The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-04 00:00:00

* No part of this income is at present paid for the use of King Leopold. The trustees, after discharging
nuities and pensions to the servants and establishment of the late Princess Charlotte, repay the balance of
to the Exchequer ; the sum so repaid in the last year was 32,0001.

certain an-
the annuity

Mr. HAWES expressed his very high appreciation of the
feeling in which the present meeting had originated, Enter-
ing into political life, he had necessarily abandoned the active
commercial pursuits in which he had been engaged ; but it was
a source of the highest gratification to him that in this new
sphere he had been fortunate enough to secure the approbation
of the merchants and traders of the city of London. For the
mark of that approbation just bestowed upon him he returned
his warm thanks.
Amongst t hose presme.ntp.a,t tTh.isi‘vie.ryc:rbastoifny,ingEsrge.-,unikicoLnpw.e, were
George Moffatt, Esq., AI.P., Alessrs. J.Travers, Hayward, and
Graham (members of the committee), Sir James M'Adam, the
Right Hon. R. L. Sheil, M.P., H. Tufnell, Esq., M.P., 11.
iri tWarburton,
eEr,sE:siAEL.l%pql...:PA.,irC. C
Htlaiwndesl7;enli.s,q•bri.LEPlii.oAtslo.llJ:
Messrs.Oieon-
APGregor, Parkes, Wilson, 80.

ALTERATION IN THE CAMBRIDGE DAY MAIL.—
The opening of the railway has brought a change in the times
of arrival and departure of the day mail. Instead of being dis-
patched as heretofore at half• past eleven in the morning, it is
now sent by the quarter before ten o'clock train, and the box
for letters closes at a quarter after nine. This is, as we think,
a change greatly for the worse, and we certainly cannot under-
stand the logic which would persuade us that when we travel
twice as fast as we used to do, we should start two hours sooner
on a journey of sixty miles. The arrival is better timed; we
have oar letters now at half-past two, instead of at half-past
four. Cambridge Chronicle.
MINISTERIAL WHITE BAIT DINNER. —Her Ma-
jesty's Ministers will :partake of their annual white bait din-
ner, at the Crown and Sceptre, Greenwich, on Wednesday
next.
The Board of Admiralty has issued orders that
mortar-beds are to be laid down in several of our first.class
steam sloops for 13-inch mortars.— Untied Service Gazette.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
(SATURDAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

SOUTH-ZASTEILN, IVIINSTMIT, AND DEAL

EXTENSION.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of Saturday.)

After the examination of witnesses on behalf of this Bill,
Mr. tinny/um was heard on behalf of the Corporation of Sand-
wich, when the Committee decided the preamble of the Bill to be
proved. The object of the Corporation of Sandwich was to have
certain clauses inserted in the Bill, which the Committee decided
against, the Bill being passed without any amendments.

THE EOLTON AND LEIGH, KENYON AND
LEIGH JUNCTION, NORTH UNION,
LIVERPOOL AND IVIANCHESTER, AND
GRAND JUNCTIOr RAILWAY COM-
PANIES' AMALGAMATION SILLS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of Saturday.)
Mr. Booth, the treasurer of the Manchester and Liverpool Com-
pany, deposed as to the necessity of the amalgamation.
Mr. Sergeant WRANCHANI then addressed the Committee at
some length, on behalf of the Manchester and Sheffield Railway, in
opposition to the Bill.
Mr. MERREWETHER addressed the Committee on behalf of the
Chamber of Commerce and the inhabitants of Manchester.
The room was then cleared, and immediately after the preamble
was declared proved, and the Chairman was instructed to report the
Bill to the House.

LONDON AND CROYDON (ENLARGEMENT)
RAILWAY DILL.
The Committee on this Bill met at twelve o'clock in Committee-
room, No. I, in the House of Lords, the Earl of Shaftesbury in the

chair.
The Bill was unopposed, and passed through Committee.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP X.
SHEPPIELD AND LINCOLNSHIRE LINE.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of Saturday.)

