The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-05-29 00:00:00

\X

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY.

Colonel Rawdon, for Armagh ; Sir Alexander Grant, for
Cambridge ; and B. Bottield, Esq., for Ludlow, took the
oaths and their seats.

Many petitions on the subject of the corn laws were pre-
sented; one by Sheriffs Evans and Wheelton, from the Cor-
poration of London.
Mr. HUME repeated the notice of his intention to move an
address to her Majesty in favour of the plan of opening the
National Gallery and the British Museum on Sundays, be-
tween one and four o'clock.

Mr. F. KELLY gave notice of his intention, on the 4th of
June, to submit a motion in favour of giving to all freemen
the municipal franchise.
Mr. EWART gave notice that, June 6, he should move for
a reduction of the duties on sugar and coffee.
Mr. PEASE asked how far it was the intention to propose
the licensing of the removal of natives of Hindostan to the
Mauritius ?
Lord J. RUSSaLL answered that there would shortly be
an opportunity of seeing, in the clauses of the proposed bill.
Mr. AGLIONBY moved for a copy of the rules and regula-
tions at the gaol at York, which was ordered.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD observed that he had that day
received a communication from Mr. O'Connor, of great in-
terest and importance, relative to his confinement in York
Castle, on which he had been in communication with the
Under-Secretary of State, and, as he proposed taking further
steps on the subject, he would suggest to Mr. NVakley not to
ask the questions of the Attorney-General that he had inti-
mated his intention of putting.
Mr..WAKLEY complied with the request.__
_

Lord J. RUSSELL presented his two bills to amend the
registration of voters in England, &c.
Mr. ViLLimits then rose to renew the motion on the corn-
laws, of which the decision was unintentionally prevented-
before Easter, through an adjournment moved by Mr. War-
burton. He said that the question was, what right any one
class of proprietors had to tax the community for the sake of
enriching themselves ? The arguments advanced on the side
of that pretended right had now been thoroughly sifted, and
their fallacy proved. There were 800,000 men in the manu-
facturing districts, who pointed to these laws as the cause of
their sufferings, and to repeal as the cure. These men were
telling you that if corn were to be taxed for the protection of
agriculture, machinery ought to be taxed for the protection of
labour; and they demanded that, if they were refused them
by the present legislature, an enlarged representation should
be given them. It was said, on the other hand, that the
repeal was sought chiefly by manufacturers, desirous to avail
themselves,of low prices of corn in order to lower the wages
of their workmen. Why, that was impossible. Wages
were already reduced to their minimum ; and he read a letter
from Dr. Ireland, a medical gentleman, who had had exten-
sive practice among the poor of the manufacturing districts,
bearing testimony to the extent and depth of the misery
sustained by the working classes. Mr. Villiers then stated,
from statistical sources, that in years when food was cheap
and labour plentiful, the health of the poor suffered little in
comparison with those years when food was dear and labour
scarce ; these last were the seasons in which low fever, the
offspring of want, spread death among the working people.
It was pretended that the corn-growing countries refused to
take our manufactures in return for our produce; but he
could show, from diplomatic correspondence, that the refusal
to negotiate on reciprocal terms, came not from foreign na-
tions, but from England herself, whose ministers were always
in fear of the landed interest. A man was now obliged to
work 15 hours a day, when he formerly worked but 12 or 8.
There was another pretext—that a country like England
ought to be independent of foreigners for its food. That
might be a great evil, but the want of food would be a much
greater. The people are now too intelligent to be deceived
by this. They see the peasantry of Ireland growing abun-
dance of wheat, yet unable to obtain it for their own con-
sumption. Sir R. Peel had referred in the former debate to
the large exports of England, as evidence of the prosperity
of her manufactures ; he might as well have appealed to the
number of mortgages and incumbrances as evidence of the
prosperity of the land. Sir R. Peel, lie thought, assumed a
serious responsibility in upholding the existing law. Repeal
might be forced at last, when it would be too late. It was
not wise to delay reform till insurrection compelled the
change ; the practice of resting long, and then suddenly giv-
ing. way to force, was a perilous policy, teaching the people
that force was their most efficacious instrument. But the
people had no wish to be driven into such a resort : it was
one repugnant to the habits and disposition of Englishmen.
Nor would it be possible long to continue an experiment
against the order of nature, which designed that the surplus
produce of one country should be exchanged against that of
another, and not that the inhabitants of each should be con-
fined to the fruits of their own narrow district. He vouched,
in support of this moral maxim, the opinions of Burke, of
Chalmers, and of other ethical writers ; and, after a short
appeal to the fears of the house, concluded by moving for a
committee to take the present law into consideration.
The motion was seconded by Mr. STaurr, wha said pro-
tection was only another word for taxation. The effect of
the attempt to regulate prices had been to delude the farmer
into the belief that cheap corn was a grievance, for which be
was entitled to redress from parliament. The manufacturer
sought no protection. This was the commencement of a
great struggle, upon whose final issue, however long pro-
tracted, there could be but one opinion.
Sir H. PARNELL said the linen manufacturers would be
quite ready to give up their protection, and contended that
the repeal of the corn laws would neither throw land out of
cultivation, nor reduce wages, which he denied to rise or fall
with the price of provisions.
Mr. H. BAILIE, the new member for Inverness, appealed
to the gentlemen returned by agricultural constituencies
whether they would continue to support a government which
was acting in direct opposition to the interests they repre-
sented. He believed that the abolition of the corn-laws
would confer no permanent benefit on the working classes,
while it would throw out of employ a great portion of the
agricultural population.
Mr. JAMES, in voting for the committee, disclaimed any
wish for a complete abolition, which would e equivalent to a
vote for the absolute ruin of such of the inferior lands as
were fit only. for the growth of corn. But he thought a
committee might originate alterations which would be useful
to all classes.

