Newspaper Page Text
THE GOOCH Ml
Sir Francis Willing to For give His Wife. HIS CASH PROVEN. Lady Goock's Lawyer Ad mits Everything. [From the London Standard.} *t Marlborough Street Police Court, before Mr. Newton. Annie Louisa Lady Gooch and Ann Walker again appeared on Saturday, November 'Si, to an.wer to a auroinona charging them with haviug, at the Grosvenor Hotel. conspired to palm ofl on Hir Francis Gooch a* his own chud a a trauma child, with intent to delntud and deceive. Mr. George Lewis, Jr., appeared on behalf of Sir Francis Gooch; Mr. Edward Clarke for l.ady Goooh and Mr. Poland watched the inee for Ellen Emily. Widow of the elder brother of Sir F. Goooh and now the wife of Dr. Gream. Mr. leevan, surgeon, Cheahatn place, .aid that on Tuesday afternoon. October 119. he went to tlio Gros venor Hotel at the request of Sir F. Goocb's solicitor; Miss Garrod took hita to Loily Gooch's room?he had previously received a communication upon the mat ter? aud there he saw a male child, which he found to be more than a fortnight old; the defendant was In bed with the iufunt and Mrs. Walker was in the room, which was very dark; Lady Gooch said she hail been confined a few days before, but she would rather not say how many days, us she wished it to appear that the child was born at three o'clock that morning; witness said, "What, with that child ?" and she replied, "Yes;" whereupon witness observed that tho child was more than a fort night old; the ^defendant said as witness knew too much he bad better know all; she was estranged from her husband, had lost her own child about four years before., was very anxious to be re stored to her husband's afTectlon and had up her wind to adopt or procure (witness was not certain of the word) another child; bhc now wanted a wet nurse for the child; witness ascertained on personal examination, made with defendant's permission, that she had not been rocently eonnned; she also stated that she had obtained the child the day before, that it was the child of a lady w ho had escaped from achool and bail been confined at Peck ham, and that Mrs Walker had very cleverly brought the child iuto the hotel wrapped up in a eloak on the previous even ing; Lady Uoocli said, in answer to witness' question, that she was quite well, and. us tie had nothing to prescribe, he lort the room. MXmii THE DATJt. Mrs. Jane Dean Main was then called and examined fV ,rr' ,LeW1*- she """d ?I reside at Arundel House, Lu Ibrokc-road. Notting Hill. y. What is your position in connection with this home in Great Coram street? A. Sixteen years ago I commenced it: I call it Main's Horn*; I was at tno home on Monday, ->ili October. Q. On that occasion was a male child handed to Lady Gooch and Mrs. Walker? A. It was y. Where was thut child born? A. At p'eekham. rather u' t'1" tbL uwae ot lbe mother? A. I would Mr. Lewis?Write it down. W itness?I would ruther not now, as I have consid ered nay position; I am not bound in my position to tell out anything. * By Mr. New-ton?I have rescued many hundreds of Children who have now kind homes. Mr. Newton?Is this child a rescue? Witness?It is. y. Has the child been baptized? A. No Q. Has it been registered? A. Yes. y. Where has it boon registered? A. In the neigh borhood of Peckham, I presume; I can ascertain. Mr. Lewis?Do you know the mother? Witness?Yes. y. Aud her name? A. Yes. n?W. Wtss t,u't hilJ br"uKtlt to the home in conse jm rne of a communication you made to the mother? Rr^iiJlywh*t ut?" did yon know Lady Gooch? A. B} the- name of Mrs. <?0(xh. y. Did you know where she li*d? A. I knew she was staj lng at the Orosveuor Hotel; I did not know hail Far! I residence: I did not ask her w ho her hu? port the chlm y "ked " thCTe W6W meMU' ?MP S' u-1'1? al<i y(Lu fiPHt Boe Ul,r - A- In August. -nV.'i . Id Hht' ? A. Hhe said she had lost a child aud wanted another; she did not ask for a male .What -vou u u h,r> A. I told her that I had ??? "r"at m?ny children adopted and that I had : jiapplneaa U-ing brought into homes in <-on V. iuenec. and sue replied thiit she was very fond of children and did not care whether the chdd was a male or female. VISITS TO THW UOXK. y. When did she come again ? A. Two or tiiroe L" intrTar4: then < ame on the-ame business. ?y- ,H'd. Hh" you any address in London when u 1? ,W* A. Yes; the Grosvenor Hotel, y. That was in August. A. Y#?. I thiuk so. iJ. Have you ever known any cthw address as that Of Lady Gooch? A. No. (j. Not Ogle's Hotel? A. No. y. \ ou nay you had a second interview with her? A. ?e?. a few days after the first. ^y. What did she then ' all for t A. Hhe came to see y. When diil you see her again after August? A. I have made a mistake; the matron saw her thou- it must have t**n tn October that 1 saw her. y. 1 ou hail several interviews with ln r ? A Yes ? Hi yoa Ar?t inform her about this nu'r ti< ular child t A. I could not tell you at which in lmVrhYr rai' k J5 l'uo ?f our conversations I told her that I had a child lor adoption. W* Was tlii* child then born ? A. It was ;on. t>m? no mo the husband of S^nthili UO ^ t0 ** Lim- but 1 Mked ?Mawty Wh4t lUd L*dy ?0Oth ***** A" SU" "I11 he fShUnL'*" N"y WhCTe? * tbe Continent or A ^Non"' y?U aUy leller" tTom Utr on the subject ? T b^or* ** kuow wbo h.e. i'ifc ? ?'" iM^ tol *?* reference? A. I should has + ?4Hk*j(i hud it not b^ou?? y. DidyouaaJt? .v. No; I did not. A. Gkl no.WU *Uy reC4 lpt tTom ker.for the ehihl? (rbe book was produced.) ,, T NO KJlTBT. tartatn nt If"""""1 U!\ U'"*- but could not find Mi\ < Dtn or tlitt ram** of Uoof-h S',Uo "ur,! if " " < atced. aUr. Newton?\\h ? k< r*r)H it? I^Wiin. ss_It.. pan of the books of the establish Mr. Law-is?I cannot find the entry hes^"i^in^tiom*'Wkm>~Vo* ^ co,UIUU th,; pfr"?n hei? Ao^'noT aqipHur.'" ,ho "axuo of Mra- Ouoeh Wiru..>._ rh,;n lt mrist be ? mistake of mine. W1 W'J. 1 1riaiu!^ i? no entry in tho reijis Smslthm? " <I,M ",u"ut al *h to Mbow ?"* WitiH-ss- No; I n -ver had one y. D.. you know Mrs. Walker? A. Yes. y. is She a monthly nurs. .' A. | ,i(?, , know. monthly nurse?? \ \? "T i"1'" u"r l,, r Uvlu? ?" ? jj.r ,j., ? '1U!l children to nurse ^orh^rnv"!^ *";1w?^rs name to Lady uaby li A. 11' ommended hs, b, take care ot tht y: When was that? A. On the Monday. ?eitf ,*vtrt,'u<lV','eWlth v"" "" A.I Q. In comnmnt, attot, with l^dv (,0.?.-h hail you ?2hj%Br: "VI."; i,m1 "? M'-b u" - a. no. Sr^tCttJr r Bh" b-j Mr,!wHuin2wL,hfi *,"',lion, A. She did not say. Wittiest-nC J """" y I,aju child ? y. Niuw? K. None, n ma - *" *"'N,;T r?<A*?RD n.i.vns. A. No ' v" money with the child ? y. INd Lady Goocti give you any money ? A. Hhe JlTh lnatitntiou. but no money for the cWotao*-11" "" nI"""1 "'""O.ptiorior. b-'' "* ?u??>? ^y_^\\ks any mousy prom bad to the institution ? y. Not ior the liaby ? A. No. <,?. Not to the mother ? \ \,'(ri ,jr< <4 " b> $*? ' -Wh. U U was given ft wa* gji.-ji 111 an ordlbai--, wj) 10. a -illteci-ipUnii to U?e Jus Utttion .< A. J I,St so: il..-ordim.rv Va " W. sou say toe mime was omitted?that it did not appear, ih, you r., -rd ?|,? 1MMrw, /oting wonj,.? who have toine to the Home, atitt wJi*> are scut to be cottfltied at soma pU .ippoiiited by the Home? ^ 'cgisie, is t i --nI ot , *ery one that coiuea |ii the liiiiwo. liiitiH u idi'im nuuib^r of voiitji/ wommii. * Mr. Nowton?Are we uot traUiiiDg out of tbo record ? Mr, i laik* ?fins tin ouuasion at the lefiuc-st of Miss Garrod? A. No, sir. Mr. Newton?it seouis that any one who a?ka lot a baby hM on* given them without making any in quiry? Witur.