li answer to the charge, Mrs. Cook said, that about
two )ears back her family got acquainted with the com-
plainant arid his brotlwr, who were then almost in a state
of nudity, and often crying for want, sir cc which time he
contrived to get married to a widow old enough to be his
grandmother, being now sixty-five years of age, keeping
hur carriage, and in the enjoyment of 1,8001 n-year and
on her husband furnishing a bill for the amount of the
clothes that had been supplied, not only to himself, but
also to his brother, he compounded for what he had had
himself, and drew a bill,of 18/.10i., being the amour tdue
by him for the brother. Such an act of ingratitude na-
turally exasperated her, and on going to Portugal-street
for the purpose of demanding the balance, she threatened
to expose the contents of a quantity of letters which she
had in her possession of his respecting his wife, upon
which he pu‘hed her against the wall, at the same time
using an offensive expression, and she considered she
was to a certain extent justified in kicking him forsuch
conduct.

The complainant admitted that his brother had com-
mitted some letters to the defendant's husband, but that
had nothing to do with the charge of a,sault.
Mr. TWYFORD said the proper course would be to
try and obtain restoration of the papers alluded to by
summons, and as the complainant was no longer a pri-
soner in the Queen's Bench, perhaps he would be sa-
tisfied if the defendant would promise not to molest
him in future.

The complainant said he had no objection, and the de
fendant having made the required promise, she was dis
charged.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

James Hayden, a waterman, was brought before Mr.
Ma ltby, charged with striking Joseph Mitchell on the
head with a hammer in Coventry-street.
The complainant, it appeared, was desirous of going
towards his home in North-street, Stepney, by one of
the Blackwall omnibuses, and for that purpose went to
the Black Horse public-house, where the Blackwall om-
nibuses stop for passengers, and where the defendant
acts in the capacity of waterman. The complainant,
who had been drinking, was objected to as a passenger
on that ground, and this having led to words between
the defendant and himself, the complainant received a
blow on the head from a hammer which the defendant
bad in his hand. The blow cut through the corn-
plitinart's hat and inflicted a severe wound on his head.
The defendant said the complainant was intoxicated,
and on being refused admission into the omnibus, be
got enraged and struck at him repeatedly. While
warding off the blows, the hammer which he had in his
hand must have accidentally come in contact with the
complainant's head. _ _

3fr. MALTBY considered the assault so ferocious and
unprovoked, that,he should inflict the full penalty of 5/.,
or two months' imprisonment, and in addition revoke his
license.

Harance Flynn and William Eckhalt, a German, were
charged with being suspected thieves.
Mr. Grant, breeches and gaiter maker, of Piccadilly,
said the two prisoners carne into his shop a few mornings
ago to make a trifling purchase. After they had left he
missed some handkerchiefs, which he suspected they had
stolen. He sent a description of the prisoners to his
neighbours, in case they she uld receive a visit, and on
Monday, on being inform( d that the prisoners had
called at a shop in his vicinity, he caused them to be
apprehended. On searching them, only a few half-
pence in money were found, but they had a new piece
of silk handkerchief, evidently the produce of their
morning's labour.
They were remanded to find an owner for the property,
and to inquire into their characters.
William Heiron, of M':ad's-court, was charged with
having committed an assault on a married woman named
Cox.

The complainant said she was going home to her lodg-
ings in Castle-street East, about one o'clock, when she
was accosted by the defendant in Mead's court. She
repulsed his advances, and instantly received a violent
blt w on the face, which blackened her eye, and for the mo-
ment stunned 'her. A gentleman who was passing, seeing
the assault, came to her assistance, and succeeded in
securing the defendant. The gentleman accompanied
her to the station-house, and signed the sheet, but he
was not in attendance.
The defendant declared his entire innocence of the
charge. He was about to put the keyin_the door of the
house where he lodged, when he saw some man strike
a woman. He went forward to her assistance, and was
given into custody as the person who assaulted the
woman.

The complainant said the defendant was the man who
struck her.

Mr. MALTBY inflicted the penalty of 5/., which was
immediately paid.
The defendant shortly afterwards returned into Court
with a female named Blabey, living in Mead's-court, who
said she witnessed the whole affAir. The complainant
and a man (taller than the defendant) were quarrelling
in the court for about a quarter of an hour. The man
at last struck the woman, and then the defendant came
forward and said, " Don't strike the woman, strike me."
The man went away, and shortly afterwards the wo'aan
gave the defendant into custody as the man who had
assaulted her. The woman was intoxicated at the time,
and was unable to distinguish the party who had struch
her.