Lord SANDON, being of opinion that the present corn-
laws were far from perfect, and the sliding scale by no means
well adjusted, expressing his willingness, if some specific
proposition were brought forward, to entertain the consider-
ation of it ; but he would not vote for that general and
uncertain measure, a committee. He thought it a very im-
portant consideration for the manufacturer, whether the
complete opening of the trade in foreign corn would not
cause him to lose more in the home market than he would
gain in the markets abroad.

- Mr. WARBURTON rose amid general cries of " Divide."
When these had subsided, he said that Mr. Huskisson, but
a few days before his death, had foretold that the first change
in the Corn-laws would be a fixed moderate duty, and that,
at no long period afterwards, their total repeal would follow.
Concurring in Mr. Huskisson's opinion, he should vote for
the committee. The wider the extent of the countries from
which England should be supplied, the less danger that the
prices in England would rise to an unreasonable height.
With respect to the currency, it might be perfectly true, as
Sir Robert Peel had said, that the money-market was dis-
turbed by other causes than the operation of the present
Corn-laws in years of scarcity ; but if the present Corn-laws
were not the only disturbing cause; they were at all events a
very influential one. The cries of " Divide" were now
repeated with great perseverance, and the continued noise
and movement of the house rendered it impossible to hear
the hon. member during the rest of his speech.
Mr. HANDLEY lamented the tone and temper of Mr. Vil-
lier's opening. That there had been many petitions against
the corn-laws he was ready to admit ; and no wonder, when
the facilities for the preparation of them were considered ;
but the masses had not spoken with force. They felt that
the cheapness promised them would be a contingency, and
that the only certainty would be the low wages. The con-
cluding portion of this, as of the foregoing speech, was
drowned in the impatient tumult of the house. The loud-
ness of the interruption was still increased by the rising of
Mr. Mark Philips, who, as representing Manchester, spoke
zealously, but quite inaudibly—of course, in favour of Mr.
Villiers's motion.

