The Sun. — London, England, 1829-08-07 00:00:00

p eace. Their hands were joined together by the clergyman, sometimes by one or other of the gentlemen just mentioned ; and they returned home, frequently riding side by side, amidst the rejoicings and acclamations of the men, women, and children of both parties. The Commnis sioners, if so they may be called, were em boldened by success, and extended their visits and exhortations beyond Limerick. Tippe rary was afflicted time immemorial by the same spirit of family faction, and, its almost constant concomitant, secret association. The passion for such meetings increased ; the numbers who flocked to them augmented. Instead of a few hundreds, who originally had been convened, and with some reluctance, for a particular pur pose, thousands now were to be seen in every direction, anxious to reconcile their differences, and to sacrifice every private compact to their loyalty, as they termed it., to the Association." The reconciliation of these factions, as they arc called, reminds us of similar transactions de tailed its a memoir respecting Corsica, laid before the Trench Government (published 1802). " An English General, who commanded the garrison of Ajaccio, but whose authority only extended over his troops, thought he would ob tain the consideration of the Corsicans by re crinciling two families of villagers whom a homi cide had made enemies. The principal inha bitants of the town seemed to join him in this great work. They went to negociate a truce, during which from thirty to forty armed men came together in Ajaccio. The Englishman had tees occasion to make long exhortations to them ; they consented to embrace each other, to drink to gether to the health of King George and returned to their homes. Scarcely had they left the town when a combat took place among them. There were five men killed, two on the side which had the loss, and three on the other side. Peace was then concluded in earnest. In the month of Pluviose, of the year five, a Member of the Executive Directory, who proceeded through Corsica, passed near a district of which several families had been at war for some time. He easily obtained their consent to make peace in his presence, which they even swore to observe in the name of the Republic, and he sent im mediately to the writer of the Moniteur an article on this subject. The number in which the article was inserted had hardly reached the Minister, when the number of homicides in the district reconciled by him had been aug mented by thirty-four." In the North of Ire land, as is truly observed by Mr. Wyse, there are two nations opposed to each other, burning with mutual detestation—the oppressors and the oppressed. The administration of law is entirely i u the hands of one of the nation ; and the other is driven, from want of legal protection, to the security of secret associations; which must, if' wise measures he not taken, extend over the North and North-west of Ireland. So long as Protestants are Magistrates arid armed yeomen, so long, in self defence, must the Catholics be brigands. Justice cannot be administered by a Protestant to a Catholic, except at the hazard to the former of his future peace. What provokes the indignation of impartial persons only en dears the partizan to his party. It is obvious, thert',lore, that strong measures are necessary in the North of Ireland. The law must be admi nistered for a time, by persons who are strangers to the country. The natives are obviously not in a condition to be trusted with the fate of each other. To make a Protestant a Magistrate, is either to expose him to the hatred of his own party, or the vengeance of the Catholics. The first step in the process of tranquillizing that part of the country is impartial justice. No Irish Protestant, indeed, who is aware of the delicacy of the position, we uld wish to be in the Com mission. A strict police, and strict justice ad ministered by strangers to their feuds, will alone preserve order. Time, under such a system, will produce its usual healing effects ; but with an Orange Magistracy time will only add to the catalogue of oppressions on one side, and of retaliations on The other. Though it may seem paradoxical, we despair more of the factions of the South, than of the great feuds of the North. The former have their origin in the habits of im perfect civilization ; and it is no easy matter to change the habits of a people. Clanship and Emily factions are always difficult to master ; and they can never be mastered directly. But with respect to the North, there is an obvious cause for the disorder, and to know the evil is half the cure. We must disarm the oppressor. There is in the North a deficiency of civilization to aid the efforts of a good and energetic Go vernment ; and we are sure the Duke of Wel lington will not be deficient in energy.—lbid. Those of our readers who are acquainted with what the City was and is must be aware that, in point of occupancy, it has greatly fallen off within the last 20 or 30 years ; that its best houses are converted into warehouses or chambers ; that western mansions and suburban villas will now alone satisfy those who were born and brought up in Broad -street, Billiter-square, Mincing-lane, and Crutched-friars ;—in short that " evadere ad auras" is the prevailing, and not unnatural, sentiment of those who are doomed through the day to toil through the noise, the smoke, and dirt, which are the too-prevailing characteristics of our metropolis. But, in proportion as people are deterred from residing at their places of busi ness by these causes, so it should be the endea vour of all who have it in their power to lessen these objections all they can, and to add as much as possible to the few attractions and inducements which still detain those who cannot or are un willing to leave their houses of business. It need not be said that the greater part of time world are even