-I-?-! tola you a pary '?niiii- ..-,tb 1 V .u Ch u t till ns who the pal Utrr ?t. ' ,. i (j. You gave the child up without any questions . A. i aaidd a great man} questions. Mr. Clarke?You never had an interview with ansa Ul?'tneL??So; she had an interview with my matron, in whom I had the most implicit confidence. Q. Y'ou a aid there wan an explanation of not asking for reference * A. Because Miss Garrodcame. CI. Bid you know Miss Garrod ? A. No. y Or her name ? A. I did not; 1 hud a conversa tion with Lady Oooch that I thought waa sufbeieut; it wan not done in a careless way hi ad. Q. Bid Ladv Oooch ever ask you to ki sp her ut.mo secret? A. Sever. UAi? THC B.'.HV CLOillts? Q. With regard to thisduurtiou, would It bo enteiod as a douatiou from Latty Oooch?Mr*. t??ocn. . ? did not know she was Lady Oooch; I diduotu?k i .. 'Vsts1"-";. ....... H?.w.a.o a. Ir?r?'K,S.Wd M,.. WUler Iron) II. to | " u '. Is slie^ to your knowledge, a respectable Person ? A. Very respactacle; I only told her that s..e ? wanted to take charge of the infant she saw, as a lady 'w'hat'naaie did you say to her? A. That was all, except that 1 said she wan to have live guineas u "?""'uid you tell lier that she seemed to be a lady Who had tik. u the child? A. Yes, and that 1 thought rho hMi taKm im? cxiim. ":??? , .he would he very comtortable. 1 hoped alio would take care of the child. (j Had the five guineas been mentioned between you and Lady Oooch before? A. 1 do not know. Five iiuiueuH a month would be the ordinary sum. R u whom were the infant'* clothes to bo washed? A. By some person I knew, y How was she to get the clothes? A. By going .to ai, told mo .to '"y.'wu' tli. ouly roioon you bikiIio of ? c?rtiio woman that you were interested in her? A. It was. y I understand that Lady Oooch told you she did not mind whether it was a girl or a boy ? A. Yes. M" Newton?When was that ? A. in October, y. Did Lady tioochever go to your private house I A y. *How often ? A. About six times, near the he iiiuuiii^ of October. . 0 Mr. Luwifc?She was with you almost every day . \ \(l y. Did she at no time say the rliild must be a boy ? A. No; she said down to the end that she did not mind if' it was a girl; I told her I had a boy. iiun,t?.d y. At what time in the day was the child handed over A. About five o'clock in the evening i-ady Gooch came to see the child, but it was not till twit ween eight and uiuo in the evening that it was taken. O Did you give any instructions that the child should not be taken to the hotel till half-past ten in 1Vd^? know that the child was a fortnight Old? A. Yes, I had known it from its birtn. A CHAMllluUMAIU Sl'KAilR. Mrs. Russell, head chambermaid at the Urosvenor Hotel,' said:?My husinoss took me to the rooms of the lady 1 know as Mrs. Gooch. , ,. y When did you first set Mrs. Walker? A. On the morning of the'ABthof October; I took up tea. y. What did she say? A. bhe said the lady had been confined at three in the morning, and she or dered me to bring up a can of hot water; I handed it inside the room and she fetched it trorn me. y When was It that she told you the lady had been confined? A. After I took up the tea. q. Could you soe Into the room.' A. No; it was very dark. _ . y. Did you hear the baby? A. Yes. 0 Did it cry loudly ? A. Yes. Q. Did she order anything for the lady? A. Yes, some gruel; I took candles up at night. Q Did Mrs. Walker at that time tell you anything about the baby? A. Nothing. W?re you under tb? imprenaion that a confine merit had taken place? A. Yes. Mr. Clarke?Lady Gooch had been there for some days previously? Witness?Yes, for two or three days. . , T o You saw her going out and in? A. Yes; but I took so little notice of her that I would not know her again. Nothing hail been said or done to lead one to suppose that a confifiment was about to happen. y. When did you first hear the baby cry .' A, Ou the Tuesday morniug. On that day I saw Miss Gar rod. at the same time that I saw the nurse. y Miss Garrod was there when the nurse told you that Lady Gooch had been coufiued ? A. She must have beeuolose by. . y. And she gave you directions to bring some things to the sitting room ? A. Nbo tonl Mrs. Walker that I would get anythiug she wanted. SO IPSA or WU'INU. O Did you ask her at any time how the lady wan getting along? A. Very likely 1 did, but I cannot say 'Ml you not remember Miss Garrod telling you that the lady was getting on all right? A. Yes, I be lieve nhtj did. ? ? . Q. When did you heroine aware of tli? ract that there had been no confinement? A. Two ur three days afterward, when I was served with a su? mons to appear here. o. Was there an appearance of there having been a confinement kept up at th ? hotel? A. Yes. m Was that done l>y the orders of the manager? A. 1 do not know anything about the orders of the mMr.Rh!iwis?Did Miss Garrod not say to the nurse. "Whatever you want you mustorder of Mrs. iiusseU; whatever I want I shall get from the waiter?" A. Yes, I think she did. . . Mr. Clarke?Did Mlaa Garrod ever lead you to be lieve there was anything wrong? A- No. Dr. Francis Luting f aid?1 am a doctor of inodi ciae. la Cleveland road, St. James'. I am tho doctor of the Gooch family. , , . Q. Did Lady Gooch come to your house iu Octo ber? A. Yes; on the 1st. (i You had known her before? A. Yes. y! What did she say to you? A. She naked me to attend her in a fictitious confinement. Q. What did you tell her? A. I told her it was an impossibility. Q Did she say what communication you were to make to Sir Francis? A. Hhe did not wish me to communicate with him at all. O What took place? A. She anted me not to com municate with Sir Francis; but she also raid t hat hor husband had pieced confidence in me, and that ir I said she had been confined he would believe me. y. what did you toil her? A. i told her it was an impossibility. 3: HOT TO BE DIHCOCMAOKD. g. You tried to persuade tier again; t such a thing ? A. Ah tar as 1 wax able i tried to persuade her to give up the Idea. Q. What did she say finally ? A. I cannot recollect; the Interview lasted about twenty minutes. Q. Did she explain why she wanted a child ? A. Not on that day. g. Did you see her next dayV A. Yes, at Batt's Hotel. Q. I believe Miss Garrod was present? A. Yes; I went there to persuade Lady Gooch to give up tho Iiroject; I told her it would be a conspiracy and bring ler to punishment; she raid she required a baby to regain the affections of her husband. g. l)i?l she then suggest your writing to Sir Francis that it was impossible for her to travel down to Bcn acre? A. Yes, hut she did not ask lue to say anyluing about having a child; Z tried to persuade nor to give her plan up, hut she said nothing would persuade her hi do so; she was bent on adopting a child. Q. Was it at the hotel the naked you to write to Sir Francis? A. No; at my house. g. You told her It was impossible to pretend she had a child? A. Yes. g. After such a conversation as that if you heard of her going to B nacre with a child you would have thought it your duty to t.