The New York Herald Newspaper, August 2, 1856, Page 2

THE EMPIRE STATE CALAMITY. Coroner’s Investigation—Fourth Day. SPEUIAL REPORT FOR THB NEW YORK HERALD. Fav. River, July 31, 1856, ‘The inquest upon the bodies of the killed, in the case of ‘he steamboat Empire State, was continued to-day before Coroner Doval. The injured parties are a little easier to- day, but there are no strong hopes of their recovery yet. ‘The witneeses to-day consisted chiefly of firemen and boiler makers, Who were employed on board of the steam- boat above referred to. It was somewhat conflicting in its character, and, on the whole, was slightly unfavorable to the steamboat company. The first witness sworn this morning was John Lingan, a freman on board the Empire State, whe deposed as follows — 1 bave been fireman on board of the Empire State for two years past; I was on board on Saturd@y night last; I no- ‘eed pothing unusual on the above night mntil the explosion ‘wok place; there was a pretty low head of steam on; the guage did not indicate any more than 33 pounds; it was part of my duty to watch the head of steam in my boiler; ‘is more particularly the duty of the fireman at the other end of the boiler to watch the gauge; 1 was on watch in ‘whe larboard boiler room about the time the explcsion took place; the gauge at the other end of the boiler was bigber than the one on the forward end; I have all my in- rtructions from Mr. Brockway; I am generally instructed by Mr. Brockway not to let the steam get above 35 pounds; one of the gauges referred to indicated one or two pounds more team than was really in the boiler, and difered to that extent from the other four gauges. Q Do you know the amount of steam you had on pre- vious to the explosion’ A. A few minutes previous to the explosion the gauge indicated a head of 31 or Jz iwcbes; 1 kft my room and walked across the deck, and before I could get back again the explosion took place; my re, and that of my partner, was at the forward end of ier. Q. About what length of time is occupied to throw the coal into the boiler? A. About two or three minutes. Q. What did you leave the fire room fo? A. For the purpose of helping one of the firemen in the other fire room to fire up. Q. How long were you away? A. Not more than two minutes. ar Did you sce the condition of the smoke pipe? A. I Q. What was the appearance of the smoke pipe? A. It was pretty hot. Q. How how A. Well, pretty hot; 1 have seen it as hot ob other occasions. Q. Is it no! usual for it to be most heated immediately after tring up’ A. No; tt takes some time for the coals to ignite; the pipe was cooling off when I left the fire room. Q. Did you notice the gauge at the starboard boiler when you went over there? A. Idid not; Tran forward when | heard the explosion, so as to save mysel!. Q Was there anything previous to the accident that gave you any alarm A. No. @. Have you at any time seen anything about the boil- ere which would lead you to euppose they were defective A. No. Q. Were you on board the Empire State previous to these new Boilers being put inte her? A. I was cit, Dit Fou ever sce any leaks in the boilers? A. 1 e. @. Were these leaks not common to all boilers you ever sew? A. They were. @Q. Did you at any time hear from any source that those Boilers were defective or dangerous? A. I never have. @_ Did “you hear any compiaints about the boilers! 0. @ Did you ever hear that the boilers did not make team as readily as other boilers? A. I often heard that. @. Did you hear anything in connection with that that would jead you to suppose,they were not safe on that account’ A. I did not. Q. What did you do after the accident? A. I came on deck and saw the injured; | then was told by the en- er to shat up the doors and get steam up in my r. Q. Did you do as directed? A. I did. &. Had the steam got down much when you arrived? A. There was uo steam in the boiler at ail. Q How jong did it take you to get steam up? A. | ould not tell. Q. Was there anything unnsual on your return passage except what was common toa passage? A. I saw Lo ing. Q. Have you any knowledge rived at Fall River? A. I ba @Q Have you, since the occurrence, been examined by the wepector of steam boilers? A. 1 have. Q Have you given him all the evidence you have given us? A. Thave. Q. How often is it customary to fire up? ot the time when you ar- not. A. Ico ar gs Q ig your usual practice on reaching Newport? A. We throw open the doors, stop the blowers, and then, after leaving Newport, we fre up. @. Did you use your blowers on the way to Newport py more than it is usual for you todo? A. No, we did nol; in fact, we used them less, @ Did you ever sce the chimney as bot before as on the pight of the explosion’ A. I have. Q. Was the smoke pipe on your side of the boat as often Beated as the one on the starboard side’ A. It was not @. Is it your business to put on and take off the blow ers? A. itis. Q. Ind you know that there were boiler makers on board? A. 1 did. Q. Are you ever urged to fire up when you are behind time? A. No. @. Do you keep the ron of the time made? A. I do Bot, | Lave not got an opportunity. George Swanton, of Brooklyn, L. 1., deposed that he ‘was a fireman on board of the Empire State How long bave you been in the business? A ogi al About ears w long bave you been on board the Empire State? came on board on the 23d of June last Q. Were you on board of the Empire State on Satarcay t last?” A. Yes, sir. |. Was there anything unusual in the appearance of Shings on board, from the time you leit Fall River unvi Uhe explogion took place? A. I did not see anything un Q. What was your position on Saturday night? A Fireman to the larboard boiler. @ Had there been any effort to make unusual speed A. No. ‘@ Had your blower been used more than it usually was? A. No; I think was used less. Q. Did you fire up after you lef Newport? A. Yes. @. How long previous to the accidemt’ A. | could not ae | Do you know whether the starboard boiler had beoa fired? A. Yes, in one furnace, Q Which boiler was fired last? A. The starboard side. @ When on the starboard side did you nowce anything uposval? A. i did pot see anything except a little leak, which was of D0 consequence. Q Ceuid you tell in what part of the boiler this litte ek 4 A. I could not. @ Was it inusual to hear such noises about the boiler’ A. it was not, but the noise from this leak waa a louder than usual. Q. How long previous to the explosion did you hear this teak? A. About ten or iifteen minutes. Q. Did it give you any warm? A. No. G. Was it the subject of conversation between you and She other fireman! A. Yes, we talked with each of aboutit Q What beight was the steam previous to the explo sion? A. I do not recollect. Q What height was it before you reached Newport A. I noticed that it stood as high as thirty eight on o @ccasion, but My gauge ind.cales some pou 's more than the other gauges. Q. What was its height after leaving Newport? A was adout thirty-five @ How many pounds does your ga than the gauge on the other end of the dicates about two pounds or more. Q Bow was the water in the boiler on that evening A. It was tho same as we usually carried t @ Do you know anthing about the water io the other Boller, when you assisted the other fireman to fre wy A. 1 do not. Q. Where were you when the explosion took pla A. I wae at my fire roxm door. @. What