The Statesman. — London, England, 1822-11-30 00:00:00

: 1 11 1 1 I i 4 r oft . COURT OF KIN('S BEM:R.—Nov. 49. WASTE I'. LADY CARR, WIDOW. This was an action on the case against the defendant, to Teener). a compensation in damages for the negligence of bee servant, in upsetting a chaise in which the plaintiff and Isis mire were riding. Sir. Grunav and Mr. Wren:smut were for the plain tiff; and Mr.SCARLZTT and Mr. ANDREWS fur the de fendant. . •It appeared from the evidence of several witnesses, that on the 27th of May bd', the plaintiff and his wife were proceeding in a one horse chaise through the Re gent Circus, Piccadilly, on their own proper side of the road, when the defendant's carriage was driven by the coachman between a hankney coach and the plaintiff's chaise, and the space tieing insufficient, the chaise was apart, and the plaintiff and I is wife were thrown upon the pavement with considerable violence. No less than six aitnessee deposed to the facts of the case, and they ail imputed the accident to the carelessness of the de fendant's coachman, who was stated to have been driving at a furious rate. S lof them swore that .e defendant's carriage had been stopping for a consi ders ie time at the shop of Messrs. Swan and Edgar, before Vie accident happened. Mr. Fader, a surgeon, deposed, that Lis bill for curing the plaintiff and hie wife o f th e i n juri e s they had sustained, unwanted to 31. 19s. Mr. Blanchard, the coach-maker, said, that his hill fur repairing she plaintiff's chaise, which was broken to pieces, amounted to 221. 16s. Mr. SCARLET?, for the defendant, le his address to the Jury, said, that the case which 4se had to lay before than was of a very differeat complexion from that de. posed to by the witnesses called for the plaintiff. He by no means imputed to them any disposition to state that which was not true ; hut they had evidently laboured boiler a mistake in Imputing negligence and misconduct to the defendant's coachman. In the first place, he should- prove by satisfactory evident', that the defend• ant's coach bad not stopped at any place from the time ef its setting out front Lady Carr 's dwelling at Ealing until the accidint in question happened ; and, in the se cond place, be should prove that the injury complained of arose from the unekilful driving of the plaintiff self, aho, ilt endeavourieg to pass a hackney coach in *tont Circus, Caine in contact with the defendant's emsch before. the coachman could avoid the collision, Whereby the mischief happened. He should further prove that the moment the tnisfortane occurred the de feedant's coachman stopped, and informed the plaintiff s.f site mono of his mistress, and did every thing a man could do in a ease a here lie himself was Dot to blame. Mr. J. T. Perceval, the defendant's son, Richard Sid tey, and William Sloper, her ladyship's coachman and footman, were then called to prove the case thus opened.) They stated that the defendant's carriage had set out la the morning from Ealing, and had .not stopped by the ) way until this accident happened. The carriage was drivenat the rate of six miles an hour. There were MOS young ladles inside, and Mr. Perceval rode on the bon with the coachman. On coming near the Regent Circlel a hackney coach was seen turning, and at that moment the plaintiff's chaise was not visible, but when the dt., folant's carriage was paasing the hackney - coac h, the' plaintiff drove right across the road in front of the hopes; the coachman pulled up as hard as he could to avoid mischief, but was too late, and the coach pole Coming in contact with the body of the chaise, It was , 'apart. The catriege immediately stopped, and Mr. Perceval told the plaintiff to whom it belonged, aid OP' pressed his regret, for the misfortune. All these wit messes attribeted the occident to the plaintiff in eaten louring to pass the the backneyemsach on the wraist side, bet it seemed to be admitted that the