Weekly Mail

WHY MARSHALL WAS EMPLOYED. The fifth day of the Watt trial was entered upon on Tuesday at the Central Criminal Court, before Mr. Justice Phillimore. MR. WATT AS WITNESS. Mr. Hugh Watt left the dock and entered the witnees-box. As he took has place there was some stir in the crowded court and a. quickened interest in the proceedings. Mr. Watt was cool, and gave his answers with readiness and, indeed, with a volubility which Mr. Muir, who examined him, occasionally cheeked. He related in some detail his matrimonial differences up to the time when he consulted Sweeney, the partner of Mar- shall. He engaged the firm to keep watch on Mrs. Watt, and in the course of a. few days he had a telephone message to his house from Marshall saying that he had important information that Mrs. Watt was going to Ostend. Witness answered that he did not believe it, and Marshall was not pleased, a.nd shut down the telephone. Witness said, "If that is a specimen of your information I will give you 48 hours to end the inquiry." Marshall said if he was to follow the lady to Oetend he should require £250, but witness refused to give him aaiy such sum. He gave Marshall JE10 for his services, and he was not satisfied. I admit," Marshall added, "that Mrs. Watt is not going to Ostend, but I hear she is going on a. motor trip. May I follow her?" Witness replied, "Certainly not. Your reports appear to me to be absolute fiction, and I must ask you to go." On that occasion Marshall commented on a. case containing chloroform which was in the room, and which witness said was used by Lady Violet, and he picked up post-cards, remarking, "If these are sent by your wife, I could get her twelve months." Witness said, "I don't want anything of the sort." On the 15th of August Marshall called and said it was almost hopeless for him to come to an arrangement with Mrs. Watt, and witness practically dismissed him on that day. TELEPHONE MESSAGES. On resuming after luncheon, Mr. Watt said that on the 16th of August he received a telephone message from Marshall that he had important infor- mation, but when witness wont to his office the next day Marshall said he had no such information. Witness then told him that he was to all intents and purposes useless, and added, "It's a. pity I have wasted my time with you." He then got up hurriedly, opened tho door, and went out. If Drummond or anybody else had been lying down listen- ing he should have fallen over him, as not a couple of seconds elapsed before he was out- side. Witness went home. and immediately telephoned to Marshall's office, giving instruc- tions that Marshall should send in his account. Mr. Muir: At any time did you ever make any such proposition to Marshall as he has suggested about murdering Mrs. Julia. Watt? Witness: No. Did you ever say a word to Marshall about getting a certificate of death for Mrs. Watt when she was murdered?—Never When further questioned, witness said he had employed Worley once or twice to make inquiries about. Mrs. Watt when she was living at a flat a.t the back of Victoria-street, and at the hotel in Norfolk-street, Strand, but it was absolutely untrue that he had even suggested to Woriey or to anybody else that they should injure Mrs. Watt. He had never given Worley a photograph of Mrs. Watt, nor a knotted stick as alleged. He had never had a conversation with Shuttle; in fact, he had never seen him in hia life. "BATTLE" AND ABRAHAMS. Continuing, witness said that on Saturday, September 16, a man called at his house and gave the name of Battle." Ho said he had tried to see the solicitor, but the office was closed. He then submitted a statement about overhearing the murder plot against witness between Marshall and M'Kenna. When he told the man that he would send the state- ment on to Mr. Freke Palmer the visitor said he had come in the interests of truth and justice." Witness gave him something to eat and some ginger-ale. It was untrue to say that he ever gave Lightfoot a. cigar. Mr. Mathews, the leading counsel for the prosecution, cross-examined the accused at length on his connection with Bernard Abrahams. Abrahams, he said. owed him upwards of £ 1,C00. He did not visit Abrahams at Maidenhead the Sunday following the day Lightfoot caJled upon him. He knew Abrahams had been in gaol, was a bank- rupt, a.nd had been struck off the rolls. He employed Abrahams for a brief period to verify the antecedents of Marshall for this case. When Lightfoot called at his house and Abrahams was there be did not give Lightfoot the name of his Jewish visitor as Mr. Rufus Isaacs. Witness had been to South Australia, and he received a letter of intro- duction from Lord Kintore, who was formerly Governor of the Colony, to people in Ade- laide. He had never had a conversation with Lightfoot about a Lord Kinloch." Further questioned, Mr. Watt said one reason for his dissatisfaction with the settle- ment was that it did not enable him to make proper provision for Lady Violet Watt and any possible children. Ho was always a.nxious that the decree nisi obtained against him should be made absolute. Ho was not incensed at Mrs. Watt in consequence of the existing condition of affairs. The inquiry was farther adjourned.