-U Mr Frwli. A. C< rtainly. g. You ar< on t< rius of Intimacy with Sir Francis? A. Yes. as the family doctor. g. Did you point out that ?s the family doctor you ecu Id not lake part fn her scheme? A. I said it was an impossible scheme altogether. g. When you examined h<T in April was there any pretence for her being in the family way? A. Mm Lad oil a dressing go .vn, but i eaunot say whether she had on an undue quantity of underclothing; she was not dressed for the day. proposal or withdrawal. At this stage of the proceedings Mr. Lewis said that Sir Francis Oooch having r-tabljsh si by the e\idcuee which had been produced that the confinement of lady Oooch was a mockery, and that he had pre vented it being used to the prcfiidicu of his family and their estates, and feeling that he had therefore done Ins duty, did not wish to press th" oaae further. He had provided funds for the defi nee of hi* w ife In this court, and having no personal feeling of any kind lie was prepared, on his own part, to parduw the act his wife had committed unl hx the magistrate thought it imperative that tlie ease should go on. THE tlir. Of TH* LVDY. Mr. Clarke ? spressed a wish to make some remarks before the matter was decided. H. wonldcoiiOue him self as far as possible to tho direct issue, uitlioiigli many extraneous matters ot a serious character hail been introduced. The (|iies!ien wr? whether them Was.evidence upon which to commit Lady Oooch and Mrs. tVaikcr for a conspiracy to palm off on Hir Fran is Oooch a fnlse child, and so to defraud other parties who were entitled to certain property. He could not go into the adequacy of tie proof as to the way in winch property might have been affected unless the magistrate thought tlx re was sufficient evidence to commit tor trial on that subject. Ho would go first iuto the charge of conspiracy agaio-t Mrs. Walker. Mrs. Walker was a respectable woman, who. for some years, had been engaged by su institu tion which?Whatever might la* stated iu that court? he believed to be* an institution whii li was doing as good a work as human charity eoul 1 possibly accotn i lis It, and she was called upon, not by a stronger, but by m p< i ?"ii whom she knew, and lu?d ri asoti to trust, to enter upon nu employment wlii? h hail nothing remarkable about, it to her. It wa* nothing Hnu sutl to Mrs. WhIsi i to be engaged to take <uic of a child, and he a-ked tbe msglstiate to tiud that tlisre was no ? aae ugaliist her. As to Lady (io?s h, tt ?#? alleged that site had Imeii coiixp?ing with ,?ir Walker tipiieprivc the relatives of xii Francis Oooch of the property which wonjd bekmg to theut on I., t death. 'I Ids poor ludy hod undoubtedly had thn In terviews Winch had been deposed io iu til* cours of the oas<. but did not ih various clreiuiietaue s which had been disclosed tend to destroy all idea of any really criminal Intention in her miud? whatever might have boen ihu cause of the tilthsp plncss ol Lady O melt, it was ch ar npou the evMeUce that wheu she Went to Dr. I,aking and Mrs. Mit.n tin idea in tier miud was. "S unahoWor other my husb?nd's love lias gone- gone probably with the little chiiu ,vho died four yi ar< ago, and if f tiud another child to lake to liiio, uo could per suade bum it was his own, 1 might gt. his iuvu back ?ruin." Wring. m> doubt, this Blight he?wrong in luiu ;.' and probably wroug in law?but surely uot mfiio.rut to itialiiy Hie magistrate in sending Lady tim>. it ! >:' iii I on a criminal charg ?. b?> tar from going h.m.i aud tvcrcUjr to v.wrk Lady C?ooe|| bad tskc-u the greatest }>o*afbla pains to innke it apparent tliut she rtaily could not curry out tat object, and him went to ilioho who wore the lout likely to assist her in any fraudulent intention. All through there had been 110 desire for any concealment whatever, unci mo tar from having Met her mind upon a boy it wan distinctly proved that Lady Uooch hail said she did not care whether the child which she w anted was male or fomale. With reference to the utAtuiueuts of Miss Gar roil, upon which his friend Mr. In wis would 110 doubt lay stress, it was almost iueou ceivubiu that tlioeu stateuieuts could be cor rect: it they WOT# it would be the sanity, rather >hen the innocence of Lady Ooocli which ought to he the question at issue. Any attempt to bring forward a false child, who might huruattcr claim to be tli ? heir to eld estates, was undoubtedly one which called for the most careful Investigation: and neither lie nor his client had any reason to complaiu of the way in whicli Mr, Lewis had dealt with the delicate ami somewhat painful duty which he had had to discharge; but now that the evidence was before the Court?now that the wholo of the possible mischief which could have arisen was absolutely gone?now that the family of Mir Francis Uooch had nothing to fear?now that it was upon record that Lady Uooch hud not neon confined within the last twelve mouths? l ALsDs in oitxun. Mr. Newton.?l>o you admit it is all false? Mr. Clarke.?Yes: certainly. Mr. Newton.?But what has become of the child? Mr Clarke.?It has burn sent bsck. The learned counHcl went on to say, in regard to the matter of confinement, it his Worship thought it would be more satlsiuctory that licr ladyship should make her own affidavit that should lie done. All the mischief, he repeated, wan at an end. Ho did not believe there would be an adverse verdict given against either de fendant if the ease were sent to a jury: and if his Worship so scut it, the result would only lie a prolon gation of misery to two persons, and ot scandal with regard to a wholo family, Mr. Lew in said if the magistrate wished him to sponk on that point he would do so. Mr. Newton?Then I would ask you to address me on that point. Mr. Lewis said it was in evidence that Lady Uooch at a certain pet tod saiil she wished to have a son, be cause she would be left destitute at the death of her husband, Ot course, if there was a son, the Court of Chancery would make a large allowance for tho child anil the mother during its infancy. l)r. Worthiugton hud saul that laidy uooch wanted a sou to prevent the estates going away. At that time elm was resid ing at llenacro Hall. Her husband was aware that she was not iu tlio family way. He left her on ac count of her intended imposture and had her watched. Tho part which Mrs. Walker was to play was to as sist Lady tiooch in gutting a child into the hotel se cretly. Miss Uarrod was asked to assist in the fraud, and it was to bo hoped that no reflection would rest upuu her tor the way in which she hud performed her duty to Sir Francis. The imposture being ut an end Sir Francis did not wish to push the matter fur ther. Mr. Newton?The question is whether the impos ture ought not to he punished. Mr. Lewis?I earnestly ask you, on behalf of Sir Francis, not to force us to go on with the prosecu tion. Mr. Newton?1 will think the matter over, and give my decision on Thursday morning at twelve o'clock. Lady Uooch and Mrs. Walker were then liberated on bail. WHOSE WAR IS IT? IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION FOR THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT-SHALL INDIA OR ENGLAND PAY FOR THRASHING HHERE ALI ? [From the Pall Mall Gaaette.] The obligation for assembling Parliament is im posed by a very peculiar provision of the statute of 18.58 |'il and TJ Vie., cap. 11*1). which transferred the government of India from the East India Com pany to the Crown. Two clauses of this statute have been repeatedly quoted, but not, we think, with any distinct appreciation of their purpose or of the func tions which they impose upon Parliament. Tho lift) -fourth clause directs that whou any order for the "actual commencement" of hostilities by Her Majesty's forces in India is sent to that couutry both houses of Parliament are to be informed of it within three months if Par liament is sitting, and if Parliament is not sitting at the expiration of this period, then within one month after its next meeting. These long intervale of time savor of the great distance by which India was re moved* from us in 1858, and deprive this statutory requirement of nearly all its practical importance. Itid.