The Sun. — London, England, 1829-07-09 00:00:00

should escape, when an attempt upon the less precious life of man brings many an assassin to the gallows, is one of those phenomena of this enlightened age which lie beyond the pale of our philosophy. All rational men will, we think, agree, that to prosecute a slanderer for a private libel is no more an infringement of the liberty of the press, than the prosecution of a stalker is an infringement of the liberty of the per son.—Times. Neither Catholics nor Protestants in Ireland are yet what may be termed altogether at home in the new state of their relations to each other. No one who reflects at all can wonder at this ; the wonder is not that the feelings and associa tions connected with the past law should in some cases still exist to a certain extent, but that they have in so many cases ceased to exist. The Catholics of Ireland are the people, and though the penal laws drew into one association Irish men of all classes, yet the Democracy, as was natural, was most powerfully represented in the Association. Hence a very natural blending in the Association of the repeal of penal laws, and the protection of the lower orders from oppres sion. Now that Catholics and Protestants are placed on the same footing with regard to civil rights, a Catholic as such is no longer bound to oppose a Protestant. If, however, a Protestant belong to a party, of which the views are hostile to the interests of his country, a Catholic, if himself identified with the people, will feel him self bound to oppose hint as an Irishman. At an adjourned meeting of the Finance Commit the of the late Catholic Association, held on Sa turday last, to consider the claims of Mr. Eneas Macdonnell, Mr. O'Connell observed, " that persecution had not yet ceased in Waterford, although Lord George Beresford was canvass• ing the liberal interest. He (Mr. O'Connell) had been offered a large retaining fee if he would give his professional services to Lord George at the next election; but he had refused the offer because he despised it.—(Hear, hear.)—lf this offer were left unexplained, some handle might be made of it, to the prejudice of the indepen dence of Waterford ; but his letter would be pub lished, and it would place the matter in its proper light." Mr. O'Connell here refuses the retaining fee of Lord George Beresford, not because he is a Catholic and Lord George is Protestant, but because the liberal politician triumphs over the lawyer. He considers Lord George an enemy to the interests of Ireland, and deems himself not warranted in giving his pro fessional services for a fee to such an individual. Mr. Sheil, on the other hand, has it seems taken the retaining fee, either because he deems Lord George not an enemy to Ireland, or because he does not consider himself, as a professional man, justified on public grounds in refusing his ser vices to any individual who can afford to requite them properly. It would appear, however, that fault had been found by some of his old asso ciates with his determination. The way to ascer tain the extent of Mr. Sheil's obligation, under such circumstances, is obvious enough. Is one man professing liberal principles bound to con tribute not in the same proportion as others to the furtherance of the public good, but to make material sacrifices from which others are exempted? Mr. Sheil is a professional man, and 3001. must form a material item in the income of an Irish Barrister. Why should a Barrister be called on to make a sacrifice of such a sum any more than a merchant be called on to subscribe 3001. from his profits to aid in defeating the election of Lord George Beresford ? Mr. Sheil may pocket his 3001. and give his best professional exertions to Lord George, and yet, with perfect consistency, subscribe 201. or 301. out of the wages of his labour to the fund for defeating the election. A Lawyer is venal, according to the understanding of modern times; it is an insult to the first applicant for his services, if, on the tender of the quid pro quo, he in any case whatever hang back; he is not entitled to have any conscience, any principles, but is bound to exert his abilities in the way most likely to pro mote the object of the party who hires him ; and though, like the venal beauty, he may not be able altogether to suppress his feelings, he is not justified in being guided by them. — A Protestant Barrister would not be justi fied in refusing his professional services to Mr. O'Connell, at Clare ; and Mr. Sheil would as little be justified in refusing his services to Lord George Beresford. Whoever enters the London Tavern is entitled to the ser vices of the house, on behaving properly and paying for them. A lawyer is equally a hire ling, though an exalted one, and equally at the command of all who are first in the field, and able to pay. So much for Mr. Sheil's retaining fee. In his speech on Saturday, he appears to have been under considerable excitement, and under the mask of defending Mr. O'Connell, to have been pleading his own cause. He seems to have felt the hardship of the condition im posed on public men, that one peccadillo obli terates with the public an age of services. The philosophy of this is not of difficult discovery ; but when the present becomes past, a sounder decision is farmed. "It does appear to me most extraordinary (lie says) that the labours, the indefatigable and countless exertions of my learned friend in the cause of the Catholic clergy, should be thus re quited. We are told that there was astonishment produced by the observation of Mr. O'Connell. Alas ! it was always thus. A single phrase—a syllable—an atom is weighed against a man's whole life. Such is popular favour, If an individual shall have devoted himself with an indomitable enerfy, and a fearless intrepidity to the public service—if he shall have given his whole heart and soul, and all his faculties and powers, all the emo tions of his heart and all the attributes of his mind to the public—if he shall have been daring in danger, uncorrupt in temptation, unexhausted in labour, enthusiastic in sentiment, reckless of conse quences, careless of a prison, and contemptuous of a bribe—if he shall have exposed the wrongs of his country with equal force and determination—if he shall have almost sweated his blood in the public cause, and if he shall appear with his hands unsul lied with the public money, without a particle of golden dust about them,poor, honest, and unrequited, then the moment an incident arises which gives ground for mean suspicion to build its base con jectures, all that he has done for his country, all that he has suffered, all that lie has dared, is forgotten, avid a pack of ravenous vituperatists are let loose upon Lytt, to hunt him into ignominy and howl him into disgrac e .