more anxious about the health and happi ness of their wives and children than their own ; and of course to these latter especially air and exercise arc the one thing needful. Persons doomed, therefore, to plod their way through a City life, have, from time immemorial, looked to the few open airy spaces which are to be found within it, as the places to which their families, and sometimes they themselves, could resort for recreation. But few persons are old enough to remember when Moorfields, and what is now a street, but which is still called the City-road, were the resort of all the " lisping babes" from Cheapside, Newgate-street, and Cornhill. That space, and all surrounding it, is now covered with a mass of houses ; and even Peerless Pool hides its diminished head by the side of a large Navi gable Canal which has swept awaythe Shepherd and Shepherdess. Then came Temple Gardens, the resort both of old and young, and where the whole world of fashion, from Temple-bar to Ald gate Pump, used to inhale fresh air, tinctured with mud, or mud-water, as the tide happened to decree. But these have long been closed as a place of general resort ; the crabbed Benchers could not bear that so many human creatures should be happy.. Among a few other places of general resort were - the Tower Wharf and Parade, and the open space infront of the Custom-house; and it is the reported closing of which that ha. called forth these remarks. We trust that tht report is not true ; or, if it is, that the order ii both cases will be recalled. Every thing shoulO he done to increase, nothing to diminish, tl:e comforts of the middling and lower ranks of people. The Duke of Wellington is constahlt of the Tower, and, as First Lord of the Trea sury, of course, has the command of the Custom house. It is not likely that his Grace can have heard of these little teazing acts of some of the underlings in office ; and we feel confident that, if such paltry doings do come to his ears, he will give the word of command for the Custom-home and the Tuwer again to take " open order."— Morning Herald. SUMMER ASSIZES. MIDLAND CIRCUIT—LINCOLN, Aug. 5. CLIFTON, CLERK, V. NEVILLE. Mr. DENMAN opened the plaintiff's case. Mr. Neville, a gentleman of large property and ancient and respectable family in this county, had imputed to the plaintiff, a member of a family as ancient as his own, and moreover a clergyman of the Church of England, the commission of an infamous felony. That imputation he this day, by his plea, repeated. He first denied that he had made it, and then said, even if he had made it, it was true, and would prove it' The Jury were therefore now empanelled to try this gentleman, the plaintiff, for felony. The plaintiff was the grandson of the late Sir E. Clifton, who had resided in the vicinity of Nottingham, where he held a living ; and at the time in question was living near Market Raisin, in this country, dis charging the sacred duties of his profession. The defendant resided at Thorney, in his neighbourhood. After a short acquaintance, the plaintiff received an invitation from Mr. Neville to pay him a visit at his house at Thorney, which invitation was couched in the most familiar language. The note was dated from the White Hart Inn, in this town, and was to the following effect :—Dear Clifton—l have just heard that two bailiffs are in quest of me. I have lately lost my housekeeper, my cook, my butler, and my dairy-maid; but have supplied their place with better cattle. If you and Mrs. Clifton will pass a few days at Thorney, Mrs. M'Candlish, the young widow of an officer late of the 70th regiment, will be ready to give you wel come. Yours, &c." Now Mr. Clifton certainly felt honoured by an invitation from a gentleman of Mr. Neville's fortune to spend some time at his house, and he accordingly went. He took care, however, to go unaccompanied by Mrs. Clifton. He was net aware of the mode of living which pre vailed at Thorny, until he visited Mr. Neville's house, where he remained, however, a few days. During his stay there the plaintiff had occasion for some money, and sold a pair of ponies for 30/. to the defendant, or rather gave them to him by way of security for a loan, because the sum advanced was certainly considerably below the value of the ponies. Having terminated his visit, the plaintiff proceeded to Spittle Inn from Gainsborough, and there found a servant waiting for him with a letter from Mr. Neville. That was the letter which was the subject of the present inquiry. The jury would judge of Mr. Clifton's astonishment on opening that letter, and reading as follows :LL(The Learned Counsel then read the letter.) The writer began by ex pressing; his great regret at having suffered a person of Will Clifton's character to enter his house; and went On to charge him, that not satisfied with the loan of 30/., which he had received from him in charity, he had abstracted his purse containing 9/. 'Ss. from his bed-room table. The plaintiff in stantly replied to this insulting letter with the ut most indignation, and no sooner had be arrived at Lincoln than he was arrested at the suit of the de fendant for this alleged debt of 30/. Lord TENTERDEN here inquired if this case could not be settled in some other manner ? Mr. CLARK, for the defendant, said his client was not in Court, but he would take upon himself to ac cede to his Lordship's suggestion. Lord TENTERDEN—Let some gentleman at the bar say what apology, if any, ought to be made' ; and, in short, what ought to be done between the parties. Mr. DENMAN must, of course, always feel most anxious to comply with his Lordship's suggestion. The case was then referred to the decision of Mr. Serjeant Adams. CRIM. CON.