Star. — London, England, 1820-10-28 00:00:00

1 e had now completely satisfied their Lordships on that past of the case which rested ea the evidence of Barbara Krebs. lie , witness was of a character unimpeached ; the facts which she' swore to were within her own knowledge ; they were of "Pugh a nature, too, that if false they might have been eontradictel; but no attempt to contradict them had been made. The in ference he would leave to every reasonable and ssrprejuslited mind. At Turin, a fact bad occurred which his Learned Friends had thought proper to pas* over unnoticed. The witness is Petrillo, whose credibility was unimpeached. The Learned Gentleman here read the evidence of this wit ness, in which he mentions having discovered Bergami in a situ ation that dearly indicated an adulterous intercourse. This witness also might have been contradicted, but no at tempt of the kind was made. In the course of her journey, her Royal Highness came to Trieste. Here his Learned Friends thought that they bad secured a great triumph—but how? . The fact which had been sworn to they did not attempt to refute; they only endeavoured to produce a contradiction as to the time her Royal Highness stopped at Trieste. First, there was the evidence of Mr. Ilownam, who stated that her Royal Highness arrived on one day, and went away on the next; and, to corro borate himself on this point, Mr. Hownam had produced a letter dated on the 18th of April. But did it follow that, because this letter was dated on the 18th, it was written on the 18th, and on no other day? Vassali, too, swears that her Royal Highness remained only a day and a half ; Yana% of whose excellent memory the affair at Carlsruhe affords such memo rable proof ! Then, to prop up the case, the Counsel for her Diajesty (Mr. Brougham), with that adroitness for which he bad been so remarkable throughout the whole proceedings, had produced a foreign Newspaper, and before he knew whe ther it could be received in evidence or aot—nay, knowing well that it could not be received, had read an extract from it, which went to confirm the statements of Lieutenant Hownam and Vassali. Was it necessary, observed the Learned Counsel, to offer any comment upon such a piece of no-evidence as this?— Why had his Learned Friend had recourse to it, if he had re lied so firmly as he pretended on the excellent memories of Vassali and Hownam? But why, instead of taking any pains at all about a matter of such comparative unimportance as the length of time her Royal Highness stopped at Trieste—why had they not rather produced with to contradict Cuchi, if he could be contradicted, as to tbe situation of the rooms in the ion, the doors, and the hangings? The Queen had doubtless had her emissaries at Trieste, as well as elsewhere; and if the facts that Cuchi deposed to were not true, there could have been no difficulty in procuring witnesses to refute them.— When, therefore, not a single witness had been produced to spew that Cuchi was mistaken in the main facts of his state ment, was he not entitled to hold that that statement was fully established? His Learned Friend, Mr. Brougham, had left this part of the case with a threat, that this witness, Cuchl, should be brought to justice. Suck threats were easily thrown out : the object of them could not be mistaken. Perhaps there were other persons whose testimony had been of a nature which exposed them quite as much as Cuchi to the chance of such future reckoning. The Learned Gentleman came new to an other part of the case, on which a great deal had been.said— the journey from Rome to Senegaglia. Ile confessed be was much surprised at the sarcasm which his Learned Friend, Mr. Brougham, had thrown out on the Counsel for the prosecution, with respect to the estimation in which they held the evidence of Sacchi, as if they bad represented to their Lordships that i he was a man deserving of more credit, because he bad served in the army of Napoleon Bonaparte. Some persons in dealing out general observations often hit themselves.— [ left speaking.) Yesterday forenoon one of her MaJr..sTi'a Couriers obtained a passport 'at the Austrian Ambassador's, in Chandos-street, and immediately set out for Dover, on his way to Milan. Her MAJESTY returned the following gracious An swer to the Address from the Inhabitants of Glasgow :' I am unfeignedly obliged by this loyal and affectionate Ad dress from the inhabitants of the City of Glasgow. When I consider that this Address is signed by more than 33,000 names, or more than a third part of tint great, opulent, and enlight ened City, I may be permitted to rejoice that the generous sen timents which it breathes are so widely diffused, and so fear lessly manifested. I cannot charge any of my wrongs upon the Nation. I charge them upon that selfish junto, which, when it might have redressed them, only made them the means of gratifying their lust of domination. If those who are now