LADY VIOLET INDIGNANT AT SECRET DOCUMENT, The case WfUI resumed on Wednesday. The accused again entered the witness-box, and waa further croearexamined by Mr. Mathews, leading counsel for the prosecu- tion. He said tha.t when Lightfoot and Bernard Abrahams met at his house he did not introduce them. He never remembered telling Lightfoot the name of Bernard Abra- hams. Lightfoot recanted his evidence on the 12th of October, and Abrahams appeared to have left Maidenhead the following day. Abrahams had not communicated with him since. On the 2nd of August he had a friendly interview with Mrs. Julia Watt, at which throe things were discussed—the settlement of the difference between Mrs. Watt and Lady Violet, a modification of the settlement between witness and Mrs. Watt, and the question of making absolute the decree nisi. He had an interview with Mrs. Watt on the 4th of August, but it was not an angry one so far as he was concerned. Mrs. Wiift introduced Lady Violet's name, and he (witness) said Ju—ey, I cannot listen to that; you cannot expect me to do so." He did not know that Mrs. Watt angrily left the house without her hat. Worley had never demanded money from him, a.nd had never threatened any hostile action unless he gave money. MARSHALL'S DEMANDS AND THREATS. Mr. Mathews: Has Marshall ever demanded money?—Yes, every time he came he demanded money. He demanded £250 for following Mrs. Watt to Ostend and for watch- ing her on. the motor journey. Has Marshall ever threatened hostile action?—Yes, on the 15th of August he repeated his demand for £250, and I refused it. As Marshall left that day he mumbled something about making it hot for me. Have you ever made that statement before? —Well, I don't know that I ever made that statement before yesterday. Was it ever stated in court until yesterday that Lady Violet heard the conversation between you and Marshall a.t your house? Mr. Avory (interposing) said this was not gone into at the police-court because when the magistrate intimated his desire to oommit the accused reserved his defence. The Judge: Unless they were going to disclose the whole of their defence I cannot see how this could have been gone into at the police-court. Mr. Avory: It would have taken a. month or six weeks to have done 00. JUDGE COMMENDS THE DEFENCE. The Judge: I will go further, Mr. Avory, and say that in a dire conspiracy, such as is sug- gested, the defendant was quite right not to give those he considered conspirators any opportunity. Generally, I don't like people reserving their defence, but I think this was. quite a proper case in which it should be done. At the request of the foreman of the jury. the judge put the question to the accused as to whether he had ever been accompanied by "Lord Kintore" or "Lord Kinloch" in Hyde, park. The defendant replied, No, never." The Foreman Then we must rely entirely apexm Lightfoot's evidence in regard to the supposed interview between him and" Lord Kinloch and Rufus Isaacs." The Judge: Quite right. There is no other evidence. Mr. Watt then left the box, having been under examination for five hours and a half. LADY VIOLET IN THE BOX. Lady Violet Beauchamp Watt followed him into the witness-box. She stated, in examina- tion by Mr. Avory, that Lightfoot had never-- been at her house in company with men whe were sup- posed to be "Rufus Isaacs" and "Lord Kin- loch." There was no truth whatever in the story. There was never any interview between Bernard Abrahams and Lightfoot in which there was discussed the evidence which Lightfoot was to give. Mr. Avory: Now, Lady Violet, I a.m sorry to have to put it to you, but I must do so. A secret document was written by Lightfoot, in which he stated, for the information of the judge, jury, and counsel, the reasons which had induced him to give evidence beyond the financial reward which was offered to him. (Handing witness the state- ment.) There it is; what have you to sa,y to it? Lady Violet (angrily): It is a gross fabri- cation of lies and most libellous. Further interrogated, Lady Violet said that on the 13th and 15th of August Marshall was at her house. Mr. Avory: Was anything said about Mr. Watt proposing to murder Mrs. Julia Watt? —Never; not a word. Were there .any words between them which suggested that Mrs. Watt was to be .chloro- formed, and Dr. Blake was to certify death from heart disease, and then she was to be cremated?—Nothing of the sort. On the other hand, what did you, hear?—I hea.rd Marshall ask Mr. Watt for £Z50. He said, "If you don't give me £250 I will make it hot for yon." Witness was then cross-examined at length by Mr. Mathews as to the visit of Lightfoot to their house. She denied that Lightfoot ever met Bernard Abrahams there. UNDER CROSS-EXAMINATION. Laxly Violet was subjected to further cross- examination by Mr. Mathews. She was seated, and occasionally fortified herself with a smelling bottle. Her answers were pitched in a high tone and were direct and incisive. When Marshall came to the house on the occasion when she said she overheard the conversation she was (she said) in an adjoining room. Marshall and Mr. Watt met in the library, and, as she was only dressed ion her dressing-gown, she went to the next room. She did not go into the room for the purpose of eavesdropping. Marshall said he wanted the £250 for his expenses in connection with endeavouring to bring about the settlement with Mrs. Watt. Mr. Mathews: Expenses. How incurred?— Well, Marshall never settled with Mrs. Watt, and it was a sort of blackmail, I suppose. Witness added that she heard all the con- versation between Watt a.nd Marshall. There was a reference to post-cards, but no state- ments so far as she could hear whioh reflected on Mrs. Watt. She had never heard Mr. Watt say anything against his former wife. The conversation was chiefly with reference to the settlement. AT THE OAFE MONICO. Counsel for the defence then dealt with what happened on the nights of the 24th or 25th of August when Lightfoot alleged that he met Watt with Lord Kinloch" in Hyde Bark. Mr. Church, managing clerk to Messrs. Michael Abrahams, who are conducting the defence, stated positively that he dined with the defendant and Lady Violet at the Oafe Monioo on the night of the 25th of August. Joseph Peter Wiertz, a manager at the Oafe Monico, corroborated the evidence of Mr. Church that he dined there with Lady Violet and Mr. Watt on the 25th of August. Witness's books also showed that Mr. Watt &nd Lady Violet dined there on the 24th of that month. This concluded the evidence for the defence, and Mr. Avory then addressed the jury. Mr. Mathews then summed up to the jury on behalf of the proeecu/tion. At 6.40 the inquiry wae adjourned.

"A MOST AMAZING CASE." The Old Bailey was crowded on Thursday when Mr. Justice Phillimore began to sum up to the jury on the Waitt case. This is the seventh day of the trial- Lady Violet Watt occupiod a seat in court, a.nd many ladies had assembled to watch the closing scenes of the extraordinary proceedings. His Lordship said they were coming to the end of a troublesome and difficult case—one of the most amazing and remarkable of modern times. The charge against the defendant was that he had invited throe I separate persons to murder his former wife. It had been suggested that Mr. Watt must have been insane if he did any of the things attributed to him. His lordship advised the jury not to ride away on the ground of Insanity, for the law believed everyone to be of sound mind until the contrary was proved. No evidence had been given to show that the defendant was insane. They must, therefore, have the courage of their opinions, and, if tbey thought he was guilty, they must find him guilty as A SANE MAN. There were two most important things to consider in this case—the character of the witnesses and the motives of the parties. The judge them detailed the matrimonial disagreements between the defendant and his wife and his association with Lady Violet Watt. The arrangements in regard to the settlement they must bear in mind were extremely inconvenient to Mr. Watt, so much so that the defendant offered Mrs. Watt what appeared to be very liberal terms in order to alter the settlement, but those terms were refused by Mrs. Watt. Having remarked that the registrar at Brighton had mis- taken the law in attempting to marry Mr. Wa.tt and Lady Violet, his lord- ship resumed his comments OlD what he described as the broad grounds of the case. It was in the cirenmstanoes that the defen- dant could not get Mrs. Watt to get the decree nisi against hiin made absolute and that she would not agree to his proposals for a modification of their financial arrange- ments that the prosecution alleged that he desired to encompass her death. There were two improbabilities in the story as told by the witnesses for the wosecution. It was most important to consider whether a ma.n in the position of Watt would run the risk involved in inciting man to carry out a. murder. The second improbability was that, if he did, would he do it so roughly and bluntly as he did in the case of Worley? At the same time, if a man was going to have suah work done, he must employ base agents. There was a.n equally strong improbability tha.t these men would invent such a, story, and not only invent it, but persist in it and swear to it. If the case depended only on the evidence of Worley and Shuttle it would not bo a strong one, but the strength of the prosecution, so far as it had strength, rested on the combination of Woriey, Shuttle, and Marshall. Dealing with the CASE OF MABSHAlAL. his lordship observed that there was no doubt tha.t Marshall was an immoral man. It had been brought against him more than orboe (the judge proceeded) that fcewassevere in these matters, and tha.t he allowed him- self in criminal cases to be too much impressed on the ground of the immorality of the parities. He had had to hear that imputation, although he considered it a. mis- representation; but, that being the case, he did not think the jury would oonsider that he would be unduly lenient to Marshall. They must, however, have in view that if Marshall had been immoral so had Mr. Watt. DisouseLmg the allegation against Marshall that he had been attempting to levy black- mail, his lordship said he did not see how his action in giving information to the police could bear that interpretation. The foreman of the jury asked whether Marshall's partner, Sweeney, could possibly have had access to statements made to the police about Watt before he joined Marshall in partnership. His Lordship said it was a matter for their consideration, but Marshall, in his evidence, stated that he more frequently came into contact with the police after Sweemey joined. him. Proceeding, the Judge alluded to discrepan- cies in the evidence of the accused and Lady Violet on the occasion when it was alleged that Marshall threatened TO MAKE IT HOT." for Watt unless he gave him money, whereas, amongrit other things, the accused stated that he had a conversa-tion with Marshall about receiving improper postcards. Lady Violet said no such thing. Mr. Avory: Your lordship forgets, perhaps, that Lady Violet did say sdie overheard a conversation about postcards. Lady Violet (who was seated-in the gallery of the oourt) rose at this juncture, and excitedly exclaimed, "Yes, I did." The Judge: Yes, that is so, she did speak about hearing a con vers&tion about post- cards, but she did not give the particulars given by Mr. Watt. Referring to the sup- posed interview between Lighufoot, with Watt, and "Lord Kinloch" in Hyde Park, his lordship asked the jury not to rely upon it. In the first place, lightfoot was a romancer. In the second, his story was highly impro- bable; and, in the third place, Wa-tt had proved a complete alibi. They must not accept any part of Lightfoot's statement which was not fully corroborated. He went in detail through the evidence, and concluded by asking whether the jury considered tha.t Marshall had brought this grave charge out of revenge for not having received a large sum of money. They had to look at the evi- dence of Worley, Shuttle, Marshall, and M'Kenna on the one hand', and that of the accused and Lady Violet on the other, and to bring their best judgment to its considera- tion. His Lordship finished his summing up at 1.35, after speaking nearly three hours, and the jury, having put a few questions, retired to consider their verdict. VERDICT. The jury were absent an hour and three- quarters. Upon returning into court the foreman stated that they found defendant guilty on all counts. The judge, in passing sentence of five years' penal servitude, said he did not disagree with the verdict of the jury. If anything was wrong with the prisoner's mind the gaol authority could inquire into it. Accused looked anxiously round the court, and had to be assisted below.

