Star. — London, England, 1824-10-27 00:00:00

; WEST INDIA SLAVERY. LETTER VII. The following Letter, which we now reprint, was originally num bered the Six:h, a std‘take which arose from the Letter in serted in the STAR of yestertlay.not having been printed in its proper place. TO TIIE . Plin i o:fit OF TIIE STAR. Silt —I am again compelled to call your attention to another ,flagrant instance of misrepresentation in spirit, if not in letter, on the past of Asonos and I antici pate the establishment of the proof of this assertion in the most conclusive manner. In the text and note beginning at page 572 of the Quarterly Review, so often alluded to, is a long series of observations on a Public document referred to by Mr. Whitmore, in his speech in the House of Commens on the 18th of May ; and the printer cf this article has made a typographical ertor,by substituting the numeral 3 for that of 2. The Review says, "In a table drawn 4 upby M. Inginac, eotitied, General Balance of the "' Commerce of the different Foreign Nations with 44 4 Haiti, for the year 1823' ; and it ought to have " said, General Balance of the Commerce, dec. for the " year 18`22:" The tiros', as I have already stateJ,.is in the printing. The reasoning is exclusively directed to the year 1824. and the Ocement referred to by Mr. Whitmore. Upo n'this, Aitot:tra remarks, 44 But there 44 is another capital mistake of the Reviewer, which ten "'tiers his whole reasoning on the subject perfectly fal l. kiCi(MS and inapplicable. The document of M. In " ink; t•O'{vlich he refers, he 'describes as an account 1 . 4 die COM* . iie'Of • Haiti with Foreign Nations for " 1823; whereas, on looking into the document itself,, " I find that it contains an ;account of the Foreign Com-1 pierce :onlayti.oot for an, but for 1822. " Does loont,iis pretend to !appose that the fact thus discovered by him 'was it& estfultßy known to the Re- : 'viewer ? • He mat havelciiraVvit &it the observations of, the Reeiewer were directed tp the Ii Cement for 1822,• because it was to that identical document that Mr.., Whit-More referred, and Attotus knew that fact, for he says the Revietver 'teives'hard to prove that the state- Xnents made by Mr. WhittriOre, on the authority of that document, were fallaCiotis, Mr. Whitmore alluded to the document for 18 4 22. The Revieeer specifically al- 1 luded to Mr. Whitmore% remarki upon that document. therefore ANOLUS must have known that the change of the numeral 3 for . 2 was in accidental error of die press. He 'states, that he had the document to which Mr.Whit more referred before him, and that fie hard looked 6 into the document itself; which is a most unfortunatiachnis sion.on his part; for, as it was before his eyes, be must hive perceived, 'that all the figures expressive - of quan tities, or •values,On which the Reviewer reasoned, were identically the same as in the document before him. He must have perceived that the question turned on their abstract accuracy, and not on the point whether they related' to ode year, or atiOtirr? And is it posiible that ANGLUS can present himself to the . Public as a fair reasoner, whose arguments are to be trusted, hen he contends that the whole reasoning of an argument is perfectly useless and inapplicable, because there is an error in the press of 1823 for 1822? The fact is, that ANGLUS knew perfectly well that lie could not meet the argument by fair reasoning ; and it is an imputation on his ingenuity, that he has only been able to resort to the pitiful expedient which I . have unmasked to the Public, to ward off the necessity of grappling with the real substantial merits of the ease. Let it then be supposed that this typographical error had not been committed, and then let us take up the argument. The tendency of the argument is, to shew that Mr. Whitmore, who cited St. Domingo as an instance of the advantages of free labour on the part of eman cipated Slaves, as compared with Slave-labour, had been misled by an om:ial document, which had been placed in his hands. Part of the letter containing the docilinent alluded to by the Reviewer is quoted in the Review; (and here I must incidentally remark that AN otos must have known the error in question to have been an accidental one, for, in the extract from this let ter, the year 1822 is printed correctly, and contrasted with 1823.) The passage is as follows ;—"Commerce " has considerably increased" (says M. Inginac, the Se cretary to the President of Haiti, to his Correspondent in LOndon;) " of which