-WALKER V. SHAW. Mr. BALGUY stated the facts, and observed that the plaintiff's case was one of peculiar aggravation. He had had the misfortune to be convicted of an offence against the laws of his country, for which he had paid the penalty inflicted upon him. It was, however, on the prosecution► of the defendant that the plaintiff had been convicted and sentenced to transportation, and it was much to be feared that the law had in this instance been made the instrument of giving effect to the defendant's views, by re moving the husband out of the way, that he might with the more security and freedom give himself up to the gratification of a passion which be had long cherished towards the plaintiff's wife; and, indeed, his conduct was such, as to leave but little room to doubt it. The marriage having been proved, Isaac Howell stated, that his sister, after her marriage with the plaintiff, lived with him as his wife. He saw them at Wrangle after the wedding, and afterwards at Swineshead, where they lived comfortably as man and wife ought to live. They had three children. The plaintiff had been sentenced to transportation for stealing ducks, and returned from the hulks in March last, and at the same time his wife was living in a house at Boston. Eiizabeth Winter said that the defendant and Mrs• Walker came to her house, at Boston, together, and remained there from six until ten o'clock. He took Mrs. Walker's child on his knee, and gave it h;s watch to play with; saying, " Bless thee, child, that is more than I would do to one of my own." He then added, " I wish Old Ducks were near me, that I might slip the watch into his pocket, and send him over the herring-pond for the rest of his life." J. Winter, a boy, the son of the last witness, had peeped in through a chink of the bed-room door, and seen Mrs. Walker in bed, and the defendant get into bed to her. The child remained on the outside of the bed, eating a piece of cake. The LORD CHIEF BARON having summed up, 'I be Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff— Damages, Is. NALL V. OWSTON AND OTHERS. This was an issue from the Court of Chancery, to try whether the will of a person named Kelly was attested in the testator's presence by the three at testing witnesses. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, thereby establishing the due execution of the will. William Sardison, a farmer residing at Aunsby, in this county, was capitally indicted for a felonious assault upon a servant girl named Elizabeth Put tergill. The prosecutrix had been in the prisoner's service about three weeks before the Bth of July, on which morning, about four o'clock, he came into her bed, put his arms about her, and awoke her. lie then wanted to take greater liberties with her, which, however, she resisted, and got out of the bed. She went to the wi►►dow, and would have jumped out through it, but the prisoner prevented her, and threw her on the floor. She endeavoured to cry out, but he put his hands on her neck to stop her breath, and by that means he accomplished hig pur pose, telling her at the same time that if she squalled out he would kill her. After he had got up, he said, " Now, Betty, if you do not tell your mistress, or any body else, I will give you a pound bill." To which she replied that she did not want his bill. He then went down, and she went into her mistress's room, and complained of the treatrnent.she had re ceived. Her mistress was her master's sister, and she only replied " Pooh, pooh►, get along, I shall riot trouble myself about any of your bother." She 'hen went down and lighted the fire, and having lone so, she set out for Sleaford, which was six miles off, to which place she walked ; and having there met her uncle, she related to him what had happened, and they went before the Magistrates to obtain a warrant. On her cross-examination she stated that there was only a thin partition between her bed-room and that of her mistress, who must, therefore, hare heard all that had passed between the witness and the prisoner. She also swore that this was the first time she had ever had a particular intimacy with any man. Her person was not examined by any body, but she was willing now to be examined by a sur geon, to show she had not had any intimacy with other men. The prosecutrix's testimony, as to what occurred at Sleaford, was corroborated by her uncle. But she was contradicted in every material circumstance by the prisoner's sister, a respectable-loeking woman, who stAted that had there been the slightest noise in the prosecutrix's room she must have heard it; and she heard none whatever. The Learned JUDGE here intimated his opinion that it was unnecessary to proceed any farther with the defence, and the Jury instantly returned a vet.- ' diet of Not Guilty. Ann Baker, aged 26, was indicted for the wilful murder of her illegitimate child. The prisoner, it appeared, was in the service of Mr. Lyster, of Burwell, in April last. At about four o'clock on the morning in question she was observed by her two fellow-servants getting out of bed, and on one of them being about to get up also, she told them it was too early, but that she was getting rip in consequence of being very ill and in pain. She then went down, and did not return until until half-past six o'clock, when she was ob served to have a bundle in her apron. She then said she was better, but complained of a head-ache. Suspicion having been excited, a surgeon was sent for, who taxed her with having been delivered of a child. She denied it, but upon examination of her person by the surgeon, the suspicion was confirmed. She, however, still denied it. A search was then made forthe child, and for some time it could not be found. One of the prisoner's drawers was locked, which she refused to open, until they were about to break it open, upon which she opened it with the key. She then tried to remove a bundle which was in a cloth, but the surgeon prevented her, and on opening the cloth he discovered the body of a new born infant. A second surgeon having been called in, they both examined the body, and found marks, as if from a cord, on the neck. The lungs also were expanded, and floated in water, from which they in ferred that the child had been born alive. They ad mitted, however, that this was not of itself an infal lible test to prove that the child had been born alive. Under these circumstances the Jury acquitted the prisoner of the murder, but found her guilty of concealing the birth of the child. She and Mary Ranson, who on Monday pleaded guilty to a similar charge, were each sentenced to six months' hard labour in the House of Correction. WESTERN CIRCUIT.