The Sun. — London, England, 1829-10-28 00:00:00

No presumption, however strong, to weigh in any ease —nothing but corruption—actual cor ruption, will do. But how? how satisfied, my Lord? Would you, its supervisor, grossly gape on? Behold her tupp'd? * • It were a tedious difficulty, I think, To bring them to that prospect." The quondam partner, the actual landlord of a brewhouse, cellar, and premises of a brewer owning eleven houses, is to be presumed quite disinterested in refusing, in his capacity of Ma gistrate, to license two free houses. No matter how materially the property of the landlord might be affected by the success of the trade of the tenant, the refusal must be presumed per fectly disinterested. "If corrupt motives (add the Magistrates) had existed, it was open to the appellants to have produced proof of them ; but as that had not been done, they must dismiss the appeal." To offer proof of corrupt motives ! And is proof of corruption so easy in our days! Alack for the chance of protection which the poor have from the Great Unpaid ! There are, no doubt, many honourable men in the Com mission. We wish, for the sake of the people, all the Magistrates were, which many of them are, jobbing knaves. It is because honourable men, like Mr. Western, are in the Commission, that knaves have so much the greater power. An honourable Magistrate would spurn at the idea of jobbing in licenses ; but what he will not do, others will always be found to do ; and his deli cacy will not allow him to suspect a brother Ma gistrate, or to interfere with his conduct. The interested and corrupt exclaim, would you refuse to give discretionary power to such guardians of the public morals as Mr. Western, while the real object for which the discretionary power is in vested, is, that brewers, landlords, brewers' re latives, brewers' tradesmen of all sorts, may avail themselves of it to poison and pillage the poor. As long as discretionary power is given in Eng land to anybody, thatpowerwillalwaysbe abused. No man in a country of law ought to have any discretionary power to interfere with the actions of others. In this country where all job, from the highest to the lowest ; where Ministers 'smuggle Bills through Parliament at two o'clock in the morning, and Archbishops, on their death-beds, are seen snatching at sinecures, in the teeth of Resolutions of Parliamentary Com mittees ; who is there who ought to be entrusted with an irresponsible power, by the abuse of which money may be made ? Let every man of irreproachable conduct who demands a license obtain one, and only be deprived of it when he has forfeited that privilege by misconduct.— Morning Chronicle. We have copied from the Cork Constitution the report of the trial of four of the Doneraile conspirators, on Friday last. They were found guilty. A number of individuals yet remain to be tried. The Solicitor-General, in his open ing speech of three hours, adverted often to the state of society in the part of Ireland where the proceedings the subject of the trial took place. " Mr. Creagh (High Sheriff of Cork) he ob• serves, " was found guilty for serving notices on his own tenants—for exercising his right as a landlord, and dealing with his own property as he thought fit." His right as a landlord ! The landlord has, no doubt, law on his side ; the law says he may do with his property as he thinks fit ; and the people deriving no benefit from the law, which is injurious to them in pro portion as it is enforced, try and pass sentence in turn on all who attempt to execute the law. 44 The agents in this conspiracy filled a district of country, and various ferocious banditties passed from different quarters to execute their judgment on him who dared to act for himself in his conduct towards his tenantry." Law in Ireland is not a rule for the common benefit, and in the observance of which all are conse quently interested. There is no Common Law. There is a Landlords' Law and a Tenants' Law. Things are pretty much, it would seem, in the state so pithily described by Words worth, in his lines on Rob Roy's grave :- -__— The simple plan, 'flint they should keep who have the power, A n d they should catch who can," The Tenants seem to be as firmly persuaded, according to the Solicitor-General, that they are doing right in enforcing their bloody law against the Landlords, as the Landlords are that they are enforcing theirs against the Tenants. In the struggle between the two laws, tho losses are considered as chances of war, and the ea,ample they hold out is an incitement to increased exer tion. At a Meeting in the house of one Duane, on Shrove-Tuesday, the capture of one Magrath was deplored. The party added (says the Soli citor-General), " that as the Aeeises were ap proaching, Low, (a Magistrate) wouldd . hang him, unless something we re done to cut him off, and a rivalry took place to see who should achieve it. Oise claimed the honour because he had transported his brother ; another because he was his near neighbour ; and a third, because he bad missed him on a former occasion,. These, gentlemen, are facts, which, if stated in another country, would not be credited ; but, unhappily, here you are too much familiarised with them to make you incredulous. Who wonld believe that the abbath was the day, the Bilide this bond, and the death-scene of a mother the place select,- vd to frame anew the plan of murder ? Yet it was under such circumstances this band of con apirators withdrew to a neighbouring barn, to de plore the escape of one human being from death, when about to follow the remains . of another to th e grave—to renew their oath of blood, and show with