The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1824-01-27 00:00:00

„ nc eitly paid, would be of all instruments the most efficient for faioiring the purposes of despotism. At all events such has actually been the ease. So recently as the year 11107 Sir Richard Phillips, then one of the Sheriffs of London, addressed a letter • to Sir A. AP Donald, the Lotd Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer. in which he c omplained that Special Juries were become virtually permanent in consequence of the same persons being repeatedly nominated by the officer of the Court ; that this wan contrary to the acknowledged principle of the constitution of juries, contrary to the express provision of the Act of Parliament 4 O. 2. e. 7. a J. ; and that a patial selection of j urors was the habitual result of interference on t h e part of the Solicuor for the Crown. The Lord Chief Baron, in an answer which he addressed to Sir Richard, does not deny any of the allegations ; he admits that special juries have become per manent ; he admits that this is contrary to the Act of Parliament ; bat, the state of things complained of he justifies, on the ground that inconvenience would arise from summoning jurors who lived at • distance; that the instructing jury after jury would expose par. ties to the hazard of points being dl understood ; and that in 24 year; e xperience, he, the Chief Baron, had never seen any !neon anience &metro:li the manner of striking special juries, and had known but few verdicts from which he should have dissented. Ie 11;17, a Committee. appointed by the Common l'ouncil of the city , of London, to inquire into this matter, reported, ” That special juries were nominated from a book containing s list of names inserted at the discretion or caprice of the Seconday, who had placed such names on the book as he pleased, and struck off such as he rased ; that he professed to be regulated in this practice by the recommendation of other special jurymen, of mine ettomeys, and of the ;Sheriff, which he considered humid( at li berty to adopt or reject, as he thought proper ; that although in the city of London there are an immense number of persons who are eligible to serve on special juries, the book contained only 48.5 names, from which all the juries are selected ; that out of thaw ; es eam of pasons, there are no less than 226 who are not 1 householders within the city of London, and are, of course, in-' eligible to serve ; that out of 269 householders in the list. the 1 number of those who art merchants, in the modern acceptation of the term, is fill ; those usua ll y styled tradesmen, and not mer chants, 171 ; that the alleged practice of a special jury being com posed exclusively of merchants (i. e. in London), is as unfounded In fact, a* it is utterly unsupported by any principle ofthat du ring tht Sittings after the three Terms immediately preceding the report. there were jurors summoned for the trial of 114 causes ; and that out of the book which contained the 485 names, 274 only were summoned ; out of whom one was summoned 55 times, one 43, one 50, one 46, one 45, one 43, two 42, two 38 times, fte. ; that the bok being left in the hands of the Officers of the Court for weeks together, they may have been enabled to make a eidaftoo destructive of the parity teal by Jury ; and that application has been made to the Secondary, by the Solicitor to the Treasury, to know the p olitical sentiments of jury appointed to try a Caul e b et ween the 'Town and an iodividual for a RW.. With respect to the city of 'London, this report occasioned some reform, as to the number of names and the equality of the persons from among whom the special jury is nominated (a reform, of little avail, while the nomination remains in the hands in which it is at present vested) t but in Westminster and other places the matter remains as it was. In the case of the King v. ardle, for an alleged libel in the Alone/tester Observer, it was affirmed, and no denied, that the special jury list for the extensive county of Lancaster (the population of which amounts to 1,074,000), am. timed fewer than IWO names; and in the case against Major Cart. weight and others, that in the canny of Warwick (the popula tion of which is 280,000) the special jury list had no more than 14 names in it, besides those of the grand jury who found thersille. From these 44 were to be taken, 48 for this and all the special jary causes to be tried in the county. Vet the 31 eta of the Crows Office called this • good and proper list ; and on motion in Court for a rule to check this practice, the rule was refused, and the Court declared that the list was a good and proper list. Here, then, is ample proof, and an admission by one of the Judges, that the situation of special juror has become virtually permanent; and being so, it cannot be other than a situation of considerable emolument, while the fee for attendance is • guinea is each cause; a degree of emolument of vital importance to a great proportion of those who are accustomed to serge ; for how. ever it may be pretended. as it was by Lord Ellenborough (Rex v. Wooler, 1 B. and A. 103. 285). that the object of the rule for a special jury is to attain persons who, „ from their better education and superior intelligence; are calculated to decide upon questions of diffindty," and as it is pretended by the effacer of the Cairn, that merchants only are selected in London, and "esquires" in the country; the contrary appears to be the case, aceording to the Report just quoted ; and.it is notorious that the service is habitually pafomied by • set of needy persons, not having so much as the requisite statutory quell hcations, but,from their constant attendance, stigmatised be the name of ginisca-inen. The reporter from the Committee told the Common - 11kuneil, that "of the favoured few to whom the Master of the Crown-Office had thought proper to grant patents of rank and intellect, the most part had no property whatever in London ; that many of those who were summoned were known to have been worfortreate is trade: it was notorious th a t man y derived a certain profit from serving upoh special juries; if any of them were to decide against the Crown, it was easy to judge what would be the consequence." A person who has repeatedly served on common juries in West. mime: makes the following statement as a sample, and a sample onl y I hew a special juryman who was a eowitivot: soldier, who during • parliamentary investigation, was discharged flora his re, giment at the instance dm army agent, and then provided for in r certain way. This man, after a time, mild to was endeavouring to cant as muck messy ea weld* seabee him so a has. hold as he had the premiss of being mark a spgnal juryman. He purchased the freehold, became a special Armen, and I saw him one day realm nine guineas in the course of about three hours. " Another had been a