Papurau Newydd Cymru
Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru
3 erthygl ar y dudalen hon
Family Notices
N BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, & DEATHS. Births, Marriages, and Deaths, should be sent to taVnf anus°ript, properly authenticated. We cannot under- arm f 8ear°h other papers for these announcements, whicn be^uently found obe incorrectly printed, or turr out 0.. BIRTHS. the • 'n9t> St- Thomas Green, in this town, Wjfe of Mr John Jone«, cabinet-maker, of a son. n 'he 17th inst, at Brick Buildings, Barn-street, the °f Mr John Eynon, of a son. %.fa'hel4th inst, at Goat street, in this town, the wue of Mr 0. V. Tippett, of a son. l^e 23rd instant, at Prendergast, the wife of Mr J On 50n' of » son.. ^9th u,t> at Saint Ann's Road, Hakin, Milford, Q °f Capt Wrn Prosser, of a son. Bevft instant, at Fishguard, the wife of Mr Henry 0 n. bmcher, of a daughter. Win: tbe 20th instant, at Fishguard, the wife of Mr On8*? ees» juP-» °f a son< th0i 6 ^Oth instant, at Fishguard, the wife Mr Thomas 01) all, ostler at the Commercial Hotel, of a son. %ij|. the 20th instant, at Fishguard, the wife of Mr Levi 0n81?s> tailor, of a daughter. *», the 24th inst., at Johnston, the wife of Mr John lunll, blacksmith, of a daughter. On MARRIAGES. the 10th instant, at the Calvinistic Chapel, Fish- t)inas' by the Rev D. Syromons, Capt J. Howells, of Jaitigg *88 ^ary Ann Davies, grand-daughter of Air On i road .surveyor, Fishguard. i instant, at Saint Mary's, Catholic Church, fordw„ Dock, by the Rev John R. Davies, of Haver- IW ^assisted by the Rev Oliver Murphy, of Pembroke fiave'w Chailes George llamsev, of Treffgarne Hall, the n"0rawest, to Edith Carpendale, second daughter oi On ,T Wi|Uam Toms. "Church 124th instant, (by licence,") at Saint John's ^•D vi nibroke Dock, by the Rev Geo. Fitzroy Kelly, H. \Yi?f.r Henry Williams, of the firm of Messrs J. and eldest ■Illani8' drapers, Main Street, Pembroke, to Mary, MeyriPtcRllter of Mr William Tiiorae, draper, &c., Street, Pembroke Dock. On the DEATHS. Joungoof j inst, at Withy bush Lodge, Anne, the aged 138 daughter of Mr John Davies, district surveyor* Q years. ^»en Pi6-n2n(i instant, at Portfield, near this town, Mr On ps* e'Hfa f2lst instant, at Hermon's Hill, in this town, ,0, ti° ll0u of Mr William Morris, cabinet maker, fa instant, at Meyrick Street, Pembroke aile te beloved wife of Mr George Mullis, aged feiatj8' deeP'y reSretted by a large circle of friends
Advertising
-=- edi ON'S BIOTEI*,TP, is certainly the best for CONSUMPTION, ASTHMA, R6s'c and'i ^ONGHITIS, and all diseases of the ?°ld Lungs and is invaluable in cases of Debility. Sft and wholesale only of Pearce & Co., teeet, Bristol. IFEWJENI8 PILLS.-These pills are more efficacious in 'to M'orlti ^ilitated constitution than any other medicine 'ecrf'^rine {.ers01's °* a nervous habit of body, and all who ivov 6 derail i11 H digestive organs, or whose health has Pih CQmnla;^?e bilious affections, disordered stomach, or ate ? fair triii Stould lose no time in giving these admirable t*Hi ■within" tl uShs, colds, asthma, or shortness of breath, inofl- ranSe of the sanative powers of this very "fe s. °*al or tme- The cures effected by these pills are not liel¡ 118111i1d a emporary, but complete and permanent. Thfiy Ce to delifo* J are efficacious, and may be given with conc- dte females and young children. Ih'^P'mant1 To LADIES.—At. this season of tha year, Linens f0r>rQCess of bleaching and dressing Laces « would tW0,pri,18 and Summer wear commences, v.r 'air readers » Particularly call the attention of W^ary jmD ° T0 the GLBNFIELD STARCH, an article of Is GI-ENFJP °Ce in the getting np of these articles, use „TAUCH is specially manufactured for tlsivelv'. ? 8uch is its excellence that it is now 8liiTs Laun^ 'n tl,e R°yal Laundry, and Her Maj- th us J 188 Prono,:nces it to be ti.e finest Starch ^er Maj°s'y's Lace Dresser says it is ii ^ls r ^as tr'e<^> an(^ was awarded two Prize its superiority. The GLRNFIKLD STARCH packets only, by all Grocers, Chandlers &c.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY. ROYAL DOCKYARDS. n (i 6 S i ves rose ca^ attention to the report of jtat Committee on Dockyards, and to move Vkya opinion of this House the number of ''Hiona] V diminished. The subject rtas one of D?011^' w^'c^ could be discussed more fully ou6*?.11^ occasion than if it were brought for- k> Wn to j Naval Estimntes. Various allusions l8ftty of redQ ^rom t'me to t'me as to "ie Possi" .