did you dof A. 1 stopped my blower deft the recom @. What did you then do? A. I got upon the other , where | met my partoer, i thea tried to rawe the safety waive, I then went down to the fire room with « lantern in my Land Q What did you do ther ler? cate more A io aod i A. I groped about and tried 40 open the furnace doo:s, but could mot dnd them oo Account of the tteam, | opened the pans; I then went ont {0 abut tbe fire room door so as to keep the steam ot, when | stepped into some hot water up to the ankles, an Got myrel! scalded: | then le and tried to cool myself Of; I did nothing more that night, my place was 1 by another fireman '@. Did you aotice the condition of the smoke stack cn the starboard wider AI did not Q. Was the smoke stack on your side heated that night A it was. Q Was it ever heated before? A. It was not @ Whatwas the reason of its getting heate Al don't know @. Have you ever beard soch a bissing noise before» that proceeded from the starboard boiler on Sa: day night Inst? A. I bave 4, Do you know whether the engineer was iuformed the fact or not? A. | do not. Q Did any ome examine the leak? A! understoo that one of the firemen went underneath the boiler order to examine the leak Q Have you been called before the Ca@et States lo Spector in relation to tM matter? A. | have Q Have you ever heard any one say that the boilers o the boat were in any way uasafe’ A. No, | never have Dut they often eid that the boiler makers took up ty auch room in ther qu @ Do you know re re is any defect im the boiler on your ide of the boat’ A. | do not. @ our duty to examine the boilers? A. It is not Augustos Deal, Greman on bowed of the Empire State, epored—That he was on the Fall River line of boat Greman for about four years, bad been on the Empire Mate for about nine months: was on board on Saturday lant In proceeding down the bay, did you discover any thing unusual prior to the accident’ A. | did not Q. Was it your wateh on the night of the accident? A war Q. Were you called upe Mr. By ting unusual? A @ amd told we to look at and examine the bolers, view of find {ng out whether the right a ince March inet, | saw that the emoke pipe was hot told ope of the Hremen to shut off the blowers, @ Were the pipes hot on both «ides? A. They @ Did you give the order to remove the blowers on woth aided of the boat? A I did Q Which smoke pipe was the bottert’ the starboard aide Q Have you ever seen the emoke pipe on (he jarboard and A. The one oa | | mon one of washers an | -ooket Bolte? A. Weil, the sosket NEW YORK HERALD SATURDAY, AUGUST 2, 1856. side.nn Bot an it bas Doom gm the stasbonrd side? A. Yea, @. Did any one go under the boiler on that night? A. Yes, 1 did yon Q. Which boiler did you go underneath? A. The star. board one. Q. By whose direction did you do this? A. I was in the habit of doing so every night. Q. Was it after you left Newport, or before, tpat you went underneath the boiler? A. It was after, and about & minute previous to the explosion. Q. Did you go to the larboard tireroom after you came out from under the boiler on the starboard A. No, I bad not time; tor just as quick as | started for that fire- room the explosion took place. Q. When in the starboard room last, did you hear any biasing noise, as if froma leak? A. I did not, Q. Ifthere bad been a leak in the steam chimney could you bave discovered it from your position under the boiler? A. I think not. ‘ y = you examined the steam chimney on that night? Q. What did you do? A. 1 found it quite hot, and opened the door of the smoke pire. for the purpose of cooling it down; the pipe was fall of blaze when I opened the little door, and I could not put my head inside to make a close examination, as I usually cid. Q. Where were you at the time of the accident? A. 1 was just entering the door of the larboard fireroom whea the — occurred. Q. Were you scalded at all? A. Not much, I got a little seoreh on the nose, and that was all. a 4 Did you assist in getting the boat back again? A. I id. Q. Did you examine your boiler on Saturday morning? A. | did; it is my duty to examine the inside of the boiler every day at each end of the route. Q. Which boiler cid you examine? A. The larboard one. Q. Was there any defect in that boiler? A. There was a defect in it; 1 told Mr. Brockway of it, and he said he would get the boiler makers to put a patch upon it. Q. Did Mr Brockway examine it? A. No. Q. Do you know whether the boiler makers who were on board on Sat night had apy other butinese to perform than fixing defect you have spoken of as ex itting in the larboard boiler? A. I do not. Q. What was the head of steam on in your boiler? A. About twenty-nine pounds. ‘What was it in the starboard fire room? A. Twenty- nine and a half pounds at one end of the boiler, and about thirty pounds at the other. Q. How long was this before the explosion took place? A. About ten minutes. Q. Did you ever hear any one say that the bellers were dangerous? A. Not exactly; but 1 have heard some of the boiler makers say thatthe boilers “ were getting r.?? Q. Whercabonts did they say the boilers were poor? A. About the connection, where the steam chimney and the boiler unite together. Q. Was this the part that exploded? A. No. Q. Does the quality of coal now used en board of these boats tend to make the smoke pipe hot? A. It does. Q. Could you see the steam chimney of the starboard boiler when you looked into the smoke pipe? A. I could = see on account of the blaze which was passing up the chimney. Q. Was the rupture in the boiler above or below the water mark’ A. It was about three feet and a bail above. The jury bere took a recess for dinner. On the re-assembling of tbe jury William Booth, boiler maker, was placed upon the siand. He deposed as {ol- lows :— 1 was on board of the Empire State on Saturday night I was on board for the purpose of putting a patch upon the larboard boiler. Q. What was the size of for? A. About three feet s the patch you bad prepared sare Q. Was the patch carned on board? A. It was. Q. Where is the patch now? boat when I last saw it. Q. Where did you understand the patch was to be put? A. Upon the larboard steam chimney. Q. Did Mr. Ketchum Say there might be other repairs A. He A. It was oa board of the to make? a not. ‘ous to this had you been engaged in A. Some weeks previous. long have you been engaged in the business? A. About ton years. Were you ever engaged in repairing the eteam chim- ney before? A. No, but 1 was at work upon the “con nection.” Q. When you were employed on these boilers did you regard them/as in a bad condition? A. No, they were not in a bad condition, nor were they in a tip top condition. The steam chimney was not braced sulliciently, that was all. Q. Did you notice the want of sufficient strength in the ron? A. I did. Q. When? A. To-day. Q. I you suppose that there was any danger when you went on board? A. I did not. \. Did you ever bear Mr. Ketebum express any opinion for or against the boilers’ A. 1 did not; I beard nim eay that be did not want to go to New York every Saturday, and algo that be was wanted on the Metropolis, and did Dot want to go in the Empire “tate. Q. Have you heard of his having expreased himself tn relation to the safety of the boilers’ A. No, I have not; I don’t think Mr. Ketchum thought there was any danger from the boilers or he would not have went asleep