boasting phrase and gesture a pistol which did good work at Chuichtown—a name ever memorable in insurrectionary 41)Pals. On the 27th of Apsil, Duane had a tent at the fair of Rathclare. I need not say to men conversant with the habits of the kOWitry, that a conspiracy being hatched at a tent in a fair has nothing start ling to create a doubt : these things are almost openly talked of as it is never supposed that one who, by his appearance, belongs to Ma lower orders, would be proof against the ty ranny of these associations, pr bold enough to betray or oppose them." The so4itor-Gene rai adds, 44 How awfully startling is the narra tive ! What ! in a time of peace and security, without any cause of discontent, is a committee to sit in secret, and coiieign to death whomso ever they choose to place under their ban ?" So complete, it seems, is the separation of interests between the landlords and the peasantry, that no man who, from his appearance, belongs to the latter, is ever supposed to be bold enough to dare to oppose the execution of the law against the landlords. The public opinien to which the peasantry are amenable, acts with so tyranni cal a force, that the landlords' law is not feared, but obedience to it is feared. This state of things must not be allowed to continue. This division into two nations, each having a public opinion and a law of its own, must lie termi nated. The landlords have possession of the • • statute-book, and the tribunals and the gallows, and analogy demands that their law should triumph over the other. But to reconcile the peasantry to their defeat, the Government must step in and make the law not alone powerful to oppress them, but also a source of protection. Who does not know that the right to remove a tenant in Ireland, is at present a right to destroy him ; and ho,v can we suppose that human beings will look tamely on, while themselves, their pa rents, wives r,nd children, are consigned to de struction ? The conspiracies are dictated by the impulse which nature has implanted in every being to preserve existence at all hazards. Whenever men openly conspire against the laws, the laws are at fault. There need not other proof than the statements of the Solicitor-General, that the British Government have much to au• swer for in regard to Ireland. The murders and crimes which disgrace that country disgrace this country still more.—lbid. We believe the Duke of Northumberland has been very unfairly treated by both the Popish 1 , and Orange parties in Ireland. It is our opi nion, that the distracted and unhappy country over which his Excellency presides as the re presentative of the Sovereign has not had, in modern times, a Lord-Lieutenant more sincerely anxious for its welfare than his Grace. Ireland has long wanted, above all things, a firm and impartial administration of justice—a just and unbiassed application of the laws—equally free from the influence of popular terror or aristo cratic dictation. The present Lord-Lieutenant seems resolved so to conduct his government as to remove the reproach of what, for want of a better term, may be called party-justice, and to make all classes feel and acknowledge the pre siding majesty of the laws. To a Nobleman of the high rank and princely fortune of the Duke of Northumberland, the government of Ireland can be no object of ambition—neither in point of political power nor official grandeur can it hold out any very strong temptation to him to exchange the peaceful magnificence of Sion House for the vexatious splendours of the Castle of Dublin. We are aware of no motive that could induce him to take upon himself the cares and anxieties of Irish administration if he were not actuated by a patriotic desire to serve his country. With the Marquis of Wellesley, indeed, the case was very different—the salary of Lord-Lieutenant was a matter of considerable importance to him, and the extreme economy of the Vice-regal State and Household, in his time, looked as if he centered all hopes of the improve ment of Ireland in checking the national habit of profusion, and putting down, by force of his ex ample, the "savage virtue of hospitality." It was thought, however, that he carried the more calcu lating virtue which he chiefly practised to too nice a degree of perfection, and the Press teemed with complaints, setting forth that the want of the accus tomed festivities ofthe Castle threw gloom upon the streets, and gave languor to the trade of the me tropolis. The present Lord-Lieutenant, though by no means, in private life, of extravagant ha bits, is not chargeable with hoarding the income of office for his private necessities, or obscuring the splendours of his rank by the plebeian anxie ties of penurious calculation. He maintains with becoming liberality the state and dignity of Viceroy. In his Court superb, and in his Household hospitable, he cultivates the elegan cies of polished life, without neglecting the use ful virtues, giving, as he does, the aid of his in fluence and example to the promotion of arts and manufactures. It is his good fortune, also, that the Vice-regal throne is graced by a lady of the most estimable qualities—blameless in all the relations of private life, and distinguished for that active but unostentatious benevolence which are the highest ornaments of exalted rank—yet certain it is, with all these advantages, and with other claims on public respect, the Duke of Northumberland is by no means popular with either of the extreme parties that divide opinion in Ireland. He had scarcely been seated in the Vice-regal chair, when Mr. O'Connell, with that peculiar elegance and polish of sarcasm which distinguish him, dilated into a broad grin the intellectual features of au assembly of Cork poli ticians, by comparing his Grace to the sign of the " Hog in Armour." On the other side, Mr. Judkin Fitzgerald turned down his glass when his health was proposed at the Civic Dinner.