•(» ISr^ our dockyard expenditure, and in ^Qlniittees Jr Sports were presented from two JaS. but ^la<^ t.aken the matter into consi- ^j^tioQ i how no direct motion dealing with the ,een brought under the notice of the hv6 shoulH however, had arrived when the L^le to a? endeavour to see whether it was not 5h V^si&2 p ct. some reduction in that large and W ^tljudic"X':>en(^ure* Se was not an advocate for *8 k rs> si °US economy in connexion with naval 'to 'Ifi n1106 ^le re8ar(ie<i the efficiency of our fleet of tfCessai'y to our safety and dignity. The th committee of 1861, founded as it was evidence of many distinguished naval rei!i Was entit,e(i t0 great weight, and he n three paragraphs from it which bore ^raDhn tlle P°5nt he Was ab0Ut t0 discass- Those •5 <lid Were t0 t'ie e^ect ,^at' the Public dock- v\, afford sufficient space in the floating a,teHyn in the dry docks for the larger ships, VW delay was cause^» which would be V vi)i ^ata^ sequences in time of war. tL^e uPon the report was another, presented L; thej^ttee °f 1864, in which they suggested \9 ttijg^^yards at Deptford, Woolwich, and Pern- SNsf e suppressed and disposed of, and the 1 })ratls^er>'ed to the larger yards, the money ) towg sale of the valuable sites being ap- \rre^ j^maeting the capital expenditure to be '^proving the larger dockyards. The ? 0 recommend that the last three of the h°uld be given up, in order to meet the t\4fea ofr^uirefl uPon sonle °f the others. Now, rlli* ^haf yards was in round numbers 900 yard exclusive of the vic- Was 38 acres, of Woolwich 56, of liV* Pembroke 76, making together 16 alon 1 ,S vv'hat would be the area of y„s satiS(f jV ,n l^e extensions were completed. ihf^s Wa«e 5 tlle cost of maintaining these l''he ne J 1rf^ out of proportion to the work ^'Shtesf1- •l"att^ey might be given up with- ttiXfc • e hJ r^i'° our naval resources. (Hear, ^'Pal-11,detail "v,01 i6en a^e to g0 through the iC^. iSnUlfhe.WOald Select a few of the d! Takin the cost of ,hese estab" ShSdr Ceilt ad/,1 /neSi' police' repairs, rates, *XtV°st in tued for 1late_nt superannuations, ^5% 2o.o;)0. wyeiai' ;Vor simplu man" V'OoA at>d t-PIu° 7,Ch' £ 4°'0y0 J Sheerness, 'ftC; Then th broke' ° £ 3°'000: or in a11 [V Hi s> bai-nl e 1was the ^pense of steam- IK h in all itf' and,every description of small hS) t Secretar y. amounted» as stated last KK *110,00*0 t0 Admiralty (Lord H. Stk S Probahlw' aild of thls sum at least r*r leferrin apPllcable to the four yards to V*S> i em "«• J UTI>« ""oval of stores was » W? '» Cut »4 he amounted te coatraot 8 per ton' thougli he had no wactov would undertake the work I at half the price. Again, at Sheerness the passing of about 9,000 tons of coal through the depots cost £6.000, or £7,000, or about 14s per ton, which, added to the original price, made the cost of the coals equal to what the Government paid for those deli- vered at Malta. These examples showed the scale of expenditure at the yards. Moreover, on going through them, which he had thought it right to do before bringing the subject forward, be had been surprised at the quantity of stores. Through the facilities afforded him by the noble lord he had been able to ascertain the issues of stores at the various yards, and to compare them with the whole balance in hand at the end of 1866, the value of which was £4,000.000. The stores of timber were worth £ 1,563,000, the year's issues being £ 225,000 the anchors £ 182.000, the issues being £ 7,500; the cables and chains of all sorts, £ 15<\000, the issues being £24,747; the canvas, £61.000, the issues being £4.650; and the cordage £ .210,000, the issues being £79,000. The issues to sawpits, mills, and shops for conversion were not included, bat these made no material alteration in the results. In round numbers the issues of the year amounted in value to jEl,100,000, while the stocks in hand were, as he had stated, £ 4,690,000. He thought these figures showed that the quantity of stores kept in the yards was excessive. Not only would the closing of three or four yards cause a saving in this respect, but it would involve a reduction in the staff of the Ad- miralty, which was now so overweighted that it could not give that close attention to the details of dockyard expenditure which was essential to careful management. Turning to the work done in the yards, he found that at Deptford the amount of tonnage to be built in the coming year was 1,628 at Woolwich, 1.937 at Sheerness, 372 and at Pembroko, 2,911 making in all 6,848 tons. Now, he believed there were private estab- lishments which, irrespective of ordinary shipping, built more ironclads in a year than these four yards put together. If the cost of building were less in the latter than in private establishments there might be a reason for keeping them up, but the very reverse was the fact. Upon this point he ha I a good oppor- tunity in forming an opinion from the contracts that were entered into for the building of gunboats, eight of which were built in private yards and eight in our dockyards. He found that the price of those built by private contract averaged £25 per ton, while those built in our dockyards averaged £33 per ton without the establishment or indirect charges. These charges had been estimated at 51 per cent., but believing that estimate to be excessive he would reduce it by one half, wh'ch would give a cost of X40 per ton for the gunboats built in our dockyards, as against jE25 per