beside one of them. Q. Did you eee the smoke pipe? A. 1 did Q. Was thot’ A. It wag red bot three-fourths of the wer op. \. Dil you eee the steam gauge? A. I did. Q. What did it indicate’ A. 27 or 28 pounds. Q. What is the diiterence in the thickness of boiler iron and emoke pipe iron’ A. Well, the smoke pipe is about one eibth ef an inch, while the boiler js three eighths 0 an icch m thickness. ° &. How long previous to the explosion did you see the steam gauge io the starboard boiler room? A. About five minutes before the explosion took place; | was at the door getting my berth ticket from Mr. Ketchum, when ! looked at the steam ciuge and it wae then 28; the”blow- ors were not going then, they bad beea stopped. Q. From what you have seen, can you teil the cause of theaceident? A. My opinion in rel ition to the matter is that the team chimney was not braced strong enoug! Q. How was it braced in comparison with other steam chimneys’ A. Well, most steam chimucys are stronger braced than that one was. Q. Was the plate that gave way injured atall? A. did not appear eo to me. Q. What distance were were sixteen incber Q. Have you ever sean any boilers braced in this way? A. Inever bave: ifthe braces had been placed closer vo- gether | don’t think any accident would have take1 place af the stays were fartene ib sockets, bolts and hb ers, they would have been much stronger; the usual tance between braces in the steam chimney is sevoa nehes, while on board of the Empire State they were six teen inches asunder. ‘Thomas Lamb, maker, of Fall river, being duly worn, deposed a8 ioliows — Ibave been a boilermaker for nearly twelve years; have spent most of my time in New York Q. Were you on beard the Empire State on Saturday night lest’ A, 1 was ©. For what purpose? A. To repair the boiler. q. By whom were you called upon to vo to New York, to make these repairs’ A. By Mr, Ketebum. im inform you as to the nature of the these braces apart? A. They repair? @. Do you know whether Mr. Ketchum refused to go on to New York om that night. A. I do not. @ Did you ever bear Lim say, he did uot want to go on board?” A. | did the Saturday previous, but it was not on account of the unsound condition of the boiler that he wanted to stop at bome What was the reason? ncay or tion to the boilers? A once 0 A. He tid be wanted to go r him express any opinion m rela Idont ttink I ever did, except jained of them for giving him so opinion, do you think you suppose! woul, for 1 was had expressed any ave beard him? A. i ‘ptimate with bum Q. Where were you when the ex In the gentiemen’s cabin. @ Ind you notice anything unuenal on the passage’ A. The baggage master called me out upon deck to look at tbe smoke pipe, which he said was red hot. I looked at it, but it was pot red hot. However, there was a fame erning st from the top of the pipe. @. Have you been in the boiler since the explosion? A. er A lon took I have. @. What is your opinion in regard to the accident? A. Well | don't think the steam chimney was well enoagh braced, and thew again I don't think the braces were of the beet kind. [ noticed a fiseure in the plate that blew up, #howing that the layers had not been properly weid ed together, this may have had a tendency to weaken the plate, Q Have you made repeated repairs io these boilers A. T have @. What is your opinion in regard to their safety? A 1 think the inside chimney chould be taken out and new lining put in ite place Q. Is this an opinion formed prior to or after the accl dent? A. Both before and «moe the accident occurred. @ Tid you think they were unsafe previous to the ac cident? A. I did, if 90 Ibs, of steam were put on, and I have seen 05 Ibs. on Q What amount of steam did you see on Saturday ght? A. | did not see more than 30 Ibs. on @ Did you converse with any one about the boilers? A. Yes, | was talking to Mr. Williamson upon the sub- ject on the very night of the accident. @. Hat you any conversation with Mr. the matter? A. 1 had not @ Had you with sny one? A. I called Mr. Reebe’s at tention to the uneale plate in the starboard boiler, but he did not seom to think much @ Tid you speak to Mr. Ki not way that I did. @ Mid you think you ran any hazerd that night when you went on board’ A. No. Q. De you know how long the chimney had been in use? A. 1 do not Q Tid you ever hear any one say that the boilers were dangerous? A, My ehopmates talked about it Q Do you know whether the Mesers, Borden were ever informed of the het? A. Ido not Q. Po you think the iron in the chimney was injured by beat’ i do. Q. Did you Gnd any of the rivets loose? appeared to be drawn in through the iron Q How far were the braces apart’ A. About sixteen ipebes @. How far are they usually apart or twelve inches. @. Then do you attribute the accident to the want of more braces’ A. Well, the chimoey should have been better braced @. Do you know where there boilers were made? A. I believe at the Morgan Iron Work « Did you work upon them? A. No . Is iteustomary for the proprietors of the Morgan Tron Works to have boiler® braced with crow feet instoad of eocket bolta and washers? A. 1 believe they have made acme boilers in that way 4. Have you ever seen a chimney fastened In this way before? A. I have, bat not often, however, | believe that Brock way ou tit chum about it? A. I could A. I did; they A. About eleven | they bave been made a great deal during the past two yeare 1 What i the diffe nee in strength between the crow foot mode of bracing th » steam chimney and the more com bolts an’ waebere ba.g larger beads and a better bold bolts snd washers upon the cutside and ibelue of ibe fron, and, r rae brace the parts more tirmly rivet heads could. Q. Whet do you think of the boilers? A, The furnaces are 100 short, and consequently the biaze is not ex- ted s00n enough ; it therefore, in these boilers, rushes: up the chimney and makes the pipe red hot, and injures the steam eee. Q. yeu, in ‘ing an ¢xamination, found a defect in the boiler, would you communicate the fact to the own- ers of the boat? A. No, I would not; it ismy duty simply te report to the engineer who e1 ys me; if he thinks proper to act upen any suggestion | may give him, why, well and good—if be does not, why I have nothing fur- ther to say; ts is not my business to do anything further than obey the instructions of employer. ‘Thomas a boiler ike being sworn, deposed that he was in company with the previous witnesses on the late trp of the State to New York; he had been sent to mend the steam chimney of the larboard boiler; he had been on board the previous Saturday making repairs, and then was of opinion that the boiler which exploded was quite safe. Q. Did you ever hear one ex; apy opinion as to the safety of those boilers A Ta. a Q. Who Was that person’ A. Mr. Ketchum. Q. When? A About two weeks ago. Q. Whatdid he say? A. He said it would blow them all up before long. Q. Which botler had he reference to? A. The starboard. Q. Had you apy reason to suppose that Mr. Ketchum regen as starboard side less safe than the larboard / A rot. @. Tid you understand that he informed the owners or officers of the boat of the danger? A. I did not. Q. What was bis manner on seying that “the boat would blow them up?” A. He said it io @ laughing way, as if he did not mean it. Q. Did he ever eay anything in regard to tbe boilers be- fore or after that? A. No. Q. Where were you when the explosion took place? A. In the cabin. vi ‘i ine you eee the smoke stack heated on that night? Q. Was there anything unusual in its appearance? A. No, it was quite a common thing for the smoke pipes on the Empire State to get hot. Q. Were there oy renee of there boilers that looked weak or required additional security? A. No. Q. Did the place that you were going to repair look ha- zardous for the voyage? A. No. Q. Did you deem yoursalf running any risk when going on board that it? A. I did not. Q. What was the size of the patch that was to be put on’ A About four feet by three. yr & = you examined the boiler since the explosion ? . I bave. Q What do you consider ie cause of the accident? A. A crack in the iron plate where the row of rivets were, and the want of proper bracing. ‘me The remainder of the chimney was sound, was it’ Q. Does the irom seem to be weakened by the aclion of the beat? A. No. Q, From what you saw before the accident, would you regard the boiler unsafe? A. I would not. Q. What is your opinion in regard to the bracing of the steam chimney? 