my enemies, but were once professedly my friends, bad not sacrificed me to their love of place, the conspiracy of HMS would have been so en tirely suppressed, and the author of it and the agents in it so completely exposed, that the present conspiracy would never have dared to rear Its bead. This last conspiracy has been mos tured by the impunity of the preceding. " It is only generous natures that are capable of confessing the mars they have committed, and of repairing the wrongs they have done. My enemies are not of that stamp. They are not made of such noble materials. With them the sentiment of duty has vanished, without leaving any great portion of the principle of honour to.stipply its place. But, notwithstanding this dearth of moral feeling in my adversaries, I repose a firm confidence in the virtuous sympathies of the Nation. Those symp athies have been my solace in the most aMicting circumstances. Copy of a Letter addressed to her MAJESTY QUEEN CAROLINE, by Mr. DALBY, butc.her,.al Derby, with a present of a baron of beef: " To Tan QUM ' S won minim warmer. " May it please your Majesty—Actuated by feelings of deep regret for the many unparalleled sufferings and privations which your Majesty has undergone since your first arrival in Britain, through the relentless sad unceasing persecution of your malig nant and powerful enemies; and strtk with the highest senti ments of admiration and reverence for your Majesty's noble, in trepid, and dignified conduct in Meeting your base detractors and accusers face to face, and demanding a full and open laves ttation ; I, an bumble individual, but one d your Majesty's faithful and devoted subjects, beg leave to approach your Ma jesty with a small token of the high esteem and veneration which feel (in common with the great majority of my fellow-subjects) or our rightful and innocent, but much injured Queen, now again assailed by her inveterate foes with a conspiracy against her peace and honour, one of the foulest and most iniquitous that ever disgraced the annals of history. Permit me to solicit your Majesty's gracious acceptance of this humble offering of respect, a Baron, not a dealer in pick-locks, but a Baron e Beef : accompanied with my sincere prayers, that the Donn ROTIC TOIL or Issocrnes will enable your Majesty completely to expose, confound, and counteract the vile machinations of your impla cable enemies ; that you may long continue Britain's Queen, in-' vested with all the privikgn and dignities of your exalted sta tion, add reigning in the hearts of your people that this may be the case, and that your Majesty may experience many years of sertne and uninterrupted happiness, with mental vigour nos bated, in the full enjoyment of bodily health, and of a good appe tite for En g lish roast Beef, is the heartfelt wish of, " Your Majesty's faithful and loyal subject, " JOHN DALBY, Butcher. " Derby, October 11th, 1840." THE QUEENS ANSWER. " Lady Anne Hamilton is commanded by the Queen to thank Mr. Dalby for his baron (y . beef, of which her Majesty partook this day, and found it excellent ; as well as for his loyal senti ments so well expressed towards her Majesty. " Brandenburgh House, October 13th, 1820." FASHIONABLE ARRIVALS. Lord and Lady Eicho, and Lady Georgina Bingham, at the Ciaremont Hotel, Bond-street, from the Isle of Wight; Lady Saxton, at ditto, from a tour ; R. Unwin, Esq, at ditto, from a Sting party in Herts. l'Ard Chetwynd, from a tour. henry Clive, F.sq. M.P. front his seat, Blaekhans, Berks. General Clinton, M. P. from his seat, ()afield, Sussex. S.r P. Halo', Bart. from his seat, Brymore, Somenetsblre. \ -V.4 ~.T.'~' CA RI a pre regret your throui nant s menti trepid and a, tis-atit fait hi) testy I feel o again her p that 4 Tour tope mai TOIL I confi cable 'esu fiat, the 4 sem bate. tite 1 4. tl Mr. this filer 11 ! T t Cu :tax shy / LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OR KING'S =gm OCTOBER SO, CROSSLIIIT 0. Lilllllo AND ANOTHIR. The plaintiff in this cause had bees employed by the defendant, the Captain of at East Indiaman, to purchase for him a certain quantity of porter. The 'plaintiff accordingly made the purchase from a per gen of the name or Hibbert, and the porter was put on board the defendant's ship. Upon arriving at the Isle of France, the porter turned out to be bad, and the defendant demanded a reduction of price. This wits resisted by Hibbert, the person from whorls the porter had been bought, and he brought his action against the present plaintiff, to recover the full amount. Upon the action being brought, the plaintiff applied to the defendant, ig learn whether he should defend the action in his, the plaintiff's name, or in that of the defendant, he ha\ing . money of the defendant's in his hands, which he might apply to that purpose. 