— We believe Mr. O'Connell's splenetic asperity to have been excited by the proper and dig nified exclusion of demagogues and agitators from the Vice-regal Court—while the other ; party could give him credit for no virtues be cause he accepted office under the Wellington Administration. We have freely expressed our opinion of the errors into which the present Government have fallen ; but all their measures ; are not unwise : there are some of which honest and impartial men must approve, and one of these is the appointment of such a man as the Duke of Northumberland to the Lord-Lieutenancy of , Ireland. His Government seems to be actuated by good motives, and, if deficient in any thing, it is in the energy requisite for crushing the local feuds, and following with speedy and vigorous ezecntion the outrages which disturb the peace and impede the civilization of Ireland. It is this want of energy which allows the Terry-Alt and Rockite banditti to insult the laws, and keep large tracts of the country under a reign of terror. To temporise with such ruffians is only to in• crease their insolence and ferocity. They are men of blood, and must be put down by the gibbet or the sword. It will not do to allow Priests and demagogues to usurp the functions of the legitimate Government—to calm or excite the ‘; wave of the multitude" at their pleasure— and to affect to hold in their hands the scales of the destinies of the country, We gave the Irish Government the praise it deserved for suppo74- ing with unshaken firmness the dignity of the la - Ws dining the trials arising out of the disturb ances at liorrisolce9n—when the Liberal Press of Dublin forgot all sense of decency as well as of justice—endeavoured to intimidate Courts and Juries—anticipated with savage joy the con ' victien of innocent men, and raised the ferocious cry for blood, We cannot equally approve of the measures of Government which leave thede luded populace under the impression that the priest or the agitator is stronger than the law, or than these whom the law has appointed to rule over them. Tho:;e who have influence to allay the passions of the multitude hr,ye also power to excite them. We have said that it is the object of the Duke of Northumberland to make the laws respected ; but there are turbulent spirits in Ireland wham he will not be able to bring under that salutary corns(); unless he shows that his vigour is equal to his virtue.--Mor n ing Herald. The announcement of Mr. Huskisson being about to join the Cabinet, and, along with him, others who profess the same . political creed, and are attached to the same principles, has excited a storm of indignation among some of our co? temporaries, for which it is not a little difficult to account. On Saturday the Morniv Herald attacked our very innocent paragraph on the subject, and denounced it as a feeler, though for what purpose the feeler had been put forth, or at whose instigation, our cotemporary did not condescend to inform us. The Standard followed in the evening on the same subject, and the Morning Chronicle, the Morning Journal, and others, have since found abundant matter for discussion in the same topic. All, however, with the exception of the Chronicle, have given full credit to the fact which we an nounced, and simply confined themselves either to a verbal criticism of a trifling e xpression in our article, or to an attack on Mr. Huskisson, anti the principles anti abettors of free trade ge nerally. Mr. Huskies on's shoulders are broad enough, we presume, to sustain any attacks of the kind, and we decline, therefore, to enter into any discussion of the arguments which are directed against his principles and their advo cates. But the article in the Chronicle* is of a different character, and we are bound both to lay it before our readers, and to show the in conclusive grounds on which its assertions rest. 'We need not observe that the information re specting the " splendid festivities" here men tioned, was in the first place derived from our columns ; but what is most worthy of remark in the matter is, that our cotemporary first describes as a perfectly "fortuitous re-union," what after wards turns out, from his own account of the circumstances, to have been indeed any thing but " fortuitous." " When the Premier was invited to Sudbourne," says our cotemporary, " the Noble host thought it necessary , (probably with a recollection of the occurrences which pre ceded the late Colonial Secretary's retirement), to inform him Mat Mr. Huskisson was an ex pected guest ;" and yet, according to our co temporary, although both were invited at the same time, and to the same mansion, and by the same Noble person, and with a perfect know ledge on the part of, at least the Duke of Wel lington, that Mr. Huskisson would be present, " the re-union was perfectly fortuitous." Passing over, however, this doctrine of chances, which is as novel as it is extraordinary, we come next to the developement of the grand " principle" to which the Duke of Wellington has invariably " adhered," and on which our cotemporary appears to rely, as incontrovertible proof, that " there is not, and there never has been, a sha dow of foundation for the assertion," that nego ciations were pending for the return of Mr. Hus kisson to office ? and what is the principle ? why that*" of drawing a line between political and personal alienations !" Now if it were not as notorious as the sun at noon-day that the " alienation" between Mr. Huskisson and the Duke of Wellington, veiled as it might be under the endearing language of " My dear Duke," and " My dear Huskisson," was a personal, and not a political, alienation, it might be ne cessary to give a history of the whole affair in proof of the assertion ; but we shall trust so far to the recollection of our readers for credit on this point, and simply add that the alleged note of the Marquis of Hertford to the Duke of Wellington is itself a proof that the " alie nation" was "personal," and not "political." Men of the most opposite parties, and of the most opposite political sentiments, meet daily in society, without any one thinking it necessary to apprize either party of the ex pected presence of the other ; but there was a " personal alienation" in this case, and the Mar quis of Hertford, in consequence, according to our cotemporary's version of the affair, deemed it absolutely necessary to apprise the Duke of Wellington of the visit of Mr. Huskisson ! and yet, according to the same unerring autho rity, the " re-union was fortuitous," and the alienation political not personal. In conclusion, we re-assert the accuracy of our information with the same conviction of its truth that our cotem porary entertains of its falsehood ; and beg to inform him, in addition, by way of illustration, of his doctrine of "fortuitous re-unions," that the Marquis of Hertford has given some splen did festivities, at which, as he knows, both the Duke of Wellington and Mr, Huskisson were present—that he intends to give more almost immediately, to which neither are invited, and that if there had not been political matters to discuss, the invitation might easily have been so managed as to prevent the very extraordinary "fortuitous re-union" in question.—Morning Advertiser. The article referred to appeared, under the usual head, in THE SuN yesterday. ST. SAVIOUR'S, SOUTHWARK. A meeting of the parishioners of this parish was yesterday held at the Vestry-room, to receive the Report of the Auditors on the late Warden's ac counts. After those were passes, a motion was made to take into consideration the present dilapi dated state of the north and south transepts of the church, with other parochial matters. The following propositions, brought forward by Mr. SELLS, were unanimously carried, viz.—" That there be laid before the next Vestry a general state ment of the fund borrowed on account of the repairs done to the church, from what source obtained, to gether with the amount of the present rental, and the amount of balance in hand." Mr. SELLS next moved for the various drawings, plans, sections, &c. made relating to the church. The CHAIRMAN interposed, and read a letter from Mr. Gwilt, the surveyor, to this effect : That on finding a motion was about to be made for the pro duction of plans, &c., he had transmitted twenty six, which he had in his possession ; these, the writer said, " were all that were or could be of any use." Mr. Sum, and other gentlemen, thought that Mr. Gwilt ought not to judge whether what he had sent would only be proper for the inspection of the parishioners, and he persisted in his motion, which was likewise carried. After some remarks from Mr. Wild. sen., Mr. Blackett, Mr. Ellis, and other inhabitants, the Ves try broke up. SURREY SESSIONS, OCT. 27. William Evans, late a groom in the service of Mr. Davidge, Proprietor and Manager of the Roya. Coburg 'I heatre, was indicted for embezzling aw] converting to his own use 401. 25., the property o his master. _ _ The facts proved against the prisoner were these :—He was intrusted with a cheque of 401. 25., to take to a Mr. Sheppard, to get it cashed. He took his master's horse, obtained the money for the cheque, and absconded. The horse was returned, and found in the stable the fallowing day.—Verdict, Guilty, Mr. Davidge recorOmended Lim to mercy, as he believed it was his first offence. The CHAIRMAN sentenced him to be transported for seven years. KILMARNOCK, OCT. 21 . —Trade here, we are happy to observe, offers symptoms of permanent im provement. In some sorts of manufacture there is a de cided change for the better, in others the change is not so great, but all are at work, and the general appearance of matters, in the opinion of those best able to judge, is, that we may now reasonably count on a gradual and steady , advance, LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, OcT. 27. SAINSBURY V. CRAMP AND ANOTHER. This was an action upon a bill of exchange for 3001., of which the defendants were the acceptors. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that the plain tiff was a bookseller. The action was brought against the defendants, Messrs. Cramp and Crowdy, upon their acceptance. The drawer of the bill, Mr. Henry Leigh Hunt, of the late firm of Hunt and Clark, had purchased of the plaintiff, Mr. Sains bury, some copies of a book called Phillips's Sylva Florifera, the trade price of .which was 15s. 9d. a copy, but Mr. Sainsbury had let Mr. Hunt have them at 135.9 d. The totaramount was 1841. Os. 8d , and for that sum Mr. Hunt gave his note of hand, which became due on the 28th of December last. On the 27th, Mr. Hunt called on Mr. Sainsbury, and stated that he should not be able to pay the bill unless he (Mr. Sainsbury) could discount a bill for 3001., which he produced to him. This was the bill in question. It was dated the 16th of Decem ber, and was payable at four months. Mr. Sains bury agreed to discount the bill, and drew out an account, in which he debited Mr. Hunt with 5/. 