coachman to a law Lord; his master laid out his savings for him in the purchase of a small freehold, and ' he was made a regular guinea-man. " Another was • very poor man, with a large family, whose! wife kept a psis shop. I have _repeatedly seen and sat by the side of a special juror wbo was so deaf as not always to be able to hear his name called, and I have seen one of his fellows give biro a push with his elbow, to induce him to answer to his name." So much for the better education sod superior intelligence of this inestimable body, as Lord Ellenborough termed it. The situation of special juror being, as we have shown, attended with considerable emolument, and perhaps the means of livelihood to a large proportion of those who sere—the attainment of such a situation having been rendered an object of desire, the less of it an object of apprehension, in whose hands is patronage so valuable lodged? who has the appointment, who the disappointment of so many aspirins? who, in short, composes the body which is sup. pond to be a check upon the Judge ? An officer of the Court in which the Judge presides! an officer, appointed bY the Chief Judge of that ('curt, orby the Judge's predecessor ! In the Court of Kinp's Bench, this officer Is commonly called the Muter; and, according to recent decisions of that Court (IL v. NVooler, t B. and A. 193., and R. v. Edmonds, 4 B. and A. 484), has a right to select (in what does arkaing differ from packing 0) weh pergolas as he way think fit. In R. v. Ennead'', It is laid down, that it would be contrary to all precedent and example, If the officer should take the names by some mode of chance. It re quired, however, the courage of Lord Ellenborough to avow and put in force this exercise of arbitrary power. In the year 1771, upon the trial of Horne Tooke, a remon strance being made by that gentleman against a proposal of tho Solicitor to the Treasury, that the master should select two names cut of each page of the Sheriff's book, the master consented to take the first 48 names of special jurors that should present thermelres ; whereupon, whenever a name presented itself P in any was suspected by the prosecutor, the Sheriff's Officer affirmed that the man was dead, or had retired, or was a bankrupt : one man, who was asserted to have been dead seven months, Mr. Tooke knew to be alive, he having that day been appointed to an office in the city. This man's name being suffered by the master to form one of the list of 48, was instantly struck out by the Solicitor to the Treasury, among the 12 he was entitled to reduce. Subsequently to this, and up to a recent period, that is, within the time during which the present muter has enjoyed the office, ' something like an appearance of impartiality has been observed on these occasions, the 48 names having been obtained by the master striking his pen random into the leaves of the sheriff's book, and taking the esquire or merchant whose name happened to be nearest to be nearest to the point of the pen. Under the authority and ex pries decision of the Court of King's Bench, this course, however, has now been abandoned, and the master, without arrignimq any SIMS, *elects or reject; arhatever names he may think proper. The following is a statement, by one who is understood to have been sa eye-wieners of what passed upon the last contested norm. nation of Jurors,--the jurors appointed to try Mr. John Hunt, for publication of The Liberal. " The masts, WeinleieaU4U a fable, round which the parties niche cause Pend, opens the freeholders' book. He turns over the Mel, reads glad any name he may 6x upon, which is taken do wn of thepertige attending; be usually takes one or two names in a but &sometimes over many pages without taking any. ‘114411 by the defendant why he thus selects, and upon what rocliPie he makes the nomination; and he explains, that In the '"'t place be only takes such as are designated esquires in the , Ind of these names the required number quite at random, "soling any one his eye may light upon, risks: he knows some ~._", a )u thy that oue it unfit, and then he passes him over, reserving objection, however, entirely in his own breast. The defendant objects to this mode, as opening a door to peril. 111. Without meaning to convey the slightest imputation on Mr. '"i 3 oton (the present master) he protests against the principle r'Practice which puts it in the power of a master most completely &jury. The defendant furthersuggests that there are sther modes of striking • jury which would be liable to no tr"m" , of wrong: h an doe, for instance, that a book shall in '' at random that the first, second, or third esquire, , :iight be beforehand agreed on) in each page so casually 7r ,. 4 111 be nominated until the whole 48 be obtained. To however, the master demurs : he declares his strict im ,k 1 1. surd men professes an earnest desire to adopt that course &11l prevent any possibility of suspicion but he refuses to ride en the taking of the names, and adheres to his own w hat he alleges to be an impartial sekctiox. The general beingthrobatio of this plan must and does excite with t he t Mat urged by the defendant, Mr. Lushington a dm its rare( %Parkin ' , Wier were crks. orrupt, he would have the power, ruder this :ij' that k u ts "efttion ensues, in which the master says he wishes th: names were collected in a heap. and he had to 4 H a: hitsarti, in the manner of a ballot. He admits that =thinel in the book are eligible, and that he might, if take freeholders who are not esquires; but then the! ;‘,e u iPson the Office ef . Se Holt "on the Law of Llbel." IR= ndieation of the conduct and principles of the --"°`°( the Nrirark Herald. practice of the cilia is to take only esquires, and he refuses to deviate from it. He asserts that the mode of nomination k left en tirely to his discretion, and also that he has on former occasions nominated in another way ; as for instance, he has thrust a pen into the leaves of a book, opened it at the page he hit on, and taken the esquire nearest to the point t the pen. Nothing can be fairer, says the defendant ; will you do so in the present instance ? No, replies 31r. Lushington I left off that mode on account of the trouble.. Would he then fix on any other plan which should preclude the chance of impartiality? No; he objects (and this after all was the chief point) to any plan which would make it peremptorily on him take persons whom he might think improper men to serve on a jury. He insists that his mode (being, as he protests, quite impar_ daily acted upon) is the best, because it leaves hint the power to piss over certain persons; for instance, he says, if I see a man holding a place under government, or notoriously connected with go vernment, I pass him over; and on the other hand, if I see a man, whose opinions are notoriously introirer, I pass Aim over." Now, the possibility of getting u pon the jury one or two persons whose opinions might, in the estimation of the master be improper, that is, be smog partisans on either side, is a thing unavoidable under any impartial plan, which can he no other than some ap plication of a system of chance ; but the law, ash stands, has con templated and provided for this inconvenience, by allowing each party to strike out 12 of the 411 first appointed ; so that the inter. terence of the master to prevent such inconvenience is as unnecessary AS it isopen to abuse. Without alleging the exigence of any each necessity, however, the Court of King's Bench determines that the masher shall; retain this power of gicciiag, unless corrupt motives or corrupt conduct can be imputed to and proved on him. 