you Will have an idea by On es i sultirik the paper which I send you, of the importa " tions and exportations of the yearHai., collected ac s " the different -Custom-houses." • In that paper is the . • table drabin uV.II M e * Ingintit, entitled •" General BA -4 lance of the ,C6mnierierif die •different "Fdreign Na• 4 4: tions . with Haiti for the ) ear 1822," iMprope4ty ps inted in the note to the Review, 1823. ANGLUS then proceeds to a second charge. He says, " In addition to this blunder,"' (pretending to suppose that the introduction of the year 1823 for 1822 was not an ettor Of'the ideas,) " he (the Reviewer,) adopts the " typographical error of the h.:forming Chi-1)7:0e, which " has translatedthe mark:forpontids weight into dial " lars Vane - In the first place, it is snipitions when ANcLus be gins to accuse the illorning,Chronide Of error ;—but when he applies the term " typographical error" to a blundering and ignorant mistranslation of a French. word, is it possible to conceive a greater confusion of the plain terms of the English language? The British and Colonial Weekly Register, of the 4th of September, a paper. with which Ationos is as well acquainted as he is with the Correspondent of M Inginac, has these Obseriations on the Review : " One "cause of the diScrepanCy s might easily 'have occurred " to . the Reviewer, if h'e had been disposed to observe . 4 it. In printing the account in the Newspaper, the 44 quantities were headed dollars instead of pounds "weight. This is so evident in all the items, that it " could 'only Lave been Overlooked by the Reviewer by 66 desinn."—All that she Reviewer had to shew was, that the public had been juggled—that Mr. Whitmore had been deceived-wbettier by interitiOn'or design,-it was not his . business • •ii qnirer—fhi Britilh and Colonial Weekly Register,•on the .25th of September, 18'21, publishes this -very -document in the original . French, vi kb this paragrae;•"` * As the errors" (not ; typagraphidder rors,. A:got r na 'called them) " which " aapeared•iii•the'statenient of .the C.Qlllllneice of Haiti, . " published vs Me MorniarChro...dide, from whence "tee "co . pied the article, have occasibned.'ronch Confusion, "Are think i it iiPedient to . punt an exact 'copy Of this " account, from the :Original intim document now " before as," (M. Ingitistei English Correspondent heir% acqtrainted - with' die .Editor 'of The Briash and Caunial Wog,. Vgiite i o): "'The I ;otirde'eilist spoil& "to th e dollar, the ound weight is nearly' eiittil to CrarN,......one bun:tired 'Haitian being equal to one_hunJaed ailed eight 'pounds 'English. beg to • i Vire , tiuw cattle " it that We - Minted The JJ:it i s/i and Colonial Weekly JAtt.r n haYing, as was afterwards shewn, the means br itces: to tl4`original document, should_ Jinn .preferred.kuoting an incortect arenslation which had appeared in the MeinikrC'hroniefel Is it pOssible to mike an apology for this substitution of error for truth ? But then it must be • remembered, that if the mistake trot been made, the argument would have been cmclusive'ahainst Mr. Whitmore and those who had reasoned with him. But I have nlt yet quite disposed of ANGLE'S and The British and Colonial Weekly Register. In the latter Paper, published . June 12, 1824, is to be found this passage:—" Sugar" (that is, sugar ft oat St. Domingo) " is effectually excluded here" (in G! eat Britain) " by " prohibitory duties: but in France alone the quantity of Haitian sugar imported in 1822 was of the value 44 of 370,000 dollars." And if any person will refer to the document itself, as pi anted in The British and Colo nial Weekly Register of May 15, 1821•, he will find it there stated, that the value of the sugar exported from Haiti to France, in 1822, amounted to 371,000 dollars. But when a sufficient time had elapsed to allow the ge neral circulation of this false statement, if any of my Readers will refer to The British and Colonial Weekly Register of September 25,1824, they will find it therein stated, not that the value of the sugar exported horn Haiti to France in 1822 was 371,000 dollars, but that its Weight consisted of 374,000 French pounds, being the same identical number.