The Sun. — London, England, 1829-09-10 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS, An ingenious letter, signed ge Hermes," the subject of which, being finance, is undoubtedly worthy of attention. That the soundness of our correspondent's views are altogether equal to their ingenuity, it would be too much for us to pledge a decided opinion. He nevertheless argues it well. The purpose of the letter, or essay, which, like the plot of a tragedy, is not fully disclosed until about the fourth act of the performance, goes to the extinction of a large branch of the indirect taxes—those, namely, on commodities of consumption—and the substitu tion of part loan, part income tax, towards pro viding for our annual expences. The letter opens with a curious table, though not quit e new, affording a com p ar i son of the periods of peace and war, from the Revolution in 1688 until 1814—the amounts of debt existing at the com mencement and close of each successive con test, from the humble beginning of 700,0001. to the splendour of 900,000,0001. Hermes is justified in affirming that a loan is raised at less expence than a tax, and therefore lodged with fewer deductions in the Treasury. He is also less favourable to his own theory than he might be, in stating that the tax returns to the pockets of the people, but that the loan does not ; for, in fact, the price of most warlike contracts and pre parations, which forms the larger portion of the expences of a war, goes as much in the shape of distribution among the people as the proceeds of any tax that could be named. We do not, how ever, concur quite freely with this writer in his allegation that loans and income-tax are taken from the rich, but imposts on commodities from the poor only. If the rich man, who lends his money to the Government, were to get no inte rest for it, the poor would feel immediately the bad effects of his reduced income in his di minished power of giving employment to their industry. Even though the lender to Govern ment receives interest for the amount of his loan, the poor are unfavourably affected by it, in so far as the capital lent is less productive in the hands of Government than in those of an indi vidual who would employ that capital to advan tage. So with an income-tax : is it possible our correspondent can overlook the fact, that a man who pays 10 per cent.—suppose 100/. a-year-- of income-tax to the Government, is made an unwilling instrument of plunder upon the poor, by being stripped of one-tenth of his means of consumption ; or in other words, of his power of rewarding Industry ? Whatever is taken di rectly from the rich, is indirectly taken from the pocket of the artisan, who invariably, though si lently, participates in the prosperous or diminished fortunes of his wealthier neighbour. The small expence of loans and of income-tax, as compared with taxes on consumption, furnish an argument in favour of the former, and perhaps the only argument ; at the same time we admit that a loan of a million at the market rate of interest, entails no more substantial burden upon the state than the same million raised in taxes, seeing that the surplus of 950,0001. or 960,0001. left untouched by the tax-gatherer in the case of loan, produces a profit when employed by indi viduals equal to, indeed greater than, the amount of dividend to be repaid to the lender of the million. Again, we recommend this letter as at leant a curious one, to our more diligent readers. --Times. In a letter from Paris, in a Morning Cotem. porary, the composition of a French Liberal, some statements are made (we have no doubt of their truth) of considerable importance, with a view to the forming an opinion as to the proba ble issue of the present disputes. 44 It will ap pear to you (says the Parisian correspondent), that without being revolutionary, one may like genuine elections, one may find the Censorship incompatible with a Representative Government, and one may deem it reasonable that he who makes the law should be entitled to interpret it. These are the concessions wrested from the old Alinistry—these are the concessions which have put the Crown in jeopardy ! But this Cham ber is detestable in its composition, it gives cause of alarm to the great mass of property in France ! The majority on the left side is at once insulting and dangerous to the great mass of property, and to the domestic respectability of France. No more open electors—no more electors from the Tiers-Etat—they are all revo lutionists.' A stranger, who is inattentive to what exists and passes in this country, might let himself be deceived at first by these words ; but if he examines matters more closely, he sees that the great proprietors sit in three times a greater number on the left side than on the right—that there is greater capital and more landed fortune in thirty Deputies of the left, than in all the Deputies united at the right side—that there are as many, and beyond all question more, persons qualified for the Peerage, both by their riches, their ancestors, their services, their historical glories, and their birth, on the left side as on the right. That on the left side are generally seated the richest proprietors, the most opulent bankers, the merchants and manufacturers in the greatest credit, the most celebrated charac ters in the Magistracy and at the Bar in matters of administration, and in know ledge of war ; in short, that it is on the left side that the real respectability and influence of France is to be found. To convince yourself of the truth of what I write, cast your eyes upon the picture of the Chamber of Deputies. As far as regards literary and scientific celebrity and ora torical talent, I do not imagine that the right side will dispute with the left these plebeian ad vantages. If any doubt existed upon this point, the Moniteur would soon decide it." if the weight of property be on the Liberal side, that side can hardly fail to triumph. Names alone, however well they may sound, count for very little in the present day in a contest with pro perty. Mr. Burke pointed out the notable de fect in the ancien regime, that the exclusive character of the nobility