FOOTPRINTS AS EVIDENCE. A SINGULAR CASE AT CARDIFF. Footprints aim quite as important to the police in tracking crime and criminals as fingerprints, and some interesting evidence was related by Ohief-detoctive Rankin and Detective George Powell at Oardiff Police- court on Thursday in a case in which Morris Shannon, 22, and John M'Kenna, 21, two la-bouring men, were charged with break- ing and entering No. 17, Hcmfray-streeit. in the occupation of Edward Oliver, with intent to commit a felony. Prisoners lived next door, and frocn the evidence of the chief of the detective staff it seemo that he found a, window at the ba.0k of Oliver's hrfuse forced with a knife, and the finger-marks hitd been carefully wiped away. The sleuthhounds were not baffled by that, for they actually alleged that a flagstone inside had been trodden upon by a pair of boots patched on the sole, which contained nine sprigs on one particular port and eight on the other. These marks, they alleged, corresponded with Shannon's boots, which were now produced, and they further alleged that the footprints led to a soap-box standing near the wall that separated the two houses. M'Kenna,, in defence, called a youth named George Elliot to prove that he had gone up- stairs to bed, ajid then came down and told the others that there was a. man in his bed. They had a game of cards until the lamp went out, aft-er which Elliot fell asleep. When he awoke (about 4.30, or later) both prisoners were still there, and Shannon asked witness to go, for some tea and oakes to a neighbour- ing tavern. Shannon was committed for trial at the quarter sessions, but M'Kenna was dis- charged. The prisoner asked for bail in £10, but Court-sergeant Price said that Shajmon was a man of no scruples, and bail was refused.

MINER AND SUNDAY LABOUR SOUTH WALES CONTRACTORS SUED. A case interesting to miners came before Truro County-court on Tuesday, when Alfred Saull, a miner, of Camborne, sued Piggott and Sons, contractors, of Liverpool and South Wales, for £ 82, being £60 in lieu of three months' notice, JE20 passage money from India, and C2 conduct money retained by defendants.—Plaintiff's case was that he worked for defendants as pit-sinker in Corn- wall and South Wales, a.nd towards the end of last year accepted an offer from defen- dants to proceed to Mysore, India, to sink a shaflt there. He signed an agreement to work the same shifts as in England, viz., three shifts a day, six days a week. After a time plaintiff and the other miners were requested to work Sundays, but they pro- tested. Defendants refused to pay his passage home. Mr. Holman Gregory, for the defence, con- tended that a. verbal agreement had been entered into to suit the men, who wished for a six-hour shift on Saturdays, and the only warv to do it was to run one shift from seven o'clock on Saiturday night to one o'clock on Sunday morning, and that was the shift pomplained of. He suggested that plaintiff wa/nted to come home, and made an excuse to break the contract and return. The Oourt gave judgment for plaintiff.

[Qan IDRISWYM."] GWTLIAU LLAWEN A BLWYHDTH iNEWYDD DDA. Mia/e'r hen gyforchiad 'lend Yn newydd fel y wawr, A oharia yn ei gylfin Fendithion gorou'r llawrj Er pob rhyw gyfnewidiad, A throion dyrys ibyd. Fe erya cyfedllgarwoh.— Mae hwn yr un o hyd. A dyma. fy nymum&ad I ahwi o galon tmJr- Bood i ohwi Wyliau llawen A'i saiD. o fur i fur; Pam wa.wrio'r Flwyddyn NewyxM< Boed iddi fod yrs llawn— Yn llwythog o drysorau A'oh gwna yn dd edwydd iiwm.

-:0:- "CYMRIC RHAGFYR. Dyma rifyn olaf y nawfed gytr°l^i hugain o "Cy-inru," ac y mae'n un o r rha; mwyaf toreithiog sydd wedi ymddang, o'r cyhoedddad oenedlaethol bwTiw. » reua gyda "Breuddwyd Nos Nadohg, gan Gwyneth Vaughan; yna daw c$ yrohion dau gawr a fu farw yn yst°a J mis diweddaf, sef Watcyn Wyn a'r D. Lloyd Jones. "Penillion telvn" £ e ,c waith y cyntaf, a "Ohladdfeydd Hy^ Prydarn" gan y rolaf, a hvsbysir ni 1T1 dyina ysgrif ddiweddaf y lienor coetn Landina'in. Yr vsgrifau eraill ydy,n y "Craig y Forwvn," gan y Parch. Jones; "Hen Dy Rhufeinig," A. M01' | "Gwibdaith Haf," gan y "Ysgol Sul Rhostryfan," J_. TVilliani » "Hen Olygydd y 'Drych, J. B. "Owilym Gwenog," E. B. "Enwau Lleoedd," Parch. R. E. Morris "Cartref Gladstone," Parch. E- Roberts; yn nghyda darnau "gan rai o'n prif-feirdd, a Oharol Nad £ —y geiriau gan J. M. Howell, Aberaeron, a'r gerddoriaefh gan Mr. L. J. Robe > Rhyl—y naill a'r Hall yn llawn ys Pi.i iaefa. Bydd y rhifyn nesaf yn un ac yn cynwys yr amrywiaeth mwyai erbhyglau, a barodoniaeth,a darlunia welwyd mewn cyhoeddiad Cymreig erl°, o'r biaen. Nid yw y golygydd yn ra^ j arbod traul na thrafferth yn y „ VTJ mwy na'r gorphenol, i wneud "Cymru deilwing o draddodiadau goreu yr genedl ao yn gylcihgrawn ag y ffxostio ynddo o ran cynwys a aawya.

SWANSEA LAW CASE. THE HARBOUR TRUSTEES FAIL. Is the King's Bench the case of the Swansea Harbour Trustees v. the Assessment Committee of the Swansea Union and the Overseers of the Parish of Swansea, which was argued before a. Divisional Court nine or ten days ago, came again before the court on Thunsday for judgment, which was delivered by the Lord Chief Justice. The question raised was the right of the local authorities to levy rate upon certain hereditaments, described as docks, railways, and appurtenances, on which the gross estimated rental was put at £33.900 and the ratable value at £ 22,900, and the total rate to be collected, if the local authority were right in the principle of rating for which they contended, at JE2,390, but the amount of the rate was not so much in question as the principle upon which the rate was to be levied. The facts were stated in threat detail in the form of a special case, and the questions left for the decision of the oourt, which consisted of the Lord Chief Jns- taoe and Mr. Justice Lawrance and Mr. Jus- tioe Ridley, were:- 1. Whether the appellants are in or have ratable occupation of the town float or North Dock itself, and the basins, Ac., connected therewith or any, and which of the subject matters or any, and which. parts thereof? 2. Whether the respondents have rightly included the town float or North Dock itself, and the basins, Ac., connected there- with in the assessable premises? 3. Which of the rates or dues (so far as not admitted by the appellants) can be included ill arriving at the gross and rat- able value of the assessable hereditaments? In the result the Court was of opinion that on both the substantial points at issue the appellants failed, and the appeal was dis- missed with costs.