—(Loud and continued cheers). For my part I hold little account favour which is to be held at such a wor:tiless tenure. I have braved the terrors of the prerogativo) I never will tremble (for I am armed too strong in inntZeilre), before a tyranny so unjust as this." The dread of the bow-string never yet de terred any man from accepting the office of Grand Vizier ; and examples of public ingrati tude never yet frightened away aspirants for public favour.—Morning Chronicle. A letter entitled a " Memorandum concern ing the Whigs" has been put into our hands, which, we understand, is the production of a dignitary of the Church of England, of long standing, and (oF what we may denominate with some liberty of speech) high in office. It only fills eleven octavo pages, but is too full of matter, and too piquant in style, to be overlooked. It is, in fact, the production of a mind of no ordi nary calibre—of a Whig of the school of Ju nius, and of one who, if he has not imbibed all his energy, is not assuredly deficient in any portion of the spirit which moved him. The writer of the " Memorandum" taxes the Whigs not only with general incapacity—with general carelessness and inattention to the public interests—with weakness and base subserviency to the " powers that be"—but with having " submitted to total obliteration" from weak or venial motives. The grounds on which the letter writer endeavours to establish his charge are, first, the practical declaration of the Whigs on the accession of the Duke of 'Wellington to the Premiership of their having no connection with party--secondly, their junction with Mr. Canning, who only agreed with them in principal on one question— that of Catholic emancipation ;—thirdly, the ge neral want of talent—the general inadequacy for the management of public business—and general absence of that esprit de corps which charac terized the party in the days of Fox, which has lately been manifested ;—and lastly, the truly pitiful exhibition which they made on the motion of the Marquis of Blandford for a reform of the Commons House of Parliament. On more than one of these points there is assuredly no defence for the part which the Whigs played. They betray ed extreme weakness, and also extreme inca pacity. They quarrelled among themselves, when they ought to have been endeavouring by every means to keep the common enemy at bay —they took shelter under Tory wings, when they ought to have been fighting under their own standard. All these things were great fol lies—in some instances, perhaps, worse than fol lies ; but while we concede these things to the writer of the " Memorandum," we must at the same time enter our protest against the assertion that " the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, and the removal of Catholic disabilities, were a triumph which belongs to the enemies of liberality." We are not so blinded by prejudice, or so attached to the exclusive interests of par ties, as not to perceive the good sense which has hitherto guided the proceedings of the Duke of Wellington, or so utterly unaware of the liberal principles of the Earl of Aberdeen, as not to give them credit for being desirous to accomplish what the writer of the " Memorandum" would confer on them as an exclusive merit ; but which was assuredly forced upon them, and would have been forced on any Government, by the repeated discussions which had taken place in Parlia ment, and the growing increase of know ledge and liberality among all classes. The writer of the " Memorandum," in fact, con fesses that such was the case, when he states that " the strong current of the general mind —sweep ing before it the withered bigotries of the last generation, and the prejudices which obstructed improvement—hurried even the Tories along its eventful channels," and made them yield to the force of things. And as little are we disposed to allow that the Whigs were guilty of a great crime to the party which supports them, in taking office under Mr. Canning. They un doubtedly sacrificed themselves, but it was on the altar of a just cause—they chose the least of two evils, and that which they did choose was assuredly considered by every one at the time, as the least injurious to the country. Notwith standing these observations, we commend the letter in question, to the attention of our readers. It assuredly merits a perusal from the Whigs.— Horning Advertiser. LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, JULY 8. HAYES V. HARE. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL moved for an order of the Court, to compel the defendant to deliver up, within eight days, the possession of a farm at present in his occupation, and that in default the defendant be committed to the Fleet for contempt. The farm was situated in the county of Lincoln, and consisted of 26 acres. It had belonged to a Mr. Abbot, who on his death left it to his widow and six children.