'The defendant wished the action to be defended in doe name, and by the Attorney, of the plaintiff ff. The plaintiff being cast, the present action was brought to recover the cogs ; the debt itself having been paid from the money of the defendant in the plaintiff's hands. The defendant's ship-broker. who bad been a wit ness on the former trial, proved the facts of the case; and the plaintiff's attorney stated the costs to have amounted to £149, viz. C5l paid to the attorney of Hibbest, the then plaintiff, and I.:98 to himself. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages $149, with liberty, on the part of the defendant,. to move the Court of King's Bench for a nonsuit. The original debt was only L'7B. . , THI XINO v. T. T. TO! AND T. lIINNET. This was an indictment by the Apothecaries Com pany of London., laid against the defendants. for a conspiracy to violate the. Act of the 56th of the late King, for regulating the trade of Apothecaries, undue the following circumstances :—The defendant, Ben net, who had, in the month of August, 1818, re ceived a certificate tb practice as an Apothecary, ap peared subsequently in the month of May, 1819, and received a certificate under the name of Fox. The certificate, thus fraudulently obtained, he trans mitted to a . person of the name of Fox, residing . at Butslem, in Staffordshire, who commenced practice under it. Suspicions of the transaction being en tertained by the Company, they sent two sconfiden tial persons to Macclesfield, where Bennet resided, and to Burslem, the residence of Fox; and in conse quence of the information thus procured, the indict ment was laid. Mr. GURNAY, for the prosecution, called witnesses' in support of the charge. Edward Bacon, Clerk to the Company of Apothe caries, proved, that the Examiners had been sworn in on the 4th of August, 1818, and that they had all, as was required 'by the rules of the Society, been Members for ten years and upwards. J. Watson was Secretary to the Court of Exa miners of the Apothecaries Company. On the 27th of August, 1818, a person of the name of T. Bennet had been examined, and received his certificate. On the 18th of May, 1819, a person of the name of T. Fox had demanded to be examined ; and a man who answered to that name had passed, and received a certificate. On the 6th of December, 1819, the wit ness, accompanied by an Officer of the Company, left London in consequence of certain information that the Company had received, and went to Maccles field, to the house of Mr. Bennet. Upon enquiring if he was at home? he was asked if he meant Mr. Bennet, the weaver? The witness said no; and that he wanted to see Mr. Bennet. the Apothecary. He then went up stairs, and asked Bennet if he had always gone by that name, and whether he had not once called himself T. Fox? which he denied. The witness then endeavoured to call to his (the defend ant's) recollection a conversation he had had with him about a certain trial at Stafford, on the 13th of May ; but the defendant said the 'conversation bad been with Fox, and not with him ; and that Fox had told him so when they lodged together. The wit ness proceeded thence to Burslern, in Staffordshire, and went into Fox's house, when he informed him that it was reported that he practised without a cer; tificate, which Fox denied; and upon the witness asking if be knew him? the defendant said No! but at last said, he thought he had seen- him at Mr. Brooke's Class-room ; and that he (the defendant) bad been examined by Mr. Upton ; but upon being questioned, could give no satisfactory account, either of Mr. Upton, or of the place where he said he had been examined. The witness then observed, that he was certain Fox had never been examined ; the father in-law, and the family of the defendant, seemed quit e . astonished at what they heard. The person who ac companied the witness then told Fox, that the Court of Examiners would probably be favourable to him if be told the truth ; but the witness himself said no thing. Fox, on the 20th of May last, had given up the certificate, and applied to be examined. On his cross-examination by Mr. Corm', who was Counsel for Fox (Bennet, the other defendant, had no Counsel), the witness said, that he was ena bled to recollect Mr. Bennet, both because his coun , tenance was somewhat remarkable, and by a conver sation be had with him at Apothecaries Hall, re specting a trial at Stafford. J. Sayer, Beadle to the Apothecaries Company, confirmed the evidence of the last witness. James Beveridge, a Surgeon and Apothecary, to whom Bennet had been an apprentice for two years, was of opinion that a letter which was shewn to him, was in the the hand-writing of the defendant. After some argument as to whether the letter was evidence or not, it was allowed by the Court to be read. It contained a full admission, on the part of Bennet, of the fact with which he was charged, and his earnest request that the Company would not prosecute, its he had already been sufficiently punished by the consequences of his misconduct. Mr. CHITTY contended, that