The Statesman. — London, England, 1813-05-21 00:00:00

strAn br. redpro,, goon as they Mont this, they remonst rated against l ine a decidetl.ps.... it. - This sum oleo divided only last year by the Can.! theformer, since Ansi mis.ioners appointed for that purpose ; andlliey de. ! city. lie ao . . . .4.,. . dared that the losses of the merchants --(from the 4nd Massed 1 0 4 Ai ~.._ t . t . ,. it Oa ty flib claims that had boon proved) &motivated to the sum of audited (mew gated that din Wend 41) the Vniteillst., _, 800,0001. more at that time. H. thought it probs. hie that the hlinistry, in l gObt, were induced to ac. .form her part' of.iiie Maly 'was no( * ll*. Cetle to the convention already mentioned from en 'nasals for declaring war, but bee 110100 *lot . eeoldle no authority for this COuntry to beeqeally apprehension that a refusal on their part might leid to a new war with France and with America.—aNetijosE 11 "--e' oaths wholehe was fen? c0n046044 that The lion. Gent. in sup;tort of the claimants, ali;ithe claim of . the American Loyalists ou wal well Ma t . 7 leged the cases of the Settlers who bad sestabild ; Wished, and insisted thet . the unitiOnglit ets-lie c. low.es by the cession of the Florides---of the Settlers ! ceded to,. unless the House vies . stilfing tO pert Doi on the Mosquito shore; who were indemnified en the i self bankrupt both of honour and resotirtge.'• rea , ion of that country to Spain—of the sufferers . Mr. VVILBERFORCE followed mach-the sails under the aequestration by the Spanish Govern• train of argument, and quoted the authority of Vat meld, in 17943-- . -and more especially the case in ' tel to prove, thatthe Goverment was answerable to which the captors• of a Swedish emir°, had been , individuals for losses occasioned by dechiratiOns of indemnified by the Government, on thorestoration Way under circumstances like the present mite. llti of the vessels to the Swedish Gover nment. lie was combated the arguments of the Chaneellet, wiini hr aware how unplemniit was to press a claim on the his opinion, bad been imposed upon, for the Chan. !louse, at such a time; bet any relief to be granted - cellor of the Exchequer would ever be foteretist tai to the claimants wouid be effective only. by . beiug concede what was actually doe, providedit !rat con s eedy. He accordingly submitted 'to thelleue this ' 'Went with his duty to the country. The' present p p ro p o sition— ..,,, , •.- I was a question of right and qot of policy ; and if the " That Ilia iartitioners have estalati4ted nieh a ems jai hew : stns of swim demanded was large for the country a is.euaritattle etoosad•for pArlimarntary Relief." • -- j tfr pay, it was large for the .indivkleals to be de. The question having been put, . - I pelted of. He referred . to the article •of the Treaty, The CIUNCELLOR of the EX.CH EB EQU. land tiontended that - the British -Goveretnewt had' not !hid, thlt the ' l mposition : 0i the Honourable Mover I, none aLl.thet became a great and generous nation. welt to thie- r that if the Gieternaisent wU finable to ' The claim seas equitable,.-and although the Teti obtain relief• fur the chilliest* freaks foreign power, T flatters alight require much more, their patience-had the House of Ctiattnons was bound to indemnify the ; been esbetisted, their fa - rhino . teen ruinest,• and losers. The qiesiion turned on dine points, his. they were willinglo take sly thing that would be 1. Whether the Goversinsent was justified, in con.loffered. He ridiculed the futile remedy of applying eludiag the Treaty of 1802, without obtaiuing fhtl ;to the American Courts when decemeets were lost, indemnification for the Claimants; and, 2. Whether, I.w ittseises dead, and hostilitiespeoding. .