4. I don’t think the braces were put cloge enough together. Q. How far were ibey apart? A. Between 17 and 18 inches. Q. How far apart ehould they be? A. About 8 or ten inches, Q. Why do you think there was a flaw in the iron? A. Well, from its appeardice, one side of the sheet appears to be good, but on the other side the rivet holes are torn open, showing that the iron must bave given way. Q. The stays must have given way first? A. I think they did, from the cxamination | have made. xe chief engiaeer, Mr. Brockway, was then called Fag the stand to testify to what Mr. Ketchum said t> him on Saturday, when be called at the office for the pur- pose of getting off from goirg to New York. slr. Brock way deposed that deceased did not make any objections, further than he said Mr. Brockway wouid have a fight with Mr. Sturgis, of the is, as the latter wanted the deceased to remain in Fall River; the witness told him that if he did not choose to goto New York he did not want him to send any of his men on; that was all that passed between deceased and the wituess. Q. Did Mr. Ketchum ever tell you that the beilers «cre dangerous? A. No, sir, he never did. Q. Do you examine the boilers every day? A. Either os or Mr. Bebee cxamined the boilers every day. Villiam Wells, fireman of the starboard boiler, test: fed that be cleaned the boiler which exploded on Satur day morning, and fourd some little leaks, which he filled up; there was nothing dangerous about tbe boiler, and « appeared to him to perfectly sound; there were no Jeaks in the chimney; the h that was put on some Gays previously was upon the conuection, and not upon the stea chimney, Olver E. French sworn, depoeed as follows :—I belong to Berkley, Mass.; 1 knew Mr. Ketebum quite well, | eaw him on Sunday morning last on board the Fmpire State; last Monday two weeks ago, while I was on board the hm pire State in New York, a gentleman came up and wanted to engage state rooms; there were none bit amidship rooms to let, so the gentleman would not take the berth oltered bim on account of its being near the boiler Mr. Ketchum then came up and said, ‘J will take the berin— Tbave got my wife with me, and will occupy the berth without fearing the boilers.’ | asked him if he would not warrant the boilers to carry thirty pounds of steam, when be replied that he would warrant them to carry fifty pounds. @. Are you employed on boar! the boat? A. Jam. Q. In what capacity? A. As wheelsman. . Do you know whether Mr, Ketchum's wife was with him on that night? A. I presume ele was, for be engaged the berth. Q. Just state what you saw on board on the night of the accident. A. We left Full River at the usual hour, ar rived at Newport in proper season, aud all went on’ weil uptil we neared Voint Judith, when te explosion took ‘lace. . . Did you see the emoke pipe bei ? Al Q. Was it heated more on that nigh; than it usually was’ A. No, | don’t think it was; the chimneys gener ally get hot every night alter we lcave Newport Q. Lid you ever bear any one on board say that the boilers were dangerous? A. I never have; once or twive I heard some of the fire say, *] guess ehe will scai us some day or other.” @ Did you put any confidence | those passing remark you beard made by these firemen’ A. No, 1 drinet. i i did, Lebould always make it point to keep out of the y of the boiler, and this I never did. ©. Tave you ever witnessed the heating of smoke 1 | 9 on board any other boats’ A. | Lave. Q. On many boats’ A. Not mavy @. Did you ever regard it as ap indicati of das A. No, I did not. Henry B. Renwick, governinent inspector of beers and steam engines for the district of New York, was then placed on the stand. Q. Have you examined the starboard boiler of the Em. pire State’ A. I have. Q. What is your impression {n regard to the ac ' A. My impression is, that the lining of the »toam eaun ney fave Way on account of the shearing off of thy rivets which ware fastened to the crowfoot ; the when a, anit a the was at ch por. sheet first commenced to give way, it sp then col apred inward; judging by the appearan torn piece of irom, I ebould think that the shee Jeast as good ax the avernge of sheets used for # pores: I have been on bosrd the boat two or.th on the passage, snd bave feen on the ging to 26 pounds: my opinion is that the rivets-or the by have been weakened by the action of the bot gas passing p the steam colmney, and also that alth bh the ri appear from Mr. Hill's pressure to have been of suflh: strength at the time that he tried the boiler, -ti! they are uot of a strength in proportion to the braces to sustain the pressure of the lining againet the steam chimney unlors these rivets had been sheared off | should not have been able to state what the relative strength of these rivets were, and I don’t think any examination of ti boiler except a hydrostatic pressure woud have dis vered the fact that these rivets had commenced to love their strength . Was steam chimney braced as |t should have been’ A. The procf, by bycrostatic pressure, shows that it was strong enoogh to bear the test, when Mr. Hill ap pea ‘the pressure of fifty pounds in the month of May it; if I had built the boiler I would have pat the rivets closer together; the after end of the chamber has been atrome time corrugated, or bent inward, owing to the crowfeet having been originally a litte too far apart, where it is corrugated it has been additionally stayed by socket, bolts, pute and washers, and that part of tle chimnry ¥: atall injured at the ume the forward je collapsed. Q. Which is the best method of sustaining the lining « a steam chimney’ A. There are many difierent opinions in regard to that point, but from what I have seen, I woule prefer the socket, bolts and washers to the crow foot fastening. Q. Much bas been said In relation to the heating of the pipes of the Empire Siate—what is your opinion in regard to that point’ A. Ail boilers pt, more or less, to heat their steam chimneys and ks, ‘t's impossible, or nearly 80, to plan s boiler © that it may be predicted ‘with certainty that when in use the eases sha'l burn in the place they ought; this heating of the chimneys i# most common where blowers are used, ana takes place, as far as my experience goes, just after anew fire has been put in. I do