defendant** carriage was also on the wrong side in passing the Eacknepcoach. On their cross-examination. the wit- TOSS denied that the defendant's carriage was 'to= lly coutpuhion, after the accident happened. but cu the contrary, the coachman immediately moppet,, and the plainiiff was instantly informed that the catu riage belonged to Lady Carr, ash that the plaiati seemed satisfied. Mr. Guitozr, in reply, contended that at all events ILe plaintiff was entitled to a verdict, inasmuch _as the defendant's carriage was confessedly on the wrong aide of the way at the time the accident happened. The LORD Calla JUSTICR summed up the MO on bells sides fur the Jury, and left it to them to lay to which party the blame of the accident was im putable. The Jury retired for about an hour, and found a ver dict for the' defendant. 11%RlIETTO V. THE INHABITANTS Or TITS lIIINDRED Or 05.11141T0NE. Thia was an action to recover a compensation in da mages for an injury done to the plaintiff's house, by a tiotows mob en the night of the 6th of Jane, 1820. 'the plaintiff's case was conducted by Mr. OURNBT, and r. CARTER; and the defendant's by Mr. Paritso:v. The plaintiff resides in Upper Portland•place, and c: the night of the 6th of June, a riotous snob of re ams visiNd that neighbourhood to compel the inha bitants to illuminate their houses. The Plaintiffs family bad retired to rest, and were awakened by the smashing of windows, and the cry of "light up, lighter." Before they could comply with this request, windows to the amount of W. I Is. 7d, were broken in the house fur which sum the present action was brought. The plaintiff's butler and glazier were called to prove the amount of damage done, and the circumstances under which it Ives committed. No substantial defence *as offered, and the Jury, under the Learned Judge's direction. found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 61. ils. 7d, COM OF COMAION PLEAS, Nor. 29. lillyttlittDce V. PRZSTARR. rt. EDWARD Lassen opened the pleadings in this ease , t ch was an - radian for imprisoning theplaintiff, in Feb. The by which he suffer ed in his credit and circumstances. The defendant pleaded not guilty. Mr. Serjeant Pam, stated the case to theJnry. The Plaintiff was a weaver in humble circumstances, and the defendant was also a w , but in a very different situa ton, for be was an opulent man, and was accustomed to lit out his looms to hire to different individuals, The itlorintiff had a father of the same name, with whom un fortunately he was not then on the best terms; since thot. however, they bad made np their differences, and were now living as father and son ought to do. A loom wee hired of the defendant, by the brother of the plain- Off, and the father, with another person named Kerr, be came seturity for its due return. As it was not properly returned, the defendant instituted proceedings in the eourt of Requests, and subsequently resorted to ilia wasure fQSwbich this action was brot.xlit —he arrested i m q t he f a ther, who KU really liable, liar the SOU WllO bail pothing• to du with the loom I. and though maimed by hie officer, he resisted in his COOll/14111111, and the Main al las taken wale House of Correction, where be was' imprisoned six days, at the end of which the defendant, thinking he was in the wrong, seat an order for his re itster, end An being applied to for the purpose awaking ape compensation, lie had the uncar uso,laary to offer. it. a day, but with mercantile sccuracy 11e deClajed Ire would not allow fur the day on which the plaintiff was arrested, nor that on which he wet released. and therefore decla ed that he would only' give is.. lie (the frarned Se,rjeant) should leave it 10 the .1 ary to 55v. whether one intlividnal was thus to imprison another iu shis country, and then in such.; manner offer compensa doll to the party injured. !oho Ilacktidge, the father, proved that the defendant ' "fa r---~-~ . . -. ~..T • ' Z'•stir 4.