-ed, if it be true that the English Cabinet, instead of expressly ordering the Viceroy to begin hostilities against the Ameer of Cabul, merely laid the reins on Lord Lytton's neck, it may be questioned whether the provision has any technical application to the ease; although of course the general couatitu tional duty of the Queen's advisers to inform Par liament promptly of uny critical event affecting the fortunes of the country is as imperative as ever. Tho rcully important and closely relevant clause of the statute of 1858 is the fifty-firth, which provides that, except for preveuting or repelling invasion, or "under other sudden and urgent necessity," the consent of both Houses of Parliament must be obtained before any part of the revenues of India can be appied to defray the expenses of any military operation beyond the frontiers of India. There can be no rational doubt that this provision governs the present case, and, indeed, it may be strongly suspected that both this clause and tho clause preceding it contain a tacit reference to the first Afghan war. which is knowu to have been com menced on an express order given by the British Cabinet of the day to Lord Auckland, and to hava been paid for by the Eaat India Company. hid ukaconsitkld obdkk tig; was? When the meaning and poiut of ths provisions found in the fifty-fifth clause of the statute of 1858 are once appreciated it almost < eases to be necessary to chow how wido of tho mark have been the sug gestions of some of our eontoiniK?raries us to the distribution of the cost of this war between the English and Indian exchequers. The principal Lou don journal contends that tbe payment of any portion of the expenses from English funds is a pure question of grace and liberal ity. India was primarily liable; but if. the English Chancellor of the Exchequer was particularly flush of money he might iwrliaps spare something out of p.ty for an impoverished dopcudency. Nothing can he falser than such reasoning. A great variety of considerations will have to be presented to the mind of Parliament before anrh a question ran b? satisfactorily decided. Tbe extreme poverty of the ]>copli! of India, the reeont notorious distresses of Indian finance, will be legitimately urged on the at tention of the uoblcmen and gentlemen who on this particular occasion will be acting as an Indian Legislature, and the metnbi rs of tlie House of CoinnioiiK in particular will not, wn hope, tie suffered to forget that if they vote this money they will dispose of it subject to no such moral restriction* as ordinarily control their as sent to expenditure, but will, in point of fact, lie di recting taxation Irrespectively of representation. Hut. after all, the great governing question is the irreprosaiblo question of iui;>eri*lisiii. Is this really an Indian war? IJoes the necessity for it arise on the south or oti ttio north of the Himalayas and tho Hin doo Koosh? Is it the English Foreign Office or tho Foreign Office at Himla which has most at staku iu the endeavor to bring Shere Ali to reason? FRANCE'S FUTURE. MANIFESTO OF THE OOF N'T DF, FHAMBOBD. (From the London Standard.] Tho Count do Ctaatubord ha* writtc u a letter to the Count de Man. dated Frohsdorf, November 20, con gratulating him on the spewh delivered by htm on the occasion of hi* invalidation. After soinn compli mentary remarks to the affect that this time honor was once more on the able of the vanquished, the Count de Chambord note forth lila views us follows j? (in ali the religious and political qiH-etiou* which ai itate Euroi*- and t.-ar our unfortunate Franre asunder you throw light, bet suae you are not afraid to point out. equally without passion and without w< akness, the real causes of our decadence and degradation. Yo*. the future belongs to tho lin n of faith, but on tho condition that tbey shall also be nieu of couragi, who will not shrink from tolling triumphant Revolution to her flue what she 1* ill her isseuee uild her spirt I, and who will act forth what should be the work of reparation and the quiet process of a c nut. r revo lution. I thiitik you with ail lny lnsirt for having num more reduced to nothing those hateful false hoods a thousand times refuted and ever revived, that wretched equivocation regarding the past, as If in order to redress blamabtc utilises it werv not in sane to have ovutbrowu protecting bulwarks. I thank you for having dwelt with so much authority and frankness on the fundamental liases, eter nal irnth< and necessary principles, without which uo society can lire at )mukq or he sure of the morrow. B> Heaven's grai e th< sacred trust of our nat: iual gi ' uui- ' and traditions has rcmaiuad intact in my bands. Every man following your example is bound to devote Lis activity aud bis life to restore the eonnentiuf links of tho chain ot ages. Return f<aflcrsly to the iu.del ot those generous populations of tiie West from v. honi I n civs such frequent and consoling pronto of unswerving ?ffcution. flu- Re vo lution, prosecuting hrr ideal of the Mtale without i >od. lias inscribed ou Iter list oi pr< script ion the hnrablo instructor of the children of the P' ijtlo and tiie admirable sister of charity. Ill') Hue- lias come when, for every insu ot heart, iiKiilici't-ic e Hud ma lion would lie Irene Usey and shaUkc. Wdh those laborious classos, th> coustant ol?J' t of my prtsiccupatiiiM, with those beloved wio'Uiugiui i , surrounded by so many flatb rer* aud so Jew real n il uds, yotl, better than any otic, cull scrvu as my interpreter. 1 always hear with happi ness their < ry of tsitli and hope. Is t Uhin M persuaded that I love them too much to flatter tliem; and, to sum up all in one word, re peat to them unceasingly that in odder that Franco should be saved it is necessary that Hod should re turn there as master and that I should return there as King. Have c'lufidi lien, ray dear De MttUj nuvir forget that the future belongs to the m?u of faith ami courage. HENRI. WHISTLER VS. RUSKI The American Artist Sues the Discoverer of Turner. NOCTURNES AND ARRANGEMENTS. What Whistler Says About Ilis Own Art. The Loudon standard, of a late date, contains a long and interesting account of the trial in the Exchequer Division, on the 25th ult? before Mr. Barou lduddle ston and a special jury, of an action to recover dam ages for libel brought by Mr. James Abbott McNeill Whistler, the distinguished and erratic American art ist, against the famous John Buskin, tlu> art critic and author. The Id cl was said to consist of a criticism which had been written by Mr. Buskin upon the plain tiff's paintings at the Grosvenor Gallery, and which, on the 2d of July, 