Lord J. RUSSELL obtained a hearing. He defended the
government against the charge of having omitted to bring
forward any measure on this subject. When there existed a
general wish for change, such a proceeding might befit a go-
vernment ; but in the state of feeling which now prevailed
on this topic, the interference of government, instead of di-
minishing the embarrassment, would but add to it, by im-
parting party spirit into the already heterogenous mass of
motives. On the present occasion he should vote for the
committee. The uncertainty always inseparable from the
corn trade was aggravated by the existing laws. The present
fluctuations would be much relieved, if foreigners could be
enabled to calculate upon a trade to England, and should
grow for that purpose a proportionally greater amount of
corn. An increased demand from foreign countries for Bri-
tish manufactures could hardly fail to raise the wages of the
labourer, and whatever should contribute to the general
prosperity of the country must needs contribute to the pros-
perity of the landlords, the class possessing the largest in-
terest in it. At the same time, he was not prepared to
abolish all protecting duties, though he would not express
himself in terms quite so strong as those used by his noble
friend at the head of the government. What he should wish
would be, the substitiftion of a moderate fixed duty ; and his
object was to increase the food of the labourers, without de-
stroying the protection of agriculture. In what he had now
said he desired that he might not be understood as relying on
the argument that our manufactures are on the verge of
ruin. The allegation, he thought, had been greatly over-
stated ; but, without reference to any such class of consider-
ations, he should vote for the committee.
Mr. PESME moved as an amendment, to addtheohrdots
" with a view to the reduction of the average prices,"
the hon. member did not find a seconder.
Mr. Mywrz thought the repeal of the corn laws would not
confer the benefits upon society which many of his friends
expected. The addition of cost occasioned by the existing
laws was not wholly lost to the country. It entered into the
prices of many commodities, and particularly
of labour,larlyotlab d of
all these laws were repealed, the value of
pr Ouroperty hinomEengtlraaidide,owow foulodrmsoeodn
two
-thirds level. w
com-
merce; and no increase of fooorelidgnhetroaodeeasiwoonuelddicootmhpeehnosmatee
the great deficiency which
thiwellng, g
asn demand
any mba ; byn a freettt itfr taldi eer s inWas corn.to b e Hea freelike trade af free
in r adoe eas
t o
tradeletthewreasi
ben aa freevery h
traaddeina
Atll.
hwearsthe trader or
and ao present, undoubtedly,
change would not, in his opinion, relieve el!
condition,
of another
evil. labourer. If an evil was to be remedied, he could not
see the wisdom of setting out by the superaddition
evil. He believed the misfortune to have arisen from
unwise conduct of the governments of all parties, whom the
had
mismanaged this country for the last 20 years. However,
notwithstanding all he had said, he should vote decidedly for
going into the committee, for he thought the landlords had
the direct power to benefit the poor; and if those landlords
did not use it, he must himself employ such indirect means
as lay within his own reach.
Mr. VILLIERS, in reply, complained of the unwillingness
which the house had shown to let this subject be discussed.
Many members on his side had endeavoured to speak, but
one after another had been put down by noisy interruption.
The same sort of thing had been done at meetings out of
doors. How could the house occupy itself so usefully as on
this important subject? Its time had not been very valua-
bly employed in the course of the present session. Parlia-
ment had been sitting almost five months, and nothing had
been done. There was now an end to the discussion of the
present question in this house ; this house had refused to
discuss it, and the people must now look at the remedy for
themselves.
The division then took place : for the motion, 177 ;
against it, 300.
Mr. PIGOTT then, after a short explanatory speech, ob-
tained leave to bring in a bill for the registration of voters in
Ireland ; and the house adjourned at two o'clock.

\.

Ni,

~~.

HOUSE OF LORDS—WEDNESDAY.
The House of Lords did not meet today, having adjourned
from Tuesday till Monday next.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—WEDNESDAY.
After the presentation of several petitions, and the transac-
tion of private business before the house,
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD presented a petition from the
Radical Club of Reading, complaining of the treatment to
which Vincent had been subjected.
Mr. T. DuNcomßE presented a petition from Bradford,
remonstrating against the mode in which Mr. Feargus
O'Connor had been treated in prison, and praying that he
may be removed from the felons' to the debtors' side, or that
inquiry into Mr. O'Connor's case may be instituted.
A long conversation on the subject followed.
Mr. HASTIE presented a petition from the Paisley Emigra-
tion Society, praying for free passage to Canada, for a year's
rations from government, and for an allotment of land, for
which emigrants might give promissory notes.
Sir E. KNATCRBULL objected to its being received, as it
prayed fora money grant ; but
Lord J. RUSSELL did not oppose it, and the petition was
laid upon the table.
Sir F. TRENCH gave notice of a motion for Thursday
respecting the Bude light, and the expediency of restoring the
lustres ; and also of a motion, on the 9th of June, respecting
the embankment of the Thames.

Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice, for Thursday, that he
should move for leave to bring in a bill for the better appro-
priation and distribution of the revenues of Canada ; and,
also, a bill for the distribution of the proceeds from sales of
the Canada clergy reserves.
The house then went into committee on the juvenile
offenders' bill. It was subsequently " counted out."

MURDER OF LORD WILLIAM RUSSELL-FUR-
THER EXAMINATION OF COURVOISIER.

(From the Morning Herald of Yesterday.)
Yesterday being the day fixed for reading over the deposi-
tions of the witnesses who had given evidence against Cour-
voisier, the street fronting the office was crowded all day.
The prisoner, on his arrival at the office, appeared in much
better spirits than he had done on previous occasions.
Shortly before one o'clock, the night charges having been
disposed of, Mr. Hall took his seat on the bench, which was
occupied by persons of distinction, amongst whom were se-
veral ladies. Mr. Dowling, Commissioner of Police for Li-
verpool, was also present.
At one o'clock, Mr. Flower, the solicitor for the prisoner,
entered the office, and took his seat at the table appropriated
to the professional gentlemen ; he was followed by Mr. H ob-
ler, the solicitor for the prosecution, accompanied by Mr.
Wing, the solicitor to the Duke of Bedford ; and shortly
after, _ _ _

Francois Benjamin Courvoisier was placed at the bar. He
looked in better health than on Saturday, and bowed to the
court as he entered. He appeared perfectly calm and firm,
and less anxious than on former occasions. The following
additional evidence was then gone into :
Lady Sarah Baillie, wife of C. N. Baillie, residing at Hamp-
ton Court said—l knew the late Lord William Russell. He
married my eldest sister. He came to see me at Hampton
Court, last Easter Sunday, and gave me a letter to read,
which he took from the left hand pocket of his coat. He
took it out of his letter-case, which was a brown silk one,
and from his letter-case there fell a small locket, which re-
mained on my table while his lordship went to the afternoon
chapel. On his return from the chapel I returned him his
locket, which I believe he put into the side pocket of his coat,
but he did not put it into the case. His lordship some time
afterwards wrote to me to inquire if he had left the locket on
my table. I caused a search to be made, and replied that I
thought his lordship would find that he had put it in the
pocket of his coat after he had dropped it. I never saw his
lordship after. I believe that the smaller locket of the two
produced is the one that was• dropped at my apartments by
his lordship. The hair in that locket was tied with blue silk.
Cross-examined by Mr. Flower—l never saw the other
locket in my life.
Mr. Hall suggested that perhaps it would be a convenience
to the medical men, if their depositions were read over.
This suggestion having been acceded to, the evidence of
Mr. Elsgood was read over, and the witness, in addition to
his former deposition, stated, in answer to questions from
Mr. Hall, that his lordship's shirt collar was not cut, and it
was open ; that the wound was from left to right, and had
been inflicted by the right hand.
Sarah Mansell, the housemaid, in addition to her former
deposition, stated, in answer to Mr. Hall, that on the Tues-
day night Carr left the house with the prisoner, when he
went to take the letter the first time to the stables, and did
not afterwards return. She also stated, in answer to Mr.
Hall, that when she went into Lord William Russell's
bed-room for the first time on Wednesday, following the
prisoner, she called out, " My lord, my lord," to which
the prisoner then replied, " There he is ;" that the pri-
soner had not previously said any thing, or made any
exclamation on entering the room. The words " There
he is," were all that the prisoner said, and he uttered this
while he was opening the shutters. She also stated that
when the valet came from Richmond to London, on the 22d
of April, the prisoner said that his lordship had lost a little
locket while he was at Richmond. Prisoner said he could
not find it, nor did he know how it was lost. The prisoner
was sometimes in the habit of having a fire in the pantry.