—Now was there ever such a juggle and farce as this, in a correspondence that as sumes the character of being carried on by the organ of a very considerable party in a State like Great Britain ? And in pursuing this subject (for it is not yet disposed of), I would beg particularly to inquire, what is meant by the explanation prefixed to the Haitian document in The British and Colonial tVeekly Register of the 25th September, 1824, that " the gout de corresponds to the " dollar ?" Is it to be understood from this paragraph that the legal Haitian coin called a gourde is really of the same value as the Spanish coin called the dollar? Is, it not clearly'the intention of the Editor th at his readers' should believe that their value is one and the same?— Because the opinion which any person may form with respect to the value of the exports and imports of Haiti may not only materially, but entirely tutu on this point. M. Chanlatte, of Haiti, in his Appel aux Haitiens, page 9, says," M. Martignac, an lieu de denigrer d'un van si " ridicule ' les petites pieces de cuivre a peine blan " chies, et aux quelles it a plus au President d'Haiti " d'assigner la valeor d'un quart de gourde,' ne de " vrait-il 'pas de prefetence soupirer amerement au sou " veoir des mandats, et des assignats, que la France " avait echanges contre les monneries d'or et d'argent 64 qui cireuloient en France, dans le -terns denomrne de " la terreur?"—This passage would give a very diffe rent'estimate of the value of the gourde. Is AMASS able to contradict it? It is really amusing to ascertain the extent to which such -grave and learned personages as the President, the Vice-Piesidents, and the Committee, of the Anti-Sla very Society, had been puzzled by this document from Haiti, the errors of the translation of which are so palpable, when the Reviewer deals with them, that it is said 46 nothing but design could have overlooked " them." In page 23, of the Report of the Anti-Sla very Committee, published (be it remembered) since the last Quarterly Review, is the following passage :••• 46 4 The sugar exported from St. Domingo, previously " 6 to the emancipation of the Slaves,' say the West " Indians, 6 was 160 millions of pounds ; but since 61 6 free labour has been established, that Island does 46 d_rst Manufacture enough for its own consumption.' " The inference intended to be drawn from the fact is, that the emancipation of Slaves will tend to diminish, " if not destroy production. 'Eat what is the real state "of the case with respect to St. Domingo? In the ," first place, it is not true that St. Domingo does not 66 grow sugar for its own consumption. In the year " 1822, besides satisfying its own demand, a certain " " quantity, indicated by the figures 652,451, was ex ported thence, chiefly to France*. It is not c!ear " whether this quantity is intended to spec k pounds or " hundredweights." Here is a grave official document, ,published for the purpose of enlightening the public mind, and of settling and consolidating public opinion, in which it is frankly avowed, that the Anti-Slavery Society are so conversant with Haitian affairs, that they are actually uncertain whether the figures '652,451 are intended to specify 'pounds or hundred-weights! 1 would only call upon any. person who is in the slightest degree conversant with the bearings which arithme tical data-have on argument, to think of the force of that series of reasoning, and . of the authority of those reasoners, who are obliged to confess their ignorance whether the exports of sugar from Raid, chiefly to France, amounted to 652,451 pounds, or to 73,074,512 pounds e. 652,15! hundred-weights) when the Haitian document itself stated, that only 374,000 lbs. were sent to Fiance ? Such are the. absurdities into which men fall, who form opinions under the influence of feelings, and not of facts. But admitting, for the sake of argument, that the Haitian document is correct, and that.652,4511b5. or about 435 hogsheads of sugar really were exported from St. Domingo, yet this is only about:the two him: dred and fortieth part of what was produced-front the French part of the Island alone, prior to the emancipa tion of the Slaves. Will ANGLUS, will the Anti Slavery I Society, deny that specific fact, thus simply and-for mally stated? Undoubtedly, if the numbers applied to hundred weights, and not to pounds, this calculation would not be correct . ;—but no man in his senses ever pretended to believe that hundred-weights were in tended to be expressed by these figures, in a French official document, wherein cwts. are never used as a le gal and official expression of •weight. A notus appears to contend that St. Domingo manu factures sugar enough for its own consumption. I would then inquire; how -is that assertion to be reccsn ciled With the - fact, Which rests on the authority