- . : • when the Government had so failed, the Parliament I Lord CASTLEREAGH supported the. .Ametitt. was bound to make it good. The first branch oithe i inept, because he thought thin to rent theelehns of : question had been waved by the Eon. Mover • but the . ILeyslikts .ivdold set a dust dangerous lad an. he should remark, that by the Treaty of ',a, theiwireantatile , precedent. It . r ts not merely justice claimants were at full liberty to Parsee their daunts i to the Win& hatjuttiCe to poiterity ti that es' to be in America, as immediately after the Peace of 1784, I considered. Ali Lerd) hip mitered its ileteit into the _ . . by which it was stipulated, that no unlawful inspe-.1 several Treaties, arguing that America. had -not (Bt. diment should be thro*n its die way of subjects of teharged her dity,indlhat until she had set the este thither nation baring claims ow -those of the other. 4 pie,. this country could not be expected to census:Besides this, - the specific sum of 80,0001. had been ; He allowed that if the.deinand were just.(whichhe obtained for oar merchants. This, Indeed; was not i denied) themagnitudis of the Mien could be no reaten so much as they 'desired; but he had the authority of. for refusing the prayer of the PetitiOners. . . . the claimants (through the letter of Mr. Glassford,4 ' The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER their agent), for saying, that any sum would be pre- i explained. (erred by them to an inde fi nite claim on 'the Ameri- 1 . Mi. WILBERFORCE also explained, during can Government. To accede to ads claim would which air Eon. Member in one of the ddegallerin encourage the practice airehdy • trio extensive, ' of; eery pertinaciously interrupted bin with calling mit,' vesting money in foreign funds, as those who so 1 " Spoke, spoke I." when vested,their money would be sore of payment .Nont ! The SPEAKER iuformed him that was disorder.; their own, if not from foreign Governments. As : ly, as the lion. Gentleman had an andeobt t ed right ' to the case of the Swedish convoy, the vessels had to explain. been restored to the Swedish Government after they 1 - Mr. FINLAY spoke in favour 'a the motion. bad, by.condemnation, become the property of the'. He felt forthe situation of doe Claimants,- a very captors. He contended also, that the case of theygnat number of whom he represeeted • but he felt settlers on the Mosquito shore, was not parallel,; more for the justice and honour of l'arliament.— and that the remuneration granted to the losers under I s Upon an attentive consideration of their case he the sequestration of the Spaniih Government in could conceive none that had more equitable foneda. 1796, was not of right, but from the Rare liberality I tions. . . - of the Crown. . Ile should, therefore, more the pre- I ••Lord CASTLEREAGH explained. • • vious question. Mr.M A RRVATT denied the justice of the claims, Sir T. BARING said, he had come down to the and argued Atria , the mischiefs to which the adthis: House without any idea on *hat ground this motion . sion of the principle would lead. could have been opposed ; - and be thought 'that on 1 Mr. LOCKHART briefly replied ' whets the House this occasion the Chancellor of the Igichiettier could . divided i and the numbers were-- . ' not have viewed the case accurately. He 'accord-' . • Asti ~ ~.,0 -.. Irl ingiy re-stated the facts which Mr. Lockhart had i . . Noes - , - - too detailed, and o.7.served, that whenever the claimants I ' • LEATHER TAX.. . • had been questioned by Lord Grenville as to the . Mr. EFXSOST moved' the second reading of his amountof the commutation they would accept s their Bill for repea:ling the additional Leather Tat.. minimum was always two millions. The claims, .he ! , The CHANCELLOR of Abe EXCHEQUER in remarked, were originally five millions, and the : the course of his ohservatious maintaitied, that the ground On which the vetitiouers now eametorerard, rise in the price of leather and shoes was not the was, that the public ought not to obtain the adman. ••effect . of the tax, but proceeded from -other causes. tages they had obtained, at the *espenceorindisiduals. With regard to repealing it; be wished the House to i The lion. Baronet concluded by- observing, that if consider well the proposition before they coosented, the claimants were (as the Chancellor of the Exobe.. i to dieduish the revenue of the country. The revenue quer had 'urged) at liberty still to pursue their debts :, of last year had -not been so productive as the pre. , in the Arberican Coertly it was not in this light ; ceding. The total amount, up to April if semi, that the treaty of 18t2, was viewed by Lord Histes. t 50,800,0001., that of 1812, 61,700 4 0001. There bury. -, . • - • was no reason for alarm, However, to ther pablie, ads Mr: Mr.' W4MITiI said, he navel' rose from the eon. - the deficiency arose from anstell purely- teinpoiarrt sidemtion of any cause with a stronger conviction of j but the fact might lona twin show how slow tb its justice, than from that of the Petition of the pre& I should be in givir - way estrare or even pestle ~ . Might :but Fe iiCt i Or! sent Claimants. The test of ths.Swedish captors was (he contended) substantially the same as that bifore the House, though some technical difference might les stated by some better jus-publicist than himself.' By the Convention of 1794, the British Claimants . 01 America, and the American Claimants on thiscOuii try, were put on the same footing, while, in par.- solvate of it, the Americiir Claitinuits received the amount of the whole Brit:4110 dire to them, While our o wur Claimants . fecefied .only 600,001. in lieu of two railliOns.. lb Wit derSiAtoo3 6 nVOuld ho now to agirl i tb i zt io :ttit a =l i ft h reis for the. re t ie: ••• • • • • • this country; 4.4..wir0• thai.iskirstaidalt to suffer for time goalie( the. apseaseisity 4111'64 being indemni fied ? Ur Ornittailhat fa the case of the Spanish Clairnals,„4lfic. no would 'not allow the right of the Clahessitai *Aids 'was urged by them; but the remuneratiosof these Claintants, wan brought for, ward to support the capture of the four Spanish fri:, gates, one of the - wont acts of Mr. .Pict's admisistrs• tion. .Adisedrantrige these 44eieseati laboured uo. der was; that•their case was . auffere d to remain un heard until it was forgotten, and then the Claimants (having lost even the support of hope) had to-come forward, thofgh in reality with a tenfold claim on public favour, under the most disadvantageous cir d solicitation. -` Oth look a dmitted rot , . laid • on, which would lin more productive ' the .same • time more oppressive to inttividsab time the one now under .sionsideretion. He had himself had kin contemplative last .year to,lny OA* on Pri.. Tate Breweries, No shillings a bead for eeery family that brewed their elm.salt ligeor ; but bow. mach More severely that Would bear upon the community than the present., He did not WO .any. thing in the bulk of the evideece that , had beetklaid before them,. that constitutedsirosnalfor repealing thetas. The distress which the HIM Gentleman.had to wiornlif described, end Ashich *net isers..hed * greet upon his fee,liater, heascribed to. the general *too If the trade of this country at proollat o and not to aiiy particular operation of the tas... • Lord ALTUOR.PE shortly replied to the Chen. cellor of the Brhequer on the Subject of the evidenee relating to the steteoftho leather trade. Mr. GEORGS PHILLIPS, in a nest