There was no fire there on the Monday before the murder,
and the cook had cleaned the place up on the Tuesday morn-
ing. Prisoner was up before the witness, and on her coming
down stairs, she observed he had a large tire in the pantry.
She said, " Why have you got such a large fire ?" and he
said, " I thought I would burn the rubbish up." Witness
looked into the pantry on Tuesday evening when she went
to bed, and the fire was out. She did not take any notice
of the fire-place in the pantry on the Wednesday, and can-
not say if there were any appearances of anything having
been burnt. There is a door leading into the attic staircase
from Lord William's bed-room. When that door is closed,
what is going on below cannot be beard. On Wednesday
morning the door was slightly open. You could not hear a
person with slight shoes walking about belePtv if the attic
bed-room doors were shut. The door was not a spring
door, and did not make much noise. She did not hear any
noise from the door on the night of the murder. (Mr. Hobler
handed two small spoons to witness—one a salt and the
other a tea-spoon—which she identified as his lordship's
property.) She found them, on the Thursday after the
murder, in the prisoner's pantry, in a cupboard on the left
hand side. The crest on one of them is nearly rubbed
out. Cannot say whether it is by wear or not. Inspec-
tor Pearce was just at the pantry door, and the cook was
in the pantry, when she found the spoons. She had seen
plate previously in the same place. She had seen the locket
now produced frequently in his lordship's possession. The
last time she saw it was on the Tuesday before he went to
Richmond, the 14th April. There was hair in it bound with
blue silk. She never recollects seeing the other locket pro-
duced. Witness had a glass of ale on the Tuesday night,
about three quarters of an hour before she went to bed. It
was handed to her by the prisoner. He also offered her
something out of a pint bottle, which she tasted and refused,
but the cook took a glass of it. It was sweet. She felt very
sleepy after she had taken the ale. He said in the evening
we were going to have a pot of ale at nine o'clock, and he
invited witness to take some. He had been in the habit of
offering witness ale. He had done so ; but they had had
none for a week previously, as the prisoner had been under
the doctor's hands. There was nothing particular in the
taste of the ale. It was shortly after the cook came in that
he asked witness to take something out of a pint bottle. He
poured it into a wine glass. Witness tasted it, but declined
taking any more. He said what was the name of it, but
witness does not remember. He said it was some wine his
lordship had had on the Monday before, when he had com-
pany. Witness felt unusually sleepy and heavy ; that sensa-
tion came over her shortly after she had taken the ale. Pri-
soner drank some of the same ale out of another glass.
Mr. Flower said he should have asked that question, but
he thought it better to defer the cross-examination. They
would put all their questions together at a future day.
Mary Hammen, the cook, in addition to her former evi-
dence, said, I left a fire burning in the kitchen when I went
to bed on the Tuesday night, and I left coals to feed it. The
prisoner was up when I went to bed. It was usual for me
to leave a fire lighted in the kitchen, and coals to feed it with.
I do not recollect whether any of the coals appeared to have
been used the next morning. Ido not recollect closing the
lower bolt of the back door. It was so difficult to move it,
that latterly I had not been in the habit of attempting to bolt
it. Ido not think I attempted to bolt it on the night of the
Tuesday in question. I kept the thimble in my work-box in
the cupboard of the kitchen. On the night of Tuesday, May
5, when I went to bed the box was not locked ; the next
morning the cupboard-door was open, and the box on the
table. We never kept any plate in the drawers of the kitchen.
There was nothing of any value kept in them. 'I he drawers
were shut when I went to bed. I found them open the next
morning, but with the exception of their being open they
were in the same state I had left them over night. Two of
the drawers had been apparently rumaged, and their contents
disturbed.