no conspiracy had been premed against the defendants; what the result might have been had they been indicted separately, he should not take upon himself to say ; but there was no proof that they had acted in concert, and con quently could net have been guilty of a conspiracy. Mr. Justice BAYLEY told the Jury, that the ques tion for their consideration was, if a conspiracy had been proved or not? If they thought the defendant Fox was not guilty, they most also acquit the other defendant, Bennet, as they had both been included in the same indictment. The Jthdrew half an hour,:and then acquitted bot t 1 4sfeadaati• -. TO THE EDITOR OF THE STAR. lffite eiurfaper of Friday lest, a Report of *het had been mid at a li — 'ngei that Aires Zolkassie. 111 04. vulgarly tiled the Cmisloma Oisomil, at which those citizens of profound wistinp tneit the Shorty to War their opinions, and to comment on sly conduct as Sheriff of Lotie.on and Middlesex, with which they have no more W do than any other of his Ma jesty's subjects, except as regards the performance of my slaty In criminal and civil processes in the City ; and of my strict impar tiality io both which cases, &shag my Sheriffaity, there are thou sands of worthy citizens who can bear ample testimony. As it will soon undergo a legal investigation, it is not missend= on this occasion to enter very fully into the merits of the exercise of this salf-created power,assanied on the part of the Court of Com mon Council, which is merely one of the branches of the Cor- i poratioo of Londoo. The fact is, the Common Council have nothing whatever to do with the elation or cootroul of the She riffs, and which, if they meld read, or, at least, if they would take the trouble to read their Charter, they would find it melt empha tically expressed those' that the citizens or commonalty, the livery, are to elect for their Sheriffs, from among themselves, whom they will, and remove them wheb they will," subject to his Majesty's approbation, expressed through his Barons of the Ex chequer • after which the Sheri ff of London becomes, to all in tents and purpose, an dicer of the Crown, as all other Sheri ff s of the Kingdom are; with this addition, th at the Sheriff of Lon doe has charge of the chartered rights of the citizens of London. It was with a perfect knowledge of this valuable Charter that I was induced to accept of the office to which I was elected (as I learnt by the Newspapers, when nearly 400 miles from London) by two or three thousand of my brother Liverymen, assembled in Common Hall, not one of whose suffrages did I ever in the slightest degree solicit, but, on the contrary, received repeated solicitations from some of the left characters, and an especial meessopr sent after me to intreat me to take on me the painful and laborious office, which I have in these worst of times per formed to the best of my judgment with loyalty and fidelity to my King and country, and with a scrupulous regard to the A:ban tered rights of my fellow-citizens. As to the interference of the ' Comatose Cashell with me, it is too ridiculous to be heeded. They are not .even elected by the Livery ; nor is it necessary that they themselves should be Liverymen, neither have they even any right, as r4Stlilat Casowilmen ' to be in the Common Han, or to vote at the election of Sheriffs, or of the Lord Mayor, or even of Members of Parliament Aar the City. I now take the liberty to explain the statement made by Mr. Samuel Dixon, which would lead the Poblic to believe that have already received the emolument of my dike L:wheteas the fact is, that I have not yet received a single shilling, nor has the accooat beep rendered me from the. difference offices ; neither have I yet received.back the money which I have advanced for the leis half-year's fee-farm rent paid to Sir William Rush, by payment of which rent the appointment of Sheriffs is vested by the King in the Cidattorof London. I have deemed it necessary to be thus particular, as I might otherwise be thought capable of a breach of promise (toque-oily mode) by me to the Public, namely, that I would give to the poor whatever I received from the yam of Sheriff that remained over and above paying the mews, and which appropriation may, I hope, in these times of distress, plead my excuse for disappointing the genisambring bat rf 4114erasess end Chessmen Cbasoriessea, whose only delight is in the festive beard ! I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant, N. 10, Dridge-etreet, J. W. PARKINS, Ex-SheriE Oct. Oft, 18110. • MIDDLESEX SESSION. .1 OLD BAILEY. Twenty-tvfo perions (thirteen men and nine women), were yesterday arraigned, chirged with havingforged notes of the Bank of E ngland in their possession,- and with uttering them, knowing them to be forged. Sixteen of them pleaded guilty, of. having notes in their possession—and six (all women) pleaded not guilty to the charges generally, and will take