2. Bd., the discount, and also the 1841. Os. Bd., the amount of the trite of hand, and paid him, in cash, the balance of 1101. 16s. Bd. The account thus drawn out, was signed by both parties, in the presence of a person whom Mr. Sainsbury had re ' quested to witness the transaction, having some ma , son to distrust Mr. Hunt. This was the transac tion connected with the bill for 300/., which he would now put in and read. The bill was dated the lfith December, 1828, drawn by Henry Leigh Hunt upon, and accepted by, the defendants, payable four months after date, endorsed by H. L. Hunt, to Hunt and Clark, and by them to the plaintiff. Mr. DENMAN, for the defendants, said, that his Learned Friend, the Attorney-General, had not let the Jury into all the secrets of this case. He would, therefore, detail to them the circumstances, and they would then see that his clients had a good defence on the ground of usury. The Learned Counsel then stated the facts as they appear in the subjoined evidence for the defence. Mr. Henry Leigh Hunt, examined by Mr. MAN NING—I was a partner in the house of Hunt and Clark, booksellers. On the 27th of December last, we had a note of hand falling due for 1841. odd, which we were not able to meet. lin consequence made application to the plaintiff to discount three bills, one for 3001. (the bill which is the subject of the present action), and two others, one for 751., and the other for 76/. 125., the acceptances of George Wood. I offered to let the 1841. note, which was in the hands of the plaintiff's bankers, go in part of the discount. My interview with the plaintiff was in the morning. The plaintiff said he would go into the city and see what he could do. By appointment he called on me in the afternoon, and told me the best he could do would be to give me a little more than 100/., and books to the value of 1511. 125., and take up our own note for the 184/. I agreed to this after some discussion as to the terms. He assured me the terms be had men tioned were the best he could get from his friend who was to advance the money ; that the books were not his own with the exception of one of them —not the principal—and that he should gain no ad vantage by the transaction. He brought with him the list of books now produced. As I did riot my self know the market valu d eof the books, I asked him if he could assure me that they were worth all or a great part of the money. He assured me that they were. We were not retail booksellers, and had not sold any of these books at our shop. The books were afterwards delivered to us, and remained in our possession up to the time of our bankruptcy, in April last. We "lever sold any of them, and I be lieve none of them have since been sold. I now know the general value of them from having heard the subject talked of. Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL.— The list produced is in . the hand-writing of the plaintiff's clerk. The plaintiff brought it to me on the 27th of December. To the best of my recollec tion and belief this is the identical paper. It was at No. 4, York -street, Covent-garden, that I got the 100/. odd on the 27th of December. Nobody was present. George Wood, the party to the two bills of 751. and 761. 125., has become a bankrupt. The plaintiff, Mr. Sainsbury, is a creditor of ours, and has proved under the commission. I have not yet obtained my certificate. No dividend has been made. There has not been time for it. There is property of ours available for a dividend, consisting of copyrights, stock of printed books, and book debts. My age is 27. I was in partnership with Mr. Clark from July, 1925, till April last. Debts to the amount of about 15,0001. have been proved under our commission. A great many of them are liabilities on bills. Myself and partner had a capi tal of about 3,000/. when we began business. The list of books referred to was then put in and read, their value, it appeared, had been considerably overrated. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs— Damages, 307/. 10s. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, OM 27. FOSTER AND OTHERS V. CHARLES. In this action, the plaintiffs, who are extensive tea-dealers in the city, sought to recover damages from the defendant, who is a soap-boiler, in conse quence of the loss they sustained by the defalcation of a young man named Jacque, whom they had employed as a commission-agent at Manchester on a representation of the defendant as to his character and circumstances, which representation turned out to be untrue. The Jury found a verdict for the defendant. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL DREADFUL DISTRESS.--Yesterday three lads, from fourteen to sixteen years of age, in a most de plorable state of destitution, being almost literally stark naked, not one of them having even the smallest particle of a shirt, were placed at the bar, charged by Mr. Brownjohn, a baker in Field-lane, with hav ing stolen a loaf. Mr. Brownjohn stated that the tallest boy came into his shop about eight o'clock the evening before, and took a half quartern loaf off his counter, which he brought out to the door, where the other two were waiting for him, and they all began to devour it with the greatest voracity. They did not attempt to run away when he followed the boy who took the loaf into the street, but appeared quite regardless of every thing but satisfying their hunger. lie gave them in charge to an officer, principally in pity for their dreadful situation. Besides which, the prac tice of poor perishing creatures coming into his shop and taking bread to satisfy their hunger, was become so frequent of late that he could not allow it to continue. The prisoners said they belonged to parishes in Middlesex, the other said he was born in Corfe Castle. They had all been for some time support ing themselves by holding horses, or carrying loads in the market, by which they got as much as bought them food, and they slept on the benches in the market ; but they were not able to buy themselves clothes, and when they became so naked, no one would employ them, and they were ready to die of hunger when they stole the loaf to save their lives. The sad story, and still sadder appearance of the youthful sufferers, excited universal commiseration. Mr. Alderman THORPE said they certainly should not be allowed to perish of hunger in the streets of the city of Londnn, and ordered them to be taken care of, and inquiry made to ascertain their several pa rishes. BOW.STREEL ONE MODE OF PAYING A LANDLORD'S RECKON lNG.