Star. — London, England, 1828-03-05 00:00:00

;ration. Ti l e red, that if th e f 'nt labour t nr t certainly b e try. The I-In k from the re. The great,* its, that s,ocv o parties who t beneficial to ays of settling lblic grant, or ten any , where, oiler to iividuals. Fnt sed to be t home. Th g r. W. Horton! lat he ohjeeted ted in P:trlia: in emigrating and thus the Any further ght, only tend Farthing of d it ; and if, as it pay in kind, it suppose ants abroad, it r expense Oa* email. A great laws, and that, greet way tt) that he wouli means of te. ve emigration. ht Right lick done hirma the mantle: he the population Alen of laud by e kad hinfielf 1, which rnight 3,0604 famed • desired was, sod abolish the ?le of Englaud Inds in England o►e we thought neourAging the he . thought we Nicks. If there by not transport more years' im home ? As the r the good meat is of England, !ady been culti should be car• e pauperism.— .ation existed in treater or more .he fact, than at labouring men tied men to the per week. king of the eau• ngdom, and the dvstress amongst nserved, that if would flow, into yment would be kur able Member kneel' erected a n which he had ter of an acre of had never found doubts whether tleman would te e would look at ut he feared the more that insur- Hon. Secretavr ly to understand it to re•introluce .1 last Session ? in with my Right r addressed the earlier attention t the Passengers' the Honourable New Brunswick a considerable d be satisfied of who arrived and itagious disorders devastated whole instances, of not The House will legislate, to take t each passenger imudation for the rage. True iC is Act which ought less or inappliea approaching, and t those who may ,essions in North tdition to benefit nlony. With re migration, I feel, coo much praise . Friend, for tbF town in the ',re present occasion , tr other reasons it to go into a dis lation is agreater tdequate emplor e may be others tut attention: 01. EAST RITFORD BILL. . , Is pobsiote in any that there should without a corres-; , hear.) Such 2 recated ; it is col/ other pa. ts of . the to the ennigsation ion !,hould pevi !tuplay mein else talent should be ig the ernigratV• opposition to the' Tail be able to go übject, and in t he ,se Should receive ~. *ll pb‘sihle information, and that it stoo!d be well cnn-' As to dr.! Passengers' Art, I trust that it will Tr ,.•• with no resistance, and rh it it will be passed be .•:e '"C5 , el , proceed on their voyage with erbigrants in the present season.—The Qlestion was diet) put and car Mr. WILNIOT•HORTON then moved for leave to b r i ng in a Bill to revive and amend an Act for regu lating vessels carrying passengets to foreign parts. On the queinion being put, Mr. HUME thought the Right Hon. Gentleman should look at the Report of the Committees which sat on this subject five years ago, before he brought in his Bill. The House wantel further information on the subject. I Mr. HUSKISSON, in reply to the observations of the .klonourab:e Member (Mr. Hume), observed, that from A statement made by Sir J. Campbell, which he held in •Iris hand, out of 160 passengers in the ship James, to Halifax, five had died, and the remainder were affected by the typhus fever; and that in a district where the population consisted of 10,000 persons, 800 had died in consequence of an influx of diseased Irish settlers. It was therefore absolutely necessary, to prevent similar 'unfortunate occurrences, to enact certain regulations on the subject—►particularly with respect to there being on . board a suffisient supply of water, and a proper diet for the passengers. On the passage to Rio Janeiro of one 'of the emigrant vessels from Ireland, great sickot-ss pre vailed, and in another mutiny occurred. After a few words from Mr. STATILIY, Mr. WAMICRTON, Mr. . IlosissoN, and Sit JAssas GRAVASI, leave was given to bring in the Bill. D. W. HARVEY moved for a Return of the number of suhyttnas ad respondendum issued from•the Exchequer Office, as also tt•e number of appearances which have beta entered during the last sia years.