HUMOUR IN THE SCHOOL TEACHERS' LATEST COLLECTION OF YOUTHFUL SAYINGS. Another large batch of stories from the eetooolrooms will appear in this week's "Schoolmaster," with an introduction by Dr. Macnamara, M.P. Here are a few typical specimens of schoolboy humour (there are sixteen pages in all), and every story worth reading: Excused.—"Plese eur mister will you eecua Charlee not been to soool as he as got no trouses and is farther wont let him come without—your torueley Mrs. B- The Point of View.—Overheard in infants' playground. Little Girl: "It's my grannie's I funeral to-day. I've got threepence halfpenny and a packet of sweets already." It Is Possible.—During a Scripture lesson, which was being taken by a clergyman, some boys were asked each to give a text from the Bible. One lad said, "And Judas went and hanged himself." "Well!" said the rev. gentleman, "that is hardly a good text," anu, pointing to another lad, asked him to give a text, and the lad said, "Go thou and do like- wise!" 'Xu.ff Said.—A tiny tot in the babies' room waa being scolded by her teacher for having dirty hands. "You naughty child! How dare you come to school with those dirty hands?" With tears streaming down her face the little tot answered, "Please, teacher, I ain't dot no more!" Anon came a reading lesson from a. his- torical book. A child read: "Edward VI. was a pious young man." "What kind of a man is a pious man?" queried the student. Every hand was outstretched, and the teacher smilingly pointed to a pupil to answer. With self-reliance derived from the previous lesson the child boldly replied, "A man full of pies." He Would Have E.ight.To a class of six- year-olds an inspector applied this test: "If I gave you four rabbits and your mother gave you three, how many should you have?" Pointing to a fad in the front row he reoeived as answer, "Eight, sir." "Nay," said the inspector, at the same time raising three fingers on one hand and four on the other and repeating his question. The little fellow replied cheerily, "I should, sir; I've got one at home." Quaint.—Infant teacher, giving a. leeson on "The Bear," and speaking of his thick, warm coat: "And can the bear take off his coa.t like you can?" "No, teacher." "Why cannot the bear take off his coat? "Please, teacher, because only God knows where the buttons are." Making Flies.-The following is a true can- Tersation between a. bright little chap ot four and his mother:- "Mamma, who made the lions and the elephants?" "God, my dear," she answered. "And did He make the flies, too," asked the little fellow. "Yes, my dear," replied his mother. The little chap paused awhile, aa if ponder- ing the matter over, then said, Fiddlin work making flies." He Knew.—A teacher in a. Welsh rural school was breaking up for the Easter holi- days. He asked the class what the following day was called, and got the answer in the vernacular that it was "Dydd Gwener y Groglith" (Good Friday). He then asked what this was in English, and one five-year-old quickly translated it into "Hot cross buns." What Would be Left.-The teacher was giving a lesson on the hurman body, and, having spoken of the head and the trunk, wanted to get the name "limbs from his class. "Supposing," he asked, "we could take away the head and the trunk from a body, what should wo call what was left?" Up went several hands, among them that of a lad not roted for precocity, and him the teacher selected, with, "Well, Johnson, what do you say?" Pleasant recollections of the Christmas goose must have prompted the answer which came from the eager Johnson, "Please, sir, the giblets!" Lightning.-A little girl of three years old was one day looking out of the window and watching very intently a severe storm. All at once, when a. flash of lightning was seen, she said: "God has just struck a match." On Me Left Hand.—A teacher was recently questioning her class, Standard 1.. upon the cardinal points. Several questions had been answered, when the teacher said to one of the girls, "Now, Sarah, if you stood with your face towards the south, what would you have on your left hand?" Without the slightest hesitation came the reply, "ringers!" Philosophical.—" A little boy friend of mine, aged five years," writes a teacher, was rather naughty one day. Now. Master Frank, if you are not a good boy you won't go to Heaven,' said the Tlure. 'Oh, well!' pays he, I went with father in Mr. B-'s yacht, amd I went to the circus. A little boy can't expect to go everywhere! How You Would Come Out—Teacher was endeavouring to explain very carefully—and very effectually as it turned out-t,he meaning of Antipodes." Now," she said, if you could go right through the earth for 8,000 miles, where would you come out?" Out of a. drain pipe," replied a boy. Thoughtful—Billy, an urchin of five, going to school, takes an apple from his pocket, spits on it, and rubs it vigorously on his dirty and ragged trousers. "Hallo, Billy! What are you doing tha.t for?" Billy (holding up apple and looking pleased): 'Tis for teacher. Her wont ait un if he's dirty." The Reason Why.—The Scripture lesson that morning had dealt with the Creation, and the master, who, owing to shortage of staff had grouped the whole school together, was sure he had kept within the comprehension of the least intelligent of his mixed group, smilingly invited questions. Jim. a tiny boy with a white, eager face and large brow, at once held up his hand. Please, sir, why was Adam never a baby?" The teacher coughed, hesitated, and was in some doubt as to what answer to give. Lizzie, a little girl of nine, in Standard II., and the eldest of several brothers and sisters nearly as sharp as herself, at last came to the rescue. "Please, sir," she said smartly, "tfhere was nobody to nurse him."

SENSATIONAL EVIDENCE AT THE OLD BAILEY. PRISONER FOUND GUILTY I AND SENTENCED, At the Old Bailey on Friday the trial was resumed of Hugh Watt, charged with inciting Herbert Marshall, a private inquiry agent, and others to murder Mrs. Julia, Watt a.nd Sir ReginaJd Beauchamp. Marshall waa further cross-examined with the object of disclosing his moral character and the nature of his financial relations with the lady with whom he lived. An assistant to Marshall, named M'Kenna, deposed to hearing accused say to Marshall that Mrs. Watt must be snuffed out, and he suggested chloroforming as a means of doing it. Witness subsequently made oat a. report which was submitted to the police at Scotland Yard. Cross-examined by Mr. Avory, the witness said that a man niamed Dromond (who is it and cannot attend the court) was employed along with witness in listening to the conversation between Watt and Marshall. On the day of hi3 arresl^-the 17th of August last—the accused telephoned to the office at about midday saying that Marshall must send in his account at once as he (Watt) waa leaving for the country. The depositions of Brumond a.t the police- court were read to the jury. This corroborated in the main the evidence of MKenna that defendant said to Marshall that Mrs. Watt must be "Sllutfed out." PARLOURMAID'S STORY. Mary Frances Maloney, a parlourmaid to Mrs. Watt, related an incident which occurred on the 4th of August when the defendant visited Mrs. Watt. There had evidently been a disagreement between them, and when witness saw him he said: "You know, Mary, I am a bit of a pugilist, and I oouid knock her out. in two seconds." He added that he would have Mrs. Watt in Pentonville, and that he would make it hot forher. Interroga.ted by Mr. Avory, the witness said that Watt had asked her to use her influence with Mrs. Watt to accept £600 a ye&r "to settle the matter." Dr. Blake, of Putney, who was the next witness, explained to the jury that he had prescribed certain chloroform found in deroo- danu 3 house, which defendant said was for experimental purposes." It was quite usual for a lady to have peppermint in her house. Avory; There was no truth whatever in the PuSgestaon that accused ever arranged with, him to grant a certificate saying that Mrs. Watt had died from heart disease. A SENSATIONAL TURN. was lent to the proceedings by the appear- ance in the witness-box of John Lightfoot (alias Norman Battle), who was convicted of perjury in connection with the case. He was accompanied by a warder. Questioned by Mr. Matthews, the witness said that he was in Hyde Park on the evening of the 25th of August, when he saw there Mr. Watt and another gentleman. He entered into conversation with Mr. Watt, whom he knew as one of the former members for Glasgow. Mr. Watt introduced his com- panion >as Lord Kinloch, equerry to the King. "LORD KINLOCH" stated that Mr. Watt was in trouble because ne wes being charged with having incited persons to murder his former wife. As they walked across the park "Lord Kinloch" said he was mstructed that the case should be hushed up, that Lady Violet Beauchamp was a. friend of the King, and his Majesty desired that the case should be hushed up. In order to supply a reason for that proceeding Lord Kinloch suggested that witness should give evidence at the next hearing before the magistrate. He undertook to do so at the instigation of "Lord Kinloch" and Mr. Watt. "Lord Kin loch" said that Lady Violet Beauchamp had received a letter from Lord Knollvs express- ing the King's desire, and that "everything had been arranged with the Marlborough- straet magistrate and the Treasury that an end should be put to the proceedings. "Lord Kinloch" told him that it would be a good thing for him, and that he was a lucky fellow. Mr. Matthews: He told you you were lucky? Witness: Yes, but I do not think so now (Laughter.) Witness went on to say that as the result of further negotiations with Watt he visited Watt at Knightsbridge, and was introduced to Lady Violet. Whilst he was there a gentle- man came who was described as Mr. Rufus Isaacs, K.C. who 6tated that the case was to be hushed up on behalf of the Treasury. Subsequently TTs discovered, however, that thi3 gentleman was a Mr. Bernard Abrahams Mr. Bernard told witness that if he would give evidence in favour of Mr. Watt he would receive £5.<n>and a good Government berth. Mr. Abrahams further said: It will be a good thing for your wife a.nd children." The Judge (sternly): Do not let there be any laughing or I will clear the court. Witness (proceeding) said that Abrahams told him how he was to give hia evidence, and explained to him that it was all settled as between the King and the Treasury. It was arranged that he should say that he overheard a conversation between Marshal] and M'Kenna. outside the Regent-street office disclosing a murder plot against Mr. Watt. The hearing was again adjourned.