1877, appeared in tbo Fort Clamgera. That criticism was in tho following terms:? Lastly, the munuerlsms and errors of these pic tures (meaning some pictures by Mr. Bnrne Jones), whatever may be their extent, are never affected or indolent. The work is natural to the painter, how ever strango to us; and it is wrought with utmost conscience of care, however far, to his own or our de sire, the result may yet lie incomplete. Scarcely so much can be said for any other pictures of tho modern schools; their eccentricities arc almost always in aome degree forced, and their imperfections gratui tously, if not impertinently, indulged. For Mr. Whistler's own sake, no less than for the protection of the purchaser, Sir I'outts Lindsay ought not to havo admitted works into the gallery in which the ill educated conceit of the artist so pearly approached the aspect of wilful imposture. I have scon and heard much of cockney impudence before now, but never expected to hoar a coxcomb ask 200 guineas for flinging a pot of paiut in tho public's face. Mr. Sergeant Parry and Mr. 1'ctheram (instructed by Mr. Anderson Rose) appeared for the plaintiff, aud the Attorney General and Mr. Bo wen for the de fendant. Mr. Sergeant Parry, In opening the case, stated that some of his client's works, he thought he was not wrong in saying, were destined to immortality, aud it. was the more surprising, therefore, that a gentle man holding such a position as Mr. ltuskiu could traduce another in a way which would lead that other to come into a court of law to ask for damages. Mr. Whistler was not merely an artist, but was an etcher, and had achieved considerable honors in that deportment of art. The libel bad appeared in a pub lication which had a large circulation among artists and art patrons, and tho fact of its largo circulation was of importance. The language used in the arti cle could not in any ordinary souse be considered privileged. A largo number of Mr. Whistler's pic tures would be exhibited to the jury. He trusted the case would be fairly tried and that no attempt would be made to ridicnle his client. whihtlkb'h testimony. The plaintiff was then put upou the stand and ex amined by Mr. Pethenun. Tho following evidence was adduced after ha had given the points of his career up to date:? .At the summer exhibition of 1877 I exhibited some pictures at the Grosvenor Gallery. Q. Was that in consequence of any request? A. There is no exhibition thoro except by invitation by Sir Coutta Lindsay; I exhibited eight pictures there, seven in addition to the portrait; the ttrst was a "Nocturne in Black and Gold," the second a "Nocturno in Blue and Silver," the third a "Noc turne in Bine and Gold," the fourth a "Nocturne in Blue and Silver," tho Aftli an "Arrangement in Black" (Irving as Philip 1L), the sixth a "Har mony in Amber and Black," the seventh an "Ar rangement In Brown," and in addition to these there was a portrait of Mr. Carlyle; that portrait was painted from siltings which Mr. Carlyle gave me; the artist's proofs were all subscribed for when tho portrait was engraved; before tho pleturcs went to the Groavouor all the nocturnes except one were disposed of; two of them were sold to the Hon. Percy Wyudhum. ? Q. "For what price? A.. For 200 guineas; I sent ono to Mr. Giuliani in lieu dt an earlier commission for 150 guineas; the third I presented to Mrs. Lay laud; the picture unsold was the "Nocturne in Bluek uml Gold," and tho price fixed for it was 200 guineas. (j, You kuow the publication called Furs t'Uiviye.raV A. Yes, and my impression la that it has an cxt iisive sale. y. Since the publication of this criticism have yon gold a "Nocturne?" A. Not by any means at the same price as before. ? y. What pictures have you been able to get to-day for the Inspection of those that were In the Grosvenor Gallery ? A. The pictures of "Irving as l'hllip II." and "Thomas Carlyle;" I could obtain no more. y. Is the one sold to Mr. Wyndlism hero? A. I ex pected It, but a telegram cuuie saying it could not be lent. Q. Is the picture of "Irving as Philip II." a finished picture? A. It is a large Impression, a sketch, hut tt was not intended as a finished picture: it was not ex hibited us for sale; there were no paintings exhibited for sale hut the "Nocturne in Bluek and Gold." y. What la your definition of a nocturne ? A. I have, perhaps, meant rather to indicate an artistic in terest alone in the work, divesting the picture from any outside sort or interest which might have been otherwise attached to it; it is an arrangement of line, form aud color first, untl I make use of any incident of it which shall bring about a symmetrical result; among my works are some night pieces, and I have chosen the word nocturne because it generalise and simplifies the whole sot of them. XKKllKD A NAME ON IT. Cross-examined by the Attorney General?I have done some etchiugs of scenes down the river as well as paintings of them. y. You have sent pictures to the Academy which have not been received ? A. 1 believe that is the ex perience of all artists. (Laugliter.) y. When dtd you last send to the Academy a pic ture which was not hung? A. The last time I sent a picture to the Academy which was refused was three or four years ago, and the arrangement was called "Arrangement In Green aud Black, Portrait of Paint er's Mother." y. That was the same picture which was afterward hung? A. Yea. y. Did you send to the Academy any of the seven which were afterward exhibited In tho Groavouor Gallery? A. No. Q. What is tho subject of tho "Nocturne in Black and Gold?" A. It is a night piece, ami represents tho fireworks at CMUorue. y. Not a view of Creiuornc? A. if it were called a view ot Crcmoras it would certainly bring about nothing Imt disappointment on the part of the be holders- -(laughter)?it is un artistic arrangement. y. You do not think that any member of the public would go to Crcuiorne because he saw your picture (laughter)? A. I do not kuow how to describe the picture; it ia simply an arrangement of color; that was for sale, and tfic price marked was 200 guineas. y. Aud 200 guineas was the ainouut you thought a lit and proper price for it? A. Yes, . y. Ia too guineas a pretty good price for a picture of un artist ot reputation ? A. Yes. y. It is what we who are not artists should call a stitiiMi price ? A. I think very likely it would be so. (Laughter.) y. You know Mr. ltuskiu as su ait critic ? A. Yes; he has written some works on art ; 1 bolteve "Mtoues of Venice" Is his; I know that "Modern Painters" is his. y. You know that Mr. Buskin's view la that the artist should not allow a picture to go from ills hand when he, by any labor be can bestow upon It, can Improve it ? A. Very likely. y. And that his view is that an artist should give good vuliu- for money, and not endeavor to get the highest price ? A. Very likely. A. Artists do not end'-svor to get the highest price for their work irrespective Of value? A. That is so, and 1 aui glad to see the prlnciplu ao well established. (Laughter.) Mr. Baron Huddlcston?Artists propose to give full value for their money ? A. Yes. ra.vciiCAn imukmaxiux. Mr. Sergeant Varry?So does every honorable dealer, my lord. CrclM-examination continued?Tho "Nocturne in Black and Gold" was a finished pi. lure; it was not a picture of two colors ouly; there was every