their trials for the capital offence. Those who had pleaded guilty to the minor charge were acquitted of the other, and will be transported for 14 years. Sophia Aargau was indicted for stealing in the house of F. Bayliss, a gold watch, chain, and seals, • his property. The prosecutor was the keeper of a brothel in the neighbourhood of Finsbury - square , and the prisoner, in September last, came to lodge there, paying largely for her accommodation. Some time after the pro secutor's wife missed her watch, and discovered that it had been pledged by the prisoner at a pawnbroker's, in Bishopsgate-street, for eight guineas. The pro. soner about the same time, absconded, and was traced to N o rthold, near Emsw orth, Hants, where she was apprehended with part of the notes paid for the watch in her possession. On cross.examination, the prosecutor said, his wife had gone by various names before and since be married her. J. Norton was called for the prisoner. who swots that he was uncle to Mrs. Bayliss, the prosecntoes wife, and that, in some cases, he would not believe her on her oath. Mrs. Norton also said, she did not consider 365. _Bayliss ought to be believed on her oath. The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, Death—but recommended her to mercy on account of the infa mous character of the prosecutor and his wife. Mr. Justice PARKS said the recommendation should certainly be attended to, and-refused to allow them 'their expenses. Mare Leonard, alias Napkins was indicted for stealing one £lO, and seven El Bank notes, the pro perty of Mary Green, in her house. The prosecutris was a laundress, having a large family to support, and the prisoner bad occasionally worked for her. • In February last she went to the prosecntris to borrow a £1 note, and the latter took, notes to the amount of £lB from a stocking, in which she kept her little store, and gave the prisoner the sum she wanted. The prisoner saw the other notes, and she afterwards called several times on trifling errands, and at length she was limed altogether from the neighbourhood. The prosedurix also missed her notes from the stocking, and after a lapse of several months the prisoner was apprehended and the notes traced to her pessession.—Verdict, Guilty—Death. Thursday afternoon, a little before five o'clock, as a Gentleman was proceeding along the Strand, near Charing-crow, observing a crowd approaching him from Charing-cross, and suspecting from their disor derly conduct that drey were pickpockets, he, in order to avoid them, stepped into the boot-maker's shop at the corner of St. Martin's-lane, intending to wait until they had passed. As.soon as he had en tered the shop, the crowd, amounting to .twelve or fourteen men, came up to the.shop door and rushed' into the shop, apparently as if they had pushed each other in,. but their object instantly became apparent, as they, in the most daring and outrageous.manner, immediately seized hold of the Gentleman , forcib l y .' dragged him out of the shop, and when they got him into the street, they were joined by others, supposed to amount to the number of forty, who proceeded to ill-treat him' and robbed him of a valuable watch , chain and seals, lac. with which the whole of them made their escape. . q. • Till LINO V. MILLS. The indictment preferred by the Solicitor of the Treasu y against Mr. Mills, for a riot in St:'James's squire, came bn at the above Sessions yesterday. Mr. MIAaIY addressed the Jury, and briefly stated, that he should be able to prove that the defendant had, on the SI st of August, made his appearance in front of the Queen's house, in St. James's-sqeare, and there conducted himself in a riotous ane - turmiltuous manner, so that the Magistrates had thought it right to order him to be taken into custody; and that after he was taken into custody, he had excited the public to disturbance, which created a serious riot, in which many of the Constables were much hurt. The Learned Counsel proceeded to call Vickery, the Police Officer, who swore that he bad been or dered by the Magistrates to station himself in St. James's-square, previously to the 30th of August ; and th it on that day he had observed Mr. Mills ha ranguing the persons assembled in front of the Queen's house, and that Mr. Mills recommended that an Address should be presented to the King, which he read to the persons assembled, saying, that on the following day he would attend, and prepare the means for signing the Address; that accordingly Mr. Mills attended on the following day, in an open lan dau, and was beginning to address the assembly, when Mr. Bennet and Mr. Alleys, two Magistrates, directed witness to take him into custody. He then made his way through the crowd, and carried off Mr. Mills on his back; and Mr. Mills addressed the people, saying—" Will you let me go? or will you let me be taken away?" In consequence of which, he was attacked by four, five, or six hundred