A CONVICT'S SENSATIONAL EVIDENCE. The trial waa resumed on Saturday a.t the Old Bailey. John Lightfoot, otherwise Norman Battle, was brought up from Wormwood Scrubbs Prison for cross-examination. He said he had once owned a poultry farm, and last year dealt in pigs. He had been apprenticed to the printing trade, and followed it for fiftean years. He was 42 years old the day he was sentenced. He went to Paris in January of this year to gamble chiefly, and went with a gentleman whose name he could not remember. This gentleman was a photog- rapher. The reason why he went to Paris was beca-nse the Baltic Fleet Commission was sitting there. He knew a good bit about the Humber, and he want as a witness. The gentleman engaged him as a witness. The Judge: Have you recollected this man's name yet?—No. Mr. Avory: I shall want his address, too. Witness added that he was paid £3CO for going to Paris, but he was not going to give evidence at all unless it was absolutely necessary. He went to give evidence about the moving banks of the Humber. He had done plans of the Humber. He knew all about the Humber. Who was this gentleman a. representative of?—A representative of the Russian Govern- ment. I was not at all anxious to give evi- dence. (Laughter.) Continuing, the witness said he was paid by cheque. He could not remember on what bank. It was a London bank in the Kensing- ton district. He could not remember where he cashed it. FIRST MEETING WITH MR. WATT. The witness was next questioned as to his story of the first meeting with Mr. Watt m Hyde Park one evening. He was sitting on a seat when Mr. Watt and his friend came up and asked for a light. Mr. Watt handed him a cigar. He thought it was Mr. Wa.tt: he was certain it was that man (pointing to the dock). But he was not going to swear it. (Laughter.) Ho had had enough of that. (Laughter.) He had agreed in the Park to swear r-o something whiah he knew to be false, but he did it for two purposes. One was to obtain the £ 5*000 which. Mr. Watt offered him. The other reason was one which had never been mentioned yet in public. He had been thoroughly deceived into giving evidence by a. man who had been a member of Parliament, and' another who was a lord and the imitation Rufus Isaacs." Re-exa-nined by Mr. Matthews, witness was asked if he would write down the reason he had not made public for giving evidence, and being handed by the judge a half-sheet of note pa per, the witness wrote something on it His lordship, after reading the statement, banded it to ooansel, and it was then perused by the jury. The statement was not publicly disclosed, but his lordship said of it. addressing the jury: If—and, of course, we have not made up our minds on the point yet—if Mr. Watt and Lady Violet were capable of passing off Mr. Bernard Abrahams as Mr. Rufus Isaacs, then, of course, they might be quite capable of making this suggestion with as little founda- tion." After Mr. George Fuelling had been called to prove that Mr. Watt had bought a fruiterer's business in Earl's Court-road, Louie Bridger, a waitress in a Sloane-atreet restaurant, stated that she remembered Mr. Watt and Lady Violet Beauchamp lunching at the restaurant on the evening of Septem- ber 22- She believed the convict Lightfoot accompanied them. ALLEGED OVERTURES TO KILL. Thomas Woriey, of iiaet-etreet, Theobald's- road, who formerly kept a newspaper stall in Knightsbridge, near to Mr. Watt's house, gave evidence as to overtures which Mr. Watt had made to him to kill Mrs. Watt. In August, 1902. Mr. Watt asked him to go down to Hampton Court, where Mrs. Watt was staying, and strike her a blow in the stomach with the object of killing her. He took money from Mr. Watt, but did nothing, and made various excuses. In the following October Mr. Watt engaged him to go to the Howard Hotel, in Norfolk-street, where Mrs. Watt was staying, engage a room adjoining her apart- ments. knock her over the head, and chloro- form her. He did-not go. Next Mr. Watt proposed to him that he should run her down on his bicycle, and offered to give him JB50 if he hurt her seriously, and £100 and £1 a. week far life if he killed her. If successful he was to send a letter to Mr. Watt with the single word "Done," and would then receive £50. After a. lapse of several days he sent a letter as, arranged. Mr. Watt met him and gave him £10 on account, promising the balanoe when he had found out if she was seriously hurt. After this Mr. Watt asked him if he knew of a. man who had "done manslaughter," who would be likely to carry out his (Mr. Watt's) proposal, and witness introdnoed a man named Shuttle, otherwise known as "Nosey," who was supposed to have followed her to Harrogate. During the time they were in negotiation with Mr. Wa.tt he paid them at various times suims ranging from £1 to £10. The hearing was further adjourned.