— The defendant had married the widow, and cultivated the farm, and it was on the ground of mismanage ment on the part of the defendant that this applica tion was made. It was stated in the affidavits that the defendant, by improper and forced culture, had so exhausted the land, that it would take many years to recover it. The VICE-CHANCELLOR, with these affidavits upon the subject of mismanagement on the part of the defendant, did not see how he could refuse to make him give up possession of the farm. He should therefore make an order that the defendant deliver up possession within eight days after service of the notice ; but he should not attach to this order any thing about commitment for contempt. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 8. EX-PARTE MARY PRICE. On the motion of Mr. WYBURN, the rule for an attachment against the husband of Mary Price, for non-payment to her of a sum of money by way of alimony, pursuant to an award, was made absolute, no cause being shown. THE KING V. THE JUSTICES OF NOTTINGHAMSHIRE. Mr. CAMPBELL showed cause against a rule ob tained by Mr. Denman, for changing the venue in this case from the county of Nottingham to that of Derby, or some other adjoining county. The Learned Counsel stated, that this application had been made on the affidavit solely of Colonel Wild man, the owner of the manor of Newstead, which affidavit merely stated " that the deponent verily be lieved that a fair and impartial trial of the issue in this case could not be had in the county of Nottingham." Lord TENTERDEN—The present affidavit is in sufficient, and therefore the rule must be discharged. WHITMORE AND ANOTHER V. WILKS. Lord TENTERDEN delivered the judgment of the Court in this case, which was argued on Saturday last OR a rule nisi for a nonsuit. or new trial. The rule for a new trial must be made absolute, without costs. NAYLOR 4Np OTHERS V. TAYLOR. In this case a rule nisi had been obt ained to set aside the verdict for the plaintiffs and enter a non suit, and it came on for argument on a former day in the present term. The action was brought on a policy of insurance, dated the 6th of March, 1826, on goods by the ship Monarch. The plaintiffs were manufacturers at Wakefield, and the defendant, John Taylor, was an underwriter at Liverpool, who had subscribed the policy for 2001. The insurance was " at and (torn Liverpool to any port or po rts of the river Plate, and in the event of a blockade, or being ordered off the river, with liberty to proceed to any other port, and there wait or discharge," The ship sailed from Liverpool with a cargo of haberdashery and carpet goods on the 11th of March, 1826, on her voyage to Buenos Ayres , On her arrival, in May, off Monte Video, a Brazilian frigate (the Pc ranga) bore 'town upon her, captur ed h e r, and carried her into that p a 7 r. for an uitittempt, as was ch the Emperor alleged, to break the blockade vc.. of the Brazils had previously decla red upon 54en" Ayres and all the ports on the river Plate. The crew of the Monarch (14 in number) were all, with the exception of the Captain and three of the seamen, made prisoners, arid detained at Monte Video about a month, at the expiration of which time, the fie' ranga with several ether vessels proceeded with the Monarch towards Rio de Janeiro for adjudication, under the command of a prize master, whom the Captain of the Peranaa had put on board. In the course of the voyage they met with bad weather, and the two ships' crews having become separated, the Captain of the Monarch and the three men (two Englishmen and a Lascar) formed a plan to re capture the vessel. Taking advantage of an oppor tunity afforded them, by only seven of the crew of the Peranga being on deck, they seized and bound them, and shut them down in the hatches, having confined the rest of the crew below. The latter were afterwards allowed to come up one by one, and thus they were secured. The whole crew (consist ing of 22 soldiers and sailors) were then put on board the long-boat and sent to Rio. The Monarch then returned to Liverpool, where she arrived at the latter end of September, and unloaded her cargo, which remained there warehoused under a claim for salvage. The plaintiffs had previously given the de fendant notice of the abandonment of their interest, and claimed as for a total loss ; but the defendant refused to accept the notice, and contended that the plaintiffs were not, under the circumstances, entitled to recover. The question left to the Jury at the trial before Lord Tenterden, at Guildhall, was, whe ther there had been a breach of the blockade, and they had found a verdict for the plaintiffs, stating that they were not satisfied that the Monarch did intend to violate the blockade. 'I he rule nisi for a nensuit, or a new trial, had been obtained on the ground—first, that the vessel had, in point of fact, attempted to break the blockade, and that therefore the policy was void; secondly, that the rescue of the vessel, when on her way to Rio de Janeiro for ad judication, was a violation of the law of nations ; and, thirdly, that supposing the plaintiffs entitled to recover at all, they were not entitled to recover as for a total loss. Lord TENTERDEN now delivered the judgment of the Court, and, after recapitulating the facts to the effect stated above, observed, that the Court were of opinion that a rule for a nonsuit ought to be made absolute. EX-PARTE CHARLES PITT. On a former day Mr. CLARKSON obtained a rule nisi, for a writ of mandamus, commanding the vestry of the parish of St. Paul, Covent-garden, to proceed to the election of a surveyor of pavements of that parish, pursuant to a recent Act of Parliament. _ The - ATTORNEY-GENERAL TIOW showed cause against the rule.--Rule discharged. ROE, EX. DEM. HART AND OTHERS, V. WYNNE, ESQ. In this case the rule for a certiorari to remove the record from the Court of Great Sessions in Wales was made absolute, and the trial ordered to take place at Gloucester. TIIE KING V. R. WELSH. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL renewed the motion made by him in the last term, for leave to file an in formation in the nature of a quo warranto against Mr. Robert Welsh, one of the capital burgesses of Wells.—Rule refused. THE KING V. T. S. DAY, ESQ. Mr. CAMPBELL moved for a rule for leave to file a quo warranto information against Mr. Day, for ex ercising the offices of Alderman and Justice of the Peace of the town and city of Norwich, he having been appointed to, accepted, and acted in, the in compatible office of Inspector of Corn Returns.— Rule nisi granted. THE KING V. J. WHEELER. A rule nisi had on a former day been obtained by Mr. Campbell, for an attachment against the de fendant for his contempt in not attending as a wit ness on the trial of a cause of " Saunderson v. Bond," at Guildhall, on the 10th of June last, pur suant to a subpoena ad testcandum. Mr. PLATT now showed cause against the rule.— Rule absolute. THE KING V. JAMES AND WIFE. The defendants, George James and Ann his wife, came up to receive the judgment of the Court upon a conviction for keeping a house of ill-fame, at No. 21, Frith-street, Soho. Mr. Justice BAYLEY said the sentence of the Court upon him (the husband) was, that he be im prisoned three months in the House of Correction, Coldbath-fields, and enter into recognizances for his good behaviour for two years, himself in 201. and two sufficient sureties in 10/. each. The Court would forbear passing sentence on his wife on his entering into a recognizance for her appearance on the fourth day of next term. The defendant then entered into the recognizance, and the wife was dis• charged. THE KING V. TAYLOR. Mr. COLERIDGE applied to have the rule in this case, for a criminal information, enlarged until the next term. Mr. CAMPBELL said it appeared that the defend ant had shown great reluctance to be served with the rule, and there was some reason to believe that this application was made merely for the purpose of delay. Lord TENTERDEN thought that the rule might be enlarged, as there was no reason to apprehend that a breach of the peace would take place in the mean time.—Rule enlarged. THE KING V. JOHN FISHER AND OTHERS. Mr. DENMAN said he had to make an application to the Court on the part of Mr. Alexander, one of the defendants in this case. Their Lordships would recollect that the Attorney-General on the first day of term obtained a rule for leave to file a criminal in formation against the defendants for a supposed libel published in the Morning Journal newspaper. That rule had been argued a few (lays ago, and the Court had ordered it to be made absolute ; notwithstand ing which, the parties had yesterday been served with a notice apprizing them that an information ex officio had been filed against them, and they were required to give bail. The ex yficio information was for the same matter as th a t for which the Court had granted the criminal information. Mr. Justice BAYLEY---At whose instance is the ex officio information ? Nir. DENMAN said it was filed by the Attorney- General on account of the matter published respect ing the Lord Chancellor. In the case of the" King v. Sparrow and another," in two Term Reports, whereby a party had applied for leave to file a cri minal information, it was held that he had waved his right to bring an action, and the same principle he (Mr. Denman) submitted would apply in this case. If at the time the rule for the criminal infor mation came on to be argued, the Court had been apprized that an ex officio information was filed, or intended to be filed, for the same matter, they would certainly have paused before they had made the rule absolute ; and as the Learned Attorney-General, as Counsel for the Lord High Chancellor, would, under such circumstances, have been called on to wave his right to file an ex officio information, so BOW he (Mr. Denman) submitted he ought to be restrained from proceeding upon more than one of these informations. Mr. Justice JAMES PARKE—What, then, is your motion ? Mr. DENMAN said that his motion would be either that the ex officio information should be ordered to be taken off the file, or that the rule for the crimi nal information should be dealt with in the same manner as it would have been had the Court been previously apprized that it was intended to file the ex officio information. It was repugnant to every principle of justice that a party should be allowed to proceed by two modes at the same time for the same offence. Considerable advantage might be gained by a prosecutor first applying for a criminal information, and afterwards resorting to another mode of proceeding, because something might pro bably be disclosed by the defendant's affidavits as to the line of defence intended to be adopted; or other circumstances might be disclosed which it might be material for the prosecutor to be put in possession of before he proceeded to trial. This Was a new case, but the principle se eme d to b e precisely the same as that on which th e C ourt h a d decided in the case of " the King V. Sparrow." I t was only yesterday that the proceeding by ex officio had been notified to tne defendants, who there fore had come to the Court as soon as they pos sibly could. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that his Learned Friend, Mr. Denman, having been candid enough to apprize him of his intention to make a motion in a case in which his (the Attorney-General's) name would be involved, he had waited to hear his Learned Friend's application. He (the Attorney- General) now felt himself bound to declare pub licly, that neither at the time when he had moved for leave to file the criminal information, nor after wards, when he applied to have the rule made ab solute, had he any intention, nor did he ever con template, filing an ex officio information ; hut since the rule had been made absolute, circumstances had come to his knowledge which made him feel it his duty to adopt that mode of proceeding. He had, however, no intention to proceed with the criminal information; and he begged to state to their Lord ships, that notwithstanding the rule had been made absolute, there had not been any criminal infor mation filed, nor was it, he repeated, intended to file any. Mr. DENMAN said his client would of course be satisfied if he received an assurance that no criminal information had been filed, or was intended to be filed. Lord TENTERDEN—The Attorney-General says that he does net intend to take any proceedings upon the rule for the criminal information; if he does take any such proceedings, the defendants may then apply to the Court to stay them, but we can't now restrain the Attorney-General from adopting that mode of proceeding which he may think proper. Mr. DENMAN suggested that the Court might deal with its own rule by which the criminal infor mation had been granted. Mr. Justice BAYLEY—What can we do ? The rule was properly granted at the time. Mr. DENMAN submitted, that if at the time the rule was granted, the Court had been apprized of the intention to file an ex officio information, they could have imposed it as a term on the Attorney- General, that the rule should be made absolute only in the event of his not exercising his right to file the ex officio. Mr. Justice BAILEY—CouId we have imposed such a condition ? Mr. DENMAN—I think so, undoubtedly, my Lord. Mr. Justice BAYLEY—I should say undoubtedly not. Mr. DENMAN was aware that the Court could not impose any condition on the Learned Attorney- General with regard to proceedings in his official capacity, but in his other character, that of counsel for his client, the Lord High Chancellor, if he had informed the Court that he intended to file an in formation ex officio, their Lordships would probably not have granted even the rule nisi for the criminal information. That rule having been obtained, the defendant (Mr. Alexander) had been called upon to state, on oath, the nature of his defence, and if the fact which the Court was now apprized of had been stated at the time cause was shown, it was possible that the rule would have been made absolute only on condition that no information ea: officio should be filed for the same libel. The Attorney-General had new stated, that it was not his intention to proceed with the two informations, but it should be remem bered that the Learned Gentleman might be pro moted, or other events might take place which would put it out of his power to act upon his pledge, and therefore he (Mr. Denman) hoped that the Court would think it only reasonable that his clients should be at once relieved from the peril of this double pro ceeding, and that their Lordships would now dis charge the rule for the criminal information. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would at once show cause against this application. He was, of course, ignorant of what their Lordships might think it ne cessary to do in this case, if they thought it neces sary to do any thing; but as this motion was made on the last day of term, probably for the purpose of furnishing an article for the defendant's newspaper to-morrow, he thought it his duty to state, that he should have considered that he had been guilty of acting disrespectfully to their Lordships, if he had applied for the rule for the criminal information while contemplating the other mode of proceeding. He begged to assure their Lordships that when he applied for the rule, and when he moved to have it made absolute, he never contemplated filing an ex officio information; nay, it was not until the day after the rule had been made absolute that it ever entered his mind to adopt the latter course of pro ceeding, which he did not determine on without very deliberate consideration, and under circum stances of a very imperative nature, after taking into consideration the question whether or not the de fendants would be prejudiced by it. He had satis fied himself that no prejudice would arise to them. If he had thought it would, he would have waved every possible advantage rather than have had re course to such a proceeding. He had, however, in adopting the present course, foregone the advantage which he possessed of brimging the defendants to trial after the term, they being under terms. It would have been a great advantage to him to have been able to proceed directly, and he hoped that credit would be given to him for having acted deliberately and with due moderation. A public officer in his situation was placed in circumstances of some diffi culty on occasions like the present. He could not publish a newspaper every day, and therein explain his conduct ; but the defendant might, if he thought proper, make the proceedings which took place in this Court the subject of comment in his paper day after day. At present he could not disclose the circumstances under which he had acted, but he hoped that the Court would give him credit for having acted with justice and moderation. Mr. DENMAN had no intention to impute to his Learned Friend that he had not acted with justice and moderation. An Attorney-General had some privileges and advantages, and an Editor of a News paper had also some privileges and advantages which he had a right to exercise, and if he exercised them improperly he must answer for them. He (Mr. Denman) had only to hope that what had occurred in this case would not tend to prejudice the de fendants. He had stated on the occasion of show ing cause against the rule, that it would have been more proper in the Government, and more conso nant with the ordinary course of law and justice, if, in this case the Attorney-General had been allowed in the first instance to take upon himself to file an ex officio information, and not to have brought the defendants into so unequal a contest as that in which they were now engaged with the Lord High Chan cellor; and he still thought that it was the very case in which