-SALISBUIZY, AL-G. 5. Stephen Payne was indicted for having felonioudy stolen a fat wether sheep, the property of Jonathan Dann, at Heytesbury. The Jury having pronounced a verdict of Guilty, The Learned JUDGE addressed the prisoner, and said he must prepare to leave the country for life. Charles Hiscock was indicted for having broken open the bed-room of Daniel Tilly, and feloniously stolen a gold ring, two sovereigns, and other monies, his property.—Guilty. Sarah Woodman was charged with having broken open the dwelling-house of Susannah Vincent, and feloniously stolen therein two silver spoons and other articles.—Not Guilty. NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—CAAIBRIDGE, Auc. 5. DOE, ON THE DEMISE OF MICHAEL WRAGG V. WRAGG AND OTHERS. This was an action brought by the heir-at-law of a person deceased, against the devisees under his will, to try its validity, it being alleged by the plain tiff that the testator, at the time of its execution, was of unsound mind. _ _ Mr. PRYME, stated the case on the part of the defendants. That the plaintiff was the heirat-law of the late Mr. James Wragg, of Swavesea, in this county, he readily admitted; he was not, indeed, very nearly related, but he was the person who would have been entitled to succeed to the real property of that gentleman in case he had not dis• posed of it by will; He had so disposed of it ; and the real question between the parties to this suit was, whether at the time he executed the will and subsequent codicil, he was of sound and disposing mind, and understood what he was about. The testator was a gentleman of large landed and per sonal property, who for many years had resided at the parish of Swavesca. He was a man of mild manners, of economical habits, and of an active and intelligent mind. The large property he died pos sessed of was the honourable gain of a long and laborious life, and was entirely acquired by his own industry and frugality; arid if any one has a right to determine in his life-time the channel in which his property shall flow when he shall be no more, it is peculiarly the man whose own industry and talents have enabled him to become the architect of his own fortune. Such a man was the late Mr. Wragg. Mr. Fisher, the attorney of St. Ives, a most honourable man, was the attorney of Mr. Wragg. He had known him long and intimately, and the greatest friendship subsisted between them. Mr. Fisher accordingly took the liberty from time to time of recommending that gentleman to make his will, and as often Mr. Wragg delayed to do so ; and it not !In frequently happened that men of the strongest minds were unwilling to set about the necessary but not very pleasant task of making their will; and this was most. natural, as the task seemed to bring the prospect of death nearer to their view. MZi'• Wra ! _rg, however, at last became unwell, and then he applied himself in earnest to make a pro per disposition of his property, his mind continuing as calm and as sound as it had ever been during his long and useful life. He sent for Mr. Fisher, gave him instructions for his will, and that gentle man made his will in exact conformity with those instructions. In that will, the testator• mentioned his having omitted to dispose of some small estates, and a great portion of his personalty remained un bequeathed. A few days afterwards, he again sent to Mr. Fisher, and gave him fresh instructions for the disposal of the rest of his possessions. Mr. Fisher took the testator's commands; but finding that, in consequence of some interlineations in the first will, and the alterations proposed then to be made, it would be easier to make a new will than to add a codicil, the former mode was proposed to the testator, who at once acquiesced,and a new will was prepared and executed; and a few days after that the testator made and executed a codicil, for which he himself dictated the instructions. On the 29th of May the first will was dated ; the second on the 3d of June; the codicil on the 9th of June ; and the testator died on the 2d of July. So far all was legal; but the plaintiff says the testator did not know what he was about. Did he not ? The Jury should have the evidence of the doctor who at tended him ; the clergyman of the parish, who visited him in his sickness, to administer religious comfort and consolation ; tradesmen, neighbours, and all wish whom the testator was in habits of the greatest intimacy. The• testator had no children; his heir-at-law had been extrava gant, to say the least ; and the testator knew that to leave his property to such a man would be to bequeath it to one who would make an im proper and improvident use of it ; but he was con siderate, and though he could not conscientiously bequeath it to the plaintiff, he did leave more than 2,0001. to his (the plaintiff's) son. Mr. Fisher was perfectly disinterested in the question, for he did not take one shilling by the will. John Dodson, examined by Mr. GUNNING—Was acquainted with the late Mr. Wragg for 40 years. On the 29th of May was witness to the execution of his will. It was at the testator's house. He waF in_a perfectly sound state of mind, ;old quite compe tent to make and understand his will. James Coulson, examined hy Mr. AUSTIN—\I'a , born and has lived at Swavcr•ta for 30 year , , during ►which time he has known testator. haw him or• the 29th of May, 1828, and signed a surrender• of r copyhold to the use of the testator's will. Ilk mind was then as sound as could he. Thomas E. Fisher, examined by Mr. PRY:ME— I - Ls been an attorney at St. Ives for 20 years, and to the late Mr. Wragg for 16 or 17. Testator frequently, during the last five years, told witness that he wished to make his will, but he had so many relations he was puzzled how to leave hi, property. Saw him on the 28th of May, 1828. Testator gave him instructions from a written paper, and witness took them down, and prepared a will in the house, in conformity with them.