—Yesterday Mr. Nevitt, the landlord of the George at Hammersmith, came to this office and asked Mr. Minshull to advise him how to act under the following circumstances : Mr, Nevitt stated, that a fortn'ght no a party of flee very respectable men came to his house, and re quested to be accommodated with a private room, as they had particular business to settle. They were shown into one on the first floor, where they had re freshments to the amount of 10s. ; which sum they paid, and afterwards had additional glasses of grog amounting to 2s. 6d. Before this last account was settled, two of the party quitted the house, and the applicant hearing the other three also coming down stairs, stepped from his bar and requested payment. All the three, however, declared they had nothing to do with the additional half crown, said it ought to have been paid by the other two, and swore they would not pay another farthing. They then went into the parlour, and there, in the course of the dis pute, one of the party threw a tumbler glass at the applicant, which fortunately missed him, but was dashed to pieces on the floor; and at the same mo ment, one of the three jumped out of the window, and ran away. He detained the other two, how ever, until he got the amount of his demand, but without charging for the glass. On Monday, to his great astonishment, he was served with a notice of action at the suit of one of the two whom he had so detained, for an assault and false imprisonment; and he wished to ask the Magistrate in what way he ought to act to meet so iniquitous a proceeding. Mr. MINSUULL—Pray do you know who and what the parties are ? Mr. Nevitt—Why, Sir, they consisted of a lawyer's clerk, a Sheriff's officer, a man who had been arrested, and his two sureties. Mr. MlNsitut.L—And who is it that has brought the action ? Mr. Nevitt—The lawyer's clerk your Worship. Mr. MINSHULL—I thought so, but I cannot assist you ; your only remedy is by applying to your attor ney to defend the action. Mr. Nevitt—l have no attorney, Sir—l never was fond of law in my life.— (A laugh.) Mr. MINSHULL—A proof of wisdom on your part.—(Laughter.)—That, however, is your only course. Find out some honest lawyer, and he will not find much difficulty in upsetting such an action as this. Mr. Nevitt then left the office, declaring he would defend the action to the last extremity. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, OCT. 27. EXTRAORDINARY DEMEANOUR OF A WITNESS. Henry Brant and Mary Ann Clarke were in dicted for assaulting the wife of the first-named de fendant. The case derived its sole interest from the, per haps, unparalleled pertinacity with which the prose cutrix resisted all attempts at cross-examination. prosecutrix stated that the female defendant was her servant, but that, suspecting something wrong between her and her husband, she discharged her. A short time after her husband brought her back to the house, and she (prosecutrix) then left, not choosing to stay while that woman was in the place. On the 23th of July she was passing along the street, when the female defendant followed her and knocked her down. CHAIRMAN—Did you say nothing to her first ? Prosecutrix—Of course I did; it is feasible I should. CHAIRMAN—WeII, what did you say. Prose cutrix—l don't know what I said. CHAIRMAN—What did your husband do ? Pro secutrix—Oh, I'll pardon him. CHAIRMAN—But what did he do ? Prosecutrix— Why he knocked me down as well; but I'll pardon him; I only want you to punish the woman. Cross-examined by Mr. P- RENDERGAST—Did not your husband have you taken up to the Police-office for assaulting him on this very occasion ? Prose cutrix—No, he did not. That's a falsehood he has got up to tell yow. Mr. PRENDERGAST—WiII you say that on your oath ? ProAecutrix—l am not going to give you my oath. Mr. PRENDERGAST—W ill you swear you was not taken up ? Prosecutrix—l'll not swear to you; I'll swear to those gentlemen (pointing to the Jury.) Mr. PRENDERGAST— Well, will you swear to those gentlemen it was not so ? Prosecutrix—Not to please you. Mr. PRENDERGAST—But I insist on your swear ing yes or no. Prosecutrix—l won't swear for you. Mr. PRENDERGAST—Do you know a man named Allen ? Prosecutrix—Yes I do. Don't you wish you knew him ? My husband has bought you. Mr. PRENDERGAST—Where is Allen ? PIOSC- Mari X—ln his skin, to be sure. _ _ _ Mr. PRENDERGAST—Has he not been in prison for assaulting your husband ? Prosecutrix—No. Mr. PRENDERGA3T—WiII you swear that ? Pro-. secutrix—Whitt, for you ! No, lam sure I shan't. Mr. PRENDERGAST—HOW long have you known Allen ? Prosecutrix—What's that to you. This strange colloquy, as may be supposed, could not pass without exciting repeated bursts of laughter. The Chairman did not, however, interpose. Mr. ALLEY indignantly rose, and called upon Mr. Prendergast