‘4;stvt. " 2' . -~°~ :~, • ~~ !`a THg STATESMAN. was a master w of considerable opulence, usd s o m e-1 times let out looms fee hire. Cross-examined—llia son William had hired a limns which be had not returned. Mrs. Wiekridge, the wife of the rest witness. deposed, that in the month of February last the defendant name to the plaintiff's house, and said he wanted to speak to the plaintiff's wife; witness told him he could not see her as she was then confined to her bed, hat if he would leave any message with witness she would deliver it. Defendant then said, he came to speak shunt the plain tiff. Witness was alarmed, and asked if any accident had happened to bins? To which the defendant an swered no; hut he was taken to prison for beinz bound fora hired loom, which had not been returned. Wit . ness told him lie hid got the wrong man, on which lie said—l am afraid I have made a mistake, and he is not the right man. Witness called on him the sect day, I accompanied by a person named Knowles, to reque-a • her son's release, es he was not the proper individual; this the defendent refused to do without security for the Wm Knowles corroborated the testimony of the last witness as to the defendant's refusal to liberate the plaintiff. After the plaintiff was liberated witness went with him to the defendant's in order to get a cornea. sating, when the defendant said he !wild give the plain tiff 4s. a day, and he could earn no more if defendant could look at his master's hooks; and then, as to the time, it was late when plaintiff was arrested on Saturday, and lie could not work at all the next slay. Cross-examined.—Whet the plaintiff told him lie was not the right man the defendant said be was. Witness did not bear the defendant try he let the plaintiff out of prison as an act of charity, his wife being in labooto it the time. Witness did not bear the defendant admit that the plaintiff was the wrong man Mr. U.l.f an attorney, proved that be called on the defendant and explained to him that he was mistaken in the person he had arrested. The defendant said he bad arrested the plaintiff for hot returning a loom according to his bond. lie refined to make any compensation. This closed the plaintiff's case. Mr. Sergeant Vationew, for the defendant, add d the Jury; He thought they would not feel the greatest inclination to favour the plaintiff when they . were in formed of the real facts of the case. The plaintiff had chosen to keep back the agreement on which the loom was hired, and lie had kept it back because it would have opened to their view a gross case of fraud and per jury. The name of Kerr bad been mentioned as one of the enmities for the return of the loom. Why was he not called? Because he could not screw his comae to the sticking point of becoming perjured, for he had as been requested to attend and swear, that the John Barkridge who bad become with him security for the return of a loom was the father anti not the son. Kerr bad refused to do so, declaring that his co-surety was the son, the present plaintiff. The Learned Sergeant declared he should call Kerr, who would prove three facts, and if the Jury believed him there was an end of the laintiff's case. The plaintiff bad been arrested en der an executien from the Court of Requests, for not having returned a loom,zad that arrest was legal if he was really the individ : who had signed the paper, and the Jury must gives verdict for the defendant if they were satisfied of that fact. Kerr swot, that at the regent of William Beekridge he became a surety for the return of a loom of the de fendaat's. His ceesurety was John Backridge, the plain tiff, and not the father. On a subsequeifibesceasioa the fatter asked witness if be did not recollect having gone with him (the father) to become surety for the re turn of a loom ? Witness said he dial not; sad the fa thee then else•rted be mid take an oath of ita j Witness replied, the oath would dies be ratite. and mooting the plaintiff added, " He was the man I west *ids. Cross-examined.