'When comulaint on this subject is made to the Legislature, up rises bane friends of the master, and with real or pretended wrath inserts that no one has ever dared to :art imputations on the purity of the master's motives. Now all this is completely, probably, purposely, beside the ques tion. Pio one has imputed corrupt motives or corrupt conduct to the master ; first, because it would be next to impossible to adduce judicial proof of such motives or suchconduct; and secondly, because such proof, and the consequent punish ment or removal of the master, would be utterly useless; for, the thing imputed to the master and not denied, the thing tom- plained of and not redressed, is, not that the master does actually pack &jury, but that he has the power of doing so, and of doing so with out the possibility of detection. To this power the parties who may be affected by it decidedly object, and for the conferring thistii.oet upon him, nothing that will bear the name of a reason has ever' been adduced ; while it has been repeatedly *hewn, that for any rod purpose such power is wh i a t ;in a t t ‘eim " Nothing can equal fib. ty with whlchlthis power may be exercised, or rather profited by without being exercised, but the abject and trembling dependence of the per juror who is the abject of selection ;—he must consider as the arbiter of his fate, as the person who may determine whether or no he shall continue in the enjoyment of an easy and ample subsistence, not only the master by whom he is at first selected, but all those powerful persons behind the curtain whom he may suspect to take an interest in the verdict : to the will of every one of these, as far as it can be guessed at, and is recon enable with that of the rest, will it be necessary for him to shape I his verdict. Although in his conception that verdict may he a matter of indifference to five out of six of these high-seated spec tres, it it be matter of anxiety to the remaining sixth, the inde pendence of the guinea-man is as effectually destroyed by the up. prehension of this single one, as it could have been by all six. With none of the persons supposed to be offended can he possibly come to any explanation ; with no certainty can he so muc h as collect their names : his punishment (omission to insert his name among those of the permanent jurors) he cannot call a punish ment, cannot complain of it as a hardship, or even know the pre cise time at which it is inflicted. In the exercise of his power of emotion or omission the master observes a discreet silence ; he names no name, he assigns no reason his acts, if omission to se lect can be called as act, are as incapable of proof as his motives; and whatever those acts may be, he is, to all intents, safe in irre sponsibility. " With those who assert that the operation of an interest such as we have described, will produce no bias on the juror's mind, will have no influence in producing his verdict so long as he is bound by the solemn obligation of an oath.—we can have no rea soning in common ; we start from different premises, we enter tain opposite views touching human nature, and can never anise at tbe same conclusions. Without entering into any disquisition on the utility or effect of judicial oaths, we shall content ourselves' with observing, that they who maintain that such oaths are a suffi cient protection against the operation of sinister interest on the minds of a jury tribunal, might with equal justice carry the posi tion fUrther, and altogether dispense with the incumbrance of a jury . by holding the judge's oath to be a sufficient gua ra nt ee f or his deciding in all cases with impartiality and integrity. COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE. Shakspeare's tragedy of King Lear, or rather Tate's' version of it, was performed last evening at this theatre.i The part of Lear was assigned to Mr. Young. We have often borne testimony to the undoubted merit of this per former in those characters which require bold and ener getic action, and which afford opportunities for the display of that gorgeous flow of action and fine declamatory style of acting in which he stands second to no performer. The character of Lear is not cut in a mould calculated for the felicitous development of these qualities: and although the Lear of Mr. Young was not a failure, yet it was not that peculiarly marked and effective portraiture of the unfortunate Monarch which the reader pictures to himself from a perusal of Shakepeare's delightful tragedy of Sing Lear. To say of M r . Young's performance that it wanted originality, is not to utter anything in dis praise of it; for were he to imitate successfully J. Kemble's personation of the character, his personation of it would be at least creditable and correct. In our opinion the de ficiency of Mr. Young consisted in a total absence of pas sion, in an indulgence of declamation, where declamation was vapid and ineffective, and in an endeavour rather to adapt the character of Lear to his peculiarities than in the more appropriate one of adapting his qualifications to the part he had undertaken to personate. However, with the exception of Mr. Kean, " who is not anything if not passionate," there is no actor who could at all respectably sustain so arduous and difficult • character. Mr. Young may therefore perform it, from the necessity of having such a play acted ; but we have too good an opinion of his taste and consciousness of his own powers, to suppose that he would select it of his own choice. The Edgar of Mr. Charles Kemble was an animated and effective piece of acting; the part is below his talents, but his stoop ing to the performance of it greatly aided and ensured the general approbation with which the play went oft Of Miss Lacy's Cordelia we cannot say any thing favourably, and we are unwilling to say any thing un kindly. This lady has a most unpleasant provincial drawl in her utterance, of which she must correct herself before she can arrive at eminence u a tragic actress. The part itself is not, indeed, a very popular one, nor likely in any hands to produce much effect. Of the sub ordinate characters it is unnecessary Is say anything, but that they were played neither above nor below the ordinary standard of subordinate merit. The play is too well known to need elaborate criticism, and we take our leave of it for the present, with a wish that we may not again see it at Covent-garden in the hands of the same performers, unless the public be tired of everything else; or unless a "special request," or some such urgent call, impose upon the pro prietors the necessity of producing it. We are desired to state that the 'Mr.Westmacott, men tioned in our police report as having applied to the Magis trates of Queen-square, is not Rich ar d Westmacott, Ssq. the eminent sculptor and academician. Ma. PlERCL.