—Ordered. TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS. Lied JOHN RUSSELL moved that the Order of the Day for the receipt of the Report of the Committee on toe Test and Cor poration Acts be then read. It was read accordingly. The IL-port was brought up, mid the - ittaplutions of the Committee, that so much of the• Acts of the 13t1iof Chalks 11. the 25th of Charles 11. and the 16th of George 11, ts relate to the Sacrament of-the Lomo's Supper, should be re. •: pealed, were then agreed to. - Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved for leave to bring in a Bill, in puravarice of these Resolutions. He should propose that the Bill should be read a second time some day next week,and be committed on Monday se'nnight. Mr. MOORF. moved the second reading ct the Kilkenny (Ire ..land) Chapel Bill. , . Mr. GRATTAN suggested the propriety of postponing the Bill for a fortnight, in order to afford time for the forwarding of infor -*nation by those who might be interested in the measure. • The second reading was accordingly eventually postponed till ' Friday. Mr. G. MOORE moved the second reading of the Irish Steam Packets' Regulation Mr. aUMIC suggested that the measure ought to extend to the United Kingdom. - Mr. MOORS replied, that such point was a question for the Cnanmium. ,Read a second time, and ordered-to be committed on Thursday. The House again lesolved itself into a Committee en the East Retford•Dbfranchisement Hilt On the motion of Mr. ..Tmessoe, Mr. it. Goanon was.called to the Chair. Several wit nesses were called before any appeared ; last .. . . Nathaniel Buxton answered. He was examined by Mr. Tenni son.—Witneas said he had been s freeman of East Retfurd thirty years; he had certainly voted at . the last lour Elections. Ile did - :me receive any Election Money at the Elections of 1807 and 1812. %Ha did not know how that happened, except because they did not ...give him any—(A laugh.) Mr. Marsh's agent had promised him • some, but forgot to pay it. In 1818, - there was 201. put in at.his *Windt* :be would speak the truth. At another time he received lorty-autneat, trr 1820; from Leadbetter (the bellman.) It was -folded up; but there was no direction - on the paper.— Mr. Fulcham ,canvassed him fur the last.elecijoa, and said "all should be right." Pe could not think what wasifheapt by that ; he bad often heard the ispression lb Eist Retford, but he never , could tell what was ineant , by it—tot labgh.) Thirty or forty other electors were there. 'He did-not know.*teether .others heard it they had ears to bear, and might have bawd *1 bat he could not tell wheiher they under stood the word. .. • • •• Examined by Do i. . did not get farthing for the tketisn Ned; bat money hid been proimised. • By Mr. O. WomersThe money bad not-been paid, and therefore ,4sqa4ctered tbat. a " lie" had been told. William Grant was called, and examined by Mr. Tenntsoe—He Mt never received any thing from Mr. Mason, the Duke of New castle's agent. He voted in the Duke's interest. He did not re mem any 'money from any candidate. lio'had malted money. kg be eceild not say what sum. • 7.0.1Vki Alderman WAITH M AN said the witness should be:tastioned not to pursue this evasive mode of an. aoariog.d.(Hear). 1 . • • • - - - - The CHAIRMAN preised on the.witness the neces. sitrof giving direct answers. Wheces said he could riot remember the amount; he had re-1 catbird bot tke. sum he 'could not renieMber. After Mr.', 04beldeatone's election hureasked a present, but be knew nut fries, whom it came. , y bir . FIRQUSON—He received presents on the occasions sections-'he had never received such presents after elections...— The presents were in bills or notes; be took care of them—" he put them into practice."—(A laugh). He was repeatedly asked whether he counted or reckoned the notes? but he gave no answer. 'The CIPIAIAMAII told the witness that last night they were obliged to send a witness to Ilewgate for his evasion; if he persisted in his anSweroir rather no-ansvier, the Committee would be obliged to recommead the same course respecting witness. Mr. Feeausom repeated his question in different shapes. Witness said, it might have been U. or it might have been WI. He had reeelved - money after different elections; he might have received presents three different times, or four ; he could not say in par. ticsibr how much he had received at any one election ; there were elections at_which he did not receive presents, but he could not tell which—be bad not