--liedknown William Backridge the plaintiff a long time, bat not the father: had known the defendant until the present, transaction. John Beach*, the father, was recalled, and in an ewer tea qttestios from "Juryman, said he coald write, but not properly. Being asked whether be could make letters ? he tail " Yes.' His Lordship called Kerr back, and aspired who .had added the description and residence. of• the different "sons who signed the agreement fee the hire of-the Th..? Kerr answered, they were welpiii . Irt •OK dm readmit. Townsend, the constable, proved the arrest. . Crocreeamined.—The plaintiff denied that bewas the right man, aid the defendant affirmed he was, at the time of the arrest. Mr. Knightly was called by the plaintiff, in reply, who proved that in July last, the father lived at the place , mentioned in the agreement. John Buckridge, the father, was again put into the, box.—He sired his hand to such a pipet as that now' produced, but it was then in a book; be signed it by making a mark : he newer was in the defendant's house but once. Cross-examined.--And that was when Kerr was there. William 13nekridge swore that be went to the house of the defendant in company with his father and. Kerr, for the purpose of hiring a loom ; Kerr did s ot know witness's brother at that time, the witness swore that the marks to the paper were those of his father and himself. Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN and Mr. Serjeant Pau. seve rally addressed the Jury in reply. Mr. Justice PARK 'unlined up the evidence. The Jury gave a verdict for the defendant. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. °9. TUB ATTURNIT•GENERAL O. LITTLE. This was a proceeding instituted for the condem nation of three bales of silk charged to have bee* sari ggled. The ATTO&SET•Gcx =A 16 called the following wit- nellel :-••• Mr. Beckwith, of the firm of Beckwith, Bamford and Varnish, silk-mercers, Maideu-lane, Cheapside; stated, that in the latter end of August, Int, the defendant called at their warehouse, and having introdnced lain self as an acquaintar.ce of Mr. Dattiford, desired that , the foreman io she shop shoald retire. This being done, he told witness end Mr. Varnish, that be could sell them any quantity of silk at a price the amount of the duty below the price in the matket. " Then," observed the witness, " the duty could not have been paid." De fendant replied " the devil a shilling duty I ever pay." The defendant having thus disclosed his builintss,sea he supplied persons in the trade with silk to the amount of 20,0010. per annum, and also that he suppled one-third of the trade aith cambric, to the amount of 90,0001. per annum, and if he could get a few houses like their's in the silk trade he wonlat do business to an equal amount .in it.• He said lie could get false dates of entries at the Cuitont House to cover any thing he chose to import to any amount. • His goods were, he said, stunggleal in by a oniverfnl friend at Dover, who could • smuggle in the Devil, lie mentioned the names of houses at Turin, Leghorn and Valenciennes, from which he bought bis silk. He offered witness three bales of silk at 424. per lb. at the usual credit. The silk of the kind the defendant offered was at the time worth 4Ss. 1 t was afterwards agreed upon by the witness to take the silk offered at 40e. cash, as they did not clause to take credit in such a transaction. Defenalaot wished to send it in at sight, bat witness said lie did nothing in the dark, and told him he might send it in the first thing in the morning. Witness in the mean time gave information to the Corr tnittee Girlie Silk Trade. information was then given at die Costal House, and an ofscer was ,ppoinsed - to be I in waiting; Mr. Beckwith, in his eioes-exessination, said he de dined dining with the defendant in Lime-street, hut took