color the palette in It. as there is in every painting; tho picture in blue and'silver is a scene on the Thsraes by summer night: there was another "Nocturne in Blue and Silver," which was also a river scene: the arrangement in black (Mr. Irving as l'hllip II.) 1 have not attempted to sell. y. Why do you call Mr. Irviug an arrangement in black? (Laughter.) Mr. Baron HuddJ. nton?It is tho idrtnrc and not Mr. Irviug who is the arrangement. (Laughter). The Attorney General?What was the "Arrange ment in Amber and Black?" A. It wasnyoungla ly in an amberdress with a black ground: the "Arrange nn nt in Brown" was similar; these were impressions ol my own; 1 make them my study; 1 suppose th"iu to appeal to none t ut those who may understand tiio tecliui. id matter; 1 did not Intend to sell tlie "llsr motiy in Ambrr and Black:" the "Arrangement in Brown" was also the portrait of ft lady; I have not got. lbs "Harmony in Amber and Block;" I painted ilia! one; I Isdieve ttint the "Arrangement, in Brown" is hero; I had made arrangement* tor tho various pictures being shown at the Westminster Palace Hotel. y. Tlie only picture you had In the Grosvenor Gal lery for sub was the "Nocturne in Black and Gold" ? A. Yes. y. 1.suppose you are willing to admit that your pictures exhibit softie eccentricities; you huvn told that over and over again? A. yes; very often, (Laughter). y. Von send them to the Osllery to invite the ad miration of the public? A. That would bo such vast ! absurdity on my part that I don't think I could. j (Laughter.) O- Von don't expect that your pleitnrea uro not to be I l lliri-mly \. t)i,_ ;iu , Uul.'S* they ai<o overlooked. ' , I'l l it take you mut'h time to paint tlio "Nocturne in Black and Gold?" How soon did you knock it off? (Laughter.) A. 1 knocked it off pogaibly in a couplo U ?uuu l'*y the work aud another to lunch Q. After partly painting it did you put it up to mellow? (Laughter.) Do you over hang these pic tures up on the garden wall? A. I do not put np the "Nocturne" nor auy other picture to mellow; I should ho grieved to see my paintings mellowed? (laughter)?but I do put my paintings in the open air that they may dry well as 1 go ou with niv work. i). And that was the labor for which you asked 300 guineas? A. No; it was for a knowledge gained through a lifetime. (Applause.) -MI-sT UK st.KN x<> BR APl'liKCIATED. Mr. Baron lluddleaton said that it this manifesta tion of fueling were repeated he would have to clear the court. Cross-examination resumed:?Q. Yon know that many critics entirely disagree with your views as to these pictures? A. It would be beyond lue to agree with the critics. (Laughter.) Q. You don't approve of criticism? A. I should not disapprove In any way of technical criticism by a man whose life is passed in practico of the science which lie criticises, but for the opinion of a man whose life is not so passed 1 would have as little opinion as you would have if he expressed itu opinion ou law. O. You expect to be criticised? A. Yes, certainly: aud 1 do not expect to bo affected by it until it comas to be a case of this kind. The Attorney General here proposed to produce the "Nocturne in Black aud Gold." Mr. Sergeant Parry objected that the court was not a fit placo to exhibit the picture in. Mr. liarou HuiUtlesioii thought it would bo scarcely fuir that an urtist's pictures should bo shown in a bad light. Cross-examination continued:?Q. What was the subject of the "Nocturne in Blue aud Silver" given to Mr. Graham? A. A moonlight effect near Old Bat tersoa Bridge. V- What lias become of the "Nocturne in Black and Gold/' A. I believe H is before you. <j. You havo not gold it? A. No, but I have do posited it. Q- You can get It? A. It would be very difficult; I believe you have it (laughter). file Attorney General proposed to show to the jury the "Nocturne in Blue and Silver." Mr. Sergeant Parry said it would be more conven ient it a room could be obtuiucd in the Immediate neighborhood for the jury to see tho collection of Mr. whistlers pictures. , Attorney Geunral decidedly objected to an ex hibition of Mr. Whistler's paintings, because Mr. i ii. only dealt with those which were ex lubited at tho Grosvenor Oallury. It was fair that those pictures to which Mr. Buskin referred should be seen by the jury. Mf. ScrKewit Parry urged that inasmuch as the plaintiff s character was attacked, and be had been almost charged with boin# an importer, he had a right to whow to tho jury what hia work* had boon. Mr. Baron Uuddleston thought that, in justice to Mr. Whistler, the jury should have the beuolit of seeing the piotnres. The Attorney General said that, after His Lord ship's observation, the impression would be tlna lie was dealing unfairly if tho jury were not allowed to see the pictures. He did not wish it to be supposed that ho waa in auy way acting ungenerously. Mr. Bu-on Huddleaton said that, so far as he was concerned he had to tell the Jury simply what was the law of the case, and ho did not think he would be much assisted in discharging that duty bv going over to tho Westminster Palace Hotel and seeing tho nic | tures. Besides, he had alroady seen them in the Gros I venor Gallery. "A PniVATK VIKW." Mr. Sergeant Parry said the "Nocturne in Black and | Gold, with some others, had been deposited with a ! gentleman an the Strand, who had been summoned | to produce four of thciu. Those four were now, he i believed, in court?two produced as by the plaintiff [ and the other two as by the defendant. ! Mr. Baron Huddleston suggested that these four I pictures might be pluced among the others in tho Westminster Palace Hotel for the inspection of the jury. After some further conversation the picture of the I edict near old Uattersea Bridge, alluded to by Mr. Whistler in his evidence, was produced in court. | Cross-examination resumed:?That is Mr. Graham's picture, and is the "Nocturne in Blue and Silver-" it represents Buttcrsea Bridge by moonlight. Mr. Barou Hiuldlcston?Is this part of tho picture at the top old Battcrsea Bridge ? (Laughter.) Witness?Your Lordship is too close at present to tho picture to perooivo the effect which I intended to produce nt a distance. The spectator is supposed to be looking down the river toward Loudon. (j. The prevailing color Is blue ? A. Yes. Q. Are those figures on the top of tho bridge in tended for people ? A. They are just what you like y. That ir, a barge beneath ? A. Yes; I am very much nattered at your seeing that; the thing isiutuudod sim ply as a representation of moonlight; my whole scheme was only to bring about a cortain harmony of color: the picture (produced) is a "Nocturne iu Blue and Silver;1' it is a picture of the Thames by moon light, looking up the river near Battorpea. y. How long did it take you to paiut that picture? A. I completed the work of that in one day after hav ing arranged tho idea in my mind. He-examined by Mr. Sergeant Barry:?The pictures I have produced are the portrait of Mr. Garlyio and a picture of a young lady, which have not been ex hibited in the Groeveuor Gallery; besides thoae uor tnuts I have produced one other nocturne picture tho picture of Philip is a mure sketch unfinished there is another picture which was at Grosvenor culled "A Variation in I'lesh Color and Greun-" thcru is another, representing tho seaside and sand called "Harmony