This having closed the case for the promoters of the Bill,

Mr. Hughes, civil engineer, w•as then examined by Mr. PAGET
to substantiate the rebutting case to the Sheffield and Lincolnshire

line. He had personally surveyed the line both of the Bawtry
branch and the Lincolnshire line, and considers that the cost of the
former would be 899,018/. 13s. 4d., including 16,7711. for fencing,
270,9731. for permanent way, and the cost of 3,248,000 yards of
earth cutting. But if taken in the same proportion as that adopted
by Mr. Fowler, the entire cost would be 676,8991. and the quan-
thy of earth cutting 3,193,000 cubic yards.
Mr. Cubitt deposed to the survey and estimates of the Bawtry
Branch having been made by Mr. Hughes on precisely the same
principle as that adopted on the London and York, and he attested
their accuracy in every particular.
This having closed the rebutting case of the London and York,
Mr. BAINEs, Q.C., addressed the Committee on behalf of the
promoters, and summed up the evidence adduced in the course of
the consideration of the case. The Sheffield and Manchester
line had some years since been constructed under difficul-
ties of a most unusual, if not discouraging, charac-
ter ; and as the line for which he now 'sought
the approving vote of the Committee was not only sanc-
tioned but virtually promoted by this Company, which, struggling
against and overcoming these preliminary obstacles—since on the
brink of insolvency, and now one of the most flourishing under-
takings in the country—he regarded that as a most important fea-
ture in the project and eminently calculated to ensure its success.
In the first place, let them look at the accommodation this line will
afford in 'every direction. If they regarded it as a means of
forming a southern communication with Sheffield, they
would find that by a junction with the Midland
Railway, it would pass through Derby, Lincoln, and Nottingham,
to London, and effecting by this course a saving of 4; miles over
the present route. But taking the distance on the Midland Rail-
way, this Company as compared with the latter, effected even a
greater saving. By the proposed Lincoln lihe, the distance to the
metropolis would be 160: miles, while by the Midland it was 177.
Thus it would be no less than 17 miles shorter than that railway.
But not only would Sheffield be thus benefited by a line through
such important towns—Huddersfield, so celebrated for its exten-
sive trade in wool, would be most advantageously accommodated
with a speedy means of conveying its manufactures to a beneficial
market, either for home consumption or an outlet for exportation.
A good deal had been said of the Chesterfield line, and the
accommodation it afforded as between Sheffield and London,
but the distance by it wee 169 miles, while by the
Sheffield and Lincoln it would be, as he before stated, 160:.
With respect to the article of coal, about which so much had
been said in the course of the protracted proceedings, Mr. Jeff-
cock, a coal owner and valuer, of Sheffield, whose evidence had
been unimpeached, and, therefore, it was to be inferred, indisput-
able, had proved that, for a distance of 27 miles out of Sheffield,
taking a mile on each side of the proposed Sheffield and Lincoln-
shire line, and reckoning to the depth of 150 yards, • there were
coals sufficient to yield 41,848,275 tons, while, for the same dis.
tance, proportionably, on the Bawtry branch there were only
6,223,425; tons, or nearly seven times as much on the former
as on the latter line. Again, there was another kind of coal ex-
isting in that neighbourhood required for converting iron into
steel. Along the line he represented there were no less than
9,323,000 tons of this class of coal, while on the Bawtry branch
there were only 453,000 tons, or about one. twentieth part ; and
it was proved that whereas the price of this coal at Sheffield was
now 9s. 2d. a ton, by the construction of that now under conside-
ration, it was reduced to 7s. 3d.

It being now four o'clock, and the Chairman having intimated
that the Committee were unable to sit longer, the Learned Counsel
deferred the conclusion of his address till twelve o'clock on
Monday.

It was said that the tedious and protracted labours of both
Houses on Railway Bills would, with the exception of one or two
formal matters, be brought to a close this day. Three Com-
mittees sat to-day, but there was no stir or bustle—the lawyers
loekcd fagged, and so did their Lordships. In the House of Com-
mons it was with difficulty a House could be made, and in the
Lords it was a " beggarly accousat of empty benches." No stran-
ger passing outside the Houses could have supposed that the
" great inquest of the nation" was being holden within ; in short,
as Jonathan says, " there was nothing stirring but stagnation."

LAW IN TELLIG ENCE.
VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, Aug. 2.
(Before Sir J. L. Is: NIGHT Bitucz.)
GUINNESS V. JONES.
Mr.
.SIMPKINSON, with whom was Mr. Heatbfield, moved
for an injunction to restrain the defendant from selling or dis-
posing 01 any stout, porter, or other malt liquor, under the name
of the well-known manufacturers, as, or for, or purporting to
be, " Guinness's stout," other Ilan such as should have been
supplied by the plaintiffs to Messrs. Sparkes Moline, or their
other agents; and from selling stout, porter, or other malt
liquor with forged or imitated labels ; and from delivering over
or parting with such bills or labels respectively to any other
person than the plaintiffs, or persons appointed by them to re-
ceive the same. The affidavit stated that the defendants had
sold, and were still selling, malt liquor in bottles of the same
shape and size as those of the plaintiffs, and that they had used
labels upon which the name of Guineas (with one n only) was
printed.
His Horton it granted the application.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME CIRCUIT—Croydon, Saturday,
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice Coleridge.)
Frances Mary Wilson, a very well dressed young
woman, and who was said to be respectably connected,
surrendered in discharge of her recognizances, to answer
four indictments for larceny preferred against her by
Mr. Cook, a draper residing in Croydon.
The case appeared to create very great interest, the
trial occupied nearly nine hours, and was noi. concluded
until late in the day ; and during the whole of thi." time,
the Court was crowded almost to suffocation. tis..`e
moment the accused entered the dock, she fainted, and
she appeared to be in an almost unconscious state the
whole of the day.
The first indictment charged the prisoner with steal-
ing at the parish of Croydon, on the 31st May, a petti-
coat, value 7s, a pair of stays, value 7s, four habit shirts,
a box of artificial flowers, value 51., and sixty lengths
of ribbon, value 6/., the property of Thomas Cock her
master. _ _