wine with him, and was shown over the house Defendant spoke largely of his dealings, and profits, and expenses. pressed witness to drink, and sheled lout a well stocked wine cellar. Defendant himself drank freely, and talked freely, wished him to take a quantity of cambric., but was refused. Mr. Varnish corroborated this stalem•nt. The de fendant made no scruple of declaring that the duty had not bees paid. Rosy the officer, said he vizecl the silk as the porter was taking it into Mr. Mecicwith's wareh 'use; the dr. fendant came in soon after, and admitted nest the silk was his, telling Mr. 11. that be would make all right.— Witness told hint he knew bins to be one of the greatest smugglers in England these twelve montlie.' Witm-sst then went to defendant's house in Linte.street; but the defendant had gone o:f; there were found only seven teen pieces of cambric on the premises, aml upon those the duty had been paid. .Mr. Durant, a silt broker, proved the veins of the silk to be from 4.Ss. to ,rills. per pound, at the tiros the defendant sold it for 40s. This was the ease for the Crown. Mr. fur the defendant. said the rase was. one of suspicion, but it would be answered by evidence, which would prove that two of the bales aeisad were bought at a Custom house sale of smuggled. t om's, at Dover, by Vessn. Lathan', as agents for M:s-rs. Seale and Co. of London, to whom they were forward e d and by them sold to the defendant. The third bale a .old uotbeprovedundersiusilarcircumstancesin consequence of the absence of a witness. E. llowers,.clerk of Messrs. Latham. consols to s.any foreign powers, and agents, stated that in Apri l l , he had bought two bales of silk at the Costons-!ootte sale, on account of Messrs. Seale and Co. to whom it.'cy ware forwarded by the waggon; be believed that tw.l of the bales seised were of those that r ere purchased; he judge , ) front the external appearance of the silk, and &hewed the entries of the transaction. J. Seale, jun. of that firm, said, that in -kora 1818, they received two bales of silk, as stated by the last at:- nese. It was purchased ,at 68s. a pound, and, with the commission, it stood them in 735. They kept them is band until 1821, when perceiving that they kept filling,, and there was no chance of a rise, they sold them at 39 on thd 25th of April. On the 27th they were seised. They gave defendant six months credit. Witness, on his cross-ezatnination, refused to say, whether he had mauled goods, or whether he !awl been prosecuted in that Court. Ile believed the two packages seised to he %hove sold. There was no private mark. T ATTORNET-GINERAL, in his reply, pat it to the Joey. w hether, it w a s lot incredible that Mes , ,rs. Seale should have sold silk at 395. a pound, when the market price was from 48s. to 50s. The Jury found a verdict for the Crown. CONSISTORY COURT, Fattier, Nov, 29. TUE PRINCIPAL ANS ANCIENTS, OR WWII BROTHERS OP THE SOCIIITT OP STAPLE-INN (at TIMM ITIIDIC) AGAINST THE OUVRESWARDESS OP THE PARLEZ Or ST. &MERV'', 11•110114. , Dr. SIV•IIRT opened the pleadings in this cottons ease, in which the above society are pr oceedin g against Os; churchwardens of St. Andrew's for ejecting them trowel seven certain pews in the said church, which have from time immemorial been assigned to. set apart for, or mu. pied by the Principal, Ancients, andAirand Brokers 4 ;(1 Staple Inn Dr. Swabey said thie eau • OpilEt of •peetaell bation of seats; sad then recapitulated the proceedings which had been had sena it. Sig Calwrifbostsia.ltossusast..saii- be had- read the Dr. Ao.tie appeared as Counsel for the churchyard 's% and opposed thimimission of this libel. This was a maim set up; In terms, exclusively of the parishioners: sad [shah' teats *lSt. Asthma's; it was a possessive eight set up by the lon of Court, as against the right of (hal parishioners generally. The claim of tbe Inn was asserted, ps appurtenant to the messeage or Inn of Court. heiog