not to allow himself to be so treated, but to assert the dignity of the Bur. CHAIRMAN--It certainly is not to be endured. The prosecutrix was, however, allowed to retire, without any more questions being put, and without receiving any reprimand. John Alen was afterwards put into the box. He said he saw the blows; but added, that there was a general quarrel before-hand. On Mr. Prendergast rising to cross-examine the witness, the prosecutrix shouted out, " Don't answer him." The witness, however, did answer, and admitted that he had been taken to the police-office, at the instance of the prosecutrix's husband, and there fined 3/. for his share in this very transaction. Mr. PRENDERGAST said the fact was, the prose cutrix was held to bail at the same time. The Jury instantly acquitted both defendants. THE BEER TAX. (Frcm the Morning Chronicle.) It has often been remarked, that in this coun try the rich take very unfair advantages of the poor in the mode of imposing taxes. The Beer Duty is a striking exemplification of the indiffe rence of the rich towards the poor. If the tax were imposed altogether on malt, it would affect poor and rich alike ; but the imposition of one tax on malt, and then another heavy additional tax on the beer made by public brewers, is im posing a tax exclusively on the poor, who cannot brew their own beer. _ _ _ Few people are aware of the extent of this tax, borne exclusively by the poor. In a Treatise on the art of Brewing, in two parts, published by the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Know ledge, evidently composed by an individual well acquainted with his subject, we find the follow ing astonishing particulars : " But it is not of the amount alone, but of the proportion in which the duty is levied, that the brewers as well as their customers have occasion to complain. Small beer is charged only at the rate of two shillings the barrel ; and by small beer la under stood ale or beer that is sold to the customer at or under the price of twenty-four shilling , . All that is above this price is accounted strong, and is liable to the ten shillings duty. The strength of the beer, which ought to be the criterion, is here out of the question ; for if any gentleman was to go to his ale brewer, and say that he wanted an article better than small beer, for which he would pay eight or ten shillings more, the brewer could not furnish it, because, if he charged more than 245. per barrel, he would have to pay the l Os. duty ; so that he could not give a better article for thirty-two shillings a barrel than ll ifor muchngs t‘ o v ri e .n n i t ed y-fu sesm. o an r. A id,,h eant de cheap is often table-ale temptation tu orrteivs is nevertheless ha eddeath t e fortystr n s g ale duty i s great, and consequently, as ap pears from the numerous convictions, the- mixing strong beer with small beer is not uncommon. Were the duty by some means proportioned to the strength, this would seldom be done. But we should \Trite ik volume were we to detail all the frauds and inconveniences consequent upon the absurdities ' t the present Brewery Laws. In small works, unle:f the brewer will consent to adopt the measures those whose consciences are not too confined, 116 will seldom succeed in his business. " It may be thought that we have dwelt too log on this subject, but we shall have frequent occasioal to show that the Laws of Excise must undergf some change before the art of brewing can be ma' advanced, without inNolving the trade in total ruff' It is now preserved in consequence of the ignorance or the indolence of the servants in private familie s ' The tax on public brewers is beyond all ordinal bounds. Were a penny a quartern loaf levied up o ' t the bakers, their ovens would soon be cold; and yet we consent to pay twopence upon every pot 0' porter we drink. In proof the following is a state meat of the expence at which a private gentlemavo who unlerstands the manigulatior.s, might hre vi a porter of as good a quality as any that is usually so l in London : 1 Quarter of Malt, at 655. per quarter 3 Quarters of Barley, at 40s. per quarter 120 32 Pounds of Hops, at 112 s. per cwt B2 Colouring, either from pateut malt or burnt sugar 5 Cost of materials 222 " To this there is nothing to add but the l a bour , which, to those who keep men servants, costs nr thing. The grains and yeast may be considered il l indemnification for the costs. If the brewing gr erl , properly managed, it would produce fifteen barr el of porter, of the average London strength, at a Pri ce under fifteen shillings a barrel, or five farthings° pot. This calculation was made in 1827, and the value will of course vary with the alteration of price. , but the sketch here given is sufficient to prove t hlt under the present laws, were the art of brewing g e, nerally understood, the trade of a public brae! could exist only upon the earnings of the poor; f /c all who could muster a few pounds would brew I°l themselves. We have supposed raw grain not much on account of the saving of malt duty as making a better beverage; but even were the porte r made wholly of malt, the saving would be erkor' mous. Thus -4 Quarters of Malt, at 655. per quarter 2605. 32 lbs. of Hops, at 112 s. per cwt. Colouring " These materials would produce fifteen barrel° l / We' good porter at less than twenty shillings per which is little more than three halfpence the pot' a What an enormous taxation on the poor 1 e great towns in particular, they have not the means of brewing for themselves, and must ts' t their beer from the public brewer. The e man is thus forced, by an invincible ne cess l 9:: either to drink water, or to pay sd. for what 11 : materials is worth only lfd. or at most 13 4 '; while the rich may avoid the tax. This it 19 to have a Legislature returned by rich men monopolists, who all, nevertheless, would spe ll — their last guinea in defence of our Holy Religl . oll ' and never miss subscribing to Bible Socienel: We are, in truth, a most moral and religtoto people. Roasting pigs were sold in Redruth m arket' lately, at 2s. each.