not think the arrangement of the boiler bas anything t do with this heating, but it depends upon the proportions of the pert, and is irrespective of the ar nt; boilers arrangod like those of the Empire State are not, in my opinion, more liable to overheat. *¢ tban other ordinary forms of boilers; all smoke stacks ave more or less subject to become dull red with bent. within the last two months | have been uently on board the Empire State and saw the smoke «t hot, red ‘but Idid not apprehend apy danger; for I knew the was properly died; iron can be made red hot with steam inside, if there is no current through team chimney and boiler of a steamb at can be hot if the engine is stopped and the safety valve ¢own, for then there can be no current of air or steam to conduct the heat away The inquest was here adjourned until 8) o'clock the following (Friday) morning TELEGRAPHIC Fatt Riven, Angust 1, 1856. Thomas J. Borden, ton of the principal owner of the Fall River boats, testified to the care and kind disposal of the victims by the explosion Riley H. Borden, chief engineer, dezcribed the boilers in use on the line and their general management. He said the owners had exceeded the requirements of the Jaw in extra hose, pumps and other means of safety. ‘We understood from Mr. Ketchom that the steam chim. peys of the Ra@pire State needed repair, and that he bet advised additional braces, with socket bolts, when he would not consider them dangerous Col. Richard Borden, President of the line, was next called, He testided to the general instructions given to captaing and engineers, the eal-ty of passengers being the governing principle. He gave a detailed account of the kind of pumps, life preeervers, lie bonte, &¢., in use, whieh exceeded the requirements of the law, The Me tropolis is provided with ten life boats, capable of saving 700 ;eople. The class of boilers used in the Empire State were recommended by Mr Morgan, of the Morgan Iron Works, as baving proved sucessful in the steamer Golden Age. Adjourned ul) 3 P. M. The evidence elicited during the afternoon develrped Do new fact regarding the cause of the explosion. The verdict of the Jury will not probaly be given be- fore Monday. The wounded arejdoing better. The Last Duel. THE AFFAIR BETWEEN EDITORS CUNNINGHAM AND HATCH OF CHARLESTON, 8. C. We publish the annexed voluminous billicose corres- pondence, because of the lively intercet that is just now felt in this description of literature, and because it will enable the ‘eager for the fray”? to take ‘the field’? fully ported up on some important points laid down by ‘Wilson in the Code of Honor: — (From the Charleston Murcury, July 30.) Statement. The undersigned, rexpeetively the friends of Col. John Cunningham and J. L. Hatch, Esq., submit to the pabliu the following statement of the recent aflair of honor be- tween them. W. R. TABER, JR. 8. LORD, JR. In the Evening News of July 21, there appeared an article, which was commented on in the S’andard of the following morning. The article in the Standard was re- plied to in the mene Tees ef July 22; and this, in turn, ‘was replied to in ‘Standard of the next morning; whereupon the annexed correspondence took place :-— CuaRiEston, July 23, 1850. Sirs—An article appears in this morning's Sfandard, purperung to be an editorial, and entitled “The Evening Nevis and the South Caro ing Delegation in Congres. As that article bas relation to myseif, and is persona! + its character, Ipmust, require of you, as the conducte the name of its author, Reepe sfiily JOUN CUNNINGHAM. Merers, L. W. Srr rt & Co. Staypann Orrick, 7 Cnanurton, July 23, 1856. 5 Sin—Ag the editor of the Standard, | have received your note of date of to-day, and hereby acknowlecgo myself the author of the articie therein alinded w Your obedient servant. J. L. HATCH. To Col. Jonn Cunniy aM. Fyavixa News Orvicr, Cnantestos, July 28, 1856. Si—Your note, avowing yourself the author of the ar ticle in the Standard, bas been received. That article contains language of studied and wanton personal» ult to myself, and I'shall accordingly expect aretra of whatever offensive in it, Respect! J. L. Haren, Esq. JOHN CUNNINGHAM Staxpaxp Orrick, Chai UeeTuN, ) July 23, 1854. sin—I have received your note of to day, calling for « retraction of ‘whatever is offensive”? in my editorial ‘Whatever in that editorial is of a personal nature was io response to what | consider a gratuitous and unjustifiable personal attack 1 myself in the Evening News of y terday. 1 thereiore decline making the retrasiion Your obedient nt, J. L. HMICH. To Col, Jonn Cunyinenam. CHaRtiston, July 24, 1854. Sin—YVoor note ef last night bas been received. I de by, in reply, that the articie in the Evening News to whic you refer wes ‘‘a gratuitous and unjustitiadle persona! attack,” and I repudiate your attempt t> make its lao guage the justification of el “studied and wantoa per fons] insult to myself”? I therefore repeat my deman! jor retraction. Your obedient servant, ToJ. L. Harcu, Heq. JOHN CUNNINGHAM STANDARD Orvice, Cuartestox, July 25, 1856. 5 S:n—I am in receipt of your note of the 24tb, in whit you deny that the article in the Evening News was “gratuitous and unjustiliable personal attack.’’ I regie that the denial is not sufficiently full and precise to able me to decide whether it is a denial of any intensio. to make a persoual attack, or whether it is restricted & its being gratuiteus and unjustitiable in point of fact. the latter is the correct conetriction of your denial, 1 constrained to differ from you ani to repeat that I sicer the article gratuitous and unjustitiabi rt as I can perceive no provocation for the ek, and un Justifable, from the tote, temper and lang wige of the in response to the eeitorial of the News. Hav ing thus acted strictly on the defensive, I have nv felt that any justification of my course was peceseary nor have | attempted ary, beyond therimple statement « the provocation. I therelore respectfatly decline acce: ing to your “demand for retraction "’ licel it however, due to myself and to propriety, make ap Cee oy to my gneral refusal to r cle of the Standard the following languag “The journal * * © which can be gratuitously abusive t AD AbONY MoUs Correspondent of another paper till that correspondent makes good his positions with his name.’ As the allusion | to matters which, occurring between } ourself ard others, bave been adjusted to the satisfac tion of the parties interested, I feel that any reference thereto by third persons is improper: and I therctore willingly Withdraw that portion of the article. Your ode dient rervant, J. L. HATCH. To Col Joun Cuxsincuam. Cuanteston, July 25, 1856. Si:—Yohrs of thie morning bas been received. In re ply I have to say, that your nrst artic e bore on its fave the intent to embroil me in a direct personal conflict with ihe whole delegation in Congress from South Caro lina, and to array me in invidious opposition to the senti mentof the community. This Intent, patent ip your first article, is poutedly developed ia your second article, which you—a New Fxgland man and @ recent comer, the responsible editor of the Standard, not in a p positicon—scek to inflame the popular feeling against m« king in zea: for the State and for the & anit ing in Support of Mr. Brooks. The intent is eti!l more manifest by your naming you did, the gentlemen with whom you expected to briu, to contict. That intent was the legitimate paren! o* ticle in the Brening News which you constrve iato uMONs and unjustifiable personal attack,” 0** claim as the jortification of “your stadied and w personal insult’ to me. After my denial that the article in the Kveni: New wae ‘a gratuitous and unj.stifable personal attack,” yo #Ul] decline to retract. I accept the alternative, and ‘de mand the Putisfaction due tome. My friert—Mr. Taber —is authorized to make the necessary arrangements Your obedient servant, JOHN CUNNINGHAM. To J. L. Haren, kisq. Staxparp Ore.) PuaKiesToN, July 26, 1856 sm beg to acknowledge the receipt of your nove o! the 261 1 cannot, without surrendering the right to discuss, within proper limits os a journalist, important (uestions of public policy, admit that the first articie in the Stay ‘s-d ‘was the ‘‘icgitimate parent’’ of the editorial of (he .v« but, upon that point, there seems to be between us an ir reconctiable diference of opinion, and the close of you letter precludes all further discursion, Had your note simply contained a challenge, it woul! have been as simply replied to, but, appended to it is th introduction of new matter, to which I must for a momer refer, That | am a New Englander by birth, te admittes but it was as South Carolinian, an adopted soo of the soil, bound to the State by every tie of interest and afl tion, that I feit called upon, both as journalist and citiz to abimadvert upon your cenrure of the entire State dele ge. Tecannot, and will not, admit that the accident « ‘rth is to deprive me of the right freely to exprese my opin: Here, too, 1 regret that there seems to be be tween us an irreconcilable diftere ot Sy In the absence of the senior editor of the Mandard, th Management of that jovrnal devolved upon me. 1 ve came, and am, responsible for its course; and it was ) discharge of my duty as editor that this diffeuny originated. Taccept Freq... aut! ‘ovr challenge. My friend, Samuel Lord, Jr 1 to make the necessary arrany " Your obedient servant, J. L. HATCH. To Col. Jous Crsxrvenam. Mr. Taber and Mr. Lord met at 2 o'clock onthe © to arrange Ee inaries; but failing to agree a» tw the mode of bolding the weapon—Mr. Lord proposing “the rise shot,”’ and Mr. Taber “the drop shot,’’ or that both parties should fire as they severally preferred—referred the point, which was decided as follows: — Mr. Taber, acting on the part of Col. wunningham, and Mr. Lord on the part of Mr. Hatch, bave submitted to ve. ae referees, the point whether the pistols shall be hela muzzies down and barrels perpendicular, or whether eball be held muzzies up, or whether cither party be at liberty to hold his weapon muyzle up or down at pleasure. Being unable to agree upon the point, !t was referred by us to Mr. Clarence Cochran, as umpire, w decides that the rule laid down by Wileoa in bia Code © Honor shall govern, and the pistols be held muzsies down and barrels perpendicular, ALFRED RAETE, Cuarimeron, July 28, 1866. JAMES CONN | desire to enter my protest against the decision of tui yeference, upon thie ground, that the recent usage of the State bas been againet the rule laid down by Wilson, er therefore, the drop shot is admissible. ALFRED RHETI Accordingly, the parties met on the afternoon of the O8th. After an exebange of shots, without injury to either party, Mr. Taber, on the part of Col. Cunningham, repeated bis demand for retraction, which Mr. le! on the part of Mr. Hatch, refused, but tendered the tole wing ition, which was accepted by Mr. Taber — ir. Hatch reiterates that his article was respoorive to Col, Cuncingham's article, immediately preceding |, which he considered personally insulting to himself. If . intention personally to 5 ple, Mr. Hateh, with this statement, consents to the wi of articles Whereupon the affair terminated. # simulta “" Theatrical and Musical. Nino's Garpey.—The Ravels io two of their most popular pantomimes this evening— ‘La Fee Cham pétre”’ and “Pongo,” Francois plays two comic cha racters, and M. Marzetti gives his inimitable delineation o the Ape. Mile Robert and choregraphic corps also per form in the ballet of “Figaro. Dowrny TheTRe —Anotber overfiow|ng audience will donbtiers be at the Bowery. to witnees the mance of the new drama called the ‘Pirates of the and the famous burlesque styled “Po ca-hen-tas,”’ in which the favorite manager and all the talented members of his company appear. Ermorasist of the true old fashioned order, abounding in whimelcalities and eccentricities, may be enjoyed at 444 Broae way, to-night Mise Faxxy DeSye proposes to give a series of drawing room entertainments at the Broadway~Atheveum. She is to commence on Monday, and it is will receive the encouragement ¢ue to ber talent and industry Aruy News.—The United States transport steam- er Fashion, Capt. Beker, which arrived at Charles ton, on the ult., frem Key West, bronght on as ; Amold, U.S. A. Lieut. Hartauff, hm, and tiity-one iaatfed”goldiers, om’ the di. 5 soldiers, the dif- ferent in Florida, The Fashion left a detach- ment of fourteen men, under a sergeant, at Indian Key, for the protection of thet pla Richmond Journals in a Biaze, PROSPECT OF A DUEL BETWEBN THE FIGHTING EDITOR OF THE WHIG AND PRYOR A. THE ety OM quirer, the paper t! Brooks’ assault on Sumner in the most extravagant manner, replies, in ita yesterday's issue, as follows to eeme remarks of the Richmond Whig :— ‘The sheepish spirit of a stricken conscience is betrayed in every word and gyliable of the paragraph. Its dis- yurting egotiem and vulgar taste are altogether worthy of the writer's reputstion. A man who scribbles under the habitual inepiration of refyse whiskey; whose daily contributions to the public press consist of the lees of last nights revel: whose grammar would condemn him to ‘tbe “foot” of the class in en old field school, and whose literature is limited to & familiar acquaintance with the jabels on the brandy bottiee—he to talk of editing a de cent newepaper | This, indeed, is ** sublime impudence.”? ment, convicted of every sort of incon sistepey and F aluification, driven inio a coruer and pinioned there ond the power of escape, the editor of the Whig has ovr permission to indulge his low born instincts in low flung bravado, This is one article; but under the ca) of “ Per- sonal” the Enquirer quotes from the Whig of July 28 some remarks about Commodore ’s with. drawal, which had been commented on by the En- guirer. The Whig says :— ‘A paper that declares Martin Van Buren “an angel of Vight in comparison with blitlard Fillmore,” ‘and. that 1a every day lugging Van Buren to its bosom and shouting over his support of Buchanan, to ba taliigg of Commodore Stockton’s support of Fillmore “as an evidence of identity of principle between them |"? Admitting the correctness of this logic, we charge that Martin and Jobn Van Baren’s support ot Buchanan—both being odious, unmitigated abolitiomsts—is “an evidence of an identity of principle between thrm.”