Inspector Tedman, in addition to his former deposition,
said the door of Lord W. Russell's bed-room in opening and
shutting made so little noise, that a person lying in bed could
not hear it. The bedclothes on the prisoner's bed, on the
Wednesday morning, were partly turned down, as if a
person had got out of bed, but it is impossible to say whe-
ther any person had been lying between the sheets • that
night, or had been merely on the bed. It was the uncle of
the prisoner who made the application, at Norfolk-street on
the 10th of May, for a change of linen for the prisoner.
There was a scar on the prisoner's face on the Wednesday
morning, May 6th, which appeared much as it does now.—
(There is a scar on the bridge of the prisoner's nose as if
from a scratch.) _ _

Inspector Beresford, in answer to Mr. Flower, said—l do
not think Mr. Russell was in the house when the prisoner
gave me the description of the watch. A gentleman has been
pointed out to me as Mr. Russell, but I saw him only for an
instant, and should not know him again.
Inspector Pearce said—The spoon found by the witness,
Sarah Mancell, I saw found in the cupboard which had been
broken open. The spoon has had the crest erased by rub-
bing it against something. It has been erased, as the spoon
is a new one. It is not done by wear. It may have been
done by a file, but if so it has been smoothed. I think it
has been done by rubbing it against something like a knife-
board. I likewise produce a knife and pen-maker, which 1
found in a case in a drawer in the prisoner's pantry on the
Thursday morning, May 7. The prisoner was not present,
nor did I mention it to him. I have examined every niche
in the place thoroughly, and the chimneys have also been
searched by sweeps.
Police Constable Collier—The drains have been taken up,
and a most minute search made in every part, but nothing
has been found. The body of the shirt, the front of which
was found in the prisoner's portmanteau, can nowhere be
found.

Ellis the late valet, on being shown the knife and pen-
maker, said—l believe this to have been his lordship's pro-
perty. His lordship had one similar, and the maker's name
provet
writtenhei.
there,
, andt o
on it was Coley, as it is on one produced. It was usually
kept in his lordship's Russia leather box in the bed-room.
there,si de-
sire. Id
edapimdolsni pstoitootasitii
estdi
delivervh positive
hv tiahnttagotl whenbiteheee hnaprdrei leftasbldoen er anyhis
I have wound up his lordship's watch repeatedly by his de-
crest rubbed off in the manner of the one produced.
wisthervtiheee
Mr. Hal
would be better it should appear consideringonn'etnhe
Hobler had said on Saturdaydepositions.,
as to the evidence of the state
of Norfolk-street on the night in question, and he thought it
Mr. Hobler said that he had
Lord W. Russell had been at his house,oherlavnitdneislasd Mr. Ellis,
landlord of the Castle, at Richmond, t who would'that
him subsequently, to ask if he had left a locket
that
i‘i
rs.e a
hlh hi
l at
hd been
ongii t
itmade,wo andnld b
e nothing
unnecessary,d
as the matter
was already in evidence.
Mr. Hobler—Very well, sir ; but I shall have him and per-
sons belonging to the establishment ready at the trial, in
order to have them examined, if it should be necessary.
Mr. Flower said he was anxious that everything should
appear on the depositions that they should have to answer.
Mr. Hobler said that he had mentioned this now, in order
that Mr. Ellis might be cross-examined at the trial, if
necessary.
Alfred Stade, police constable 124 C—l was on duty in
nine o'clock at night, and went off duty at six the
duty at
side of the street
Norfolk-street on the night of the sth of May. 1 went on
next morning. I take the opposite
Lord William Russell's. I am thirteen minutes. going round
it is No. 14. I never
the house of Lord William Russell, .
-street every time. I know
my beat. I go through Norfolk
-street
am accustomed
I did not see a light either above or below.
in any part of the
to observe those things, and saw no light .
saw anything particular at Lord William Russell's house.
house on the night in question. Did not observe or hear any
noises in or near the house that night, nor any person seated