—Nothing has transpired during the pre sent week as to the mysterious disappearance of Mr. Pierce, of this city. The subject, however, continues to receive its full share of public attention; and the London Editors having set their inventive powers to work on the subject, we may expect every day to have fresh versions of the tale. It is lamentable to think, that a circumstance so distressing to individuals as tb.s should be made use of for the display of that wretched kind of wit called hoaxing; but it is fact that hundreds of persons were attracted to Tyndale's Park on Saturday last, in consequence of a re port circulated by some silly person that the body of Mr. Pierce was then in the Park, where it had been discovered by blood-hounds. To this hoax we may attribute a state ment in the Cheltenham Paper of Thursday, that the body bad been dug up in the Park.—Bristol Mirror of Saturday. THE WISE Mew or rue EAST.—A Friar belonging to the order of Saint Francis, gave out a discourse for the benefit of his confraternity. It should be remarked, that it is the constant usage of painters to describe one of the Magi who were led to Bethlehem, by the star in the east, to pre sent their offerings, as a sable Ethiopian. Of this concep tion Friar Emmanuel took a pleaasnt advantage. Having expatiated at some length on the eternal rewards attendant on pious donations, as well as on the peculiar claims of his order on the bounty of his hearers, he proceeded to speak of the wise men of the east, and of their offerings. " The ant," said he, " my worthy and benevolent auditors, brought gold; the second, frankincense and myrrh; and the third—What did he bring? It is with concern I tell you that he came empty-handed, on which account God 'turned him black. Yon will agree with me that this was a terrible punishment, but not a greater one than was me rited by so heinous a neglect:—This being said, each pressed earnestly forward with his donation, insomuch that, on their breaking up, to the great joy of the Friar, who congratulated them on the event, not a single black face was to be seen in the admiring crowd. MEXICAN LOAN A Loan of 3,200,000 Stock, for the service of the lo verninent of 'Mexico, has been concluded between Don Francisco de Boris Migoni, agent of that Republic, and the house of 11. A. Crultli , chtnidt and Co. The contract is founded on a decree of the Congress of Mexico, dated let May, 1823, in virtue of which full powers have been transmitted by the Executive rower to Don Francisco de Body Migoni, for contracting tilts Loan. These powers, together with the general bond, pledging the Government of Mexico for the amount of this Loan, will be deposited in the Bank of England. Special bonds will be issued in the following propor tions, viz.:- 2,000 . .of . . I,ooeatit 1:1.000,000 4,090 . .of - - Warmth 1,000,000 12,000 . .of - . lee each . 1,2110,000 03,200,000 with sixty half-yearly dividend warrants, at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum, payable is London, free of all ex pense, on the Ist April and IdOctober in each year, at the house of Messrs. B. A. Odinchmidt and Co. The first payment to be wade on the lat April next. The Subscriptions to the Lap are to be paid in the fol lowing instalments, viz. :- 10 per Cent. on the 211th January 10 . . 18th February 10 . 9:h April 14 . . 19th May 14 . . flu June 58 per Cent. with interest on the two lad inatalnsents at 4 per Ceti*. per annum from the 9th, pf April, and a discount at 4 per cent. per annum willje allowed on anticipated pp meets. It is atipaintai in the bond lure Loan or Lens being raised vernment of Mexico, one Loan or Loan@ shall be a asiessit Lome, std also thariiii ea* Loan forAeservioe of the said Government shall be negociated in Europe within twelve months from this date. in the event of any fa.. it the service of the o.' rt of the amount of snob The whole of the revenues of the state of Mexico are pledged as security for the re-payment of this Loan. The Loan is to be redeemed by a Sinking Fund, to which the sum of 64,0001. sterling is to be applied in the first year, and n,oool. sterling in each succeeding year, with dividends accruing on the bonds so to be redeemed. The numbers of the bonds redeemed are to be advertised half-yearly in the London Gaulle. THE OFFICIAL. DOCUMENTS AND CORRE- SPONDENCE ILLATIVE TO TAE DWI/MI II ETWEEW THE MIRCHANTII OF LONDON AND THE LONDON DOCK COMPANY. It is well known to the mercantile inhabitants of the metropolis that a mismidersunwling has, for some time, existed between the merchants of London and the Directors of the London Dock Company; but the particulars of the dispute, so important to the commercial interests of this great city, had not transpired. We therefore fed much pleasure in being enabled to communicate to the public the official documents and the correspondence which had passed between the merchants and the London Dock Company on this important subject, which involves in it not only the interests of several of the great branches of our trade, but the prosperity of an incorporated body, the London Dock Company, whole stock amounts to between four and five millions sterling. As introductory to the following documents, it may be tecessary so premise that the dis pute commenced with the Directors of the London Dock Company having reused to delver goods to the Orders of the merchants to whom they bad given transfer notes, in consequence of which several cargoes have bein deli vered at the warehouses direst, without panting thrones the intermediate mearstre of placing them in tlic London Docks. Baltic Coffee House, Nov. H, At a Meeting of Merchants and other Persons interested, held at the Baltic Coffee House, to consider what atom should be taken in consequence of t h e Directors of the London Dock Com pany having refused to comply with their own Certificates of Transfer nENJA3IIN kIAWES, Esq. in the Chair; Resolved unanimously, Ist That the wage of making transfers of good s st HeLoudon Doeks by the London Dock Conpee", from the sellers to the buyers, has hitherto been productive of great facility in mercantile operations. Id. That the sums paid to the London Dock Company own each transfers are ample compensations for the trouble inci den t thereto. _ 3d. That the transfer notes issued by the London Dock Company expressly acknowledge the transfers to have been made, and contain a positive engagement "that the goods will be delivered to the parties named in the transfer notes, and to their order only." 4th. That, according to the usage of merchants, transfers made by the London Dock Co m p an y o f Goo& in the London Decks have always been deemed, and considered, and acted upon, as actual transfers of such goods. 