his Learned Friend ought to have exer cised the power with which he was invested, in stead of first calling on the defendant to answer on oath, and then discrediting that oath. He (Mr. Denman) was willing to give his Learned Friend credit for having now adopted the proceeding by e x °Pio, in consequence of circumstances which had come to his knowledge since the rule for a criminal information had been made absolute; but he sub mitted that upon the principle laid down in the case to which he had before adverted, as well as upon every principle of justice, the Court ought to take care that the defendants should not be subjected to the peril of a double proceeding for the same supposed offence. Their Lordships were aware that by the former pro ceeding the defendants had been put to considerable expense in showing cause against the rule, and pro bably some prejudice to their case had arisen; and he would ask their Lordships whether, if it had oc curred to them as probable that an ex officio infor mation would be filed, they would have entered into t he details of the defendant's affidavits, or whether they would not at once have declined to interfere and take upon themselves the invidious and uncom fortable task of . deciding upo n suc h an app li cat i on ? His Learned Friend had said, that the object in coming to the Court on the l as t d ay o f Term, was to make an article in the newspaper to-morrow ; but the defendants having received notice of the new proceeding only yesterday, he would ask how it was possible for them to have applied earlier? It wa s only last night that they had been apprised of the proceeding by ex Viejo, and requ i re d to give bail for the very same libel for which the criminal information had been granted. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that if the Court thought it expedient to discharge the rule for the criminal information, he did not wish to oppose it, and he had told his Learned Friend so. Lord TENTERDEN, after distinguishing the case of " the King v. Sparrow " from the present, observed, that in this case the Court had made the rule for a criminal information absolute, and the Attorney- General had since thought fit to file an information ex officio. He might, however, think proper to abandon the latter proceeding; but in order that no hardship might arise to the defendants, the Court would now order that no proceedings should be taken upon the rule for the criminal information without the leave of the Court first obtained. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had told his Learned Friend (Mr. Denman) that he was ready to agree to abandon all proceedings upon the rule. THE KING V. GRAY. Mr. PATTISON obtained a rule nisi for a quo war ranto information against Mr. Gray for exercising the office of assistant justice of the borough of Ips wich, and two other offices, after having accepted the incompatible office of treasurer. This being the last day of term, the Court did not rise till nearly eight o'clock. MAYOR'S COURT. ALTERCATION BETWEEN THE RECORDER AND THE BAR. WELLINGTON V. FOX. This was an action brought for the recovery o : Si. 10a. A bill of exchange, in proof of the debt, was put in. It was drawn by a person named Saunders, now dead, and accepted by the defendant, in Nov. 1823, but the action had been commenced within the period of limitation. Rebecca Saunders, daughter to Saunders who drew the bill, deposed, that she was present when the bill was settled, in November, 1823, by her fa ther with the plaintiff. Her father was doing a job, as a carpenter, for the plaintiff, who said, when it was finished, " Now, Saunders, you and I are straight." " Have you got the bill with you ?" said her father. "No ;" said the plaintiff, "you shall have it when you come to London; there's no occasion to be afraid, for your two daughters are present." The bill meant was Fox's acceptance; went afterwards to plaintiff's house for the bill, but did not get it. Mrs. Russell (another daughter of Saunders) de posed, that she was also present when the plaintiff said to her father that the bill was settled. Mrs. Valence called three times at the plaintiff's house, and saw his wife upon one occasion, who searched for the bill, but could not find it. A man, named Penfold, deposed, that in Decem ber, 1823, Saunders went to demand payment of the bill of the plaintiff, who told him that it was mislaid; but that when it was found it should be given up. Mr. MIREHOUSE here spoke privately to the plaintiff, who instantly started up, and said to the Recorder, " Upon my oath, my Lord, there is not a word of truth in all those witnesses have said." The RECORDER, astonished at such an interrup ' tion, sharply rebuked the plaintiff, and ordered him not to dare to utter a word again. The witnesses were all upon their oaths, and could have nu interest in false swearing. Another witness deposed that he was, four or five months ago, offered 11. if he would get the ♦alue of the bill from the defendant. He applied, but was not paid. Mr. MIREHOUSE said, that he had a witness in Court to prove that a writ had been issued against the defendant in the year 1823. The defendant here said," there's not a Sheriff's officer scarcely in London who does not know where to find me.—(A laugh.) Mr. Ashley, of the Mayor's Court, proved that a writ had been issued against the defendant in Octo ber, 1823, and another afterwards. Mr. BOLLAND ridiculed the idea that all the wit nesses would perjure themselves. Mr. MIREHOUSE said that this case was to be con sidered no longer as one of pounds, shillings, and pence, but as one affecting his character as a man of veracity. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to point out the discrepancy between the evidence of the two sisters, and stated that one of them had sworn that the bill was settled in March, which was before the rent was due, while the other swore to a different period. The RECORDER—It is no such thing, Sir; the young woman did not swear that it was settled in March. Mr. MIREHOUSE—I have taken particular notice of her words, my Lord, and I have her words on my notes. The RECORDER—I tell you, Sir, she said no such thing. Mr. MIREHOUsE—My Lord, I pledge you my honour that she mentioned March; I took most at tentive observation of her words. The RECORDER —lt is most indecent, Sir, to con tradict the Court in this manner; I pledge you my oath that the witness said no such thing; and I de sire, Sir, that you will not repeat thiS conduct. Mr. MIREIIOUSE—I was just about to address the Jury upon the strong fact of this variance of evi dence. Look at your notes, my Lord, before you pledge yourself so positively. I am borne out by my colleague in what I say. The RECORDER—Sir, I have looked at my notes; I desire that I may not hear this again. Mr. BURNABY (who was with Mr. Mirebouse)— My Lord, my notes exactly agree with my Learned Friend's, and mark the variance in the testimony of the two witnesses. The RECORDER-Sir, I desire that this disrespect may end at once. Mr. BuRNABY—My Lord, I have in the Courts above often requested the Judges to refer to their notes. It is a common practice, and their Lordships never felt any offence at so reasonable a proposition. The witness has said what my Learned Friend has mentioned. The RECORDER--It is not so; or, if she did, it was a mere slip of the to ngue , o f which you take an undue advantage. Mr. MIREHOUSE then suddenly sat down, saying to the Jury he should leave the case to them, and say not a word more. The RECORDER summed up at great length, and commented upon the evidence as he proceeded. He declared that there was no reason whatever for doubting the testimony for the defendant. While the Jury was deliberating, His LORDSHIP, addressing Mr. Mirehouse and Mr. Burnaby, said I must henceforward expect to be treated with more respect in this Court. Mr. MIREHOUSE started up, and said I always act most respectfully in Courts of Justice ; and I must say that I have always been treated with respect in every Court of Justice, except in this. The RECORDER—This only adds to the disrespect. Mr. BURNABY—AS I am included, I must say that the word indecent, which your Lordship has used, is unbecoming, and altogether unprovoked. The Jury found for the defendant. The veteran TOWNSEND now actually sports the very brown bat once worn by hie Royal master. The following paragraph, which appeared in a London paper on Tuesday, Jan. 1, 1723, will show the difference that subsisted in the present wear, and that of a century since, of what is now one of the most com mon articles of apparel :—On Sunday a woman was seized near London-wall, for wearing a gown faced with calico ; and being carried before a Magistrate, and refusing to pay the penalty inflicted by the Statute, she was com mitted to the Corspter." A numerous and respectable meeting was held a few days since at the Mechanics' Institute, Cork, for the purpose of taking final steps towards creating a con test at the approaching election of a representative for that city. Sir AUGUSTUS WARREN was proposed as a candi date by Dr. BALnwirr, and the proposition was favourably received by the meeting. IRISH LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 4. LORD ELDON, ST. JAMES'S CHRONICLE, AND RICHASP RADFORD ROE. Of WRIT OF ERROR.-THE RING AT THE FROSECUTION NICHOLAS MAHON, ESQ. V. RICHARD RADFORD aor. At twelve o'clock on Saturday this celebrated individs , was brought up in custody of one of the turnkeys of Net gate, for the purpose of assigning errors. The Prisoner—My Lord, I have humbly to apply Oil your Lordship will give me time to assign error. WO I made the application for the writ, I was not able to pf", cure my books and papers out of the vessel, the Gui/dforof on which I was on board. If your Lordship would asSO any day next week I will be ready, as it is my wish 0 assign error. Suppose your Lordship would say say d 4. after the term. Mr. PERRIN—My Lord this is a case in which we cad not go out of the ordinary course. CHIEF JUSTICE—WiII the prisoner be ready on Mondai • Prisoner—No, my Lord. • CHIEF JUSTlCE—Tuesday ? Prisoner—No, my Lord. This is a case, my Lords, great moment, because I have the opinion of my toi l e Eldon in my favour. I have it here in this paper, and the Solicitor-General would be pleased to look at it, I ° . can have it. Here the prisoner produced the St. James's Chronic(' . which he said contained the Noble and Venerable Et Chancellor's opinion. • CHM JUSTICE—You had better say no more about You must be ready on Monday to assign error. The prisoner made another application for a postpooe: l meet to a more distant day, but it was ineffectuid.—DubOt Morning Register. . . SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE; LIVERPOOL TUESDAY, JULY '7 High - water 53 minutes 11 0 two o'clock.—Wind S.W.—Arrived the MinarvPj Lawdon, from Pernambuco ; Exchange, Mount, fib Charleston; Julian, Smith, from ditto; James and Mg' garet, Simon, from Mobile and Nassau ; Jessie, Boag, New Orleans; Byron, Andrew, from Calcutta; Barto Dixon, from Barbadoes ; Hall, Clark, from Jamaiesi Richard Walker, Lowthean, from ditto ; Laneashit s • Witch, —, from Lisbon ; Elizabeth and &mit. Simpson, from Miramiehi; Liddell, Thompson, frog. Quebec ; Mary and Anne, Clift, from Newfoundlaik . St. George, Taubman, from Havre-de-Grace ; Rebead*: Koper, from ditto ; Hena, Grievesen, from Antwerlo Dora, Krohn, from Weismar ; Haltsema Vieter , VS' Wyk, from ditto. CLEARED OUTWARDS. Fame, —, for Dour, las ; Lieben Brudens, Bigen, for Lubeck ; Providence` Mann, for Newfoundland; Navarin, ---, for Stettidr: Zante, Little, for Leghorn ; David Cannon, Cane, O t r Malta and Corfu; Mar gare t, G ran b y, for Bilboa; rra , Helena, De Winter, for Antwerp ; Malvina, Chappel, h t . Hammerfees. Pasted Holyhead, inward bound, the Prince Repo' from hfaranham. THE MARKETS. COAL MAR Bishop's Main 255. 