received apy present from Mr. Mush, for Mr. IL gave no presents. He once received a present in London after an election; it was given to him in the common street; he believed is was in news, but he did not know how much it was—he could not say whether it was one or twenty guineas; he koevethe value of the notes he received tor his labour. Having been asked if he loam Alderman Parker, Mr. SYKES wished to know why that question, should be put, as yet the House bad heard nothing of Alderman Parker. Mr. TENNISON replied. that he had put such ques. lion because it had been intimated to him,•that Alder. man Pallier (an Alderman of Retfcrd) bad been en gaged in the . Lobby in giving advice to the witnesses against adducing that sort of honest evidence required by the Howe. Alderman WAITHMAN again spoke of the charac. ter of the last witness's evidence. He would not recom mend his commitment ; but he thought if they did. not commit him, their treatment of Fox would have bee!, harsh, and they would be somewhat unmindfulof the character of the House. Lord NUGENT said he had never heard of Parkas, but he thought there was the perfect right-to ask shoot ' any one if it were suspectedtbat the witnesses Lades tampered,vrith. 'MTV F. - PALMER observed, that a more prevaricav, thirwitners had never been at their bar than the else just :examined. 'He had not given one straight forward' answer. • _ Several Member Intimated that there was se r—'— Nivea the Committee. ' 2 . & . .71 •2; • _ • !:. .1 • ; ' Mr. PALMED . said be:bad nude/its:Oa that there was the. worthy- Aldernnan's'propositionisit the commit- ment of the last witaess—(Gries so)i: 1...41! Mr. Secretary PEEL remarked) that the worth/' Alderman had 'only intimated that if this witaess•were not conintiteed, fox would have been treated,with harshness. Mr. FERGUSON said bewould not defend the alt.. nirss's prevaricasinal. bet. allokanees ought cube made.' consideting_his sittla•ion in life, as compared with that of F. x. • Mr: Secretary Peet, spoke to the like effect, as did Lord NUGENT. The witnels was nor recalled. Mr.TENNISON said, though he h id upwards of 20 witnesses in attendance, he thought it would be, unne cessai y to call further witnesses, and to multiply his proofs. Mr. G. BANKES sa id h e s hould consider nothing as proved, except Mr. Fulcham, the banker, who was al leged to have been the prime agent. was called. That Gentleman was alleged to have used the words about all right;" words which he had denied before the East Retford Committee; and it was therefore important that such Gentleman should be examined—(Heat). Mr. FERGUSON observed, that last Session he was against the Bill till further evidence should be adduced ; but after what had been adduced, his opinion was corn. pletely changed—he was quite satisfied the Bill ought to proceed. _ _ Mr. Secretary PEEL said, the Hon. Mover (Mr. Tennison) ought to pursue hienwn course, and close when he thought he had made °id his case. There were then cries of" Go en, go on." Mr. SYKES said, if Mr. Fulcham, the banker, who had been named, did not attend, there was satisfactory reason for it; he was positively unable to attend, on account of set i nos indisposition. It was then stated, that other witnesses would be called. Richard liodgkinson was called, and examined by Sir R. Wit.. sou—Witness said he bad bebn a freeman 21 years. After one election he had received 20 guineas. He had seen Alderman Parker (an Alderman of Ret ford) in the lobby, who said to hint—" Nu witness was bound to commit himself." Sir R. WILSON said it was hopeless to think of ful filling their ii quisitorial powers, if such language were 41Inwed to br uttered with impunity. Mr. TENNISON said, he had no hesitation in say ing, that now he should close hi; case, though he had twentrone more witnesses in attendance. He should then propose to commit the Bill pro forma, to hue some amendments introduced, and to have it re com mitted on Monday next. In the mean time, if Counsel Were to be heard, this would be the time for hear ing them. Mr. G. BANKES had no objecti'm to hear Coun'el; but he should reserve to himself the right to call other evidence, if he so thought fit. Mr. Secretary PEEL trusted that the Hon. Member (Mr. Tennison) would not infer that the House was satisfied wi.h the evidence adduced; he gave no opi nion, but he trusted that such inference mould not be drawn; and he said this the more particularly as only five witnesses had .been examined, and the question of sending to Newgatt had been raised on two of them. Islr. TrIMISON then called tbelrown Clerk. Edward Brown appeared at ititibir,:and stated that he was an Attorney, residing at East-Berford. 