ton for those built in the private yatda. It had been said that the contracts taken by the owners of private yards had been com- pleted at a loss; but on writing to Glasgow he was told by the firm to whom the construction of one of them had committed that they would gladly under- take to build a dozen such boats at the price. Then, again, he noticed that there was a great discrepancy between the cost of the vessels built in one yard, and the vessels built in another. An ironclad vessel, for instance, of a little over 1,000 tons, built at Dept- ford, had cost £68,00ij, while the Daphne, a sister vessel, built at Pembroke, cost £56,000. This I might give rise to the impression that building was cheaper at Pembroke than at -Deptford, and possibly it might be so, but the Amazon, a sister vessel, built at thetllame place, appeared to have cost £82,000. He believed that if we could succeed in closing these yards to which he had alluded, there would be a saving to the country of close upon a quarter of a million a year, and that saving, he also believed, could be effected without in the slightest degree impairing the naval resources of the country. The great transition which had of late taken place in the construction of vessels, the increase in their size, and the chdnge from wood to iron had gone far towards placing the large private firms of the country on an equal footing with those Government establish- ments, and in support of this he need only refer to the statement made the other evening by the First Lord of the Admiralty, on the authority of the Con- troller of the Navy, that ships could be built in private yards in all respects equal to those built in the public yards. [Mr Corry.—'Iron vessels.'] I Then the size of these vessels rendered our present docks unsuitable. Out of our ironclads only ten could enter Woolwich, while from the hardness of the work it would be difficult to afford additional accommodation at Pembroke. Chatham, it was true, had received great extensions and was admirably protected. The smaller vessels, in case of distress, would very probably seek the nearest port in coming from the Baltic, and there several ports which could be made to afford every facility for the refitting of the smaller vessels. Chatham he regarded as the only port for our vessels to return to in case of disaster in the North Sea Portsmouth and Devonport would give sufficient protection in respect to St. George's Channel, while the graving dock now building at Cork would afford admirable accommodation for ships coming from the westward. He did not hazard these statements upon his own ouinion because this was a professional question, but he was borne out by the opinions of some of our most distinguished naval officers. It was thought too, by officers of ability who were perfectly able to form an opinion on the matter that we ought to concentrate our work more upon our larger arsenals, and that in spreading the completion of these yards over so long a time as we were doing we should endeavour to build them with greater expedition. It might be urged that the terms of his motion were vague, but he had inten- tionally left them so, because he thought it right that the House should only affirm the policy which should regulate our action, and that the details should be left to the-Admiralty. (Hear, hear-) He did not even attempt to suggest the number of yards which, in his opinion should be closed or the manner in which it should be done, because he believed that such questions were better left to the department. He would, however, offer a word or two with regard to what should be done with these yards. If there was a good market they might be disposed of, if not it might be a question whether it would not be better simply to close them and dispense with the services of a large portion of the staff. By the returns which had been furnished to the House, he found that the value of the buildings, inclusive of the land, at Woolwich, was £ 1,027,000; at Sheerness, EI,143,000 at Deptford, £ 412,000; and at Pembroke, £745,000, giving a total of something over £ 3,000,000. He would suggest the desirability of retaining Deptford as a victualling yard, and closing it as faras the building was concerned. It might be advisable, too, to retain the factory at Woolwich, but he would suggest that the whole system of management should be altered, that one of our most experienced dockyard engineers should be placed at the head of it, and that the ordinary common-sense principles which govern pri- vate yards should regulate the management of the factory. With those alterations he thought the factory would become a most useful appendage to the navy. Sheerness, from its proximity to Chatham, was, to his mind, almost useless, and though Pembroke appeared tp possess some value as a building-yard, the expense of maintaining that establishment was entirely inadequate to the results obtained. It might be said that we could