EX-CONVICT'S EVIDENCE. The trial was resumed on Monday. James Shuttle, one of the men who alleged that Wa.tt wanted him to murder Mrs. Watt, then entered the witness-box. Mr. Mathews, who leads for the prosecu- tion, opened his examination by the ques- tion, "You have been convicted of crime on a. good many occasions, have you not?" Witness: Yes, sir. There are, I believe, four convictions against you for theft, one for attempted theft, and one for assault?—Yes; there are six convictions altogether. Witness then related the circumstances under which he became acquainted with the accused. He was introduced to Watt by Worley some three years ago, and one of the first ques- tions which Watt put to him was, "Have you ever done time?" Witness replied, "Yee; I have done three years for killing a woman." Watt then told witThe6S that he wanted him to go to the Howard Hotel, Norfolk-street, Strand, square the chambermaid, get a jemmy, and break into Mrs. Watt's room and chloroform her. Watt gave him leave to do the job. Is it true that you have done a term of penal servitude for killing a woman?—No, air. TO GET MONEY FROM WATT. Witness, further interrogated, said he made inquiries about Mrs. Watt, and dis- covered that she had gone to Harrogate, and witness, in order to get money from Watt, pretended that he had gone to Harrogate by having a letter sent to him from there. Watt told him subsequently that he believed he was a liar, a,nd would not give him any other money until he had "done the job." He, however, gave him a sovereign. Witness came into contact with Watt again in 1904, and the accused then did not recognise him, when he said, "Tom (meaning Worley) sent me. You want a job done?" Accused said, "Have you done time?" and witness answered, "I have just come out from doing five years for hitting a woman over the head with a bar of iron." That statement was not cor- rect. Watt suggested again that Mrs. Watt should be chloroformed, and he promised wit- ness J6100 as soon as the lady was put out of the way. On one occasion Watt gave him JE6, and he bought an overcoat with it, and another coat for a. man named Harvey, who assisted him on the job. By Mr. Avory: He was discharged from gaol on May Z7 for an aæauLt. Did Woriey know you got your living by tbJieving?-He might have done; I don't know. Did you make any disguise about it?—No. And you are not ashamed of it now?—Oh, yes; I have turned honest since then. For the last fifteen months I have been, living an honest life. TALK OF MURDER IN THE TRAIN. Further questioned, witness said he was to use the jemmy to force open Mrs. Watt's door at the hotel, and not to "persuade" the chambermaid. (Laughter.) He made up the story about Mrs. Watt's going to Harro- gate, and the letter from there was sent to Worley to show to Mr. Wait. This was all for the purpose of getting money. Watt told him to murder Mrs. Watt in tbe train on the way to Harrogate or in the hotel there. He did not say anything about murdering in the train when at the police-court. He told Watt that he had bought chloroform, but Watt did not ask to see it. Do you really represent that you. a man who falsely said you served three years rund five years' imprisonment for assaults on women, care about your past being exposed? —Yes, I do. Mr. Avory then addressed the jury for the defence, and before he had concluded his speech the court adjourned till Tuesday.

ALLEGED JEWEL THIEVES SENSATIONAL ARRESTS IN A LIVERPOOL HOTEL. During the temporary absence of Mr. Wil- liam Bird, a commercial traveller for a London jewellery firm, from his bedroom at the Union Hotel, Liverpool, which he locked and in which was stocked about £10,000 worth of jewellery, two thieves effected an entrance. They were, however, caught red-handed by the police, who were summoned on Mr. Bird's return, and on them. were found £ 600 worth of jewellery, which they had secured by pricing with a jemmy the cases in the room. After a desperate struggle, the men were secured. They were possessed of rubber gloves to prevent any clue by finger marks.

ijfj ~=^rsr- n., Iota's Jjj2rd k is well worth the trouble to keep the cruet s'up- plied with good Mustard. It is evidence of good household management. A well replenished mustard pot is the hall-mark of the cruet. It means satisfaction at the table. It puts an edge on the appetite, tickles the palate, and maices digestion easier. The housewife who likes to see the family or her guests "enjoy the meal" should always see that the tMstafd pot is right. colmds D. S. F. Mustard The Perfect Condiment. [ Rgg. S.H.B.