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Creasy conducted the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Clarkson, with Mr. Ballantine, defended
;he accused.

From the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecu-
tion it appeared that the prisoner had been in the ser-
vice of Mr. Cook, as his head milliner and manager of
that department, for nearly three years, and that she
boarded and lodged in the house, and received latterly
thirty-five guineas a year wages, and the utmost confi-
dence was reposed in her. For some time prior to the
month of June, Mr. Cook entertained an opinion that
his stock decreased in a manner that he could not ac-
count for, and he suspected that some one about the pre-
muses was robbing him, and at length that suspicion was
directed to the prisoner, and he gave directions to the
other persons in his employ to watch her. On the 18th '
June he sent for Collier, an inspector of police, and gave
the prisoner into his custody. She handed over her keys
to the officer, and pointed out seven boxes as belonging
to her, which, on being opened, were found to contain a
very large quantity of property, consisting of flowers,
gloves, linen, stockings, ribbands, the whole of which
Mr. Cook believed to be his property. Some articles
that the prisoner had given to a young woman named
Grainger, a dress-maker in the town, were
likewise taken possession of by the inspector,
and Mr. Cook spoke also to these being his property.
Mr. Cook now identified some of the articles that formed
the subject of the present indictment, and deposed to his
private markbeing upon them, and that they had not been
sold. Mr. Cook anti the inspector underwent a most
searching cross-examination by the learned counsel who
appeared for the prisoner, and it was admitted that she
was taken into custody suddenly, and without any ex-
planation being asked of her, and that she readily gave
up her keys and pointed out the boxes that belonged to
her, and that a number of documents referring to pro-
perty of the description alleged to be stolen, purchased
by her, were found in her desk. The prosecutor stated
that he had received a most excellent character
with her, and that he found her services so valuable
that he had raised her wages and, placed the utmost
confidence in her. He likewise admitted that
it was the custom of his establishment to allow the per-
sons employed there to take any articles they pleased
from the stock at the cost price, and all that was re-
quired was for the person who did so to give notice of it
to the cashier or seine of the shopmen, and the amount
of the article was deducted from the salary of the person
who purchased it. It was also admitted that the accused
was engaged a good deal in malting up article's of mil-
linery for sale, and that she would therefore require a
considerable quantity. of such articles as were found in
her possession, and it was likewise admitted that, al-
though in the first instance Mr. Cook had professed to
identify the whole of the property founel, and which
he estimated to be of the value of 1001. ; yet he had
only indicted her 1,-.)r stealing a portion of it not worth
more than 101. or 121., and this had been made the
subject of four separate indictments, one of them refer-
ring to a cambric handkerchief, which had been seen in
her possession some time before the 18th of June, and
which she hail lent to one of the shopmen, who returned
it to her on that morning, when it was well-known that
it had been arranged she should be taken into custody,
the object apparently being that the officer should find
it in her possession. It likewise appeared that although
the Magistrates had dismissed two charges of embezzle-
ment that were made against the prisoner, and expressed
their opinions that they could not be supported, the
prisoner had been indicted upon both the charges.
' Mr. CLARKSON made a most eloquent and feeling ap-
' peal to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and aft‘,l.
Pai(!utely dissecting the evidence and commenting in his

usual able manner upon the more material portions of it
affecting his client, he asked the jury whether, upon
such a case as had been made out by the prosecutor, and
bearing in mind his own conduct in the transaction, they
could feel justified in destroying for ever the prospects of
the unhappy young creature before them, by returning
a verdict of guilty against her. The learned counsel
thin in a most feeling manner described the misery the
prisoner had already undergone, and said he believed he
might safely &dare that she had been in the state in
which they now saw he: in the dock, almost without in-
termission, ever since the period the charge was first
made against her, and to add to her distress, she had
only the day before sustained the loss of a near and dear
relative. The Learned Counsel concluded by observing
that after what had been already admitted on the part of
the prosecution, with regard to the character of the ac.-
cased, he should not at that late hour detain them by
calling witnesses to speak to it, but ho should leave the
prisoner's fate in their hands, confident that they would
return a righteous verdict.
Mr. Justice CoIa:RIDGE having summed up,