of President Boy-er himself, so late as the 20th of Match, 1823, that sugar was smuggled into Hayti from Colo nies where it had been raised by Slaves, in direct oppo sition to the laws of that Republic ? If it ever be per - mined to form human opinions by inference,—how is it to be supposed that it could answer, to introduce foreign sugar into St. Domingo, with all her advantages rf soil and climate, if she were enabled to grow enough for her own domestic consumption, in the fair sense of the term? Let ANGLUS cease to suppose that the cause of the Abolition of Slavery,—the cause of putting an end to the worst form in which human society ever appeared, • Here I must observe, that it appears only 374,00014. are said, even•in the Haitian document, to have been sent to France. T 4 official documents of the linked Stites atid Great Abrltiiin Got agteeibg with the Ilaitiah docOment, is ibewn by the Reviewer, now France is selected for illustration. The Reviewer hid not noticed France In any 'manner. can by possibility be perinanently.aided by sophistical argutnents or by perierted acts. liefore this series of letters is c0n4414, he still,find additional reason to be convinced of this truth. 3MI, Sir, your humble servant. VINDEX. St4R4Y ,Q(I4IRTER ,SESSIONS, OCTOBER 26. Jane Baker, aged es, ras indicted for stealing fifteen silver spoon's, and various other articles, value 301. the property of her master, James YAtes. The prisoner was a servant to Mr. Yates, and in con sequence of -various articles being occasionally missed, suspition fell upon her, when she acknowledged that she had stolen them ; she also said that she had met with a young man, (whose name did not transpire), with whom she had been intimate about five weeks, when he told her he had become bound for a person, and unless she could assist him, he would be utterly ruined. She said she had oo money, but he advised her to make use of some articles which were her masters. She was in c , •nsequence prevailed on to take the plate, &c. mentioned in the indictment, an.d she pawned them at three different pawnbrokers, he waiting outside the shops to receive the duplicates and money.—Guilty— Sentenced to Li years transportation. Joseph Fry was indicted for stealing two shawls and other articles, value 51. the property of Charles Fox Smith. Several witnesses gave the prisoner an unex ceptionable character for several years.—Guilty.—Sen tenced to seven years transportation. Joseph Pitt Will indicted for intermarrying with Sarah Elizabeth Meadows on the sth of January last, his former wife being then still living. The circumstances of the case were these :—The prisoner, Joseph Pitt, was of the age of 38, and had lived in the capacity of a gar dener with Dr. Fox, of Hackney, who kept an estab lishment for insane persons. In the same Gentleman's I service the prosecutrix was first engaged as a house maid, but in consequence of her very correct and pru dent conduct, her master afterwards promoted her to the care of the insane persons. While living in the house, the prisoner ingratiated himself into the affec tions of the prosecutrix, and by his attentions to her, and his representations that he was possessed of 3001. which would assist in advancing their prospects in life; lie prevailed upon her to listen to his overtures. She, however, wishing to consult with her father, who held a situation in the beck-yard, at Deptford, on a step of so much importance, wrote a letter to him, and having obtained his consent, it was arranged that the prisoner should remain in his house, paying a weekly sum for his board,•&c. till the marriage was solemnized. Pitt did accordingly remain with him for a long time, but being 'then anxious that the marriage knot should be tied, it was agreed that the ceremony should take place on the sth of January last, and after the usual pub icatien in Church, it was entered into on that day with all the accustomed ceremonies. The parties lived to. -*ether at the father's house for some time after the Marriage, but it being then apparent that the money the prisoner bad spoken of would not be forthcoming, 'he was desired to quit the place, which he did, and the prosecutrix at his desire again went into service. Some time afterwards the prisoner was sought after upon an affair not connected with this charge, when it was dis covered that he had been married in Birmingham, in 1808, and that his former wife was still living. That circumstance was further inquired into, and the fact having been clearly