in Blue and Yellow;" tho "New-' turi:c in Biaek aud Gold" was the out to which Mr Buskin alluded: this subject of tho arrangement of colors had been a life study to my mind; the pictures are painted off generally from my own thought and mind; sketching on paper is very rare with me y. Do yon conscientiously form your idea and then conscientiously work it out? A. Certainly. y. And these pictures arc published by you for tho purpose of a livelihood? A. Yes. y. Your manual lubor is rapid? A. Certainly. At this stage of tho proceedings the Court ad journed for the purpose of enabling the jury to aee the pictures iu the Westminster Palace Hotel. "A XOCTfUNE." The jury having returned in to court, tho -'Noc tnrne in Black uud Gold," which represented the fire works at C'remorac, w as produced and exhibited to tho jury. " By the Attorney General-This is Cramorue? (L mghti r.) A. It is a "Nocturne in Black und Gold " y. How long did it take you to paint that? V Olio whole day and part of another; that is a finished picture; tiie black monogram in frame was placed in its position so as not to put the balance out. Q. You have made tiie study of art vour study of a lifetime; what in the poculinr beauty of that picture? A. It would be impossible for mo to explain to vou I am afraid, although 1 daro nay I could to a symmn tlictie car. J 1 y. Do you not think Mr.. Iluskin might have come to tbe conclusion that It ha<l 110 particular beauty? A. 1 tinuk there in ilixtinct evidence that ho did- I <lo not ihiuk ttnit auy artist would conic to that conclu sion; I lmvo known uuiuHaeuccd people recogni.ee that it represented A reworks. y. Yon offer thai picture to the public as one of particular beauty as a work of art end which is fairly worth ami guineas? A. I offer it as a work which I have conscientiously oxs. utod and which 1 think worth the money; 1 would bold my reputation upon this as I would upon any til my other works Kc-t xamftied by Mr. Herges nt. Parry?That picture was painted, not ua offering tint portrait of a particu lar plat e, hut at an artistic impression which had been tarried away? A. Many of my works are catches of scenes on tbc Thames; I livo on tbe Em bankment. William M. lU.si.etti, tho art critic of the Loudon Academy ; Mr. Albert Moore, an artist, and Mr. W. G. Will- the dramatic author, thru gave evidence us to cisod ^ 440 ,luuhty ot tho Plaintiff's works criti Mr. Sergeant Parry then said?That is the esse. J he Attorney General submitted that his learned friend had made out no case whatever, as be had not shown malice. Mr. Larou Huddisston?Surely this Is a question for. 11 by itself it is calculated to hold Ml. Whistler up to ridicule, but the question Is Whether it woes within tho license of privileged communication. Tlmt Is a matter for the Jury. A critic ought to be v. ihu enough to form a right Judg ment and bold enough to express it. If it be sn Imuest and fail criticism it is privileged, and whether In this ST'A'.Vf. s'T T Ulr lk n Point to be decided. The Lord t/hiet Juslice of Common Picas, in nslml lar care, pointed out that the plaintiff would mil be ?i ? .1 i , roV'ovt r damages unless lie could show that the defendant was actuated by malice. Me must show thut the defamatory mailer was published with out auy ground. Thus, in a case of literary criticism, considerable liberty i? allowed. fdc uuxxcx orsMKin The Attorney General said that he would call wit nesses on bah sit ot Mr. Ituskln quite as competent as those already examined. He mud that his client had criticised the pictures fairly and honestly. No doubt a grrut many artists would bo well phased It critics did not exist. There was more abuse i f critics than of auy other persona; but, after all, critics had their uses. Hu should like to know what Wkiuhl become of literature, of poetry, of orator) , of politics, of paint "'*,'' ,5 1 "i", ?Vi''"ble men?were to bo extinguished? If there was to be nothing but pi-aiso there would 1m? no incentive to t-aoul. He would not be able to rail Mr. nuakin, as he was Mr too u to attend. The jury had seen tho jiicturcs for themselves, and he asked them whether, it they had tc en exhibited to them before the elabo rate disquisition* which had been given by tbe wit nesses wuo had been examined, they would" not havo eolnu to llie conclusion that tlcsc paintings were slisngi and extravagant productions. Mr. whisticr took tuem to the Grosvenor Gallery and said, "Hero are boauMtnJ work , of art." Mr. Whistler might be right, but Mr. Luskni was of a different opinion, and nad not cutimdtUxl any uiisdeutcanor or uny breach or the duties and privileges of an Englishman be ? .uimc H* had dtoputnd Mr. Wlilnttar'* Vkir of hi* own pioUucliofiH. KHKiiK ALlH VENGEANCE. (From tho London World,] A wril authenticated story reaches inn uncut unr friend Hli' ro All. Among the Ritsisn mission lately received In Cnbul in found an outlawed Afghan of note. Ho ACirar ntOfBlMil the culprit himself, iuuI iu spite of tlm protest* of the unm r?l IB eliaigo o! the mission the delinquent paid tna penalty of hit rashness with bis head. JUDGE PrNCKNKV'S EXAMINATION. C1.LIIK IS'TllOXY Bi8 HTOE*?EX-AS nUKYMW TH.VIN OS THE STAND. At hall-past two o'clock ycsterilay ufteruoon tho formidable array of lawyers engaged in the Pinekney case arrived at the office of the Corporation Counsel, und immediately thereafter the referee, Mr. Buell, entered and took his place. The office was densely crowded, the case apparently growing in interest day by day. After some talk among counsel about threat* s.iid to have been made against the witness Anger* maim, c.vAssemblyman Alexander Thaiu was eallet! and testiiied as followsI have been a lawyer foi thirteen yt ars and have practised iu the district cour presided over by Judgu Pinckney; j had one case that came originally before the Judge named, but in 1871 it was removed to tho Court ot' Common Pleas; 1 had occasion to see the Judge lu a case which Hon. Fernando Wood placed iu my hands, not only upon the bench, but also In his private office; I took paper* to him for signature and fouud him iu a state of in toxication; tins impression was made on my mind, not only from his excited condition, but from tho odor of his breath; on tho occasion referred to, when I visited him in his private office, he wus then evi dently under the iiiflueuee of liquor, and this was between the hours of nino and ten o'clock in the raorniug; I liail some surety bonds which 1 wanted to file iu a case and weut to tho court repeatedly, bul could never find Judge Pinckney there. Ou cmss-oxamiuation Mr. Thaiu stated that the date when he had seen the Judge under the influence of liquor was November, 1877; that he did not notice anything about the room in bottles or glasses, and that be did not think his persistency in going to tha Judge to get a certain bond approved occasioned the excitement mentioned. A PXmtHXNT QUESTION. A very pertinent question waft here asked the wit ness by Mr. Beovey, of counsel for Judge Piuckuey:? y. As a lawyer, would you have asked the Judge to discharge his duty to you when he was in an in toxicated condition? A. Yes, I would. y. While tho case of Irving vs. Wood was pending did you ever see the latter iu the private office of Judge Piuckuey ? A. No. Mr. Patrick Anthony, the clerk of the Court, then took the witness