The jury expressed a wish to retire. They were ab-
sent about five minutes, when they returned a verdict of
Not Guilty.
The moment the verdict was pronounced, a most ex-
traordinary scene took place. The prisoner shrieked
wildly two or three times, and than fell perfectly insen-
sible into the arms of the gaoler. At the same moment
a burst of applause issued from the body of the Court,
and two or three distinct rounds of cheers were given,
it being utterly impossible to repress this ebullition of
feeling.
Order having been at length restored, Mr. CLARKSON
inquired of Mr. Bodkin whether he was instructed to go
on with the other indictments against the prisoner ?

Mr. BODKIN intimated that he was.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE then said they would stand
for Monday morning, but the prisoner might go at large
upon entering into the same recognizances upon which
she had that day surrendered.
The required recognizances having been entered into,
the prisoner was removed in the charge of her friends.

M I DLA ND CI RCU IT.—Leiccstcr, Aug. 2.)
CROWN COURT.—(Before the CIIIEF BAnoN.)
The CIIIEF BARON having briefly addressed the grand
jury, proceeded with the trial of prisoners.
Two men named Ife‘iley and Price were charged with rob-
bing the prosecutor, a labouring gardener, of upwards of 21.
in silver.

Hildyard prosecuted, and Mr. Wing and Mr. Roberts
defended the prisoners.
It appeared that the prosecutor and a man named Choice
went into the Britannia public-house, Leicester, on the night
of the robbery. Choice was to treat, but the prosecutor, who
was very flush of money, also behaved liberally to the corn•
pany, and frequently exhibited his cash. Eventually, 4s. tid.
was due to the landlord, and the company called upon the pro-
secutor and Choice to pay it. This they refused to do, when
a " judge and jury" were appointed to try the parties. As a
matter of course a verdict of guilty followed, and the defend.
ants refusing to " tip," the tipstaffs levied execution, and
away went lights, tables, glasses, and the prosecutor's money.
According to the evidence, judge, jury, and witnesses, all lay
scuffling on the floor together. When a li,;ht was obtained,
the prisoners and the rest of the court had adjourned, and it
was not until the following day that the prisoners were taken.
The CIIIEF BARON more than once attempted to stop the
case as a "drunken row," and, eventually,

The jury reluctantly acquitted the prisoners.
William Webster, a youth of respectable connexions, was
charged with feloniously embezzling, on the 19th of August, at
Ashby-de-la- Zmich, the sum of 295. Gd., the moneys of Mr.
Wright, his employer.
Mrs. Pratt, the wife of the vicar of Parkington, deposed,
that she purchased a shawl of the value stated at Mr. Wright's
shop. The prisoner served her. She made a memorandum at
the time of having paid the money, but she had no distinct re-
collection of the circumstance.
Mr. Wright, the prosecutor, being sworn, stated, that the
prisoner had entered the shawl as owing for, and the bill was
accordingly sent in to Mrs. Pratt at Christmas. The prisoner
told him that Mrs. Pratt said nothing about paying.
In cross-examination the prosecutor said he had three persons
in his employ at the time, all of whom had since left. Could
not say that none of them had received the money, or that it
had not been put into the till.
Mr. MILLER, for the prisoner, strongly urged the probabi-
lity of the lady being in error, and dwelt upon the circumstance
that the prisoner well knew that the bill would go in at Christ-
mas, made out in his own writing, and notwithstanding this,
he had gone into the service, of another draper in that small
town, where he had continued with great credit to himself up
to the present time. Besides this, his circumstances and those
of his friends were such as to place him beyond temptation.
The Learned Gentleman also commented upon the frequency
of persons confidently believing that they had done certain
things which they intended to do, but afterwards found them-
selves to have been entirely deceived. He then proceeded to
call witnesses.
Mary Fletcher, servant to Mr. Cottingham, of Chesterfield
(steward of the Duke of Devonshire), stated that she had lived
in the service of Mr. Sherwin, of Rotherwood, who married
Mrs. Pratt's daughter. She recollected the prisoner coming
with some shawls for Mrs. Pratt, who was visiting there. She
came into the kitchen, and asked prisoner if he bad any change.
He said he had not. Mrs. Pratt then said she would send the
money up. Had heard nothing of this charge until her master,
Mr. Cottingham, without telling her of it, asked what took
place on the occasion.
Mr. Welsh, the prisoner's late employer, gave the pri-
soner an excellent character, and said, if acquitted, he would
take him again into his service. The prisoner was a relative
of Mr. Webster, of Christ's Hospital.
His LORDSHIP recapitulated the evidence with great care,
expressing his confidence in the veracity of Mary Fletcher, as
well as of Mrs. Pratt, and dwelt upon the possibility of error
on the part of the latter.
The prisoner was immediately acquitted.
His LORDSHIP ordered him to be discharged.
CHARGE Of MALICIOUS SHOOTING.— Robert Davenport
was charged with having, on the 11th of July last, discharged
a gun at William Fox, with intent, to do him some grievous
bodily harm. It appeared that on the day in question the pro-
secutor, in c•smpany with a number of other boys, were in the
Abbey-fields, throwing stones at the birds in the trees. The
prisoner was about forty yards distance in Mr. Warner's garden.
They did not throw at him, but at the birds in the trees which
were near him. Shortly afterwards, without a word of repri-
mand or caution being given, a gun went off and the prose-
cutor was struck, and several small shots afterwards extracted
from his legs and body.
Mr. MacaULAV was about to cross-examine as to provoca-
tion, when -