on the step of the door, nor any person come out of Lord
W. Russell's house, nor any person come up the area, nor
-did I observe any person go into the house of Lord William,
either by the door or area, nor did I observe any vehicle of
any sort at Lord William's door. The street was perfectly
quiet. The last person I saw in the street was a fishmonger,
going to No. 16, at half-past eleven. Day broke about half-
past three. It was a fine bright night.
G. Glew, police-constable 45 C.—l was on duty in Nor-
folk-street on the night of the sth of May. I went on duty
at nine o'clock. I left at six in the morning. lam twelve
minutes going round my beat. I take the same side of the
street as that on which Lord 'William Russell's house is
situated. I go through Norfolk-street every time I go
round. I try the doors and area-gates of the houses several
times during the night. I did so with the door and gate of
Lord William Russell on the night in question, five or six
times, and from the time I went on duty up to half-past five
o'tlok in the morning, they were all safe. I did not see
any light in any part of the house that night, nor did I hear
any voices in the house, nor did I see any one sitting at his
lordship's door, or any other door in Norfolk-street. I saw
no one come out or go into his lordship's house, nor did I see
any vehicle near the door. I pressed against the door fre-
quently. Never more than five, or six minutes could have
elapsed without either myself or the policeman whose beat
was on the other side having been in the street.
Sarah Mancell having been recalled, said, in answer to Mr.
Hall, that Inspector Beresford had applied to her for a rush-
light, either on the first or second day after the murder.—
That she had furnished him with one from the same parcel
from which she had taken the one put up in Lord William's
room, and that it was of the same size. She saw it lighted.
It was for the purpose of trying an experiment to ascertain
how long the one found in Lord William's bed-room had
been burning.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Hall said to Mr. Flower,. the witnesses are all bound
over to appear at this trial, but I shall not sign his committal
to-day, because I wish to get first the evidence as to a fact
which has come to my knowledge, and on which I am not
yei satisfied. I shall, therefore, remand him until Saturday.
Mr. Flower.—Very good, sir. It is not, of course, my
wish to give any unnecessary trouble, but, in a case like this,
which is of the last importance to the prisoner, of course I
feel anxious to know all that will be said against him at his
trial. Now, Mr. Hobler has said he intends to call a witness
from Richmond. I should like to know what his evidence is
to prove.
Mr. Hall.—He has told you the witne3ses's name is Ellis.
He is landlord of the Castle Inn, and he will merely state
that Lord William Russell was at his house, and that, after
he left, he wrote a letter stating that he had lost a locket, in
consequence of which search was made, but no loaket was
found.

Mr. Flower.—Perhaps Mr. Hobler will have no objection
to furnish me with a copy of that letter.
Mr. Hobler.—l have it not. It is in the possession of
Mr. Ellis.

Mr. Flower—ln this .casueverything is of impoi-tance ; the
date must be known.

Mr. Hall—l dare say Mr. Haler will furnish you with a
copy of the letter.
Mr. Hobler—Yes, sir.

Mr. Hobler then Landed a letter to the magistrate, which
he stated had been received at the house, addressed to Cour-
voisier. It had not been opened, and he thought it right to
give it to the magistrate.
Mr. Hall-1 shall make the same order regarding this let-
ter that I did in relation to the letter which I received on
Saturday.
The prisoner was then remanded till Friday (this day.)
On being removed from the bar he was taken into a private
room belonging to the office, where the letter was opened and
read to him in the presence of Mr. Hobler, Mr. Wing, and
other gentlemen. We understand the letter was anonymous,
and recommended the prisoner to be spiritually minded, and
to attend devoutly to the exhortations of the chaplain of the
prison.

ANALYSIS OF THE VOTES ON MR. VILLIERS'S
MOTION ON THE CORN-LAWS.

FOR THE MOTION.
ENGLAND.

Counties
Boroughs

118
- 128

WALES.

Counties
Boroughs

SCOTLAND.

Counties
Boroughs.

25_

IRELAND.

Counties .
Boroughs.

Total for the motion

AGAINST THE MOTION.

ENGLAND.

Counties ....
Boroughs....
Universities.

110
105
2
217

WALES.

Counties
Boroughs,

SCOTLAND.

Counties .
Boroughs.

IRELAND.

Counties
Boroughs
University

Total against the motion

Majority against the motion 123