chair, and his examination was con tinued. y. Did you ever state in your private office and elsewhere since those proceedings began that you "had got that , Judge Pinckney, where you wanted him anil that you would put him off the bench ?". A. No. y. How much money did you return to the Comp troller when you were clerk under Judge Stemler ? A. I cannot tell. / Q. Ix> you now keep any book account of moneys received for summonses, trial fees, Ac.? A. I keep a slip, a docket; that hi all. y. Don't you know that Judge Pinckney was suffer ing from fever anil ague? A. No. y. Did you give uuy money to persons to testify agsinst the Judge in this case? A. Not one cent. a judicial nunc. Q. You testified yesterday that you helped to giva the Judge an emetic iu his private room? A. Yes. Q. Do you remember when it was you went in a beastly state of Intoxication into tho saloon of Mr. M'-Manus, at the corner of Third avenue and Fiity scventh street, and had to be helped from then- home? A. No. y, When wcro you first rouiovei from the office oi clerk? A. In January, 1370. y. Who was appointed in your place? A. James U. Da vies. y. When were you next deposed? A. June 17, 1873. Sonic amusement was here occasioned by a wrangle among tho lawyers over what was called "indigna tion" meetings hold In Judge Pinckney's court room auil presided over by a "Sir. Jonathau Thompson? "with a p." Mr. Patrick Anthony also seemcil con fused In answering certain questions as to the de struction of judgment records. In the redirect ex amination Mr. Anthony testified that tho memoranda taken by him and placed in evidence were accurate, and that Judge Pinckney's doctor had told him that Pinckney would never recover If ho did not stop drinking. oxiiKB witnesses. Tho next witness was a young lawyer, who testified that he was admitted to the Bar iu May, 1H77; that Judge Pinckney often excused himself from the lamcli and remained away over an hour; when became bock he looked as if he'was under tho influence of liquor. This witness admitted his practice of drinking brandy, Clarence C. Hard was next examined. This person claimed to be a wlio'caule grocer. Upon erosa-exaini nation It was found that he occupied only a part o? an office down town, was a voluntary witness, and hud a case decided against him in Judge Pinckney's court. The investigation was adjourned until Monday afternoon at half-post two. THE SHEHIDAN SUIT. IMPOUTANT ADMISSIONS BY MORGAN JONES, JR.? THE I'LAIN TEST, WHALEN, ON T&H WITNESS STAND. A somowliat diminished crowd of spectators wai present at tbo Shuridau trial yesterday in the United States Circuit Court room, Judge Wheeler presiding. General Sheridan occupied liis accustomed seat un H early in the afternoon, when he left for bis hotel Ills brother, Lieutenant Colonel William Sheridan, remained to this close of the proceedings "fiie cross-examination of Morgan Jones, Jr., was continued by Mr. Bcckwith, who put in a written agreement in which the wituuss agreed with plaintiff, James A. Whalcn, to pay half the costs of tho suit and to receive half tbo profits iu case any verdict should be obtained against General Sheridan on the claim of <17. In relation to this partnership Morgan said that it had reference to tht business of planting cotton, sugar and corn; tbs plantations were never owned by them?the Lous Star, the Ezra Dans, the Quitman and the Eillona plantations were rented. Witness acted for James Condon, one of the owners mentioned in General Sheridan's order, and after repeated que.-tionings and much argument said that Slater, as far as the witness knew, was not on the plantation that day. The rt dirm t examination was then commenced by General llutlc-r, and the witness reiterated the story of the previous day that the bill of sale of the plan tation to Mark Hoyt was a "blind" and not a Um&fli* sale, and that the i>nrpo*e of it was to protect him self and Wlialeu from the proceedings of thoii creditors. A man named Stalil, who claimed to bs the agent of J. H. Slater, was put off the plantation by witness and Whalcn. They scared him out of bod, and be went off in a buggy, lor ho was a "scary" fellow and easily got rid or. There was a United States marshal on tho plantation from January to August of 1870. Mr. Wbalen, the plaintiff, was tho next witness. He testified in detail as to the value of the planta tion aud the property thereon. He said that be had worked a sugur cane plantation since PfciJ. When witness took possession of the plantation there was personal property of Mark Hoyt upon It. General Butler then read order No. 110 Is show thai it did not properly set l'orth the conditions of owner ship. Mr. llerkwith claimed that It did. Tho cross-exsmiuatiou of Mr. Whalen was then d? fcrrcd until Monday morning at eleven o'clock. A3 ASSIGNEE'S TROUBLES. New Yojuc, Dec. 6,1879. To thk Editor or tiik Hciuld The remarks of Judge Van lloescu, in the opinioa which lie rendered on denying my application for a discharge as assignee of John L. Barker, as published in your issue of this date, reflect so seriously upon my motives and action In that caao that I desire to insko an explanation of my connection with tho matter. At the request of Mr. Barker and solely to oblige him, ss ho said he conld not find any one to act as iris assignee besides myself, I very unwillingly accepted tbe as signment which ho made to me for the benefit of hie creditors. I expected no commission or compensa tion or any pecuniary benefit from it. I wished simply to help liiro. 1 expected him, therefore, to procure the sureties upon the bond which, as assignee, I win required to give. A meeting of ths creditors was called a few days after the assign ment was made. Only three creditors attended this meeting, and they, alter going over the accounts submitted to them, signed a paper agreeing to take twuntv-flve cents on ths dollar In payment of their clsima, iu notes of three, sU aud uiuu mouths, and agreeing that 1 should be discharged from my duties ss assignee, ami that 1 might execute a re assignment to Str. Parker of the property assigned to mo. This paper was afterward signed by all but three of Mr. Parker's creditors. As these three re fused to sign, and as I was unwilling lo trouble any of my friends by asking thoiu to go on tho bond for $10,hub or $17,<K? to oblige Mr. Parker, and ns 1 found the duties of as signee would seriously encroach upon my business 1 made efforts to got one of the creditors to accept tbe trust in my place. As lions of those to whom I ap plied would accept I made application, in, provided in section 6 of the net of 1N7H, aud obtained from Judge Lamnuors an order ioftbo assignor to show caus? why 1 should not be discharged, which was served on liitti six days before tho return. On the return day ho appeared and consented to my discharge. Tho ?? tton referred to provides that I lie Court, on petition of tho assignos himself on unties of not 1< ss than live day. to the as signor or such other person as the Court may proscribe, may discharge the assignee, tee. (Law* of 1878, chapter ;)1H, soct on <k) fudge Van Hoesen hoe thought lit to deny what tile law expressly gives iiih ths right to a?k. It any creditor, therefore, will do uis the favor to have me removed 1 snail be greatly obliged, a* i only ask to account and be disc barged. H EN KY A. MJUUOTTV.