The CPIIEF BARON, interrupting him, said no provocation
that could be proved would justify the act of firing ; and that
the more of provocation there appeared, so much the worse
would it be than if it were an act of wantonness. It was high
time that a severe example should be made of such acts, which
were deserving, under any circumstances, of the severest ani-
madversion. Such a disregard of the lives of others was far
more mischievous to society than the petty thefts which were
brought before them in that Court.
Edward Nicholson corroborated Fox's evidence. After Da-
venport bad fired he said Fox had hit him three times. Fox's
legs were covered with blood. It was between eleven and
twelve in the day time.
The CHIEF BARON—It is an abomination that persons
should be protecting gardens with fire-arms in the day time,
and firing at boys and even men.
Mr. MACAULAY urged that the prisoner fired the gun with
intent to scare away the boys, not to injure them. The pro-
perty was very valuable and exposed to the depredations of the
worst characters.

The CHIEF BARON—This mode of dealing with them is the
way to make them worse. For how can persons be expected to
respect property if it is to be protected by such means?
Witnesses were called to character, but they did not answer.

The felonious part of the charge was withdrawn.
The CHIEF BARON, in summing up, said it was due to the
prisontl" to remark, that he might possibly not have intended
prosecutor or his companions. The law, how-
to injure t::`'
ever, had a grt7tt respect for human life, and he was happy to
period in which life was taken away
have to administer !L at a
for very few offences. The offences against property were, in
his opinion, far less misch: 490t11 than such acts as that with
h--.4d. If they were satisfied that
which the prisoner stood char
vii;seld have to find him guilty
the `prisoner fired the gun, they
of an assault.
The jury accordingly found him Guilty. Sentence deferred.
The Court adjourned at six o'clock.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
(SATURDAY.)
W. Vigors, a person of very respectable appearance,
was charged with having committed a misdemeanour of
a serious description. William S. Foster, of No. 25,
Token-house-yard,
oken-house-yard, stated that he was a broker, and in
partnership with his brother. He had been int,roduced
to the defendant a short time before the 9th of June last,
and understood him to be a very respectable man. About
the 9th or 10th of June, the defendant called at the office,
and said he had an account at the London and
Westminster Bank, which account he was about to
withdraw, and to go to some other bank, and he re-
quested to be accommodated with an exchange cheque,
which he might pay in that day, and he would give his
cheque, which would be all right next day. Witness
accommodated the defendant with a cheque for the sum of
5001., and that cheque had been duly paid ; the cheque
given by the defendant upon the London and West-
minster Bank, in exchange for the complainant's
cheque, was, however, dishonoured. Witness did not
present the London and Westminster cheque for pay-
ment, but he paid it in on the day into the hands of his
own bankers, Messrs. Prescott and Grote, and it was
returned on the following day, he having no effects
there. Had not prosecutor believed he kept a banking
account at Prescott and Grote's, he would not have
given him the cheque.
Mr. RODGERS, who appeared for the defendant, re-
gretted the unavoidable absence of Mr. Bodkin, and
begged in the meantime to say, that at the proper time,
as he had been instructed, there would be a complete
answer to the charge preferred against the defendant,
who was set at liberty on two respectable persdns in the
City becoming bail for his appearance to answer the
charge of misdemeanour.