-:0:- CYMRU A'R BEIBL. Yeliydig iwythnosau yn ol, traddoclodd SYrr Alfred Thomas, A.S., arweinydd y Blaid Gymreig yn y Senedd, araeth a greodd dipyn o syndod, oblegid datganai ei farn na ddylai y Beibl g&el lie yn yr ysgolion dyddiol, ac mai gwaitii y rhain ydyw cyfra-nu addysg fydol yn unig-dim Ib i'r Beibl a dim o'i eisieu; drwg i gyd ydyw ei bresenoldeb, a dylid ei &au alla-n. Wei, fe ddymunwn ddweyd wrth Syr, Alfred ar unwaith tiad yw Cymra o'r un farn ag ef ac y bydd iddi ei wrthwyne'bu hyd at waed. Y mae wedi cael prawf o'r "addysg fydol," fel ei gelwir, yn y blyii- yddoedd a oietliant heibio, ac y mae ami gywilydd heddyw o'i hymddygiad. Fe gamryd y Beibl allan gan ugeiniau o Fyrddau Ysgol, a magwyd dwy neu dair ceniiedlaoth o Gymry liollol ddibarch i'r ''hen Lyfr" a phobpeth cysegredig. Ni wna wrando ax na phregethvr nao Aelod Seneddol na p'hroffeswr i gyflawni y fath gamwri eto; y raae wedi oael gormod o brofion o effeithiau damniol ei chamgy- mariad yn y gorphenol; ac fe saif hyd farw dros i'r Beibl gael lie anrhydeddus yn ho 11 ysgolion elfenol ein gwlad. Os yw Syr Alfred Thomas a'i gefnogwyr yn bwriadu gwthio y cwestirwn ar y wlad, y mae Cymru ynbarod 1'W gwrthwvnebu; a gallaf eu sicriiau nad arbedir mo honynt dan unrhyw amgylchiadau—fe'u gadowir yn gelaneddau o Dan hyd Beersheba, a bydd yr alanas yr un fwyaf nodedig gy- merodd le erioed yn hanes Cymru. GREDOAU NELLLDUOL. Gwir fod Cymru yn erbyn dysgn oredoau en wad neillduol i'r plant, ond y mae yr un mofr benderfynol dros fod y Beibl yn cael ci ddarllen yn ei holl ysgol- ion—elfenol ao mvchraddol, ac o fewn muriau ei cholegau cencdlaethol. Syl- f-aetia ei chrediniaetli ar egwyddor ddiogel a safadjwy, sef yw hyny, y dylai p-ob addysgiant fod yn gorphwys ar addysg y Beibl. Dyma'r unig reol an- ffaeledig a gydnabyddir gan Gymru; nid oas un ,nerth mewm addysg fydol ynddi ei hunan i SuT-no pymeriatd; fhaid cael rhywbeth i dreiddio i ddyfnderoedd enaid a chalon y plant; rhyw ysbrydiaet'h i'w gallao-gi i ymgyrhaedd at y ddelfryd uc'haf o gymeria* ac nid yw hwn w i'w gael yn U'. lie ond yn y Beibl. Does yr un addysgivtr na llyfr—hen na dhveddar— erioed wedi amlygn cyfundrefn o foeseg a wna lenwi holl anghenion dyn; y Beibl yn unig sy'n datguddio yr egwyddorion hyny a WTia ddyn yn ddeiliad teilwng o gymdei<th.as ac i ymddwyn yn urddasol at ei gyd-ddyn ac i barchu ac addoli ei Greawdwr. Am hyny, hawliwn y lie amlycaf ao anrfiydeddusaf i "Lyfr y llyfrau" yn ein holl sefydliadau addysgol; bod y plant yn cael eu dysgu i edrych arno fel llyfr ysbrydoiedig; a bod ei foes- wersi hanfodol yn oael eu hegluro gyda phoh symirwydd a ffyddlondeb. Nid ydym yn gofyn am ddim mwy, arc ni fodd- lonwn ar ddim llai-dtaid i ni gael y Beibl i'r ysgolion a rhaid i mi gael ei ddarllen i'n plant a'i egluro yn ei wir- ioneddau mawr a hanfodol am ddyled- swyddau dyn at ei gyd-ddyn a fehuag at Dduw. YE "HEN GORFF" YN S IAS AD YN BLAEN. Da genyf weled fod y Methodistiaid, trwy ysgrifenyddpwyllgor addysg y Gym- deithasfa—y Paxch. Aethwy Jones, Lorpwl—wedi dod allan yn gryf a, diamwys i wrthwynebu Syr Alfred Thomas a'i gyfeillion. Ymdda.ngosodd llythyr o'i eiddo yn y "British Weekly," a. gwna yn gIir beth yw golygiad y Method- istiaid ar Addysg Fydol. Dengys nad yw Syr Alfred yn cynrychioli barn y Cyf- undeb, nac ychwaith farn mwyafrif aj-uthi-ol trigolion Cymru. Ychwaneg na hyny, pasiodd Sassiwn Lerpwl gyda'r un- frydedd mwyaf y dydd o'r blaen y pen- derfyniad cryf a ganlyn ar y cwestiwn: — Mr. J. E. Powell, Y.H., a gynygiodd y pen- derfyniad canlynol ar Addysg Fciblaidd yin yr ysgolion dyddiol:—"Fod y Gymdeithasfa yn cymeradwyo yn ho11o.1. y J,reooerfynia.daro aa- Addysg Feibl-aidd ym yr ysgolion elfenol a baeiwyd o flwyddyn i flwyddyn yn y Gymamfa Gyffnedinol, a thra. yn wrtliwynebol i addysg enwadol yn. ysgolion oyhoeddnB y wilad. d.a.t- gaaaa ei hargyiioeddiad dwfn na ddylid mab- wysAadu unrhyw gyfrnndrefin o addysg nlad ydyw yn cynwys addysg Ysgrythyrol fel moddion i roddi meiithrmiad crefyddol a moeeol i'r plant sydd yn mynychn yr ysgolion. hyay." Gefnogwyd gan y Parch. R. Aethwy Jones, yr hwn a bwysleisiai ar y ffaith mai nid peth newydd oedd hyn. Yr oedd wedi ei basio am fiynyddoedd yn olynol gan y Gym an fa Gyffredinoi. Dyma'r aafle gym.er.ai y Cyfun- d<eb, ar gyfrif, laf, yr hyn ydyw addysg, eof adeiladu cymeriadaxi. Hetfyd cwyn yr Eglwye- wyr oodd mai addysg secularaidd oedd addysg Ymibeilldnol, gan honmi mai hwy yw y rhai ofàLarnot am addysg grefyddol. nir.au ein bod yn credu fod crefydd yn hanfodol i bob addyag, nid credo un blaid XMJU sect, and crefydd bur a dihalogedig Gair Duw. He bin w hyai, cydnabyddiai Agnosticiaid fod y Beibl fel gwaith lleniyddol yn haeddu y lie uchaf o holl lyfrau y byd. SYB ALFRED THOMAS YN DAL I HA. U EFRAU. Drwg genyf nad yw Syr Alfred Thomas yn ddigon llygadog i weled ei fod yn creu cweryl ac ymbleidio trwy ddadleu y dylid cau y Beibl allan or ysgolion, a'i fod yn rhanu Cymru ac y cyrner brwydr ofnadwy le ar y cwestiwn. Wrtli anerch ei ethol- wyr yn Ferndale nos Wener diweddaf, dywedai Syr Alfred fod y Cymry ddeugain a deng mlynedd ar hugain yn 01 yn gwybod mwy am y Beibl nag ydynt yn bresenol Yr oedd safon gwybodsieth yn uwch yn y wlad nag y bu o fewn cof neb sy'n fyw; ond a oedd cymaint o barehedigaeth yn cael ei ddangos at bethau cysegredig heddyw ag ydoedd o fewn cof llawer o honynt? Nid oedd ef yn credu fod—dim byd yn agos; nid oedd manteision addysg wedi bod yn foddion i fagu mwy o barchedigaeth i grefydd a'r Beibl a phethau cysegredig eraill. A phaham? Nid oedd ef yn petruso dweyd fod dwyn y Beibl i'r ysgolion a'i ddysgu fel daearyddiaeth. neu ryw gangen arall o wybodaeth wedi effeitihio i iselhau y Beibl yn mgolwg y plant a pheri iddynt ei gashau. Pan oedd ef yn yr ysgol, gor- fodid ef i ddarllen rhanau o'r Beibl, ac nid oedd hyny yn cael effaith ddymunol arno-yn hollol i'r gwrthwyneb; at'r un yw profiad eraill. Oyfeiriodd hefyd at yr anmharch a ddangosir at y Sabbath trwy fod boneddigion yn dwyn i Gymru rai o arferion gwaethaf y Cyfandir, a'r Cymry yn eu dynwared. "Os dyna yw effeithiau y Beibl ac addysg grefyddol yn yr ysgol- ion," ychwanegai Syr Alfred, "goreu po leiaf a gawn o hono." Y FATH GABOLFA 0 AM5HYSONDERAU! Fe wyr Syr Alfred Thomas cystal a neb fod y Beibl yn cael lie amlwg yn ysgolion dyddiol Cymru cyn sefydliad y Byrddau Ysgol, a dyna un o'r rhesymau fod y Cymry ddeugain mlynedd yn ol yn gwybod mwy o'u Beibl ac yn talu mwy o barch iddo ac i'r Sabbath a holl sefydl- iadau crefyddol y cysegr. Givyr ffaith arall gystal ag undyn-ffaith sy'n flotyn du yn hanes ein cenedi a chrefyddwyr ein gwlad-sef yw hyny, fod y Beibl wedi