Mr. MALTBY decided on sending for the police-in-
spector who booked the charge, in order to make a
further investigation into the case under the new aspect
which it had assumed.
MARYLEBONE.

Lieutenant• Colonel Taib,,t, residing at No. 5, Douro
Cottages, St. John's Wood, was charged before Mr.
Raa'linson, with having violently assaulted a journey-
man plasterer, named John Raines.

Complainant stated that, on the evening of the 4th
instant, after he had left his work, he was proceeding
towards his home, accompanied by two other workmen,
wlu m he had occasion to leave for a short period, in the
Park-road. They went on without him, and soon after-
ward,,, as he was about to rejoin them in South-bank, he
passed defendant, who struck him violently with his
umbrella, and knocked him down. He got up as soon as
he was able, and was again attacked by the defendant,
who gave him a blow with his fist.

In answer to a question from the Magistrate,
Cemplainant said—l had given him no offence what-
ever. After he had assaulted me he was going to run
away, hut I gave him in charge to a policeman. He was
taken to the station-house, where he left his card, but
was not detained.

The above evidence was for the most part corroborated
by two other persons ; one of whom said, that as com-
plainant was moving along he happened to brush against
defendant's arm.
Li, ut..Colonel Talbot stated in defence, that on the
evening alluded to several men passed him in a very
disorderly manner, and among,t them was complainant,
who, after attempting to trip him up by the heels, ran
off with the view of effecting his escape. Ile(defen-
dant) pursued him, and un coming up with him, com-
plainant attempted to strike him. He (the defendant).
in his own defence, then gave him a blow.

Mr. llawLiNsoN—liare you any witness in support of
your statement ? Defendant---I have not, Sty.
Mr. RAWLINSON—Then the evidence is all on one
side. Under the circumstances, I should recommend you
to make some small satisfaction to the co raplainant.
afeLdant—l had rather pay a fine than let him have
any reward, as I don't consider myself to to in the wrong.
The MAGISTRATE decided the case by ordering de-
fendant to pay 405., and an additional 25., the cost of
the warrant.

Complainant here stepped forward, and said that, in
consequence of defendant's conduct towards him, he had
lost three days' work, and had also been obliged to go
to a doctor.

Mr. RAViLINSON-I can't help it. The fine goes to
the Queen, but I bad rather that the defendant had
made you seine satisfaction. The penalty and costs
were paid.
WORSHIP-STREET.

Henry Edwards who stated himself to have been for
merly an actor at the Garrick Theatre, was charged
berore Mr. Bingham with causing a serious disturbance
at what is called the " Free Church," in White's-row,
Spita 1 fields.
The Rev. George Montgomery West, who said be was
the ordained minister of the church in question, appeared
as the complainant.
Mr. BINGHAM asked him if it was a church of the
established religion? to which he replied that it was not
at present under episcopal jurisdiction, but was regularly
licensed, and the service performed in it was that of the
Church of England.

~
The complainant then proceeded to state that the de-
fendant was known as a prominent member of a body of
professed infidels, who occupy a building in White-
chapel, denominated " The Hall of Science," which he
said was regularly used for the propagation of their
infidel principles; and some time since several of their
prominent speakers came with a number of their fol-
lowers into his church, and publicly challenged him to
a discussion of the comparative merits of Christianity
and Atheism, they having learned that he had delivered
lectures on the subject. By advice of some of his
Christian friends he accepted the challenge, and they
subsequently had a number of discussions, from which
his opponents at length withdrew, and a large and
respectable meeting was afterwards held, at which
resolutions were passed, to the effect that his argu-
ments in favour of Christianity had triumphantly over-
thrown the theory of the infidels. Copies of these reso-
lutions xere given in the presence of witnesses to a Mr.
Harwood, the understood proprietor of the " Hall of
Science," and to another principal member of the fra-
ternity, and these resolutions, he observed, referred also
to, and pointedly contradicted, a slanderous statement
which the defendant, Edwards, had publicly made on
the platform of their hall last Tuesday evening. He
came now to the immediate subject of complaint, and
said that three lectures had been announced to be de-
livered at the Free Church on different evenings by a
New Zealand chief, for the purpose of explaining to the
Christian public the savage manners and customs of the
native New Zealanders, and of the happy progress which
Christianity had lately made amongst them through the
agency of the missionaries in that part of the world. On
Monday evening there was an assemblage of at least
2,000 persons in the church. to hear one of these lectures; '
but during a portion of. the proceeding, the defendant
commenced interrogating the lecturer, speaking at the