6th. That the transfer notes issued by the London Dock Com. pony are in conformity with this usage, and that such transfer notes have always been deemed so correct and official, that the fullest credit has been given to them by merchants, either by their paying for the good s p art i cu larised in the transfer notes, or by their making advances upon the goods transferred. 6th. That in the cases which have given rise to this meeting,. the parties to whom the London Dock Company have refused to dc ' liver goods, have actually paid the purchase-monies fcr such goods, upon the faith and credit of the transfer notes issued by the London Dock Company. 7th. That the London Dock Company well knew the credit and reliance Oven to and placed upon their transfer notes. 11th. 1 hat the refusal of the London Dock Company to act upon their own transfer notes, in fulfilment of their own positive engage ments, is a beach of good faith, and if persevered in will not only be utterly subversive of all confidence in the London Dock Com pany, and of the usage which has hitherto prevailed, but will tend to establish a system highly Injurious to the interests of com merce, and productive of the most ruinous consequences to indi. viduals. 9th. That if the London Dock Company have omitted to do any act which they ought to have done, or have acted irregularly in making transfers, and if any lou has been sustained by indi viduals, in cons equence o f any om i ss i on or act of the London Dock I Company, that loss ought to fall on and be made good by the I Lontion Dock Company, who were paid a compensation for making ' the transfers. 10th. That the London Dock Company are the agents of the parties to whom they have issued transfer notes, and with whom they have entered into expres s engagements to deliver the goods included in the transfer notes, and that their refusal to deliver such I goods in conformity with their acknowledgment, and in fulfilment of their engagements to their princip a l s , i s a dereliction of their duty as such agents. 11th. That a deputation, consisting of Mr. Tooke, Mr. Thomas Wil/1011, Mr. Edward Parsons, Mr. Andrew Thompson, Mr. Taylor, Mr. B. Hawes, and Mr. Alexander Macdonald, do wait upon the London Dock Company with a copy of the preceding resolutions. 12th. That the example of the London Dock Company having been followed by the proprietors of Watson's Wharf, a cop of the preceding resolutions be sent to Messrs. Watson and Metcalfe. 13th. That in cue the London Dock Company and Messrs. Watson and Metcalfe refuse to deliver goods , for which they have ' issued transfer notes, a committee, consisting of the before-named gentlemen, be and is hereby appointed to consider what further steps should be taken to remedy the grievance, and to take such steps accordingly. 14th. That a copy of these resolutions be printed and circulated. (Signed) BENJAMIN lIA WES, Chairman. - The above Resolutions were followed up by several Meetings between the Directors and the Deputation : as no alteration was adopted, the following declaration has been signed, and continues to be signed, by houses of the first respectability. We give no opinion on this important sub ject, but shall be obliged by any information or commu nication on the subject : GOODS IN TIIE LONDON DOCKS, AND THE LONDON DOCK COMPANY. The Condon Dock Company having refused to fulfil their own specific engagement, contained to the transfer notes issued by them, in relation to goods landed at the London Docks, the undersigned feel it incumbent on them thus publicly to draw the attention of Merchants, Bankers, and others, to the risks and inconveniences to which they are exposed, if the line of conduct recently adopted by the London Dock Company be persisted in. Hitherto the fullest reliance has been placed on the transfer notes which have been issued by the London Dock Company, for goods warehoused and transferred in the London Docks, because the Company not only expressly scknowledge the goods to be trans.. ferred, but state that the goods will be delivered to the party to whom the transfer is made, and to his order only, u will appear by the following form of the London Dock Company's transfer DOUm:-. " Transfer of floods deposited at the London Docks. " Mr. I have this day transferred to your ac count by virtue of as Onler of Mr. -, dated-----„ which said goods, as per marks and numbers In the margin, will be de livered to you or your cedes only. For the London Dock Company, A. B. " No Order In wbich there is say erasure will be received." It is hardly possible to conspire any form of engagement more stmg ace p ac k s t h an i s puss* by these words. And it is further to be °Wand, that the Company have been in the habit or making a distinct charge for the transfers In their books, which transfers are the foundation on which the notes here alluded to are issued. But, in violation of engagements so precise, the Company have lately accepted of orders to withhold the delivery of goods to 'he the parties named in the Transfer Notes. These Transfer Notes, ' , issued by the London Dock Company, are either correct or not cot. rect. If correct, there cannot, of course, be the slightest pretence for refusing to comply with the tenor of them. If not comet, the Landon Dock Company ought not to have issued them ; bat hav ing issued them, whether advisedly or no, the Company are equally bound in law and honour to abide by them. If the Company be not so bound, no person having bought or sold goods, or advanced money on goods in the Lomita Docks, epee the faith of the Trans. for Notes, can be considered as oat.. And the mast satensio mis chief may ensue to individuals by the stopper of goods; on the due delivery of which, in pursuance of the tithes aT dre Transfer Notes, they may have Implicitly relied, as the 1111111•11 it making their payments. It was in contemplation of the bijoviens Weds which would re sult from invalidating the security of such transfers, that Lord El lenborough decided against the werehousekeeper, in the ease of " Simard atoinst Dunkin." His lordship's weals. as 'opened, were, that whatever might be the rule between "buyer and miler, it was clear that the warehouseman weld no2s e d=sr: belong to the party claiming it, after the es. knowledged to hold it on his account, and he, borough, should entirely oversee the security ef orreanede l lalings, were he to suffer the warehouseman to moan the title of the party to whom