situate oat of-this palish, called Staple-lan ; and it was Spite clear that In the event of the case being proved. it was a claim that was not merely exclusive of the palish losers and inhabitants, but equally exclitsive of the or& awry himself; for the ordinary could have ao right la virus merely of his own office, to assign perm in a pa rish church to those who paid no parish rates, who dwelt not in the parish, and who, together with their house' or i usessuage. were in every respect estrmparochial. • This, then, was a claim distinctly against the general law, which vested the right to swats solely in the parishioner.; , and though be was ready to admit the force of peed.' ruler exceptions founded on prescription, en h faculty, or on others erotrads, he cot:tested that those ;roiled* must be With jar* distinctly tad definitively laid and proveckThe learned counsel then went on to ergs/ that here neither prescription nor faculty could he Muslin. The prescriptive right could ,only Waist with the fact that the messuags to which it might have been at some time made appurtenant should be within the parish. Here, on the contrary, the parties moving the question de scribed themselves as an extra-parochial house oreociety. Again, a prescriptive right in these matter s, let it be ever so go od or valid, presupposed the Athena of a faculty. No faculty. however, could be shown to have been taken out at any time by this society. Bat what it was incum bent on them on the present occasion to prove was, hot so much the rigat to any particular seat or seats its the church, as the right to sit there at all. Now neither fa catty nor prescription could confer the right to sit there at all on any nomparishioner, to the prejudice nr con straint, as to rocas, of those who were parishioners. This it was beyond the pov.er of the ordinary, In whom was the distribution of seats to parishioners, according to his judgment of their rank, order, and gradation, to do; for it would be to take away from perisbioaers a right which the law had conferred upon them. Still less, then,. coals! is be said that the rector and church wardens coold. at" any former time, hart legally given such a right to the Society of Staple Inn. Parishioners, on the other band, were in all cases legally thus enti tled ; and for these reasons—they paid the parish rates ; and especially they paid for the repairs and snstenation of the fabric in which they pew stood. It was distinctly laid down In Blackstone (Commentaries, vol. 2. Book 2. cap. 17.) 0131 " a prescription cannot be for a thing which cannot be raised by a grant; for the law allows prescriptions only in supply of the loss o such original grants." Why he had shown that the or dinary even could not grant that which this society claimed as a right, and he should like to bear whet species of other grant the ingenuity of his learned friends could devise on this occasion, as likely to have been made to the society. A case hail Peen de cided by the Court's predecessor (Lord Stowell) from the chair, in attach it now sat. that bore strongly on the general question here at issue, though not opal the pattioular facts of the case. He meant that of " Walter e. Bonner and Drury." (I Vol. Dr. Haggard's Rep. p. 314) There the Judge said. " This i s a p r o. ceeding est these churchwardens, calling upon them to show cause why certain persons should not be seated in church; and certainly the case itself very properly g oes on the illegality of the transfer of pews;" ants (p. l 317) the teamed Judge added all private eights to posts mast he held under a faculty, or by prescription. hich presupposes a faculty; and no faculty in the pre sent case was ever granted to that effect" (namely, to enable a person ceasing to be a parishioner ur inhabi tant of a parish to transfer a pew to another); " for the ordinary most have exercised his discretion lest he should depopulate the church of its own proper