speede r . pointed out various Inconveniences resulting from the' proposed . tax, and the inconsistency 91 some of the arguments used in its defence. His contended, that the circumstance of taxing the article by weight wonki make it fall most heavily on those who sloolsi bust support it, namely, the poor and 'amnia( . tuuutances. • Mr. B. BATHURST opposed• the motion; on the ground that the British Government bid ineffectually done all that was inits poweeto enforce the demand of the Claimants, who. ere now left to what he ad: mitted to. he the futile remedy of ipplication to the Republican Courts of Justice., • Mr. WILITBREALI keprobsted ha seigy pc) ;pied terms thermain ground on Whielt the I Chancpor of the Exchariter had refused Ms compliance ith the motion, viz: that. the sum demanded was large: if the claim were just;k - and these unfortunate Individuals w e r e depdred of their due, the more enormous the emounwthemersi flagrant was the- ihjbstice, and he mare severe the cruelty of contusing to deptire the m of emir - eight. The Honourable Member then . . Lord CAS'rLEREA . GII strenuously urged the House not to relinquish &lax for which no other tee 'had been proposed to be Substituted, and the' prelho eareoef which, in the increased pike of the article, we should still have to bear an addition to Met, the tax *liickehould be substituted for .If. - He e that the rich paid their proportion of the tax, eveseirs the article of shoes, from the greater gambit ibttti. they wore, and that the tax, as it applied to the nes of leather in saddles, harness, &c. fell exclusilnq 'on the more opulent classes, Lord MIL-TO:l . l4rd, this wits the only Institut*, he believed, which had ever occurred in which a, Chancellor of the Exchequer' had persisted In a tax &nerd* lease of the House of Commons had been declared against it: • • ' Oryw a coutpariiiva picture of the conduct of Loed. Greusliteisad toped Liehtpool upon this subject, glw Mr. W:SMITII, by a referetice to papers - Pub. &bawd front the Castest-bouse •abotred that Owes. ... , .->. . S. " ^ " ••• . • I , - , , . • •.• • tilf; 1 01 111**4• ''''' • . . '‘ r '7 o f nf crw7 — ' -- 7'7:3 1 1 - --;- 7 7 ,1a . , with Ztnin faiinis ainiiietitr*itfi the kit leit ._ *, dlidattnot white to•tia4v thililiaeisei . 1 Mit lied Ih Nutt .ifoisse, but wbe entertained 4site ,' , I eautnirr opinion from the Petitioner,' as to the eifel• - .4if the bus- ender consideration upon *that tradc. • -* . • - • ''. tevi (Nation being -here fetidly called for, the Heti', difidelt, and there tippeatid for the Bill 12t1 ' —AgiMat It 1254.: hhj oil ty . s.—. The Bill for the re- I peat of Oh ter it of oolorti trist • I. On odi re-admi ssion into the Gallery, we found Itt.p.PIEEL on his lilt, •w ho stated, that until the goo. Ida in e vi,o a dvdec . lared its opinion Upon l'tlte ItiMan Catholic Om...tic/N.lm thought it would be ilyrOttg tOrieS the WI School Bill, or any compre. ' !'hetisiie p ink frith Education. lie-therefore Moved, that tloliteh. School Bill.be read a second time, Roof i that it alstio — Id be coMinlited on Wednesday, which ". i was accordingly nreedfich . . . 1 • - Lord CASTLEREAGII bring* op 'eters' papor4 i relating,to the Catholic Question (which had been ' moved for by , Sr . J. C. Ifippisley), and moved that they should be printed, whieh was. ordered accord- . latgly. * ~..._• - • •• . ' . • * 1 Sir G. WERSTER . wished in kno w of the Noble ' Lord (Castlereagh), whether it area his intention to 1 *prof a s motion for leave to bring in a Bill (the title lof which we could not learn), or to allow the Bill to Ibe first introduced , if not inconvenient to the Noble I Lord. Thellon. Baronet Mated, he should :prefer the latter course.. - L Lord CASTLEREAGH