ascertained, tfie friends of the pro , secutra had taken the 'present proceedings to punish him for the unfeeling and disgraceful - imposition which be had practised upon her. Mr. Wallace, a carrier of Birmingham, was present when the prisoner was married to his first wife, Ana Richards, on the 7th of March, 1808, at the Church of St. Martin, Birmingham, and produced a copy of the marriage registry. Pitt's first wire was related to his (the witness's) family by marriage. He saw Pitt's first wife as recently as Monday last. She was then living in Whitechapel. Cross-examined—The primmer and his first wife were married by banns. Sarah Elizabeth Meadows, an interesting young woman, about twenty years of age, was next examined. She stated, that the ceremony of marriage was solemnized between herself and the prisoner on the sth of last January, at Greenwich. They *ere married by banns. ..... ....—During the time I lived with the prisoner, he always behaved to me with great kindness and attention. She meter saw the prisoner's first wife. Peter Meadows, the brother of the prosecutrix , proved that be was present at the marriage of hii siste r with the prisoner Pitt. The prisoner, in his defence, said be had been separated from his first wife for many years, in consequente of the extreme irregularity of her conduct. The Cuatastaw, in his address to the Jury, said the case. had bole too cleat ly proired to admit of any doubt as to his guilt. The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and The CHAIRMAN, in passing sentence, said, that if it had not appeared, by the testimony of the prosecutrix, 'that.he had behaved with great kindness to her, after 'he had so'shamefully deceived her, be (the Chairman) would have felt it a duty to have passed a heavy sen tence upon him, as, by his . defence, he had admitted his 'kuonitedge of having a wife *living at the time he en tered into the second marriage, but willing, from that .circumstance, to 'treat. him .with lenity, the sentence of the Court was, that he should be imprisoned in Brixton noose of for six months, and there kept to hard labour. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL hfr. C. P. Priebe, merchant, in Crosby-square, was charged by his brother 'Mr. A. L. Pasche, with appropriating to his own use .660, brought to the firm, to be held in trust, for a debtor- M ilking the intimacy between the prisoner awl a former partner, who had' done everything to injure the camplaittafit, and fearing the con sequences of ihit intimacy, he had entered into new articles of part-. nasal> with his brother in January, 184.3. On the 14th inst. notice of a dissolution was published in Theqa., ; eop: but on Monday, last he discovered the prisoner, who had never before drawn , above .€lO l at a time, had taken to himself £6O. Mr. P. was extremely anxious to read what seemed a very lengthy narrative of their affairs, and, some letters ; while the Alderman was desirous he should give the points onty, and, those briefly—Mr. Smith, the Solicitor, on the other hand, produeetrthe articles of partnership, by which the ac cused Was to have a`nionth's notice of any disnalatian, and there was no restriction as to the amount which either might draw from the joint stock. fie therefore contended, that the prisoner was still a partner, as between themselves, though not perhaps as between them and the Public. lie also shewed, fluin'the cash-book, which he had-required the complainant to produce, that his client' had openly debited himself, as nsual, with the £6o.—Mr. Alderman Cauwona held, that the prisoner had a right to do what he was charged with doing, and dismissed the complaint. 130 W.STREET. Mr. Was. Hawes, the public singer and director of a musical aca." l demy in the Adelphi, was brought before Mr. Hat.t.s, charged with an assault twin one of' pupils, Jacob William Gear, a boy about twelve years of age. Mr. llawes came accompanied by the lieu. Dr. Hughes, one of the Canons Residentiary of St. Paul's Cathedral, and some other Gentlemen of St. Paul's and the Chapel Royal. Several of his pu., pill were-also present. The charge was, that Mr. Hawes, on 11Eirsday last, s•t•irk the boy a aevere blow acrosa•the arm with a walking cane. After hearing evidence, Mr. Haus said he had fat it his du , y to suffer Mr. Hawes to enter into thefullest explanation, and he had permitted him, perhaps, to introduce some extraeenus matter ' • and it was because he thought that a charge o f cruelty (and this was so preferred when the warrant was applied for) against the diree t ,, r of a public establishment of such comiderahle consequence, not be too narrowly inquired into for the sake both of the and the individual. The charge here seemed to him to-be frivolous and unfounded, and ought never to have been thought (A.