—Falmouth Packet. .t ST. K ATHA RI NE DOCKS.—Yesterday r half-past two o'clock the water was admitted into the eastern dock, which will be ready in five or six day . 1 . ,, S the reception of shipping. This additional dock increir the wet-dock accommodation of the Company upon 11:64 whole, to upwards of 150 vessels, besides craft, at one the same time. FIGHT BETWEEN A MAN AND A Al Tirs..—On Saturday morning last, about four o'ele c ,r; Mr. SOMERWILL, the proprietor of the Pettington i t ; ( l Kilns, Nwth Devon, arose from a little cabin he has 6 , up on the spot, to attend to the process of his kiln, having effected his purpose, he lay down again withent dressing, having over his clothes a smock-frock. tp after the door of his cabin, which he had neg lect fasten, was thrust open, which alarmed his little dog l id : on the floor, and caused him to bark, when the W which proved to be a very large mastiff dog, se ised little animal, and shook it with great violence. 00 1°— ( 1 ing his prey, the little dog leaped up on the bed, sought the protection of his master : thither the 1 0 °„;o pursued him, and placing his paws on the bed, he hold of, not the dog but his master, whom he dray from the bed to the ground, where he held him , while; at length Mr. SOMERWILL caught his assailant tie throat, and regained his legs, but it was with the most difficulty he could withstand his powerful covet; Fortunately for him, a piece of hoop irou was within reach, which served him for a weapon, wherewith he erd tinned to heat the head of his shaggy antagonist till he b b' cleft his skull, and finally destroyed himt Mr. so lo; wit'. received no other injury than the alarm and feti„, occasioned by the contest, the thickness of his clothes boo' ing proved a protection from the fangs of his canin e The owner of this savage animal remains uncliscogred. Extract of a letter to a gentleman in Lir; pool, dated Buenos Ayres, July 27 :—" I have to ii°r, you of our safe arrival on the night of the 6th, O r l y tlerably good and agreeable passage. But it is with sy j deepest regret I have to relate to you the melancholy distressing accident which afterwards occurred to l b o f of any passengers, the Captain of the Gazelle and /O r o his crew. On the morning of the 7th instant, Celis CHEVELY, of the Gazelle, of your port, came a loagl o , of us (the Zeno) with his small boat to inquire for neof &c. He kindly offered his services to land part n' i of passengers, which they eagerly accepted. The sv i l f ilb this time was blowing fresh, right in for the tower o r rain. After taking a snack of biscuit and ale, th e pttl ther cleared up a little, and Captain CHEVELY JO o r vessel, at about one o'clock p. m., with three of 011, e r , sengers and our of his crew, making eight in o°lo4 In 12 or 15 f ninutes I followed him w:th my sm all _, o e in which were the other five gentlemen. I was not O t os of the danger until we were too far to leeward ° o ber; back; and we found the sea running much higher r we approached the shoal of water, between the cute the inner roads. We, however, got on board a s hi p l obe ( inner road, after a very narrow escape. We saw t he ! bo S boat more than once after we put off from our ye'ie,,ki lost her all at once in a squall, during which I e°",„ 14 for a moment direct my attention from my own h° ll- 4 i this squall, I fear the other boat must have swami :1;0' all on board perished. We waited some tune % a rid the vessel we had reached, in hopes of seeing °E' • sP 0 .0 14 something of our companions; but, alas ! it novz but too evident that not one was left to tell the s i ae I had nine persons in all with me in my small boat ; a 0 my boat was, I think, rather less than the Gas A* This boat was found bottom up three days afterOpie and the body of Mr. M'RarmarrE about is days ateoo( accident. The names of the three un fortunate Y opa gentlemen were, Mr. CHARTERS, Mr. MTAats.l4s' Dr. BROWN, al: from Scotland." BIRTHS. • On the 25th inst. at Paris, the lady of J. git°ll.ll Esq. of a son. f 11 9 . On the 14th inst. the lady of J. Aylee, Esq. °- mont, Essex, of a son. ) 11* On the 22d inst. at Coval-cottage, Chelmsford) R. Bartlett, of a son. MARRIED. 1 0. On the 27th inst. at St. George's, Thoonisbul'Apl so H. Moxon, of Tanfield-court, Tensile, to MarY eldest daughter of W. Lowe, Esq. of the same OP° of Montagu-street, Russell-square. On the 27t1e inst. at St. Pancras, Arthur Ko•e of Kelly, Devonshire, to Sophia, only daughter of R. Maitland, Esq. of Tbaxtead, Essex. . On the 22d inst. at Addingham, Yorksh ire , 'A t Gard, Esq. of Highbury-place, to Miss Parr, oil ," ter of Richard Parr, Esq. of Woodlands-cotes ' Beaton, Lincolnshire. 0 4 ,‘ ; DIED. At Wine!more Hill, on the evening of Mona%Or 26, Emily, the much beloved wife of the Rev' I', ter b ° to On the 24th inst. Sarah, the eldest daughoorb Sherwood, Esq. of Snow-hall, in the coun t y of aged 23. sti le On the 27th inst. deeply lamented, Christisos, J. Dixon, Esq. of Savage-gadenr, aged 29. . On the 26th inst. at Blackford, Somerse tsb ' Giles, aged 40. ? it* On the 25th inst. at W:sbeach, Cambriii A. Swanshorough. ,0100 I PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO j - . 0 $ ME SOH OFFICI, 112 3 &mom, PP S " ° I