stated; that he **Wit not i pledge himself to oppose a Bill of which he enlyitient i 1 . the title. - Sir G. WEBSTER begged to know, whether he was to understand, that the. Noble Lor d would net • oppose the Bill. •• .. . The SPEAKER begged leave to' remind die Min. Baronet, that the House always gave . its opinion after hearing-the reasons for introducing a Bill, 'and. ••would not be pledged beforehand. . The Tobacco Excise Bill was read a first / and or- .. . demi to be reed a second time to-morrow. I . ' - The Hogliglisandjourned. . , LAW INTELLIGENCE- COWIrt or CHANCERY, NAY 18. oasegiar, z mArrri. or :ram,. Immo, _ _ auneo. • - ..."1 .• This interesting case came this day before the LORD' CHANCELLOR, upon petition and counter-. I petition; the former praying for an order on the I Assignees of Messrs. Stein, Smith, and .Co. bank ! rupts, requiring them to pay into Couit attest of • i 40,0001. admitted to be in their hands, of the bank rupts' effects, and to have the same vested in Exche.: - quer Bills, for the security of the creditors . ; as else to pay a sum of 30,0001. to the use of Ike creditors: of Messrs. Kentington and Co. being the dividend on . a debt by them proved in April lest, it "es. in the pound, under the commission of Stein; Striith, aiid Co. to the amount of 290,0001. accruithiby 6 interest ' for uine years upon pecuniary advances made-by " he, Kensington% pursuant. to contract, to the two houses of Stein, Smith, and Co. in London and Edinburgh, including commission of one half per cent. es to the Scotch house, which is not allowable in London. - • . The amount of the accommodations grounding this large debt, extended in . nine years to the snot- moos sumer 64 millions sterling. The banking-house of Wood and Company, at Workington, had failed, as did that of the Ken singtons, through -the -failure of the two houses of Stein, Smith, •and Co.. passing by different names, but belonging to the same proprietors, although the .Edinhurgh•honse was in the name of Scott, Smith, - and Co. and it did *tot appear whether Scott was a real or fictitious name. 'The Aisigneee of the Workington • Batik peti tioned to stay the dividend tilt Mr. Edward Ken sington, the acting partner 'of his house, should pass all examinations, and render en account of a sin . rdar Ware, being daily entries de die in diem of lathes, pecuniary advances ; which account, after preperbig 300 sheets thereof, as he promised when proving his*debt, ite,found it wholly impracticable 1 withiu.the period of his natural life, and therefore• refused - to proceed in the account, as chalked out by 1 the eintiinlisioners. - • Sir Sxixort. ROMILLT, Mr. HART, and Mr. Wit...! Sol% argued' for . the Kermingtons ; and Mr. RICK . . ANiNi g My.."Lfe4tu, had Mr. MONTAGUE, for the e,okinter-petition, - contended for thtcharge 'of usury: The lawn CnAnCti.Ldß l in his judgment, stated l that thi-Cuestaitaloo . Was legal; eat that no usury 1 was • pitivedi ' but direeted '-the Commissioners to flake* report of •their opinion or. conriusicin en the Atiestion; 'Whither the dealings - constiteted usury Or not, 'with - liberty te either pitity, on the com ing up . of the Cmendisieriters' Report; to apply* tO, this. Court . for einlitsiii ilt liir, to try before a jury, Whiamost 'betlie final tribunal on the facts of this *case, if the 'Ripbrt 'of tie Ccimmissioners be, not satisfactory. His Lordship ordered the tri6- , ley tabe paid in, aid Mr. 1061tsingtrin to be further, eSamlned in the mode Mott approved by the Com-. mitsionett. . - • -: ' - . Judgtheat for the ffrit.'Petition. t , —.-5.•....