— On both occasions he perfectly understood what he was about, and his mind was perfectly sound, On the 3d June he proposed some additions to his will, but as there were some few interlineations in it, witness thought he had better make a new will than a codicil. Witness accordingly took from the testator's dictation the particulars, and incorporated them with the former will. The will was written in an adjoining room. Witness read it over to the testator, who said it was all proper, and then it was executed. (Will produced.) The codicil was pre pared and executed in testator's house. His mind, on this and on the former occasion, was sound and competent. On the 24th witness found him worse. and his mind wandering, and he died on the 2d of July. Not one of the devisees of the will was a client of the witness. All the witnesses to both wills and the codicil were then examined, and a vast variety and number of other persons, to prove the sanity of the testator. It appeared that he had filled all the offices in the parish with the highest satisfaction to all, down to the period of his last illness. The Rev. Henry Kirby visited the testator on the Ist of June, and on every succeeding Sunday till his death, as a minister. In witness's opinion he was perfectly sound until the 29th. Dr. Haviland—ls Regius Professor of Physc in the University. On the 2d of June I attended the testator. On the 7th I again went, and found him sitting by the fire-side, and in low spirits. I con versed with him on several subjects, especially about his will, and was perfectly satisfied that he was in a fit state to make his will. Mr. Seijeant STORKS then addressed the Jury for the plaintiff. His Learned Friend had told them that the question for them to try was, whether the testator, at the time he executed the instruments now before them, was of sound and disposing mind ; but he begged to say that the real question was, not whether the testator were insane,--not whether he were absolutely an idiot, but whether his mind was in such a state as to render it easy for others to ex ercise an undue influence over him, and whether such influence had been, in fact, exercised ? It was evi dent that the had been maoe with great precipi tation, with " breathless haste," at the time when the mental and bodily powers of the testator were rapidly decaying. Legal men ought to be called in, to advise the ignorant, and to assist the weak ; but they ought not to goad an old man to make his will to the disinherison of his heir at law. The testator had been unfairly dealt with. Thomas King—Heard Dodson say that the tes tator was as feeble as a child, and he was obliged to take him out of bed and hold him when he signed his will. Josiah Marriott—Heard defendant Jeneway say, " if he had not gone to the old gentleman, he never would have made his will." He said his legacy at Yarmouth was a nice little place. Alice Webster—ls niece to Mrs. Richmond, testator's housekeeper. Went to visit her omit in March, previous to his death, and stayed a month. Ilis memory was very bad, and so was his health. Has asked the testator " how he was ?" and lie said, " he did not know, but they used to keep him in bed, though nothing was amiss with him." Ile did not know what he was saying. He was in a very weak state when he signed the will, and wa3 in bed. He sat up, and I supported him. By the Learned BARON—For eight weeks before his death, he %vas unfit to make a will. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. PRYME was about to reply for the defendant, when— The Jury said that was unnecessary : they were quite satisfied that the will was valid. Mr. Bamn GARROW—Do you think, gentlemen, that Mr. Wragg was of sound and disposing mind on the 3d and 9th of June, 1828, when he executed the will and codicil ? Foreman—We do, my Lord. Mr. Baron GARRow—And so do I, and so must all who have heard this trial. The Jury then found for the defendants. Win. Reader, aged 27, and 11 7 m. Turner, aged 22, were indicted for voluntarily and maliciously setting fire to a stack of haulm at Linton, on the 31st of March last, the property of Mr Wm. Chalk. The prisoners had nothing to urge in their defence. Mr. SMITH submitted that the indictment was not good, inasmuch as the word " haulm" was men tioned, and there was no such word in the statute; it was clearly substituted for " straw," which was mentioned. Again, the word " voluntary" was used instead of " unlawfully." The Learned Judge left it to the Jury to say whether the prisoners were the men who put the fire to any, and what buildings, and all other mat ters would be left to the consideration of the twelve Judges. The Jury, without much hesitation, found the prisoners Guilty ; and they were of opinion that they intended to consume the whole premises. Mr. Justice PARKE told the prisoners that they had reason to be thankful that their time in this world was extended to a distant period; he hoped that they would use it in preparing for another state; because, should there be no room for the scruple in his mind, the Judge, who would succeed him at the next assize, would sentence them to die, and order that sentence to be carried into execution. OXFORD CIRCUIT.