1 142 'was asked whether be had ever received any erection alleinej.?" ' Witness hesitated for a short-time, and then appealed to the Chairman whether he was bound to answer that question. The wisreas having been ordered to withdraw, The ATTORNEY GEnRAL rise trend said, that the w imess was not. bound AO answer the question, if the reply would tend to criminate him. • -Sir ROBERT WILSON immediately rose, amidst considerable commotion in the House, arid replied with great warmth. He said he was astonished at what had fallen from the Attorney Ge.reral; it might be law ill the Courts; but it was not the 14w of Parliament — (Cheers). He knew the law of Parliament, he thought, quite as well as the Attorney General; on that point he would not yield to such Law Officer; and he would add, that if the House had not the power to enforce an answer, there was an end of their functions—(Continued cheers). The honour sod character of their proceedings were involved in this question ; and if they were of opinion that an answer ought not now to be required, they owed an ample apology to Fox, whom they now had in Newgate—(Hear). It was perfectly right in the witness to ask permission of the House to answer ques tions, the reply to which might, in some degree, com -mit himself; but having obtained such permission, that would shield him against all ulterior proceedings on account of his answers. He strongly repeated, if wit nesses could be allowed to evade answers as they were now sought to be evaded, there would be as end of their functions.of those privileges which were exercised for the maintenance of the liberties of all the people. Mr. LITTLETON also declared that if witnesses were not compelled to answer questions, there would be an end of their inquisitorial functions. As to the law of the subject; thes 6 ignorance" shown by the Attorney General was surprising —(immense cheer ing)—but even that ignorance was trifling as compared with its ten dency to treat ,with contempt the - privileges of that . House—(Continued cheering). If they did not enrol ce answers, he should consider that they;wete guilty of gross abandonment of duty—(Cheers). The ATTORNEY-GENERAL complained of the unfounded and wanton attack that hadjuit been mace on him. Even the charge of ignorance was alleged to be trifling, compared o ith his attack on the privileges of the House. • He . would not reciprocate coarse lan guage in reply to the Honourable Member who had 'smarmed to charge him with " ignorance." Ile had been longer a Member of the House than the Honour able Member for Staffordshire; but to such rustic coarse ness—(Loud laughter)—he should offer no reply. He would say, that there was not a more independent Member in the House than hm.elt ; and he would say, that the. language of the Honourable Gentleman was . rude, coarse, and ungentlemanly—(Loud cries of Hear, from both sides of the House). Mr. Pegs, Mr. LITrLITON, and Mr. Sedan Ewe, started up together; the two latter gave way to Mr. PEEL, who said he was sure the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Litt.cton) had used language towards his Right Hon. Friend (the Attorney-General) which, in his calmer moments, he would not have done; and which naturally excited the feelings of his Right Hon. Friend. On the question before the House, he thought that the witness should be called in, and informed that he must answer the questions put to him, and that the House would protect him from any penalty—(Hear, hear). Mr. LITTLETON said he had not said any. thing with the intuition of offending the Attorney-General, or of exciting the ebullition of irascibility in which he bad indulged. Mr. HORACE TWISS said, he did not think the House could protect the witness from the penalty of bribery, as any two or three of its Members might be summoned into a Court oflaw to give evidence of what the witness had