? And we belive there is & perfect iden- tity of principle and feeling between them. They are ail squatter sovereignty men, and consequently the worst enemies on earth of the South. But it is not true that Stockton ever “prociaimed his adhesion”? w the black republican platform. Not a word of truth im any sach charge. It is manufactured for the occasion out of whole cloth. He was, however, opposed to the repeal of the Mistour! compromise; but he has never gone farther. We eubmit it, that if Martin Van Buren aud Tom Benton may support Buchanan, without exeating the Enquirer's distrust of Buchanan's soundness, it bas no right to com- plain should even Seward or Sumner support Me. Fill- more. The above paragraph, t.erefore, is a stupid and ubmutigated humbug trom beginumg to ead, These remarks of the Whig are followed up by Mr. Pryor, the fighting editor of the Enquirer, wi card which we here quote:— ‘The reads rs of the Whig must have observed from the recent course of that paper, that its editor is determined to provoke me int? a personal dillicalty. For some time past he bas pursued a systematic plan of coarse criticism and Gilentive msinuation. Thus, a few days ago, be ia- directly charged me with misrepresentation ina state- mevt of tact. Reluctant to distarb the public peace, and unwilling to be involved in a per sopal rencounter except under the pressure of absolute necessity, I forebore to resent imputa jons Which though'not provocative of a challenge, would ¢ juried me lL aby severity of retaliatory denuaci pabie of appreciating a geatlemacly motive, ining upen my forberance, the editor of the Whig bas at jast rushed to an extremity which compels me to check his carcer of vulgar inuendo. The ticle irom yeeterday’s issue of his paper, betrayiag a eprit cf Cowardly irresponsibility, stigmatizes ‘a state mentof mine (which everybody knows to be literally correct) as “* manufacture for te ovcasion out of the whole cloth.’ Ifhe bad the manlinces to employ une uivecal language of insult, 1 should not have retorted through ihe cclumus of the Enquiver. But he cr00ge; to skulk among verbal amibguities, and I choose to kick him ircm his concealment, and to hold him up to the world as a wilful falsitier, vulgar blackguard and drunken bully. If any pergon is disposed to doubt the sufficieacy of my provocation, I pledge myrelf to furnish evideace to the public that the editor of the Whig is resolved to attempt sp escape from the infamous position in waich I have placed himself and bis paper, by driving me to a ¢rsoual difficulty; and that he has freely and publicly wasted of bis purpose to compel me to fight him or to disgrace me in the esteem of all bonorable men. I have written enough for the present; and it is needless to say, that ] write with a full sense of my responsibilities. ROGER A. PRYOR. Within the past three years Mr. Pryor has had on hand four or five different affairs of honor, neither of which, however was carried to the field. Our Washington Correspondence. Wasauneton, July 30, 1856. The Bill for the Settlement of Revolutionary Claims —Another Move in the House to Raise Money for Electioneering Purposes—Speech of Judge Stew- art on the Slavery Question. The House of Representatives passed a bill to-day, a copy of which I herewith enclose you, which is destined to deplete the treasury tothe tune of seve- ral millions of dollars, and fill the pockets of agents and attorneys. Certain officers of the Revolutionary army, under reso.utions of the Continental Congress, were cn- titled to half pay for life. This, however, seemed to reduce those patriotic spirits to the condition of pen- sioners, at which their feelings revolted, and they were pressed, too, for ready means, many of them having expended their last cent in defence of the new republic. Under these circumstances, the Congress, by an act dated March 22,1753, passed an act allowing to these officers five years’ full pay in lieu of the life pension. Many officers lived more than ten years after the close of the Revolation, and to all such, and to their children and grandchildren will the money appropriated by this bill go. If they lived beyond ten years, then their half pay for life would have excecded five years’ full pay, and it is this excees which the bill proposes to pay. No in- terest is allowed. The bill having come from the Senate, is returned there with a few ments made by the House, and will at once up and . Pthe joure has been considering to-day a bili os tensibly “to expedite the issuance pen for confirmed land claims in nd really to rob and plunder a portion of the citizens of Califor- nia, to fill the pockets of land sharks and poli! blers. Out of this bill it is elect fund for the tial cam- paign. It will be interesting to watch the ayes and naye on the main Meer now ict a general approval of the bill by the a side of the jouse. Shouid it the , its fate is still doubtful in the Senate. The speech of Judge Stewart, of Maryland, on the clavery question, is regarded by all patties here as the ablest exposition of the whole subject eve: de- amend- taken livered on floor of Con; The Judge isa forcible speaker and an ori 1 thinker, and his speech will be widely circulated. ABSTRACT OF HILL FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF REVO LUTIONARY CLAIM, fection 1. Officers of the army ot the Revolution, who were entitled to half pay for tife under the resolu tiore of Congrers; of the Sd atd Zist of October, 1780, the 17th January, 1781; Sth of May, 1781, and the Sth of March, 1785, ehall be entitled to receive the same, al- though euch’ officer may have received, jn hea thereot, the commutation of full pay for five years, under the re solution of the Congrese of the 224 March 1783. Sections 2 and 3 regulate the modes of calculation and 4extends to the widows and orphan children of deceased revolutionary officers, whether of the conti- ental line or volunteer Ce the benefits of the resola- tion of the 24th of August, 1780, mates the benefits of Section 5 extends to sy the resolution ot the 17 ary, 1781 (giviag same pay as howpital jane and surgeons.) ‘Section Frees the Secretary at War to prese:\be such rules of evidence as may be necessary to carry into effect the isions of this act. Section 7, All payments made by authority of tais act to be without interest. Section §. Proois of claim. , Section 9, This act not to extend to any officer or his representatives who have rageived half pay for life voter any #pecial act of Congress, Section 10. Persons claiming under this act, to accept its benciits as full satisfaction for all claims arising under aay of the resolutions of Congress above recited. Section 11. Pereons entitle! to claim. Section 12. This act to continue in force for ten years All claims presented a Ver that to be coa- Mr. Campbell's Conduct on the Army Appropria- tion Amendments— Probable Rejection by (« Se- nate of Mr. Dunn's Kensas Re Organ'-ation Bill—Increosing Feeling in Favor of Sec ssion Amongst the Southern Members—The Revolu- tionary Movement in California— The Governor of California Said to be a°Oorrespondent of the NN. Y. Herald—American Grievances Against Spain, &c., &e. ‘The liberal and national course taken by Mr. Campbell, of Ohio, in the House, on the Army Ap- propriation amendments, has’ given very general satisfaction among politicians of all classes. Mr. Campbell, in opposing the disunion designs of such men as Giddings and friends, in their attempts to embarrass the government, has shown himself to be something beyond a mere partizan. A like exhibi- tion of national sentiment at the proper time, by the friends of Mr. Fremont, in the House, would add greatly to public confidence in the party of which he is