ei droi allan o'gannoedd o ysgolion yn ystod y deng mlynedd ar hugain diweddaf; a'r canlyniad o hyny ydyw yr hyn a wel Syr Alfred heddyw—diffyg parch i'r Beibl a. phobpefh cysegredig. Nid darllen a dysgu egwyddor ion y Beibi yn yr ysgolion dyddiol sydd wedi cynyrohu hyn; nid | gol" oedd yn cael ei ddarllen yn ha,ne ion ein gwlad; ond y ffaith ei ioa W y ei droi dros y drws sydd wedi esgor fath ganlyniadaxi annymunol. y Beibl wedi ei gadw o dan y Ysgol yn eu boll ysgolion trwy'r wla gyffredinoi, dichon y buasai rliyw maint o rym yn nadl Syr Alfred ond fel arall y mae hanes yn cronic^ dr** gwyr yr aelod anrhydeddus Ddwyrain Morganwg a Blaenor yl* Gymreig hyny yn dda—ac y mae ymresymiad yn tori i lawr yn ^el yn wir, y mae ei gadwen ymresyipi^ wedi troi yn rheffynau am wddf llun; vno y mae yn awr yn nghrog> j ni raid bod yn rhyw lawer o bron^T ragfynegu ei dynged—fe'i gwelir dyddiau nesaf yrna yn cael ei gludo i Vi ei hun. BARN DR. MACNAMARA, A-S. Yr oedd y gwr enwog uchod yn yn Ng'iiaea'dydd yr un noson—nos diweddaf—a datganodd farn hollol Syr Alfred Thomas. Fe wyr pa-wb a111 allnoedd; y mae wedi bod yn ysgol; ei hunan; addysg yw prif bwnc ei i<a»eth drv. y ei oes; y mae pobpetii flaenau ei fysedd; a tlielir tpdw arnscr i'w farn yn Nhy y Cyffredin. ar mnter yn dal perthynas ag ysgolx elfennol yn neillduol. Wrth siarad alTi^ dyryswch yn nglyn a dysgu crefydd ysgolion, dywedodd y buasai ef yn pob ysgol ddyddiol gyda hanesyn sviw Beibl wedi ei sylfaenu ar un 0 eddau hanfodol y Grefydd Gristionogo^ Dichon y gelwid ef yn hen ffasiwn, OI? oedd arno eisieu i'r plant gf^l hyifforddi yn y Beibl, ac ymgydnabyo a'i ihanesion dyddorol a'i trwytho egwyddorion pur ac uniawn. Dyna « muniad po-b dyn sy'n ystyried y Pers"j,al sy'n amgylchu plant ac yn meddwl gafael ynddynt, gan eu dwyn i fyny om yr Arglwydd ac i barchu ei oedd a'i ddydd santaidd ac i ddarllen genadwri at fyd o bechaduriaid. A YW BYIt ALFRED YN CREDU RYN? Os cauir y Beibl allan o'r ysg0^^ dyddiol, be^h geir yn ei le? Os na defnydd o hanesion syml a dyddorol 3™ "hen Lyfr" l ddysgu'r plant yn eg^T'j' orion rtdnwedd a moesoldeb, a oes rhy* beth arall yn rhywle a wna, lan^ '1 gwagle? Nac oes, ddim, meddaf. 0 teilyngdod llenyddol, y mae ar ei ben hun; nid oes iddo gystadleuydd y ftaenoriaeth; a phaham yr amddifadlr J plant o gael ymgydnabyddu a ph ordhest llenyddol y byd ? Dysgir yn^d wersi a dyledswyddau na ddyChmyg? yr un dyn am danynt erioed—egwydd^ ion sy'n cyrhaedd dyfnderoedd natur 8d enaid dyn ac yn ei godi i fyw y bywY. uchaf sy'n bosibl i fod moæol-i garu eJ elyndon ac i fyw er mwyn eraill a'u gwaS- anaot/hu ? A oes rhyw lyfr arall yn dysgll peth cyffelyb ? Nac oes, a byddai'n 8n: ffawd genedlaethol i gadw'r gogoneddus hyn oddiwrth blant a pho-b gwlad arall, o ran hyny. Ond, y^r v/aneg na hyny, ac uwchlaw hyn oil, "3^ Duw yw y Betibl; ie, geiriau y byrO' tragwyddol ydyw. Y mae'r Iesu £ dweyd wrth ei ddysgyblion am chwIllO t ysgrythyrau am eu bod yn tystiolae^'1 am dano Ef—"Myfi yw y ffordd, y gW1t. ionedd, a'r byTvyd" Efe, Mab y dyn Mab Duw; Efe, Cyfaill publicanod phechaduriaid a ddaeth i'r byd o bWI-PaS i farw drostynt ac i'w oeisio a'u cad^ j Efe, yr hwn a'i g wel odd a welodd y Tad digon byth; Eife, y Person rhyfeddaf gogoneddusaf a rodiodd ein daear orio^1' ac Un y raae holl ddynolryw wareidàledig yn ei addoli a'i edmygu. Hwn yw y Beibl—Gair Duw; "Gair Duw, ysbi'3'_ ydynt a bywyd ynddynt"; "bywiol f Gair Duw a nert'hol, a llymac'h nag i eleddyf dau-finiog, ac yn cyrhaedd txwod hyd wahaniad yr enaid a'r ys-bryd a cymalau a'r mer, ac yn barnu meddyl*2, cymalau .a'r mer, ac yn barnu meddyhÐ-1J. a bwriadau y galon" raewn gair, y bywyd y byd yn y Beibl. Ydi Syr Alfr0*1 Thomas a'i gefnogwyr yn credu hynY, tybed? Os ydynt, paham y gwaliarddaW i blant ein hysgoiion dyddiol ei gael 5, eu dwylaw; a gwyddant yn eifhar da fQUo miloedd o blant, hyd yn nod ylt Nghymru grefyddol, nad ydynt byth yJ1I tywyrhi Eglwys na. chapel ddydd yn '1 flwyddyn, ac rnai'r ysgol ddyddiol y^^ hunig gyfle i ymgydnabyddu ag Bwyw eu Tad yr Hwn sydd yn y nefoedd. YN GROES I RESWM. Y mae profiad pawib yn gwrthdystio erbyn yr haerdad fod presenoldeb y yn yr ysgol a'r darlleniad o hono yn dygaeedd yn y plant a to; ni bu eri ffiloreg mor afresymol ac annatoirioli/ oblegid fe wyddys fel mater 0 ffarfh f(jØ, gan bob plentyn wedi y tyfo i fyny barQh haner-addoliadol i bobpetk oedd yn y* ysgol gynt, ac y mae hyd yn nod el meinciau .a'i llechi a/r hen fapiau a,'r dM- luniau ar hyd y parwydydd yn anwyl a yn gysegrodig bytth yn ei olwg. Y mae n anmhosibl i bethau fod yn wahanol gy^a Beibl a'i adael ar yr un tir a eraill; ond os dangosir parch haedo" iannol iddo fel Gair Duw, ac adrodd e1 hanesion, a dysgu ei foes-wersi; oø gwnoir hyny, nid yn nnig fe ddaw'r p|aI1. i'w barchu, ond fe ennynir ynddyn gariad ato ao ymhyfrydiad ynddo. fvdd yn darian y ffydd iddynt a'r hon 7 gallant "ddiffodd holl bicellau tanllydj fall" yn helm eu hiachawdwriaeth i sicr* hau eu glaniad yn ddiogel yr ochr dra^ > yn gleddyf yr Ysbryd, "yr hwn yw Duw," meddai Apostol mawr y cen 3k oedd, i ymladd ac i orchfygu pob gelyn godo ei law yn eu herbyn; gwna, fe wn cannoedd a miloedd o blant Cymru, in^ obeithiaf, dderbyn ysbrydiaeth yn «„ ysgolion dyddiol i "chwilio'r ysg'rythYl'aol1 ac i gael hyd ynddo i Geidwad dyn, J. Hwn yw y fforad, y gwirionedd, a t bywyd. GWLAD YR UN LLUR. ( Ac y mae hen wlad y Beiblau :J,'r cymanfaoedd a'r Ysgol Sid a'r DiwYg- iadau <yn mynd i selyll byd farw dros J Beibl y tro hwn. A pha ryfedd? I r hen fwmrwn hwnw yr ydym yn ddyted am bobpeth, hyd yn nod ein bodolaeth;. ei addewidion a greodd ynom awydd 1 fyw ac efe roddodd nerth i ni godi ar e* traed i ymaflyd yn y bywyd a osodid o blaen; y Beibl gyneuodd yn eu wesau ffia<m o obaith ac a'n cynysgaed odd a ffydd fawr, arwrol yn ein dyfodo • Gwlad yr un llyfr-y Beibl—yw Cyinrtf • ac y anae'n enghraifft nodedig o gene wedi byw ac ymddyrchafu a. gorchfygu unig trwy ac yn nerth ei addysg. Y 311 a hanes ein gwlad yn dystiolaeth Ddwyfoldeb y Gyfrol YsbrydoledW oblegid y mae'n llenwi holl angheiu0 cenedi ac yn ei chyfarfod yn mhob cyr^ ac yn rihoddi bywyd newydd yn gwythienau y ffordd y oerdda. mae wedi wneud i Gymru olrhein^r hanes er cyhoeddiad y Beibl Cymra i? cyntaf; y mae'n deffro, yn codi ar thraed, ac yn dechreu ymlwybro y mlaen, ac yn ymddadblygu i A,, genedl o ddylanwad; ie, y mae hea^y yn wrthrych edmygedd cenedloedd ci'eo ran ei sefydliadau cenedlaethol a i yddiaeth a'i ohrefydd. Trwy'r Bei^ cafodd y cwbl; ac, mi greda-f, ei heddyw yn barod i ganu gyda "Tegidon Af at y etanc i fa.rw, Mi drengaf yn y fflam, Cm byth y rhof i fyny Hen Feibl Mawr fy Mam.