-- •.' COURT OF XINO% RENCII;I4IAi 20. THE' IMO V. T. • CREZVE Y : Ese , • :Mr. Pram 'moved. fertile 'judgment of the Court oat theiDefendant in Ali call% who had been • found . •.. - slimy lit -the kit liasidatter 4116111e5, of publishing a fibetk Ogabet a person of -the- name of iiirbpatrick, "beta held lbe-situadow of. Inepector-Ginerol of 'Aseeseetrraiee and Property cat in the town •of Liverpool: . The 'libel was• Contained in a poblica- Am teat t Mr. Creamy to the Printer of the-Li• set oo! iliereuro, purrierting le be a corrected- re-' pert of'a iPseeh atedrilyMr. - creevey in the Commons -Howse of'Parliameitt, of rich he. was Auld is a Mem . • The eiitleitee en the trial being read, Att affidavit was pet 'lkon the part of 'Mr. Creerey, in , whielt beg mobiles the snetlibt by which ha was tetoited is mairjug the. *saki bl fitment/31, mid if e; ; , t • OMP ye* fiat' ilitVdieelit*Liihe ditittstiel'etenCer the Vide Gt.+ Liifehntil,lift teileettJetiepeeMti* *to the 7 , Vas iedbelit iiiidAsisstabasaeWart: gat:. Obiriot , 'boo deoisdtibyi Coastal. Tarlekr, hi e ha CaJon,tis .. Zi t 'firf; oppotMitdtg. whiclt afterwards presented itek. namely the occasion or the denbrari prezindi e a Petition frdin - Literpool• l ite repeat his stitertiatiflni"* that iebjeCti a:4*Jan to . mihtion aft 'tdditiun'ttl trri 4,4- 'mire en the sohjedt of sees:hang* inWlat thaliroveir • Tat Ad, of, isitk tha i ithabita is ts.of t hit tonch.co lb. ;plained, and which had cAnnit icihis;ktiowledge wisi.. .; leo at Litertfo;f. An 'incorrect. accOnfit of-lhie 'speech having ipkeated in iodic newspapers; wriif ' aritongothers in tiieLiverlioel 01.1 - dis, he had feq •• , himself called on te•send It &rout eecuont.4 '4 l; ,t, •- 1 actually fell from hins;to the pulatishatot sh4 . p aper . .. In doing so .he tli2p conceived-And etilLdid kionseis* , ' that. he did4tothiuk Nit what,lteltad a aglit tikdo.7r. , By the liill'of ltieSts it iiiii eipressli.declarecl,ti4 . i Members of the Confined% '-: geese eYPartialuent - • should not be. resptesible for.t4at they. uttered in 1 . that mouse .. lie; therefi2re,-claitned the protection l 1 of the 13111 of air l ifts ) and denied Oak for the pub..- liattien in- question, whicTl was admitted. an be the stibstaaceef a speech mode by him in' ilrliansent,he was amenable to the jurisdiction of that or any nth& Court whlcl he knew of. There itere 'many Reso ' lotions of the. House of Commons prohibiting the pulilication; of their proceediags , by 'ohningers, bet theta was not a single Iteselstion prnhibiting Sem iberg from publishing their own speeches, which they had been and ware in the daily habit of doing—This was the first time attempt had bei'nt made ho ren der Members of the Cominoits knise of Parlitrrnnt ; 1 amenable in a Court of Justice for any thing uttered by them in their place in Parliamenti' . Ter tte - ifonse alone in which the speech was made, did he conceive himself called on to account for..atty thing which fell from him. lie did solemnly protest against the juris ! diction of that Court over him, and this he did con ceiving it to be his undOubted right. Lord ELLENBOROUGH asked, did the Defendant, . by himself or his Coon/elf-Wyk, to tuly . aofthingl No inclination to address -their. Lordships•-being evinced, either. An the part of Mr. Cseevey,:or at Mr. Brougham, his Counsel,,whl wasalso'.ia Court.; • • Mr: PARS, on the part Of - ih'e• pri)seiutinti, said, the affidavit which Me liaestAnt Uri j tiddread .t&the Court it would'ill become him .t' !Aka ntitite.' of, becauie it wits.a just statement by the Defendant,i on his oath, of the very same. argument which had been se,ably. urged py i lda.Ccuneel ,last %reek been then fully Conside:iedil—afid the yti-dict ha been , esteemed so satisflctirq, that even a rule to show cause why a nets , trial; 'shad& not take plat," had beetrgranted. • ll . gas