not suppress any of these yards until Chatham was completed, but he could not see that there was any connexion between one and the other. He was aware that the subject was not a popular one. The friends of Deptford, Wool- wich, and Sheerness would, of course, insist upon the fact that their names were most intimately associated with some of our brightest memories, but the reform was one that was needed, and in which he believed they ought all to take their part. The hon. member concluded by moving—'That, in the opinion of this House, the number of dockyards should be di- minished.' Mr Corry acknowledged that the question was well worthy the attention of the House and the Admi- ralty, but reminded the hon. member that he was the very member of the Dockyard Committee who had proposed to recommend the abolition of the river dockyards as soon as the Chatham yard was com- pleted. The hon. member had stated that there was no connexion between the completion of Chatham dockyard and the object he had in view—namely, the suppression of the small river dockyards but the committee attached great importance to the com- pletion of the Chatham dockyard before the others were done away with. It was true that in the com- mittee of 1864 he had voted against the motion for the suppression of the then dockyards, but he did so because Pembroke was among them, for although he was of opinion that some of the river dockyards might bf given up, he deemed it most unwise to do away with Pembroke-dock. The hon. member had spoken of Pembroke as if it had been a fitting-out yard, whereas it happened to be the only thoroughly trustworthy yard for shipbuilding, except Deptford perhaps, because in all other yards the regular work was liable to be put on one side, in order that ships returning from long voyages might be refitted, and sometimes it was imperative that a transport should be put into good condition within ten days or a fort- night after her arrival. The importance of having one dockyard such as Pembroke at command was therefore obvious, and that alone was the reason which had induced him to vote as he had done. Had the motion been confined to Woolwich and Deptford he would have supported it. The hon. member had suggested the giving up of Sheerness, but such a proposal was rather premature, consider- ing we as yet know little of the capabilities of Chat- ham. Perhaps five years hence the Admiralty would be able to form a sound opinion on the subject, but at present he thought it would be unwise to abandon Sheerness,—a port which would be of the greatest use for speedy repairing in case of a war in the neigh- bourhood of the North Sea. He had spoken to the Controller of the Navy on the subject of Deptford, and discussed the question as to whether it should be given up except as a victualling yard they came to the conclusion that this could not be done at once, because, in addition to the fact that besides ships in course of being fitted, a very large quantity of timber and other materials were stored there. The expense of removing those materials would, of course, have been very great, so it was agreed that the best thing to do was to wait until the whole of the materials were worked out, and then to consider what should be done with the yard. Regarding Woolwich, his own opinion was that with three basins at Chatham, besides large steam machinery, and with other places for the repair of ships, Woolwich was scarcely needed as a dockyard, and might be dispenced with as soon as Chatham was completed. His hon. friend had adverted to the great expense of dockyard craft, and the conveyance of stores by dockyard labourers, thinking such work could have been done more cheaply by contract. That subject had been under the consideration of a committee appointed by the Admiralty, of which Sir Thomas Symonds was then president. The recommendations of the committee had been referred to the dockyard officers, and as soon as their remarks had been received the report would be laid upon the table of the House. No doubt, if the recommendations of the committee were carried out in extenso, a great saving would result. The question of the coalhouse was now being con- sidered. He was afraid his hon. friend had rather over-estimated the cost of salaries, rates, &c, at Deptford, Woolwich, and Sheqpess, and also at Pem- broke. The whole cost of salaries did not amount to £65,000; and since the report of 1864 had been made, suggesting the suppression of those yards, not a single farthing bad been spent by the Admiralty on any new works at any one of those yards. This showed that the Government had been holding its hand until a sound conclusion could be arrived at as to what should be done with the several yards. His hon. friend had spoken of the large quantity of stores in the yard; the most important item, however, was that of timber, and it was an ascertained fact that it was sound economy to use well seasoned timber; it was