stated at the bar. • TAO SPEAKER said, no Member would be justified in giving evidence any where of what passed in the „House. without the permission of the House—(Hear). The witness was called in and informed, that lies must answer the question, and 'hit- he-would be protected. • ' The hues...said, that after the elections of 1818 and 1820, he rgeeivg4 wont,. About sib weeks alter the election of 1818, two Jetta/ came to* house, each of which contained 204 Alter the arable of 1826, two letters came to him in the same way, each 'containing 201. He understood the money to be electiori money. practice of g ivin g such money to the lower freemen was SeitgX4 . . • • By Mr. kaat.—He was at that tittle a lower ckrk in the house In which he was nu a partner. Dy WiLsos.—Tirere were about 20 voters In East Ret. ford; about 120 received money. When Sir Henry Wright Wil son came to East itettord, witness told him the lower freemen were in the habit of taking nieney. lit replied," I'll do what's just and right, and nothing else." Ile understood Sir Henry to mean, that he would nut give any money, and hr so explained it to the elector.. Ahout thirty-six freemen hive been appointed since 1820. lie does not ki.ow of any money having been paid at an election since then. There were foity electors at the last election who did not receive money. The witness was ordered to withdraw. Jonathan Benkes called in and examined by Mr. Tennison— Witness has been a freeman of Retford 20 years, ..nd has been bailiff. He is a smith and farrier, and has received money after several elections ; about three times. He received money after Mr. Evans and Crumpton were returned. Two letters were put into his house late at night, there were 20 guineas in each. The election before he received a letter with 20 guineas. He believed it came from Mr. Crompton; he received another letter soon after with 20 guineas front Mr. Evans. At the election, in 1812, he applied for his election money, but did not get it. They said he was nut a staunch blue.—The witness was ordered to withdraw. William Hodson called in and examined by Mr. Thomson — Witness has been a burgess of Retford 20 years. He had received money after different elections, he could not say exactly how often. He could not say how much. The CHAIRMAN cautioned the witness, that the House bad power to send him to Newgate if he did not answer the question.. It was the custom at Retford to make presents to the freemen after the election, but it was not for their votes. He received 201. front each candidate at two elections. The witness was then ordered to withdraw. Robert Appleby examined by Mr. Ternason.—Witness is a Burgess of Retford ; and has lived there all his life. He has re. ceived election money after the elections at Retford. After the election in 1820, two letters came to his house, with twenty guineas in each. Mr. Evans and Mr. Crumpton had been returned {refute, and he received the saute sums then. After the election of 1812, he also received a present. Witness is a miller, and an Al derman of Retford. tie forgets whether he received any money at the tared in 180. When an elector at Retford is canvassed for his vote, and told " right," it means that be is to 'get forty guitieas.—Trie witness was ordered to withdraw. - William Clarke examined by Mr. Taloasoti—Witness had been a burger, of Itrtford thirty years, and is an Alderman. After the election of 1818 a person hr did not know came to his house, and left a packet which contained. forty guineas. He has heard that presents of twenty or forty guineas are usually made to the free men. After the election of he received twenty guineas on account of ,Mr. Evans.—The witness was ordered to withdraw. JutephWarreck examined by Mr. Trauttisoti..—Witneas lives near Retford. At the election of 1807, Mr. Peddisun, the Duke of Newcastle's ...Veward, who. W 36 witness's uncle, gave him about 50 packets, which he left at the houses . of freemen in Retford. lle believed they contained n, o The witness was ordered to withdraw. William Ledbetter, etasniited by Mr. I. Woon.