he gave his acknowledgment." This doctrine of lewd Ellenborough was recendy confirmed by the present Lord Chief Justice Abbott, on the trill of a cause— " Hawes against Watson," at Guildhall, on the tid of December, ; and the warehousekeew was accordingly WE Sable to the Ley to whom the goods had been transferred. It was to have been expected that the result of the above trial, and the confirmation given by bad Chief Justice Abbott of the doctrine of Lord Ellenborough on this poi n t , weak! have induced the London Dock Directors to have abandoned any further attempt at resisting the fulfilment of their engagements; but unfortunately this is not the ease, for the Company still refuse to del=ve the goo ds which have been stopped, and threaten to brie( the patties *ho claim the goods under the Transfer Notes, and who Intend com mencing actions against the Company, inttt e t * Sof Chancery. The undersigned have no hesitation to disapprobs. • of this conduct of the Common as befog mob ye of all that 1114 and komenraltie In deagipl sod they &ether that if the elsinparty pent* W•tenempt to invalidate their present written acknowledgments, no confidence whatever Can be placed in any form of engagement which the Directors may here after think proper to issue, because none can be more solemn or precise than that which they now refuse to fulfil. J. Thompson, T.Bonar, and Co. William James King. Thomas Wilson and Co. Wilkie and Sosmes. Baring, Brothers, and Co. John Smith. W. Astell Charles Field. C. G. Thornton. William Seymour. Thomas Tooke. J. S. Greenwood. John Mitchell and CO. Trueman and Cook. Garry and Curtis. Neale, Bowdon.. and Co. Paris, liPeausland and Co. Thomas Kemble, Son, and Co. Barclay. Brothets, and Co. Roebucks, Stow, and Co. Edward Parana and ed. James and W. Field. Ewart, Taylor, and Co. Kymer, Petry, and Co. Cartleys and Esdaile. 'it dilate Mitchell. Jno. Hubbard and Co. John Frederick Amy. Douglas, Anderson, and Co. John and Joseph Crop and Co. Jacob H. Busk. Eduard and James Man. Cattley and Stephenson. Joseph liedley and Son. Thomas and Benj. Hawes. Dubuisson and Rougement. John Schneider and Co. Palmer and King. T. B. and L. Rowe. Kilby and Carroll. W. Simonds. C. H. Stavenha. George Morewood. Tetleys and Richards. Skey, Lodge, and Co Robert Day. L. M. Hilbers. A rt h ur Ryder. John Ord. Holden and Vanhouss. Frederick Scheer. David Morgan. And for John Milford James Hill and Sens. John Anderson and Sons. J. Henry Schroeder and Co Thomas Frame. B. A. Goldschmidt and Co. Featherstone and NevilL E. H. Brandt. James Turpin. Edward Lee and See. William Neal. J. B. Suwerkrop. B. F. Hopkins. A. Palmer. James Henry Levin. John Rew. William Charles Levin. George Houghton and Co. &e. &c. [Anvinurisz]tExT.] GENERAL BENEFIT' INSUIIAYCE OFFICE, ALDERSGATE-STREET. I 'nisi ailisilishment of this Company in 1820 may be considered $ sew win in an important branch of political economy ; anthe successful labours of its founders, in assimilating its plan and pear. I rice to the various eminent Fire and Life Insurance Offices, call for and meth the attention of those classes for whose security and convenience it was undcnaken. Experience proves that the lives of a given number of persons will become extinct by regular progression I and it is also certain, that sickness and accident will affect a certain portion of and like given number: to enable the Mechanical and Labouring Classes to provide against these casualties, ins manner the least exmsive, the most secure, and with the least possible lose of value rinse, are she objects of this I orikation ; and the phertical operation of the system amongst the very large body who have already availed themselves of the advantages offered, afford decisive proof of its importance as a substitute for the proverbial uncertainty of Friendly Socicties._ These Societies have been necessarily named (and of which there are many, in their component parts, highly respectable), not for the purpose of denouncing them generally, or of detracting from the merits of particular Associations, but for the purpose of enabling the public to form a correct estimate of the plan and practice of this Institution. In the farrago of puny observations, which have been recently put forth on Benefit Societies, and recommendatory hints for their improvement, nothing has been offered that has not before through the ordeal of public opinion into th e waste-paper passed of the chersemonger. Benefit Societies ever were, and ever will be the same; legislative enactments have failed in producing any beneficial effects upon them ; any number of maims being comp.. tent, under the Friendly Society Acts, to form themselves into a Benefit Club for the purposes usually advertised, it would be worse than useless to endeavour to convince them that those who gene. rally undertake the management, have not the ability to do so, although experience 'hews that such is the fact. For the improvement of Clubs, some recommend higher rates of contribution, and more vigilance in dispensing the funds ; but these trite observation , ' have already occurred to many thousands connected with Benefit Societies, and have been tried in repeated instances, without producing the expected results; yet there are persons vain and ignorant enough to put forth such propositions as entirely new ; in one word, the classes to whom these observa tions are addressed, are invited to a comparison of the advantages and conduct of this Institution with that of any existing Society, when it will be found that the large average number of the assured, and the concentration of business, enables the Company to offer allowances in sickness, and other benefits, at a less rate of premium than could possibly be afforded by any Society of less magnitude; and that a liberal administration, equally conducive to the increase of the Society, and to the security and comforts of the assured, pervades every branch of the establishment. EAST INDIA SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. ARRIVAL/ AT BIXGAL.—The Norfolk, Greig ; the William Miles, Beadle ; the Lord Suffield, Brown ; the Sophia, Sutton ; and the Cadmus, Talbert, from London ; the Bridget, Leslie; and the London, Brown, from LirerpooL SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. R • ND, J•x. 23.--Arrived the Jean, Redman, from Se. vile ; Coronation, Power, from Harlingen i Britannia., Olin et, from Waterford ; Fortune, from Wexford ; Prance Coburg, Ludd, from Rotterdam ; Narcissus, Calder, from Liverpool. Sailed the Daniel, Buckle, for the S.W. Fishery; Medway, Emerson, for Rio; Hetty, Brown, for Lisbon; Stag, Lashley, for Rio; Turners, Leader, for Antigua; Salado., Hearn, fat Ja maica; Montrose, Roxburgh, for Trinidad ; Diana, Davis, for Para ; and Duke of Kent, Pound, for Rotterdam. FROM LLOYD'S LIST. FALMOUTH, JAM. 24.