that, indeed, which made dockyard ships much more serviceable than contract ships. He believed he had shown on a previous occasion that dockjard built ships were, in the end, the cheapest. Of other articles which did not need seasoning the stock in the yards was very limited, and in no respect in excess of the wants of the service. His hon. friend had referred to the small quantity of building done in the dockyards. But Pembroke, as he had stated before, was the only yard devoted to building, all the others were liable to be called on to refit. The statement that the price paid for the gunboats was in excess of tenders received by the Admiralty last year had already been explained on a previous occasion. It had become a practice with some builders to seek to undertake Government contracts at a loss in order to obtain notoriety and attract the attention of foreign Governments and knowing that some of the tenders for gunboats referred to were below any profitable price the Admiralty wrote to their contractors in- quiring whether they had not overlooked something. They answer was that they wished to abide by the tender. It might also be mentioned that in some snstances contractors had applied for 10, 20, or 30 thousand pounds, money they had found themselves out of pocket on fulfilling a contract they bad ten- dered for at too low a price. All these things should be taken into consideration in estimating the differ- ence in cost between contract-built and dockyard ships. He was afraid his hon. friend had made in- accurate estimates of the matter, and especially so in the savings to be made in dockyards, but, in con- clusion, he assured him that at the proper time the matters he had referred to should receive the fullest consideration of the Admiralty. Mr Scourlield said that was the first time he had heard a complaint made of the want of water at Pembroke dockyard. He had seen the Great Eastern lying exactly opposite the dockyard at low water and remain there for some days, and it was well known that some of the largest ships of the navy, had been built and launched there without difficulty. It was easy, when there was competition between the dock- yards and private yards to obtain low prices, but the house ought to keep in mind what would happen when the dockyards were diminished and they were left entirely in the hands of private contractors. Mr Alderman Lusk secunded the motion. Mr Danish said he happened, to see the Great Eastern lying at Pembroke, but there was no in- tention of taking her into dock. He was surprised that the right hon, gentleman should propose to maintain Deptford on account of the stock of tim- ber there. Unless it were desirable on other t grounds to retain that yard, it would be better to sell the timber and do away with the establishment. (Hear.) If the Admiralty could make up their minds to get rid of the smaller yards, which they acknowledged would be desirable, the better way would be to do away with them at once. Mr Childers said there was one slight incon- venience attending this debate, and that was that the House was not in possession of the whole policy of the Government, nor would it be until his right hon. friend should make his statement on moving the Estimates. He did not think however that time had been entirely thrown away, because it would be next to impossible to induce the Ad- miralty to bestir themselves in this matter without a smart debate in that House. He wished to state distinctly what his own views and those of the late Government were, and to show that those views bad been unfortunately departed from. He did not quite agree with the hon. member for Liver- pool as to the value of Pembroke Dockyard. It was quite clear to him that it would at present be disadvantageous to give up Pembroke altogether as a building yard. There was a great public ad- vantage in having one yard at which building only was carried on, while, on the other hand, it was useful to have building and repairing conducted in other yards. He would say, however, that Wool- wich Dockyard ought to be given up at once, and some steps ought to have been taken in that direc- tion long ago. The late Government had deter- mined not to do anything which would prevent the giving up of Woolwich as a dockyard. But what was done in the course of last year ? Why, instead of carrying out what their predecessors had pro- posed, the present Government put up more machinery and built more ships there; so that, though steps had been taken for gradually giving up Woolwich Dockyard, that policy was distinctly reversed by Her Majesty's Government. He hoped his right hon. friend would fully explain how that had occurred when he should move the Estimates. \s to Deptford, he doubted whether it was possible to build ships economically there, though it would be always useful to have a certain amount of stores and basin fcccommodation in the place. He should like to have the opportunity of asking his