the immediate representative. Mr. Dunn's substitute for reorganizing the Terri- tory of Kansas, which has passed the House with a provision to restore the Missouri compromise, will be certain to be rejected, upon its presentation, by the fenate. With but a few more working days left, before the adjournment of Congress, every minnte of which is required by the wants of the country to its interests, yet the same must be | in some fruitiess partisan attempts to make capital for some one of the Presidential canal ‘The stand taken by Mr. Campbell will not be y its benefits in the House. From mere pero] reports, a very imperfect opinion of the real of feeling exteting in the Senate, between No| and Southern Senators, can be formed, the of which 1s to be found in the internal im| ment bills now daily passing the § The indifference with which Sontherr eals and votestations are received b| ‘orth and West to repeated de Jarations| no confederacy on the face of the eart] expect to exist where contributions are | upon a minority for the benetit of the majo | telling with surprising effect upon our ten brethren. here is no exaggeration of the fa the feeling in tavor of a separation trom the been increased, and is daily Lely, be the South, who have come to the conclusic themselves or institutions have uo longer a b) link north of Mason & Dixon's line. The attempt made by a portion of the p establish the impression that California, t Vigilance Committee, has in contemplation ¢ dation from the Union, is properly ridiculed i city, where members of gress and citize: in receipt of late letters from the princpal belonging to the Committee, who promise to at the proper time the necessity for maint their organization. I'am qnite contident th President would readily gatisfy any demand o| g1e88 upon him for any information on this as 9 bit of on, that ne 1 gk es is with havi writts letter from Sau Franoi ne dated July 5, lished in the Hera of the 20th inst ~ The result of the Cabinet meeting yesterda| to await further intelligence from Spuin befor! ing out new instructions to Mr. Dodge, our Mi| on the subject of American grievances. The of Espartero ard the remodelling of the ©, with O'Donnell at its head, who, from tie fir! been friendly to a prompt settlement of our « will doubtless be favorable to the United Stati I learn that Mr. Shannon, Governor of K was recalled at his own request. Wasaineron, Jaly 31,1 Delate in the Senate on the Appropriation for ¢ provement of the Newark (N. J.) Hartor—Ey) be Maile by Senators for the Restoration of the & Compromise—The Minnesota Land Biil—Con Vanderbilt's Appropriation Bill—I's probable 1 The Commodore Won't Bleed, and the Lolhyeors wor port him—The Contest for Governor in New des, de. River and harbor bills in the Senate, with priation and contested election bills in the have thus far consumed tke time of the week. The debate inthe Senate, on an approp for improvement in the harbor of Newar! Jersey, called out strong opposition from the The bill itself was but se’dom alluded to, wh| widest range of discussion, including slavei the Kansas question, was indulged in. Th sand times repeated arguments of the tyranny, majority was set forth with much earay by various Senators. The opposition Senat, only thirteen strong on the question of app; tions, so that they have no other alternative talk, and let the bills be passed. Strong effor's, it is anticipated, will be m| the Senate to restore the Missouri compromt:e! covsideraticn of the Army Appropriation bi the House. Some recent converts are said t been made, who voted for its repeal, bot thei bers are not sufficient to ensure success. There is nothing heard of the Minnesota la which for a time produced much talk and s tion in and out of Congress. It is ascertain the parties havicg charge of it will wait am) vorable occasion before bringing it forward. ,| pressure is made on Congress to get Denver's Railroad project adopted. The bill has not repoited, but the principal features of it known, and I should judge are favorably rec members generally. The riment is again being made by C| dore Vanderbilt to get through vill for the mails to Liverpool, solely = the merit cate us presented by bim to Congress. It well for him to understand, and 1 believe he d erstand, that the hundred outsiders agains! e has arrayed htmeelf, by refusing to emplo cr lol purposes, and in berger the «f his claims, are earnestly at work to put him] The Commodore is strongly opposed to the : le of feeing and bireing those outsiders a who claim the credit of making pinion. Upon these men he has commenc nd the result of the fight will be looked nterest. As soon as it was ascertained Commodore bad no “liquor” on board steamer for his visiters, the number o because sudden!y less and far between. A) Congress adjou ned purposely to allow suc! bers es wished an ty to examine I Jearn that not more than twenty, includin of both Houses, honored the Commodore on casion with their eee. The temperance don’t prevail in ), & fact which th modore cannot be i ot. The old opposit to Collins still exis’ Senate, but does not to have incr in the last two ‘anderbilt’s bill is special order for beens Ah the Sena‘e. you have an abstract of I have taken some trouble to ascertain New York members stand in relation to vernatorial candidate, and find that a ls Forty of the armocratc ey Cocteees nemination of Fernando Wood, but doubt h to succeed, by means of the immense rests that will be brought to bear This, however, is to be seen, APSTRACT OF Mite VANDERBILT'S MATL Al ATION BILL. Bee. 1 authorizes the lostmaster General to ef 8 contract with ( nnelius Vanderbilt for the ton of the mail, once a month, between New Y: Scuthampton for the term of tea years, for the rame to be $16,680 ‘or each round trip. bilt to provide steamers of the first class with mail rooma. government to have power te the trips to semi mouthly or weekly serviee, and the right to appropriate to ite own use any oF fteamebipe, ata price to be fixed by the * Navy and Vanderbilt. In the event of the] ited States and Great Britain the owners o/ all steamships transporting the mails between the two countries, pensation whatever, this contract shal! be nail Sec. 2 gives power to the Postmater General trips of raid etosmers to Bremen, re or Ant to said places alternately, without acdiiooal tion. See. 3 directs the Secretary of the Navy to for the termination of the arrangement with Wasnivoton, Jaly 31, Debate in the House on the Kansas El Brilliant Speech of Mr. Stephens —Whil be Rejected, §e., §e. | The debate in the Honse to-day on the election case excited the deepest interest, in the hackneyed character of the subject. ‘The argument of Mr. Stephens, of Geo brilliant, powerful and thrilling. Hie delicate person seemed to dilate with his he portrayed its vast and vital importance, whole body crowded around him as he the mere man and stood forth the orator man, plesding for his country and her He told the majority of the Honse that about to de what any mob had the same and to effect a part were taki tically a fevennionaey . wai State as ation by rte majority of Southern men in Kansas, mittee labored to the The speeches of Mr. Oliver, of y committee, and of Gen. Whitfleld, aitti Re were severe the Committee ee Winke is to be raven fete or w W is 5 or imme has been determined on, and wil Bed rut.