people, who assailed the witness and the other Bow-street Officers with stones and brick-bats. Upon Vickery's cross-examination, he persisted in saying, that Mr. Mills did address the people, and excite them to rescue him ; in consequence of which, Mr. Mills took down in writing the very words which Vickery swore he had used. William Wootten, the Constable, swore that he had endeavoured to stop the carriage in which Mr. Mills was, ineffectually, and that Mr. Mills had said to him, if be knew'who he was, he would take him into. custody; upon which the CHAIRMAN inquired what was the name of the witness? and finding it was the person mentioned in the indictment, he asked the witness what Mr. Mills did is him ? to which the witness replied, " he did nothing to.me." The CHAIRMAN said—" From this evidence, it is . ' clear that you obstructed Mr. Mills, instead of that. Gentleman obstructing you; surely that part of the case must be given up. Four other Bow-street Officers were then examined,. who proved nothing material. Mr. Mills, in defence, went at considerable length into the history of the transaction, and said he stood there to defend his principles and his conduct, and he would fearlessly assert and maintain that he was. only exercising the right which every Juryman, in common with himself, and every subject of the realm possessed, of petitioning the Throne at any and at all times, whenever they chose to do so. Mr. Mills then related the part be had taken publicly, relative to the prosecution against the Queen ; that he had given to Mr. Hume, on the 18th of July last, a Petiuon to be presented to the House of Commons ; and that he had subsequently given a Petition to the Duke of Lein star to present to the House of Lords, and which had been presented by the Noble Duke. He then read the Petition he had presented to the consideration of the Meeting in St. James's-square, which was of the same tendency as those presented to her Majesty from all parts of the kingdom. 44 This," said Mr. Mills, " is the head and front of my offence." He then concluded his address by an animated appeal to the Jury, and proceeded to call a number ofmost respectable witnesses, who satisfactorily proved that Mr. Mills had conducted himself throughout in the most peaceable manner. The Court and Jury expressed their full convic- , tion that the charge could not be supported, and a verdict of Not Guilty was returned. On the day that the Address went up from the Ward of Farringdon Without, a man was stationed within a few yards of the outer gate of Brandenburgh House, delivering the bills of - Mr. Fletcher's. manu facture, as from the Plate Committee. He threw one of them into the carriage in which Mr. Sheriff (Al derman) WAITHMAN was riding. He was stout, about forty, and ill-dressed, but very active. GUILDHALLr.A miserable-looking female, of the, name of Catherine Carpenter, a woman of the town, and an occasional pensioner upim the parish of I Christ Church, Surrey, was examined at this (-Ace on the 11th instant, upon suspicion of an intention to' I destroy an infant about four or five weeks old; . by' throwing it into the Thames: 'Through the vigilance. and peneveranee of Potter, the beadle of St. Ann's, assisted by the information of the driver of the coach No. 440, the parents of the child were at length dis- • .covered, is a-lodging at the West - end of the town, iuidbrought to the Office. Theydescribed themselves as• married, and gave their names Jelia and Ain Meyers. Their appearance was respectable; the female scarcely • 20 years old, and the supposed husband about 25: Prom the evidence produced it appeared, that I* pristmers, professing to be husband and wife hired a second floor at the - hotise of a Mr. Watts, Glouces ter-street, Queen-square, in the beginning of Septem- . ber, saying they had just arrived from the country. The female was far advanced inpregnaiicy, and was delivered of a female child on Sunday evening, the Sd of September. ' The mother declining to suckle the child, it was delivered, a day or two after the • birth, to the care of Mary Brindsden, the wife of • the Beadleof that Parish, residing in Eagle-street, Red Lice-sip' are. With her the child remained until • the evening of the 10th of October, when - it was taken away by the parents' about half an hoar after • ten o'clock, they stating that the child was going to nurse in the country, 900 miles off. Within half an • hotir of this time, the same evening, accordinic to the • statement of the prisoner Carpenter, the child was . left with her at the foot of Blackfriars-bridge. The prisciners, it . appeared; remained at Mr. Watts's until • the evening Of the 14th instant, when they gave up - the lodgings, and went away in the hackney-coach, No. 440, about nine o'clock in the evening I by the clue of the number, as above stated, they were traced • and apprehended. They were committed to find &A 1 II 1 ::..., . % ~. Atli