right hon. friend the Secretary of State for War whether he was not aware that there was part of Deptford Dockyard which might be of great use for military purposes, and whether it would not be more econo. mical to turn this to account than to incur the enormous expenditure which, he regretted to see, was contemplated by this year's Estimates. Sheerness, although a wretched place, was a most extravagant dockyard; and when the works at Chatham were finished he sincerely hoped that ex- penditure in this quarter would come to an end. The expenditure direct and indirect upon Deptfoid, Woolwich, and Sheerness Dockyards was not less than £450,000 a year. lie hoped that the Board of Admiralty, acting under the strong pressure of opinion in that House, would take economical action in the directions he had indicated. Mr Graves said, in explanation, that be had quoted from the official figures, of which he had no reason to doubt the accuracy. The motion was then by leave withdrawn. PAPER BOAT.-They have a paper rate-boat in Portland. It is 3lAft. long, 12in. wide, and weighs but 221b. The ligntest wooden boat of similar dimensions weighed 4llb. The most singular part of the matter is that the paper boat is four times stronger than one of wood. All that portion save where the skuller sits is gas-tight, so that in the event of a race sufficient gas may be taken into it to reduce its weight to 81b.—-New York Observer. o THK LUTON MURDER.- William Worsley, con- demned last week at Bedford Assizes for the murder of William Bradbury, at Luton, is to be executed on Tuesday, the 31st inst. He is in a very depressed state of mind, and pays reverent attention to the chaplain's daily ministrations. The Bedford borough magistrates have memorialised the Government to hurry through the Private Executions Bill in time to meet this case. A requisition to commute Worsley's sentence is also being signed, on the ground that Levi Welch, who was sentenced to fourteen years' trans- portation for assisting to rob the murdered man, was equally culpable with his companion in the brutal crime. THE TODMORDEN MURDERER.—The English Inde- pendent, in an article on the Todmorden murders, without any wish, as it says, to extenuate the mur- derer's guilt, tells the following story :—' When. Miles Wetherill was an infant in its cradle his father happened to come in one day during his mother's temporary absence, and was seized with some cruel impulse to take the child out of his cradle and put him in a drawer. When his mother returned and inquired for her child the father professed ignorance, and aggravated her distress by telling her that he had seen a woman piss by some time before, who had doubtless stolen him. For two hours he allowed her agony to continue, until by accident she found the child in the drawer where he had placed it. Such story any one may hear in Todmorden to-day. If vices run in the blood as well as other things, surely here was a germ of murder, or any cruelty that might develope itself in generations to come.' THE FENIAN PRISONERS IN NEWGATE.—Up to Sunday evening the authorities at the Old Bailey had received no intimation of any special arrangement, if any such be in contemplation, for the trial of the seven prisoners now in the gaol of Newgate on the charge of murder in connexion with the affair at the Clerkenwell House of Detention, or of the two. charged with treason-felony. The next session is fixed for April 6th, but there is a very general im- pression that the trial of the Fenian prisoners will not begin until the following Monday, though nothing is yet definitely known in- that respect. A longer interval than usual will have elapsed by the time that the next session comes round, and as the ordinary business usually lasts the greater part of a week, and may on that account be still more pro- tracted than ordinarily, it is hardly likely that the approaching State trial, as it may be designated, can commence until the week beginning the 13th of April. As repects the prisoners there is reason to believe that the poorer of them will be aided to a limited extent in their defence by assistance froni the Sheriff's fund, but we understand that will be confined to feeing counsel, and will not extend to the payment of any preliminary expenses connected with their defence, unless they are expenses attendant upon preparing copies of depositions given before the magistrates In other words, expenses incident to the preparation of briefs for counsel, we have reason to believe, will not be borne in any way from the Sheriff's fund. On principle, and for obvious reasons,, the fund is ordinarily dispensed in enabling the very poorest prisoners, especially women and foreigners charged with grave crimes, who may be friendless in this country and destitute, to procure counsel, and in affording them a little needful aid on leaving prison at the expiration of sentence; but this will be an extraordinary inroad upon it,-—limes.