—Witness is a burite-s of Retford, aud voted in 1612,1818, and 1820 ; he received nothing at any of tae elections; never one farthing, nor any of his family; he never told Mr. Newton chat he had received money; he never heard that a single fartbing was :lynx to any elector of Retford for voting at the election, nor after it. • The witairas was ordered to withdraw, and a Member desired that he should be detained. Wm; Newton ex &mined by hlr...f. Woon-i-Withese is a clerk to an attorney at Retford, but pot a freeman. He has heard many of the . freemen say that they had received money after the election.— He had heard the last witness say that he had received the election money in 1812,1 u 1818, and in 1820. Witness was not employed at the last . election;, witness was, employed to procure witnesses against the Borough of Reified ; he went round to get a petition signed, praYing to have the elective franchise extended to the in habitants; •he was not employed to get up evidenee..but acted from the impulse of his own mind; a Committee was formed in Retford since the last election for the purpose of .obtaining information, and assisting to put an eqd...th the cmcupticin that so long existed in Ret ford. The witness was ordered .to withdraw. .* •!.',l • Ledbetter was again called in, and the.evidence given.bythe last witness was read over to him. He was then examined by .Lord Nooses., and persisted in saying that he never received any election money, nor ever admitted that he-had received any. He was not . spoken to by any one respecting the - evidence he was to give,to the House. None of his family ever received any election Money for him nor any other Naluahleteomniodlty.• • • '• ' The witness was ordered to witbdraWAst not to leave the House. Hodson was recalled and examined, and persisted in his former statement, that he had not seeeleed any money ifter the elietions. The House resumed. tThe enstalisse teportrd ptogrest, and asked leave to sit again on Thiirsday...:.iLeavegiven. ' Lord ALTHORP, in the abs ence. of Lord . JOHN . . Russw., brought up a Bill for the repeal of the Corporation and Test Act:.—head a first time, ,nil 'wane(' to be read a wood time on Friday se'anight. Lord ALT HOR P said, It erits.the Intention that . the Bill should be committed on the Monde . ) , after the second reading. Sir MATTHEW W. RIDLEY moved for a Return of all the Country Bankers' notes stamped in the years 1824, 1825, 1826, 1827, and the amount of composition paid by the Bank of England for the same period, in lieu of Stamp Duty. Mr. THOMPSON moved for a Return of all the Grain and Flour shipped from all the Ports of England, Scotiaml, and Ireland for the last four years; and an Account of all ihe.Grain and. Flour imported into all the Ports of England, ScOtland, and Ireland, in the same prriod.—Ordered. The other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the House adjourned-at a QUA . KTIR PAST 011 Z O'CLOCK. • • COURT, OF ALDERMEN., . . • • Yesterday the Loati"blitoa held a Cooft of Alder men at Guildhall, for the dispatch, of. public Imioess, which was fully attendei. . The Petition of M. FRANCIS, Falai against the election of Mr. Jamas Ilicuaaosott, as Common Councilman for the Ward of Crip plegate Within, was withdrawn by. the Petitioner. • • • The, Court proceeded in• the comideraton- of- the Petition of Messrs. SAUL to be admitted to the freedom bUthe . City whet the Hon. C. E. Law wacheard as Counsel owtheir behalf; and after lailieracionshereon, the Court agreed- to the same, theytaking the Ustial treasuTel,for ,sucbadmissiuna " The Court Ulso agreed to rescind their former Standing Order - re. Wise to the admission of baptized Jews to the freedom of the City._ , Mr. F. 13. k)ocutsar was,edssaitted and sword Deputy is - the I Comptroller of the Chamber. The new By Laws for the regalation of the Watertnen 'and Lightermen of the River Thames were. ordered to be laid before the Judges for their approval. Sundry persons were• sworn, and others•allowed to be brokers of the - r ... LAW .INT.4I,IAerENCE. COURT Of KING'S BENCll;lllmtcsi 4. Special Jurles. ►EST V. DAY AND HORN[. This was an action brought to recover the sum of 1,6581. 10s. the balance of the price of 142 bags of hops, sold, as a factor, by the plaintiff to the dtfendant, in 1825, at seven guineas per cwt. The price of hops de clined soon alter the purchase, and the defendants then complained that the plaintiffhad charged 7s. a hundred weight..more than he could account for to Mr. Arundell, .thaselleri. who had boiight them a short time before of Mr. , Alderman Wood, at .51. 