—Arrived the Summer packet, from Lisbon—sailed the 14th inst. Heart of Oak, Stone, from Gibral tar—sailed the 4th instant, and the Osborn packet, from the Lee. ward Islands. Oft the port,. the Priscilla, Mitchell, from St. John's, New Brunswick, in th i rty-two days, and received orders to proceed to Plymouth. PLYMOUTH, JAN. 24.—Arrived the Priscilla, Mitchell, from John's, New Brunswick. PORTSMOUTH, JAN. U.—Arrived the Indian Trader and Fan ny transport, from Gibraltar; his Majesty's ship Creole, from South America ; and the D. nmark, Plaudcr, from Hamburgh. COWES, JAN. 25.—Arrived the Rising Sun, Stokes. from Easel. His Majesty's ship Seringapatarn has been got off, with the assist. ante of two frigates and a brig, and passed through for Ports mouth. DEAL, JAW. 23—Arrived the Mellish, Cole, from Calcutta ; Surrey, Powes, from New South Wales ; Perseverauce, Luke, from the South Seas; Helen, Erskine, from Charleston • Asoph, Webster, from Pernambuco ; Coventry, Horn, from D emerara ; lithe, Ford , from Naples; Caroline, Edward, from Faro; Sir David Ogilvie, —, from Genoa ; and Cassia, Barclay, from Messina. The two young men, Wilson and Frazer,'whole sen- teen of death is to he carried into edict on Wednesday next, have been exceedingly restless since the other convict, Douglas, got a respite. In c.msequence of this unlooked for extension of the Royal clemency, Wilson and Fraser, it seems, entertained a hope that it might also be extended to them, considering their own crimes as of a less atrocious character than that of Douglas. This hope Wilson particularly continued to indulge till yesterday (Wed nutria') morning, when he gave himself up to a state bordering on despair, uttering horrid imprecations, and vehemently declaring I that force alone should drag him from his cell to the place of exe cution. It is hoped, however, that the exhortations of these cler gymen who visit him, will bring him to a temper of mind snore stutable to his awful situation.—Calcdonian Mercury. Lir INTELLIcaNcr. tOURT Of CIiANCZIV, NowDAir. J•st.lll. ILA! v. BURR OW SOMERIIIT.-_.*, The Laid It ° ltcrt.l.9it on coming into Coed Air tossing, to gaze/mem in this protracted rem. He had e:. Fetaime, Muir circumstance tt and ea t Mr. Go t u i r i l l ay une the P7egrrtaertlindie t h is te /1111soneRbt this own noise. His ignorance of the practice of the Coen, and de @wooer in which he acted from that ignorance. rid series, f d n nente in the carne of the rase. lie had eke to osingican Q the observations which Me. °outlay thought ptoper le NON In inarente to the steward of she Duke of Soarer ". he certainly would pot permit any Counsel at the end ft in. However, he Could not, with a view of te4 r pun' de juin introduced who this scandalous and imperti. ma firm the cause to be stopped, became that would be injenffne etc dpdlent. It would be a coosideration witlatini linnt awes k was expedient to pursue with respect to w persoo whir hod the just resentnient of the Court, when it would be to peak him in the usual wanner, without to as fanseest parry. With these prefatory °beer_ adds he Waal • peaeeeA to give judgment :—. The meant area Aplitee him in the shape of a petition from W i QM lan she Unite of Somerset, against the judgment of the Masan Ilf the Rolls, and all the proceedings consequent on data:. .b . dignent. The Master of the Rolls, when the case originally 011111111118111 hini, 'directed two issues to a Court of Law ; the tint was to determine whether Mr. Gourley was entitled to comperes ties for having been k e pt out o f t h e farm i and the second, if he should be sassed compensation for certain outgoing,. which he had expended. Op the that issue the Jury fonnd for Mr. Gourley : on the sewed Bee the Duke of Somerset. Mr. Gourley apt Wed from Ibis deities fora new o.kal, which was granted. The se ocd trial took plain lit die Sommer Arisbes,.before Mr. Justice Hol. royd, when • vaned was retuned that linGou.lay was 'nutted to 1.83 M. fdt alike outgoings. Tie jury were further of minims that dal. bad been laid out by Mr. Gourley, but that he was not entitled to recover that sum, as the expenditure of it was pot ap peeved of according to agreement. The Master of the Rolls subse- Jz n tedy approved it this verdict. It w a s agoiende appealed and of the Master of the Rolls that , the Roble Disks now sp. paled. The first part of the drandinea tif the ease to which he would advert, was the agreement betweee the parties. It appeared that Mr. Daarlay. was the am of • gentleman in Rutland t re d that he Wee brought sup • beam In that part of thMnited Kingdom, the people thentobt themselves farmers of extraordinary MTH. The art of farming was there learned philosophically. Hating fondled it theoretically, they pro ceeded to carry their theories into . practice. The Duke of Somer set, thinking it expedient to introduce improvements in farming Into Wiltshire, employed this gentleman fr om the North. And here he would remark that it was somewhat extraordinary that, beloti tZ whilst the nature of the improvement s entirely to the Scotch system , they s h ou ld h e j u d ge d o f an d exam i ne d persons acquainted only with the local custom ; o f f ann i ng i n county of Wiltshire; who were therefore of opinion that every departure from their mode of farming was erroneous and wrong. A pm. posal was in consequence made by Mr. Gourley to take the farm, from the Duke of Somerset, and cultivate it himself. A lase( was accordingly drawn up, by which the Duke of S:inerset gavq the farm of Thetford to Mr. Gourley, on condition that 2001 was to be allowed to him out of the first rent that beanie due, for en -- tin improvements on the premises, provided that such improve.: meets were sanctioned bylus Grace err by his agent, Mr. Cpay. It was necessary also that Mr. (lour should produce satisfactory ers vouch of such Improvements. One of the principal question@ between the parties was, as to the extent to which the - allowance far improvements should be carried. Mr. Gourley stated in his bill' that he was a native of Fifeshire, and that he there cultivated a , farm ; that hearing the Duke of Somerset wished to introduce the' system of Scotch fanning intd Wiltshire, he (Mr. Gourley) negotiated with him for a tam, to cultivate it, and introduce the agricultural improvements of Scotland. An agreement w accordingly drawn up in M a y, 18119 ; and Mr. as with an understanding, a Instates, that be was to comp into possession in the following month of October, repaired to Scotland, and brought his family and servants to Wiltshire about that time. He did not, however, then get possession , as it was stated to him that the custom of be country was that aa tenant should bold possession of the farm-heves for a ehon sw P subsequent to the expiration of his term, in oder to amble NIP wind up his affairs. Mr. Gourley incurred a any heavy make for rent, &e. in consequence of not hark( abak eid : s q eriseden pursuant to t. For this commie be new nation. His