parishioners the Intahitaags t which, bower• r, w.. 014 have been ?he cage. had lei granted aneh a faculty a• t o as ,,m, p rty in to tratt•fer." And actin, (o. 319.) *. R em f there tale a prescriptive right, it civil i out be exorcised by tr.n.femng it to persona not intrthiisalsof the parish of the hams , t• which it had been sale +nista.. nant," The letrned counsel amended from thane stehotilies, awl from titedoetrioe 161 down in " Watson. eh. 3;),.. End " GO - icon, p. 197," the Cents of Lord Coke thou , the same ..lbject —that of Ja•tge 641 n i• "ttita r k, c . Booth," (Term Rep. 4.01), aml.• Primal and Bridger,' in the Aretes Court (Or. iiti , llimore's lonnottn. eel. I. p. 311;)„ that the claims of this seat'', In ccrniis pew s is the church of • parish. within which they were ac, aa si th e rates levied in shirk they were sae liable to, entail not If sustained ; etst therefare it woold he nee,' le aktor the Coon to penc•ed farther is the if it should be, as he tray rd it ..odd ha, of 'gild. / that the libel oocht to he rep! eI ; a n d finally, th a t ty its rejertion of inch libel, the Court ocght sow Weep s:llor ;he ranee. Dr. Jev Nen, an be same side, ',Meeting Ire Court at I.agth._ Dr. SWAIIIIIT lINI Dr. LVIIIIXOT9N were beard in sui. port of the filrel given in by f o r society. Sir CURISTOPIIIiII ROSINS .1.4 said lir shoot! ti'se ti to ennsii!er the able argiaravnts of r.oinsel, authorities cited, before be de.:hied as to me oullAissiva of the libel. 4 • • LON 1./ON 41A It ti rs. OM, 01' °RAIN OS 1110i110 SNIP, ti 0711122:-- Wheat red. (old) 3.1 Beans. (nor) ..ti --.--- while. Old) —23 (n1d)....22 k r..tl (new) .. SS 36 lien. (new) - fine .. -. 36 40 ------ (..1d) . v - superfine 39 41 -- h"rrioweii4) white (new) 36 22 fl • • ---- auperimo u4S Oatg, fey,/ Rye. (sew) lO 2i --- lee ..... ..•1224 Barley, (old) 2O 26 Poised IS it -- (atir) 9l 97 he .,...19 3l Palm,.. .... .11 . 9$ ---- 'operas, ....S4 36 ------ W•••• IS VS Illalt 44 50 Scut% -_ - - sae 53 55 —... Peas*, bog SO SO Flour. per Sari SS 0 -- inaplo f7 30 --- Seewnds .• • •;..111 36 ---w ew) — --- Nett/ CeallOy. !1$ hits 74 $1 Pollard. floor. per v..• HI 14 -- bollert (new) "/ 14 Bran - A -7 U WRIT SDITIIPIELD. ►RIDAT. 110Y.761. Thi market this day was again bet Wily sepias& Beasts, bilk —Sheep. 4.603.—The Milian trade 'best toe gene es on Friday la I.—W.4ller. u•srih 2s. ad per Miss. sad sink.-The Beef trade rather Lisa snd I ower.—tho Mesa of good Beet ran he bought at at,out tat . la s . t o 14 . Many Beasts turned oil unsaid. It is suspected the Breca are busy on the road for Monday neat. MAIMST, VIIISOAT. woe. It Bed Wether Mutton flecked from fts. 61. to Is. ed.—Best Beef short sides, Is 64. to te. frd. HAY AND STRAW. Fie 1.041).—N0V. IS. iturrarteLo-11 ay. COE Od. to 74, 041.—ftravr, to silo Od.—Clover, 670. Od. to S7l. 01. Sv.JA/Iref...-111 , 17. ROS Od. to OM. Od.—Strotr. 101. W. to lei. Od.—Clover, fLis. Od. to Ms. Od. Warrunarat..—Hay.ooB.o ,l to 901 od.—Strew,S6l. CAL. to Sav ad.—Clover, 70s. Od. to No Od. Crty, Nor. U 7, lett. B %CON. Ad there teems to be asi Rope of a spec/dine/ in this er. tide, those who have • good deal engaged ara almost wh oa helm. Accustomed during • long course of been. re sesetseeedeprossious end revives, th-y very relotwantly mil spell hope thaSasottarre mienl will sods. The prissiest Cheese/loggers, however, who are • steady lad well4a forsaml jet of men. here, for MON MD*. beets thereoehly outride/id, that their interest lies not is ono:our/Ong WO ices; and aceordingly they are owe rohniag offers's: Bacon. which, if brought here at regent. would have is to kept over as the Bethel' has iseen„—Twenty-Mght strilliass on board, in Waterford, is the price an. asked; hat vary little toed. Now, here, 335. to Sts.; (Nd, llis. to 90r. BUTTER. • The injurious consequences of bringing Irish fitter to 1 th• London Market, too early io the season, a recomps.