3d. Burdon Killingworth 28 9 Ord's Redhugh 23 6 Peiaw 27 0 Pontop 24 6 Townley 27 3 Wylam , 29 3 WallsEndßewicke&Co. 30 6 Walls End Brown's 27 9 Wall's End Carr and Co. 27 0 Ditto Cramlington....... 26 0 Ditto Riddell's. 3O 0 Ships at market, 41%-Shi A KET.—July 8. Walls End Newmarch.., 295. 0 "; Nesharn Main 43 Walls End Hatt0n...,,... 31 Walls End Lambton,... 31 6 , Walls End Walls End Stewart's 31 Russell's Hetton's W.E. 31 ) .. 1 . El Cowpeu Hartley Silkstone Field and Liddell's Trader—.... Tandeld ips sold, 24 —Unsol, Co. 27. 24 6 31 11. 173 i. COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE WESIE_%, • Wheat. I Barley. Oats. Beano.' Per Quarter. s. to s. s. to a. s. to s. Abingdon.....-- 58 82 32 39 21 32 ri Andover-- 65 '7B 29 85 24 27 Birmingham— 70 80 32 36 24 36 r h Bridport 56 '74 32 39 26 34 Cirencester 58 80 30 33 113 25 Faringdon— 54 86 36 40 26 38 Guildford -- 48 74 32 35 25 33 45 54 83 30 Hereford 64 84 38 35 20 45 36 4 30 0 Highworth 62 80 32 42 28 34 Maidenhead 65 84 98 39 22 30 Oakingham 56 76 30 36 18 32 Reading 6O 84 32 37 94 35 —. Salisbury 56 76 34 .37 24 34 Southampton ...... 54 78 37 40 28 32 4 4 Stroud 66 80 34 38..92 32 41 Tewkesbury 65 87 40 42 90 38 Uxbridg Ste 48 33 37 24 31/ Wantage----... 56 '7B 33 37 24 So 4 1 1, Warminster .-- 44 83 33 .37.. 25 96 fl. Windsor.--. 60 80 34 36 16 - 34 Worcester.—....... 72 83 36 40 94 33 4. CHELTENHAM MA RKET,...JuIy 7. Per Bushel. s. d. to s. d.I Pet lb. d. to m Wheat 8 0 10 0 Beef ' . ... CHELTENHAM Per Bushel. s. d. to s. d. Wheat 8 0 10 0 Beef..., Barley 4 6 5 3 Mutton Oats Beans 4 0 5 0 Lamb.... Pease 5 0 8 0 Pork ....., Hay 3l. 108. to 31. 1! 1 1 . to It 6 rzi •••••• 6 - • •••• 6 . - 13 0 Sr."•••• 6 la • per ton. LEWES MARKET.—JuIy 7. White Wheat (per quarter) £3 12 oto .42 16 0 Red ditto 3 10 11 3 12 0 Barley ...—..—..... Oats, New 1 2 0 1 5 0 Pease 1 17 0 2 0 0 Oil Cake, New 12 0 0 per thousand._ HULL MARKET.—JuIy 7. The weather has been unsettled, and a good deal of reit has fallen since our last, b ut we d o not, up to the prese n t time, hear of much injury being done to the coming crop; we deem it necessary to mention this, as future prices Ea° be materially influenced, should wet weather continue' To-day the show of farmer's Wheat was small, an d sbal of fine fresh foreign equally so; the prices of last sree ) have been fully maintained on these qualities, and in sow instances an advance of ls. per quarter has been obtain t The secondary q ua liti es , an d sta l e chambered parcels, which the principal bulk here consists, are ditscalt- 0 quit, and very little noticed ; we do not, however; AO our quotations. All spring Corn, although the quanta offering is very limited, may he considered dull sale a t 10 week's prices. We have no inquiry after any descripti on of Bond Corn. Rapeseed and Linseed without alteratioo• The duty of 10s. Bd. has been paid upon 1.5,91 S quartere of Wheat in this port, and Pie should think nearly th e whole at present under lock will be liberated during th l week. Wheat, Old —8 8 —B. We,/ —4. 544. 630. ----- Foreign —s. 60s. 635. ......In bond... —s. —I. - ' 4 : Oats, Poland —s. 20s. 245. Old:— .. .... --s. --I. 3v.. --- Small or Feed.... —a. 12s. 18s. —s. —s 20. -- Foreign --s. 221. 24a. Barley, Norf. & Suf. ... —a 264. 288. Linc. & Wold —s. M. 30 1, ----- Foreign Beans ato 365. 38s. Foreign —4. 365. 38$. Pease, White —a. 365. 40s Grey —a. 30s. 345• Tares --s. 344.365. Foreign 28s. 325. Rapeseed, in bond none. Free, per last —l. 261. 281. BIRTHS. On the 7th inst. in Montagu-square; the lady of The' Perry, Esq. of a daughter. On the Sth inst. at Northaraptdn-square, the wife °I Mr. J. Landels, of a daughter. ; *. MARRIED. On the Bth inst. at All Souls, Mary-la-bonne, bi_tl it s Rev. H. Higginson, Captain Taylor, of the 4th Region Madras Cavalry, to H enr i e tt a , y ounges t d aug h ter o f IP' ., late Christopher Savile, Esq. M.P. of Park -street, We il ' minstor, and Hale, of the county of Norfolk. On the 4th inst. at St. Paul's, Covent-garden, Mr. 1 7; Browne to Sarah Susannah, sect:Ma daughter of P" . Cobbett, Esq. At Toulouse, first at the CommUne according to in forms prescribed by the French law, and afterwards • the Protestant Temple, according to the rites of the Chore° of England, by the Rev. Frederick Yelverton, B. Yelverton, Esq. of Ballea, King's County, Ireland, ei°, son of the late H on . W. A. Y e l verton, and grandson of ~t"" late Right H on . Viscount Avondale, to the Hon. A. Bingham, daughter of the late and sister of the prese° Right Hon. Lord Clanmorris. The bride was gives Avi s / by the Marquis de Castellane. DIED. At Greenhill, near Edinburgh. on the 19th ult. in b fourth year, R o b er t H ay , t h e secon d son, an d on t h e 21 in her si x th year , Eli za b et h , the second daughter' of _,„" 'Forbes, Esq. At Greenhill, on the 4th inst. in his second year, }fo r "? fourth son of George Forbes, Esq. On the 6th inst. a t h er h ouse i n S out h Audley_- !1 ,pe — t ' A in the 81st y ear o f h er age , A nna M ar i a, daughter, Jonathan Shipley, l a t e Bi s h o p o f S t . A sap b , and %Via° of Sir William Jones. On the Bth inst. at P ec kh am - rye , age d 77, MOP the wife of John Fell. On the 15th April, in Trelawny, Jamaica,'N. 04)11 / 111 ' Esq. of Green-vale Pen, in that island. • At Steward-street, Springfield Lyons, Robert Andrea' Dig. many years R ece i ver -G enera l f or t h e eastern dill.° of the county of Essex. March 17, in Edgefield (S. C.), Tom, a negro in s !' belonging t o M rs . B acon , at t h e great age o f 130 year"; He died from the gradual waste of nature, without disease, and apparently without pain. PRINTED and PUBLISMED by MURIX, YOUN b° Onus, 112, STRAND, LONDON. f N CL( * EI i -~.~ QBII tO Sig PUtni later of th, after] DAN blunt Pubbi Time 11 laty 4 trait s i nters half_) 1 1ii8 POrrn Ch Ge 130 Thi, , Q itb fil l 1 ti i , t