I,aedsiip here read, in very maple dank w ings, in order to state what were t he repremninikes aim& an this point, as also on the material point, to Ant meek eneollmr. ante to 6:made for repairs, la.: out of this esnelkoode• nest illio question whether all the repairs made by Mr. fileedep let* be properly termed improvements. On the point demidene were taken on both sides. It was the opinion af Nosy pinepie:eapp rienced in fanning, that many importune ingemeneke Mil b introduced into the farm by Mr. Gonda . The oplaiee wee confirmed by an agricultural society k that eddy. The depositions on the other side contradicted the easel of the to kr diertl4 mer, and this counter-testimony more ' app lied the &Iterations made in the farindouse. is tha l read the proceedings which took place before the Mager the Rolla, and also the notes of the Learned Judge, Mr. Addeo Perk, en the Brat trial, which took place in this saute hisfkip. Mr. Gourley said that awe were some Oillieltiolli in the Judge's notes , which he had made oo 't to supply. It differed materially from • copy which he had, and which he begged leave to read. The LORD Calumet Lci it said that he meld sot pike• espy of the Judges notes from any person but the Judge himself. Mr. Gourley said It was material that the parts omitted fel die notes, as read hy his lordship, should be supplied. The LORD C y am ready to attend to any mg gestion as to an omission which may be referred to the Leinsa Judge, but I can only attend to such notes as have his senedere. His Lordship then proceeded to read through other pans of low. mentary evidence which detailed the various transactions lateen the parties from 1009 to the present period. daring reed am* the several documents, he said that he would ansider this mew, as he had done from the commencement of it, as one Wand suitor and suitor in this court, and not take iota account the asps. rity of rank between the contending ponies. The question kr him now to decide was not whether the decree of 1814, mad by the Master of the Rolls, was a decree which he (the Lord Clemellhew should have made were the case brought b efo re Mai at that Nage of the proceedings, but whether, due regard being hod to all tie circumstances that occurred from 181 y to 1818, and to the eendlike of the parties, that decree should now go for nothing. He was et a loss to know why this appeal was not brought forward whoa a motion for a new trial was discussed :—why was it reserved till now, and not then hinted at,which was • more appropriate dine he the mention of it? lithe appeal were now to be entertained fa r. ably for the Duke of Somerset, he was disposed to believe that his awe would not wish to deprive Mr. Gouvlay of what he might conceive hint fairly entitled to, but it was not the province of this Court to calculate upon the aid of the generosity of any person, but to decide in strict justice on the case as it stood fairly be. fore it. Two points had been mentioned, which would induce him to reserve his final judgment in this case for Wednesday or Thursday next. The first of these points was, an objection taken to the notes of Mr. Justice Parkf ; if any material omission were made in them, the intermediate time might be employed in supply ing it : the other point referred to the identity of the plans which were affirmed by affidavit on one side, and denied on the other. If any affidavit was ready to disprove them, let it be submitted to him by that time, and on Wednesday morning he would give judgment ; and he get rid of the case altogether. Mr. Hear said, that he did not mean to deny the correctness of the plans ; all that was asserted on th e p a n o f the Duke of Somer. set was, that no person remembered those plans as the plans which were introduced at the former trials. The LORD CHANCELLOR then YON to retire. Mr. Gourley—My lord, I wish to make an observation— The LORD CHANCELLOR did not appear disposed to bear him. Mr. (Mutiny (with much embarrassment of manner and copes. sion)--My Lord, it is of vital importance to me to occupy your time for a few momenta. lus thts day without a shilling. After I had obtained the decree of the Master of the Rolls in my favour. and before I proceeded to put an execution into the home of Duke of Somerset, I paid 7101. into the hands of a pr. son in this town for the benefit of my creditors; smut that period I have been without money, and I have not means to live. The LORD CHANCE Limo said, that at ten o'clock en Wednes. day he would hear him and dispose finally of his are. Mr. °outlay resumed; and after stating that on a !Owner occasion he had come into Court with a statute which he now hold in his hand, providing Counsel for paupers, and complaining that he was not then heard, again called his Lordship's attention to his present state of poverty and distress.—For the hat two years I have lived only on borrowed money. I have made great exertions and great shifts to prosecute this case. During last autumn I lived on breed and water toensble me to continue it. Front the Dike of Somerset, of whose generosity your Lordship spoke, I have received no re. lief. neither have I from any other man. I am at this moment enabled to exist only by the charity of some ladies. Amongst them I found pity • amongst men I found none. To the charity of some young ladies I am indebted for my present mode of existence; " For pity moves the soul to love." I owe it to the bounty of these ladies that I have not been obliged to work with my hands for my support. I must starve, my Lord, if these delays iro on. The LORD CHANCELLOR (as we understant said, that it was not his province to instruct suitors of the Court wto proceed. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MONDAY, JAN. 28. VitaNpix Banco.' PERUVIAN LOAN. THOMAS FINDER mum TS AND CO. vi The ATTORNEY-GENERAL 1110,101 for a rule to show cause why the verdict in this case should not be set aside, and a new trial \ granted. He stated, that the circumstances out of which the case arose were these :—Some time ago the inhabitants of a partof Peru, under the command of their General San Martin, took from the mother country Lima and other plac: s, of which San Martin was proclaimed Protector. They then sent two persons. Meson. Garcia and l'aroissen, to England, as envoys; but the British Omar-. meat did not in any way tveognise them, because it was on terms of amity with Spain. A loan was endeavoured to be obtained by the envoys, of 1.200,0081., sad persons were found to negotiate it. The appointed agent was the plsintiff, Mr. Kinder. The rai ment' of the loan were to be by instahnents, and the first instals ment was paid into the bank of the defendants, Main. Everest and Co. Various changes afterwards took place in the Paravian i Government, and at the date of the action there wese no less that three different powers at the had of affairs in Pau. The envoys •.#11.." 3 ,'1 ) 'ki 11 ~1, 4i I