—WORCESTER, Auo. 5. TILE KING V. JOAN HUNTER, ESQ. It will be recollected that at the last assizes for this county a true bill was found by the Grand Jury charging the defendant with the forgery of a deed, or with uttering the deed knowing it to be forged. He had been at that time out upon bail, and on the bill being found, an application was made to the Court to put off the trial at the last assizes, in con sequence of the illness of a material witness. Mr. Hunter then surrendered, in order to be present at the application, and on its being granted, Mr. Justice Park directed that he should enter into fresh recog nivinces, and give bail to a heavy amount, which was accordingly done. The trial was fixed for yes terday, but in consequence of the long duration of another cause, was put off till this morning, and the Court was crowded to excess at an early hour. Mr. CAMPBELL (with whom was Mr. Seijeant Russell and Mr. Curwood), in addressing the Jury said, it now became his painful duty to state the circumstances of the case out of which arose a capi tal charge against an individual occupying a very re spectable situation in society, and who probably but for this unfortunate affair would have been attend ing his Lordship in the situation of High Sheriff. He had to begin by stating to them, that in the county of Worcester there was a certain manor, called the Manor of Benholme, belonging to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, and on this manor there are certain demesne lands, likewise be longing to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster ; and they have been in the habit, from time to time, of granting leases of the manor, and houses, and lands therein. Within this manor stands a house, part of which belongs to the Dean and Chapter, Lind part of it belonged, for a great many years, to a family of the name of Carruthers. That house N% as now one tenement : it was formerly divided into two houses. The family of Carruthers formerly held e ~art of the house as their own freehold, and the at her part as the lessees of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster. The Dean and Chapter wen in the habit of renewing the lease of their de mesne lands at stated periods ; and their lesser wanted an under-lease to the Carruthers of the part not freehold. On the 24th of Aprl, 1778, the lessees under the Dean and Chapter were Wm. Bell and John Drew ; and on Laly-day they granted a lease to George Carruthers for 21 years. It was probable, that before then the two houses had been converted into one, but that lease fol lowed the terms of the old leases from the lessees of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster,and described the premises as a certain house in the occupation of George Carruthers. But there was endorsed or the lease a memorandum by the lessees, Was. Bell and John Drew, stating that part of the therein described premises wet e fi eehold, and then he longed to George Carruthers ; and the said Win. Bell and John Drew covenanted with the said George Carruthers at the end of seven years, to re new the said lease on the terms therein mentioned. The jury would therefore perceive that those who held under the Dean and Chapter acknowledged that part of these premises belonged to George Car ruthers,and were freehold. Another lease by Wm. Bell and George Drew to George Carruthers de. scribed the premises, as all that inessuage or tene ment being now part of the dwelling-house of the said George Carruthers ; and from that time the leases to the family of Carruthers always described the premises as part of the premises of George Car ruthers. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to detail the particular terms of various leases down to 1807, when a person of the name of Perrot, the as signee of the lessee of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, died, and on the Ist of August, 1807, a new lease was granted by the executors of Mr. Perrott, in the terms of the old leases, for 18 years wanting three days. That lease of 1807 expired at Lady-day, 1825; and on the 29th of September, 1807, the executors of Perrott assigned their lease from the Dean and Chapter to Hunter, mid on the 28th of December, 1812, a new lease was granted to Mr. Hunter by the Dean and Chapter for forty years;--therefore Hunter became the landlord of the leasehold part of the premises, and was en titled to receive the rent, and recover the possession of that part of the premises at Lady-day, 1525. In June, 1811, George Carruthers, who held the freehold part of the premises, died, leaving Jo seph Carruthers, his son and heir. In September, 1812, Joseph Carruthers contracted to dispose of his part of the dwelling-house to a gentleman of the name of Hemming, but a difficulty occurred as to what part was freehold and what part was leasehold, and it was impossible to tell what part belonged to Carruthers in his own right. The Jury would find by and by, that Mr. Hunter produced the lease of the Ist of August, 1807, for the purpose of showing what part was freehold ; and on the 27th and 28th of October, 1813, Joseph Carruthers conveyed his share of the property to Thomas Falkner. Falkner took possession, and was Ia possession of the pre mises at Lady-day, 1825, when the lease expired. Disputes then occurred respecting how much of the property Mr. Hunter was entitled to. Falkner would have delivered up the leasehold part of the premises to Mr. Hunter, but he insisted on having the free hold part; and, pending these disputes, Falkner sold his interest to a person of the name of Bum- I ford, who put in a person of the name of Champkin, I as his tenant; and in Trinity Term, 1827, Mr. Hunter brought an action of ejectment against Champkin, to recover the po-session of the whole of the house, insisting that the whole was leasehold. Champkin, under the direction of his landlord, made no defence as to the leasehold part of the premises, but Mr. Hunter was not satisfied with that, and the question in that action was, whether Mr. Ilunter had a right to recover possessi, n of the whole of the dwelling-house. If the whole of the premises had been demised