- dee, which we noticed some weeks back, begin one to ta felt by the holders. A great quantity of that wt.ieh ants :imported diving the hot weather, cannot be sold at asr price: so that the real reduction, upon the slugs slid of ' the eterket, is, etas at present, very great bulged. The Deteh 'merchants. as usual. ere prolltiug by this state et things : they are pouring in their Butter, which is a 3 *dolt white raism, and consequently at hest prices.--Csrlow , M. to 711a.—Belfnst. ?Ss. to ?lg.—Dahlia, dEls. to 706.—Wat,r -460,...i1a. to 702.—Cork and Li me-ick. tels.—fhwelt. Mu to SOL These prices are for the beat articles of lb. respeetise O da ' ' CHEESE. ' s lteigie very 6ne Double Gloucester Cheese welliii Wog Os. to 4fig. hesez.p4to all other kinds pricks are gestaal. Very little doing. • , - TALLOW. he. TER Cert. • Mosta Candle, yellow. 01. Os. to 91. 3s.—Ditto, SlSsri~. 01.00. to 01. (h.—Ditto, Soup. W. Os. to 01. Os.—Arrbentei. Of. Os. to 0/. Os.—Town Tallow, 21. Is. to 01. %h. —Urged Sod. It. lbs to 01 Os.—Rough ditto, it. 38. to 01. lat Gratos 7s. to Os.—GoodDregs, 101: —it, Loaelan yel low, al. lOs. to 01 . Os.—Do. !mottled. S ot U—Do. ourJ, 01 Os.:—Etateb, English. SI. 110. COA.L;II. I IRKET. New. 29. Ships at Market. Ships sold. iMett. 17; Newcastle IS lbs. Od. to 4Se. Ot. IS Sunderland -- ----------- -- - -- - - - COURSE 07 SICHANOR.—Fataar. 340. 13. Aasstardsta is 1 . ..1111 1 Olbraltar /4 0 Ditto at Sidbt 11 11 lazitera.... ...... .4/6 0 Rotterdam 11 S. Genoa, ....... . ••••. 4 s o Antwerp..... 11 1 Vestiee Italian 1.1e....17 SO Hambargb. ...• / 7 6 Malta , 6l 0 Altana ..... ... ....S7 7 Naples 111 o Paris, $ (1111 0. 110, .115 43 Paierato . I:.V 1161 Ditto l3 73 Lisbon • 4 . s itordealu. ...... —.se nk wi.• . • *IN Frankfort on tbe Main 166/ Itnatteler 0 Petersburg 3as p Atte 9 i Bahia ...... 10 0 Berlin.. c 1 .Cur Dolls 77irr. Dahlia Vienna. E(.s 5....1110 to ri Cork • Trieste ditto ...... ....10 111 nu LLIOL pr as. Madrid.. 171 0 Pornspalgt.ldistaii. ol . oB . ol Cadiz . silt U Foreigagald is kin. S 1711 Bilbao 37 0 New Doubloons .... 0 it u Baresloda . ...16 0 New Doilies ... . .... 06 66 Seville... ..... .... SS 11 Sara riltbartuolhrlllllll6 • MARRIED. On the 14th lest. J. Rinzinan. Eq. of Oteat street, Rloonsbetry. to KM.. wily child St Welles ystot t • Braden• of the lath HUM. Lately, at Aeharhau. Locbaber, Mr. W. Ikrdntyrr, it , i taetsraan of Druintteur. seed 101 yea' a. He tesleblead. manner and lananace„ n striking speci.nin of the patfista il dignity of thn HiOttanders of the preceding •;•. ways worn the mountain garb. and d.ns a Itting lestory of the feuds of the last century. Ile was a super:or diF4 stalker. and killed his roe at the see of ninety. 1111 retained its vviur to the last. Hit ftINNIIII won conveyed to the grate by a number of his clan. of *Mei there were resent , of pis own descendants, a Number Were 688 et& dent for that purpose. Lately. in the commune of Fteastptty, Paseo% Dreingr 0 e Esan3an, aged 188 years and IS dn) a Ha nett% wall • 1 . and was, from lag great age, an object of varteridloi to *lt the country. London : Ig4tbod, prtated. ago poo m b e d, at th• °Root " STATIV4I4IO‘ bed 'rug ColirTnrCre (rlOll3, Paper) No. len. Strand. b) R. WARDELL, MAL to wboislb estrnalegiops. Qrd dre. ti!rritagel to it — iddrour4. . . ' • qr -~,:: 7: 411 IR t ~ .. -. V s NUM I segg; ft SEC tin. OW DV rity br t feheftel be.. 11 of r. Cr TI et*: ilaWan; TOM" lia SAC tT ug .eqo caktito ths, z t cameow miry no 16 cos 4666 cd 66 I,6re' end ITeig , ; &rev^ eve. T Vi i Ctivrhav, The tinuanup einee the ettfrr ea false: ftersaz beimot NW Sim coal Ilt;q? rle • vtgi,tw V,XLI aC9,o g.c.du Rpotati XIS; sani ,fte - e• 4%4 Oath meth. Ken Cherie idiom Chei Northi aeon. Wel I ■ r r. ~~s • : hi; Pf` r 4 s ' w }.n4s 1' r 9 !!! hie 61 n 1 gorf!ree AO. Vr Orel erten ►aside read. Che' aide, e Wed° Dol at hall The coach, passel acd D Item. I)c;rc Bs Wen te PHIT %mei IMP at a Mot Mot tog ecy R ye' T L.l "I 011