—l!, warrant was discharged. Mrs. Riviere, the wife of Mr. Riviere, a gunsmith, in Orft•ni. street, applied for the Magistrate's cdvice, as to what mean, ,;, e should adopt to recover, or gain some tidingi of a favourite ter of her's, who bad suddenly disappeared from the house--,:, believed removed sway by Sir. Riviere. Mr. Riviere said, that it was very truel►e had removed his t 1 :1: 0,_ ter away from the reach and controul of her mother, for tlie h c , T , ail possible reasons; that had he nut done- so, the girl's ruin wit -t be the consequence ; and, to give the Magistrate some Hex of ; 1,, probability of tin.: result, he would mention a few trausactire ls , a line of conduct, which this young creature, 15 years of age , „ a. encouraged by her mother to pursue. In the first place, this you n girl, with the consent of her mother, went and hired a large La. room, ler the purpose of giving weekly dances and halls, and i n . siting all the young men and women, no matter whom they nerv, that came into her own or her mother's head. In the next plat she became an actress, by bet mother's wish, at a private theatr e , where she acted the chief parts in tragedy ; and all this lt.al for some time been going on unknown to him (Mr. lliviere) until he fortunately found it out by the accidental circumstance of his miming the key of the street-door, which, upon proper inquiry, L e discovered this young creature was in the habit of taking pith Ler. by her mother's consent, every night after be went to bed, and let ting herself in at four and five o'clock 11.11 the morning. To teSCLe the girl, thetefore, from the inevitable ruin that must await her. if not removed from such states, he bad placed her in a siiterien where both her morals and her education would be attended to. li e had not, as was stated, iotrasted her removal to the care of any ere, for he himself had placed her where she was. Mrs. Riviere could not deity the scenes described by her hu.. band, but said all she wanted was to know where her daughter na., and to hear from her occasionally. The Magistrate said, that he thought Mr. Riviere had acted %shit great propriety in disposing of his daughter as he bad done, and ad vised Mrs. Riviere not to interfere farther upon the subject ; would, of course, always have an opportunity of - nearing that her daughter was well ; and, for the present that was sufficient. LAMBETH-STREET. Benjamin Burrell, a man dressed in the garb of a working me chanic, was brought up for having attempted to commit an assault upon the Rev. Mr. Mathias, Rector of Whitechaprl, and one of the Magistrates fur the County of Middlesex.— Ntr. M. stated, thu ye.- terday morning, on his way to this office, he observed a number ( , f persons assembled in the street, and on his coming up; he found tao persons fighting, the prisoner being a second to one of the partite, and the most active in urging them on to fight. He, Mr. Mathias, endeavoured to remonstrate with him on the impropriety of his c o n. duct ; but scarcely was be allowed to utter a few words, when he was assailed by the prisoner with a volley of low abuse and daring threats, at the same time placing himself in a fighting attitude, and was going to carry these threats into effect, when Lee, the Aar, came up and took him into custody. The prisoner was ordered to find good bail to keep the peace. UNION-HALL. Thomas Fos, a carman, in the employment•of Mr. King s a tin. plate-worker, was summoned, for causing an obstruction in Black man-street, Southwark, by placing his horse and cart in such a ri tuation•across the street, that there was no possibility of movie; either one way or the other. The obstruction continued for the space of an hour and a quarter. The defendant was fined a penalty of ter. shillings and costs. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Rosaeav ♦$D ♦rrntn ay Aasom—Yesterday, Mary Ganger was brought up for re-examination, on the charge of stealing in a dwelling-house, and also with attempting to set fire to the premises. Mrs. Rhodes, of Flask-row, Five-fields, Chelsea, deposed, that about three weeks ago, the prisoner, who stated herself to be the wife of a private In the Third Dragoon Guards, took an apartment in her house, and, up to the evening of the fire, there was no reason to complain of hcr. In the room, on the second floor, there lived a Mrs. Armstrong, who, about a week ago, had missed 'from her room a large bundle of wearing-apparel. Not the least suspicion was at first entertained of the former, and it was thought I,oole I thief had crept up stairs, and committed the robbery. Tuesday evening Mrs. Armstrong went out, and left the key in her room door. The prisoner at this time was in her own room. About five o'clock some of the neighbours came running in, and said the house was on fire, and that the flames were then breaking out at the second-floor window. Witness and one or two others ran Up stairs, and on going into Mrs. Armstrong's room, it was found to be in a body of fire ; the bed, bedding, window-curtains, cupboards, &c. were all in a blaze. Fortunately the flames were confined to the roost, which, together with the furniture, was entirely destroyed. Suspicion now fell on the prisoner, who shewed peculiar composure. It was said in her presence, " that the party who committed the robbery had set the house on fire." The prisoner then, in agitation, exclaimed, " If you think I have committed the robbery, you may come up stairs and search my room." This was agreed upon, and the prisoner ran up stairs first, the window of the room was wide open, and whilst the search was being made, the boodle containing the stolen wearing-apparel belonging to Mrs. Armstrong, was picked up by a little girl in the middle of the road opposite the house. Coles, a Constable was sent for, to whom she was given in 'custody. Before he came, she confessed her guilt, and begged for mercy.—lt was seated by the prisoner that Mrs. Armstrong's hus band had promised that he would not prosecute if she confessed, and in consequence she did so. The prisoner was again sent back to prison, and ordered io 'brought up on a future day, when Mr. Armstrong is to be in attend ance. She is a very decent-looking•woman, about 30 years of age ; and during the examination appeared quite unmoved. Another affray between the Coast Blockade.men and the Sussex Smugglers took place at Bexhill on Wednes day : a considerable number of tubs with spiritwmn 'liquors were run, about three hundred, it is said, anl about the same number was seized. A smart skirmish look place, and some severe wounds were inflicted. A smuggler, of the name of Benjamin Bradford, was talce:i prisoner,. and he is now under confinement in one of the Martello Towers. Manna InTatmoaaca.—.Copper Ores sold - at lledrilth on 'Phan dap—Quantity of Copper Ore sold, 2218 tons—hvaroge Produce, iti—Quantity of hoe Copper, 179 tons, isowt.--Amaantet 3414 16,888 i . nib—Average Standard, 1471.1111. BIRTH. Oct 21, at Plymouth, the Lady of Capt. Hailes, of the King's Regiment, of a daughter. MARRIED. ' Oct. 15, at Aberdeen. Alajor J. S. Sinclair, Royal Artillery, to F.uphenda, a:Jest daughter of the late Thomas Buritiot IA4I. • Auchmacoy. Monday sennight, at Sundrum, the Rev. George (WAIle, 3ii• 'Aster of Kilwinning, to Jauet 31aria, daughter ut the Lte macdougal, R. .• DIED. Sept. 10, at Carskey, Lieut.-Cul. 3lakoltu1lIacn“l; of Car- lt ••• July 17, at St. Atm s, Jamaica, Robert Laing Grant, E$E,..- cond son of the Rev. William Grant, Sancta, Orkney. Oct. 17, at Edinburgh, John Pitcairn, Esq. uf- Pitcairn. Saturday, in consequence of drinking boiling water from a try kettle a son 4-It. Walters, bf Sta ff ord, hlackirmith. The 13th inst. at Woodbridge, Suffolk, aged 41, Charlotte Skin ner she was letter-carrier in that place upwards ut thirty ye'i"• and is 'Opposed to have walked a distance of nearly 80,00 0 au"' in that capacity, being more than three times the circutuleicu" " 3 the globe. •-•— lAA I LS —' •Sli. sus. Oublis 1 0 Waterford 2 0 at . ,eressy _d Jereoy a 0 Lisboa 1 0 DLT. •sa. 1 011 ' France 0 0 Hamtaurgh u to Flanders 0 0 O Lreward Maeda 0 .„ 0 America Gottenburgh J.maica U 1 O 0 LObitION-BRIDGIC Ileums • • . 17 mutes •Pa 6 Atlermine - 43 minutes after 6 LONDON : Prittleti rind PaNikkefl by .1. F L K IX : , al 'TAM 01 I 14. I 1u..1, lithet, __.:.:~ rimisrsmQm !;. .;0041 ).ea • al ;; .~ • ••••• NOP tad flue '1 the 1 Cot NI the '~ sun 1, • r VI; b lip: ' ••.! 4 . 0 " I In tl bee . • ::,:. : _ _ • 11 will NO' Tbei . C, Prtz and 'ew, Moo niie 8' the 1 eidei 'ever, sof N Oillo High &am LE G Ravi TIC ' rteor had Amo 'years of p• COlng yr hiel We; t am, To 261 rs. kts, raw about vend 1 .1 he co Our p recoil him t Pktel will znd Attet To Tb - %Vlli 'Ella that dal, )41-