10s. per hundred. How. ever, the defendants, who had paid 9601. in part of the, purchase, gave an order for the hops to be delivered to Mr. Alderman Wood, on that•G'entleman's paying the rest of the purchase money. 'Mr. Alderman Wood re fused to accept the hops on that condition, on account of the fall that had taken plactia the value of the article, and the Alderman still holds the . hops on account of Mr. Arundell. - It was now contended that the conduct of the plain tiff, in representing to bfr: Arundell that he had sold for only 71. per hundred was a fraucl,_and that, there fare, be was not entitled to recover the value. It was suggested, but not proved, on the pin of the. 'plaintiff, that there .might have been an internitediitei poichAser, and that, at all events, the defeadant 'had admitted the money to be due from-thetd, thbligh the. plaintir hitble *Oto.'aemitittt T?ither;to M Th undell - for e •• '-• .c Tlx Jetttetutned dle defentliititt.bttt the Lord.Onief Justice **tie4e.douriakEfortite 1)1.4: titlesivelo move tVietlisidefthis finding, O l d to enter. a serdsct.foi ifthe'Vourt thvith):4: - Of opi 7 nion that he was entitled to it id. Oa of lati:* • • BRADLEE •. WATERHOUSE AND BRIGGS. The plaintiff in this Action is a grocer and banker at i • . A shbutptiei ii` - Derbj Wei; 'aid the deferctdie well known coach proprietors. A parcel was sent id July, 1826, by the Defiance coach to the plaintiff, cent .ining rounds of tea and two hunched sovereigns, wrapped up in a canvas bag. The parcel steles. arrived at its desonation.and a man in the strvice of the defendants, nausea. Nlaslin, was afterwards convicted at Leicester of stealing this pare, I, and was sentenced to seven sears' transportation for the offence. This action was now brought to recover the value of the parcel. It was admiued that the plaintiff had notice that the defendants would not be accountable for any parcel above the value of five pounds, unless insured ;. but it was contended, on the part of the plaintiff,.that such a notice could not protect the carrier, unless ordinary cart was used ; nor from any act of misfeasance or Misma nagement., such as had taken place here. It was proved that Mr. Briggs; one of the defendants, had said that he would call on. Mr. Bradley, and settle for the loss, and that he hoped that Mr. Bradley Would bear part of it, and he would take care that the guards should be mulcted for their negligence, for they had no business to leave the coach, as they did at LeiCester, (where the parcel was stolen), and to leave the potters to help themselves to any of the parcels that were Ro go Fby the coach. On the other hand, it was proved that the defendants give the plaintiff notice that they would 'net Wee 'countable for any of his Nis t parce l s stolen. Lord TEN TERDEN left it for the Jury to say, whether they considered This a case of gross negligence on the part of the defendants, or whether, they thought that the plaintiff had contributed to cause the dishonesty of the defendants' servant, by the careless way in which he had sent parcels of such a value. The Jury returned a verdict for the defendants:.. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. • REltys4ll4lt—RittiDlNG. TRIAL 0/ Poacusas.—:George EdMeads, . Samuel Whitc,George Baker, H. Burnet; Wm. Watter,'Thos. Field, 'I homes Hunt, and Samuel Cope, were indicted for maliciously shooting at one James Miniey, in the Park of G. H. Crutchley, Esq. of Suuning-hill, near Windsor, on the 6th of January last, 44 with, intent to do him some grievous bodily harm." The trial occupied the,greater past of the dal, . but the particulars have already been fully given in this Paper. The plachers, finding themserves ‘Oliposfcl, formed regularly in line, one of them knotkirig avin 'a man named Mancey with the butt•end of the foil,- ling-piece, and while he was reeling about Eremitic effect of the blow,another fired at him and shot him-in the 'hip. They then attacked Mr. Crutchley's bailiff; a man named Glasscock breaking a gun over his•-head, which was laid completely open, and then. robbing him of his boots ) • handkerchief, &c. They left Shim almost lifeless