to limiter in 1807, lie was entitled to recover the whole when the lease expired at Lady day, 1825; but it was not till the month of June, 1827, that the action of ejectment was brought, and the case came on to be tricd before his Lordship on the other side of the Hall. It was for what WaS done at the trial of that cause that Mr. Hunter is called upon to answer this charge here this day. The lease by the executors of Parrott was at that trial produced, and given in evidence to prove that Mr. Hunter was entitled to the whole of the dwelling house in question. If it had been a lease of the whole, no defence could have been made. It was put in, purporting to be a demise of the whole premises, for it ran thus:—The lessor demised " all that messuage or tenement, being the dwelling-house of the said George Carruthers," purporting to be a lease of the whole. What had been suspected turned out to be true. Between the word " being" and the words " dwelling-house," where the words " part of" had originally stood, there was an era sure. No explanation was given. The deed ap peared to have been examined, and no notice of the erasure was mentioned in the attestation. The space was not filled up as usually done by lawyers and law stationers, when a deed is engrossed and there is any erasure. It was stated by the Counsel for Mr. Hunter, that the deed then pro duced was a lease of the whole, and the Counsel for the defendant having stated the evidence that he was prepared to give respecting that deed, the Coun sel for the plaintiff prudently withdrew and sub mitted to a nonsuit. In consequence of what then transpired, it was thought right not to allow the sub ject to rest there—that further inquiries should be made ; and it was resolved that a prosecution should take place, and Mr. Hunter be called on to account for it. But before the Spring Assizes for 1828, Hunter had left his dwelling-house. A warrant was taken out, and a constable was entrusted with the execution of it, but Mr. Hunter could not be found, and it was impossible to proceed against him at the spring assize?. A day or two before the summer assizes for 1828, Mr. Hunter gave notice that he meant to appear to take his trial, but the prosecutor was ad vised that it was impossible for him to proceed with the prosecution, until the depositions had been taken, mid at that time Mrs. Perrott was not at Worcester : she was gone to Harrowgate, and having left the necessary documents locked up at home, she did not return till after the Grand Jury had been discharged : no delay took place. At the spring assizes, an indictment was presented and a true bill was found. Ott that occasion an applica tion was made by Hunter to have the trial ad journed to the summer assizes. No objection was made on the part of the prosecutor, the object of the prosecutor merely. being that an investigation should take place. Having confined himself as briefly as possible in the opening of the case, he (Mr. Campbell) would now shortly draw the atten tion of the Jury to the evidence., The lease of 1807 was an original genuine document, but the alteration of a genuine document was in itself a forgery. (Here the learned Counsel proceeded to expound the law of forgery, stating that not only the fabrication, but the addition or erasure of a letter, by which an alteration was effected, amounted to forgery). Such being the law on the subject, the charge against Hunter was that he did either erase the words " part of" out of the deed in question, or, knowing it to have been done by some other person, uttered it knowing it to have been altered. He (Mr. Campbell) would now go to 1826. Falkner was then the owner of the premises he had bought from Joseph Carruthers. Disputes then arose between Hunter and Falkner respecting the premises, and it was not till March, 1826, that Mr. Hunter produced the deed in the altered form, by which he insisted on his right to the whole, with the words " part of'' erased ; it was noticed, and the erasure pointed out. He said it was then in the same state that it was when it came into his possession. Having thus produced it in its altered state to three persons, he brings the ejectment, and in its altered form, by his authority, the deed was produced at the Assizes. The ques- Lion for the Jury was, whether it had been produced by him, knowing of the alteration. Mr. Joseph Carruthers—l am subpoenaed on the . part of the prisoner in this case, and am the ooli ion of the late George Carruthers, of Pershore . Ott his death I could find no papers in the house' Hr. Hunter heli,ed me to what papers he sail be' longed to my father: they were securities for ,noney : he bad the possession of them at the time ,f my father's death. Hunter produced the title t 0 he leasehold part of the premises. In 1812 I en" aged to sell the leasehold part to Hemming. 1-10 0 ; ter went with me with the lease to Mr. Dinely. , aw the lease there produced by Hunter. 1 rest(' part of it. It was opened by Bryan. I read the, parcelc. As far as I recollect they w ere d e .cribea " all that rnessuage or tenement, being' part of the dwelling-house of George Carruthers." Ther e was no erasure at that time. 1 was subpoenaed at the trial of the ejectment at the assizes for 182 1 6 and observed the instrument given in evidence an the part of limiter. I heard it read. I have 1 0 the least doubt it was the same I bad seen at Dimly's in 1812. When I saw it in 1827 in Court, it was not in the same state it was in 181 2 : there appeared to be two words erased mite"' the words '6 part of." They were not take° clean out. I think the term was 18 years some odd. Cross-exlmined by Mr. C. PHILLIPS—I took parr, titular notice of the erasure ; the words , 6 par t of were era-pd ; " being" was the word before the gar in the erasure. 1, every word you have here spoken as true 84 that ?