iottfinced4hat•tiever any decision had -givec• -InOW.Vallfat latill4Cti9n. %its: Defendant, in his aklpzit, bitd.9yfileaked,this,raar, aerial fact, that. jajliterfaming the, present proses,:i 7 „ tion, the ' Court Oa all interfering #ith-any r thing falling front 111eivinli at o7 in - liietr place . in Parliamenth -- •Alitheteott did wilt AI take - I cognizance of. a lihciluisr toblientihn • and- this watt' - enie.which .he liape44ll vfoolll74fren.4 to g that a n y •: vabliast ion fin a Newepaper,..by anx. man whatever, Wai.cognizahle iu iM4..coukt.::. He thin groieded to Antice. particular' passa ges p? s hficntion, of the iucOrrecttivii of Whithrttritreerey,liiiikinfedu` , pains . ,. Might •havessatisktt lazitaalt;!cnithlstYalloded tri an insinuatioN'ille truttriarAwhiCh Ott • Dcrendent • did not allege consisted with.his.own kiln/sledge, arid; to which; therefore, he °light ,not to. have given pvb.., licity—retteCtinc on the conduct of a remvlAbly eminent and worthy character Olte late Mr. Per- Ceval). 'to =Mike,. :tht publication' itself in-' ferrid it.: `.: : • • Lbtd ELLENNOROUGII saidi as to the jorisdictioty of the Court. there could he' no question ; far as it was neiessary, that point. had been eonsidered one the motion for a new trial, - . Mr. Justice GROSE in s proneunciog judgment, oh,. served, that the Defendant 'wss now to receive the sentence of the Court, tor a publication, which was charged hs.4Seinff calculated to excite public discon tent, and stiso -ter vilify-and degrade the , character of the Inspector-General .of . Taxes in Liverpool.- An attentive reader of the publication, •the Learned Judge remarked, could not but,. suspect, that there was something more meant than was disclosed in the Affidavit, or that appeared on the face of the publi cation. The whole of transaction showed that the shah was levelled against' another person; high in the estimation of the public,' and that the Prose , tutor would not bare been thought wostity .of the Defendant's notice, had he.not, througb the. Wow. cutor, meant to direct his shaft agaiiist thi4t otho, and highly elevated character. So far, liiirefrlie, this war' a mitigation of the offence, in'tv•fai'as'it went to Infer malice against. this Inspeetor - orTasew ' to•:arlsonvotsly thepresent indictment warkkTiOtiaatifee The Court; considering every port .of the Inset, .aild how far it was necessary! that such publication should be lepresied, ordered, that the be fettla n t pa ttq the King a fine of 40 s 01. and'do stand enitmitied In the custody of the Marsh:A of the bliffshulvea 'of tA Court, till suchlne be - The fine was immediately paid eveotti. , r.* - , • 4-Mr. Creevti was eccompanied':!by the I'.ttl4 - Or ,Albemarle, Cpwper r • Lerst essulhtoni.. Lori Atthorpe; ford Lla,ousol, $l. Robsrt 11. Montgemery t Mr. Whitt read 4 _ usa.Lif,t44/ son; Mr. Western, Mr.• ,Westerd, Mr. , I noward, Mr. Folei, M. `llrancliing, Mr. 4rob,-mc. - e, Ord; Dr. Taimiht, 8.41' •: . . , ....___ - The Royalists of: Rio la Riche bad Wilt snot • 1 waled in taking from the .Samite.AJOhi.art , “ thrill 'I towns situate in the ioterior 7„,1nul MO pen deloftiNt ~its one day from': the Atql• of tlie I tideiiiitlentsbc9P" mended by Gen tAIIIYaT. '7 : - . . . • - . 4. li On Tuesday . morning a 'fatal acr itilPir ~'! j the,buke orßedford'a galiiii*ear Tiaistoce-ttinari•, - A young man in •a' eingle.liise 01110 4rttic patsiOC atOng the private•reasi when 4116..6116 . RM -animal tntk fright,i leaped over thistenapasts of,..the .later 0 4 by cant ing I , lp . i. 1 7. haise ~ . s: t . h . rew i . h e .. yollit min e Wi r . ' fgll. with his heed ea the iron raiiiug v - and .I . Es i ... !il / 110X * . Avou. 1 . IT. rims 41, Osrscs. 64, `" !• • • • 7. F I s , i , I * 9 ~ ~