on the pound. * Only three • Men could be identified by Mr. • Crutchley's seriants, viz. White, Burnett, and Field, and therefore receune was had to Turner, the accomplice, to identify the remainining five; but the Jury did not believe Win, and returned verdicts of Guilty against White, •But nett, and Field only. Mr. Baron VAUGHAN immediately passed sentence of death on the wretched men, hotting out not the slightefA hope of mercy, and they ate ordered for CULiOgi on Saturday , fortnight. The miserable convicts fell on their knees in the dock whilst sentence was passing upon them, and appeared quite resigned to their inevitable fate. • DURHAM. • • John Carripllell stood indgcred for felOnionsil Ellen' it and slaying John Thompson, at BishopwearmaiK' in this county. = : Kalph Kirkley deposed, that he is foreman to Nli-srs. Gates, ship builders, at Bishopwearmouth.; the priieneir and the deceased were ship carpenters, and were fellow workmen in the yard. Oa the 15th of o.:tober last they quarrelled whilst at work, and in the evening the, pri soner asked him (witness) what he was to do w s gth Thompson (meaning the deceased)? sir irness said, let hies alone, and say no more to him; and he said he would if he would let him be. After they had done work, the deceased left the yard first to g 6. home. and in about five minutes after the prisoner followed. Shortly after witness heard that they had had a combat, in which Thompson had fallen. ;., :tr . _ _ Cross-examined by Mr. ARCHBOLD-Campbell u5.u3,117 left the yard first; but on this evening he remained.— In the afternoon the deceased challenged the prisoner to fight, but he refused, at least during his masier's hours. All the other workmen urged him to the combat,. but he refused; and went to his work immediately. -He had 'known the prisoner nineteen or twenty.years,. and. during that time he was always quiet and peaceatslc.;.•. . /Ralph Haswell—Heard the prisoner say to the del , teased, ,4 Do you want to fight?" Thompson said AR did ; the prisoner then told him to prepare, or somb;e* thing to that effect. The deceased then pulled off lint things, but Campbell did not ; they then began to fight, . . • but he did n o t go near them. The JUDGR—If Lam not mistaken' the father of tiatt • 3 deceased encouraged his son to fight? Mr. ARCHBOLD—He did, my Lord, I unders tand, The witness, in his cross-examination, said, titai the prisoi:er had to pass Thompson's house ou his way home Tile pi isoner in his .defence said, that he-did all in hip power to avoid the deceased, who repeatedly-alai lenged Lim to fight during that day ; and, after he had left woi k, he was going home quietly pastThomPson's house; he was standing at the door with several others, and as he passed, the deceased struck him a heavy blow upon the side of the head—and he then struck again in "is own defence. d Many witnesses proved that the prisoner had re ceived many insults from the deceased; and that, al though irritated• by Lim, he refused to meet him, and seemed to wish to avoid him. A numbet;of -per.ons of the highest respectability gave him an unexcep tiocable character, as being a quiet inoffensive man, and a most obedient workman—all of them had known him upwards of twenty years. Mr. Justice BAYLEY summed up the evidence to the Jury, and remai ked, that allowing the deceased had struck the prisoner, he had acted wrong in returning the blow : it was his duty to have avoided it, unless his self-pieservition required him to do so. If they should be of opinion that toe prisoner, had not done all in his power to avoid fighting, hemoilld be just as criaiinal,aa if he had.proposed it. The Jury consulted for about kve minutes, and then *renounced the prisiabere . ciiike,, - ;,but, strongly recom, thentliedhisild mercy; tOraccotitiedf his previous ex emplary character. Mr. Justice il4itt4r 7 -,JOhn Camplt you have been . fOind guilty • the:.'Jury could not .pr uce any other verdict; but.thrreare.circomitonces m your "lisedif• terent,tA= ciiitiae, and faVottiable . to ,yosi,:ll;tesifilte•rthali not „sentenie.yoiito any imprison, otirerybu to be discharged upon paying a ihe of The fine was instantly paid, and the prisoner was set at liberty. Ml O f f' J, r r ~t s ~~ . I: I it ( 7 1 I . qr. ,i~ I • - ~r~ I . •. ~-~ 1,11