-1 shall not answer that. I have been tic' cased of doing something improper. Were you never accused of forgery ? Witness—." Forgery!!! Mr. C. PHILLIPS—Ay, forgery ? Witness- - b' gentleman accused me of producing a will impOr perly. I was accused of forgery. After that acci r sation I paid one of the certain persons the money that was due. Did you not pay the money you had sought t° defraud them of ?—I paid the money, and the atior a ney's bill. By Mr. Baron VAUGHAN—I paid it under tha t imputation; that is 18 or 19 years ago. Cross-examined—l paid the attorney's expellee for the prosecution of myself—that is, the expencel of the proceedings against me. t What amount WaN the forgery money ?—I don know, on my honour. Mr. C. k'nums—Your honour! Come, wha: - was the amount ?—There was 600/. or 70° 4 paid under that imputation, and the attor n ey's 70/. Mr. C. PHILLIPS—Before you paid the mond: did you happen to have a bill of indictment faro'' as-ainst you at the Warwick a,:sizes for forgery ?''' The bill was found while I was there, and I afte r ' wards paid the money. Do you remember any other little charges agaii l6C you ?—I don't know. Ou your oath (lid you not give security for 500 1 . ? —I don't recollect. Do you mean to say you never gave security t ° another person for 5001. ?—My bead is very bad. Your heart is worse : was it given to Robinson• By Mr. Baron VAUGHAN—Did you give it to ail body ? Witness—My Lord, I believe I did. if may have signed it. I have not the least doubt. ; you have got the deed there, why I did. Baron VAUGHAN—Does not the sight pro Ade l—, mot painful recollections? Witness—l did sign !; Other evidenc e was a dd uce d, but it was, oil the whole, of so vague, suspicious, and unsatisfactory. ° character, that the Jury expressed themselves fivour of the defendant, even before his defence 09 heard. After it had been entered into the Jury re turne d a verdict of Not Guilty. The Court instantly resounded with eeelarnati oo .! The Foreman of the Jury here said, they were returning their verdict, about to add that they me s honourably acquitted the prisoner. IP This trial lasted from nine in the morning till )It past ten at night. HOME CIRCUIT.—CHELMSFORD, A u o. 6. ` TIM IVITHAIR FIRES. Edward Polls, aged 19, was arraigned on f °t , if t indictments, charging him with as m a n y distill..., crimes of arson in the parish of Witham. The Pr ; : i soner, who is of very youthful appearance, plea Not Guilty. Mr. CLARKSON, on his behalf, challenged eve farmer summoned upon the jury. In consequen— much time was lost before the pannel could be corn' pleted. On this being done, the prisoner was t u.- raigiied on a charge of feloniously setting fire to ° r ; wit' outhouses at Witham on the 7th of March , t h "" property of William Grimwood. JEssoP stated the case, and called serer` witnesses ; but as the trial was not ov e r when 01/ ' reporter sent off his despatch, we shall postpone °lit account. Died at Clyne, Sutherlandshire, on the 20t h. ult., Mr. Hunts M'KEtsztx, aged 101 years. He ll ;e quite a primitive in manners, dr ess , an d conversa tion. , bad a strong dislike tl hear an evil report of any e T ' e r : and, though few knew better the wide distinction betive et the vicious and virtuous, in him was in exercise t i s charity which thinketh no evil. At the early age e f he became deeply impressed with the importance of f i e ; ligion, and was upwards of '7O years an Elder in t o e Church, during which time his character was without stain. It is very remarkable that, for a long period bef e ' r his death, he anticipated his dissolution with great P', e j sure. He spoke of a future state (says one who obs er ! t b his habits well) as one speaks of his native country, ° lto which he was well acquainted, and to which he long return. Ills faculties remained entire to the 13'4. Glasgow Courier. We regret to learn that there is a great Pr ° o - liability of Mr. LitrroN's early and final retiremen t ft° • the stage. How the vacancy is to be filled, we are a t loss to know. It is also said in the thcatricle circles t" YOUNG and JONES will retire after the present seas° ll ' ..° Brighton Gazette. Last week a sturgeon was caught in the riv h cr Parrett, and taken to Bridgwater alive. The roe of t ": fish weighed 401 b., the other viscera 12, the head a and the body 1381 b.—total 2231 b. Its length was 9 fe el and its girth 3 feet 7 inches.—Bath Chronicle. It is, we understand, quite true, that a theatr ho e ' larger than either Covent-,garden or Drury-lane, is t erected at the top of Gray's Inn-lane, for the repre"t r • tion of the legitimate Drama. Whether the ~ht o n will obtain a license is another Gazette. BIRTHS On the 6th inst. at Montpel . ier, South Lambeth , the '- of E. J. Lack, of a daughter. Joe On the sth inst. in Portland-place, the Lady C ather Legge, of a son. On the 3 , .1 ins'. at the Friarage, Yana, Yorkshire, the lady of T. Meynell, EN. of a daughter. colie At Woodhall Park, the lady of the Hon. Ales - Melvilh., of a son. MARRIED. - - autop_,quare, On the 6th inst. at St. Mary's, Bryak D. Massy Dawson, Esq. son of J. H. Missy Dawson, Hof M. P., to the Hon. Susan St. Clair, eldest daughter Lord S;nclair. On the 4th inst. at St. George's, Hanover-square, 14• Garry, Esq. of Conduit-street, to Anne Pluebe Veer, the eldest daughter of George Vescy, Esq. of Cadogaiv place. On the 4th inst. Richard Battley , Esq . to Ellin°l.' (laughter of Wm. Dalrymyle, Esq. of Norwich. At St. James's Church, Piccadilly, Will iam A mbNise Sh.iw, Esq., late of Bengal, to Mrs. Emerique) or same place. DIED. On the 6th inst. Thomas, eldest son of T. Hard'', E gg. of Walworth, aged 26. On the sth inst. Philip de Jersey, the infant son of It. Stocker, Esq. Welbeck-street, Cavendish-square. On the sth in,t. Mr. J. H. Atkins, Mount-street' Bet keley. squure, aged 24. On the sth inst. Captain Thomas Horncastle, Superi° tendent of the Commercial Docks, Rotherkithe, aged 74., PRINTED and PUBLISHED by MURDO YOUNG, at tba Omcs, 112, STAAND, LONDON. i 2