arrayed property and talent against the existing order of things. If before the Revolution the new men were so rich as to balance the nobility, how much must the plebeian side have gained since that event I A fact alluded to by this Correspondent is well de serving of attention :- 44 This inexorable faction (he says) wants a people to back it ; and the Clergy have entered into a contract with its leaders to find or make such a people for it. Their task is to excite the fear, the hope, the credulity, the ignorance, the fanaticism of the lower orders of society. There cannot be a bet ter understanding between any two classes of persons than there is between the most potent seiguor and the basest vulgar—between the priest and the mendicant! The Clergy do not spare any exertions to fulfil their part of the contract, and never cease to hurl their anathemas from the pulpit upon the nation which pays them with exemplary resignation." The Priests can have little or no influence with people of education, because that mrostration of the understanding which they in culcate is revolting to all but the merest vulgar. The Ultras have the owners of property against them, because the former are poor and rapacious, and the latter wish to preserve what they possess. The Priests and the Ultras have both an equal interest in courting the rabble ; and having a common interest, they naturally seek to promote the views of each other. We have always under stood that France owes its political salvation to the high pecuniary qualification which limited the number of Electors to 80,000 out of thirty millions. Universal suffrage in France, accord ing to the opinion of the best informed people of that country, would have led to the triumph of Ultraism and Priestcraft, by enabling poverty and ignorance to outweigh property and educa tion. Any one who attends to the domestic his tory of England, from the breaking out of the disputes between the Parliament and Charles the First, will perceive that the rabble in England were always opposed to the friends of order and . .. good government. On this subject we could produce numberless authorities ; but the point will hardly be disputed by any person of good information. Richard Baxter, in his Auto biography, acknowledges that " all the rab ble of the ignorant ungodly vulgar" were against the Parliament. Again, he says, " A very great part of the Knights and Gen tlemen of England in the several counties (who were not Parliament men) adhered to the King, except in Middlesex, Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire, Ike., where the King with his army never came ; and could he have got foot ing there, its like it would have been there as in other places ; and most of the tenants of these gentlemen, and also most of the poorest of the people, tukom the other called the rabble, did follow the gentry, and were for the King. On the Parliament side were (beside themselves) the smaller part (as some thought) of the gentry in most of the counties, and the greatest part of the tradesmen and freeholders, and the middle sort of men, especially in those corporations and countries which depend on clothing and such manufactures. If you ask the reason of this dif. fence, ask also why in France it is not commonly the Nobility nor the beggars, but the merchants, a middle sort of men, that were Protestants ? The reasons which the party themselves gave was, because, say they, the tradesmen have a correspondency with London, and so are grown to be a far more intelligent sort of men than the ignorant peasants that are like brutes, who will follow any that they think the strongest, or look to get by ; and the freeholders were not enslaved to - their - landlords as their tenants are." Down to the very last war, the rabble have ever been Church and King, which is saying enough. In the reign of Queen Anne and the First Georges they were Jacobites, and burnt Dissenting Meet ing-houses. The Church and King riots of Birmingham, Manchester, &c., are still fresh in recollection. This is the most perilous rock in the way of the Reformers. Changes of opinion proceed from the few, and gradually extend among the many. In most countries, the mass of the people are exceedingly ignorant, and the slaves of prejudices. When any measure is submitted to the decision of the many, prejudice and inveterate attachment to old usage will carry the day. As a country becomes rich, there is a large middle class with means and leisure to read, but even in this, the richest country in Europe, the middle class is greatly outnumbered by those who toil. It has been said that the body of the people, though not themselves qualified to decide on measures, know who are best fitted to be en trusted with the decision. But we are not so sure of this. Let us suppose an election—the opinions which the Candidates entertain will of course be canvassed ; and it is certain that on such an occasion truth will always be triumphant? Again, Mr. Mill thinks that the mass of the people will be led by middle classes. Of this we are not so certain. When Dr. Priestley's house was burnt down in Birmingham, the middle classes and the mob espoused different sides, just as the rabble were, during the civil wars, generally against the middle classes. But in our times a new feature iswitnessed in society. Mechanics and work ing people in towns and villages begin to be well informed, and to display nearly as much respec tability as the middle classes. The more nume rous this class is, the more safe is it to extend suffrage. But the condition on which the suf frage can with safety be bestowed, is knowledge and respectability. The problem is, to find a body of electors whose interests are identical with those of the country, that is too numerous to be bribed ; and if the addition of numbers do not increase the security against sinister interests, while it tends to affect the wisdom of the deci sion, a qualification of some sort in a question of Reform will be beneficial rather than other wise.—Morning Chronicle. The Admiralty at length decided upon fur nishing all papers and letters required by the members, the prosecutor, or the prisoner, in the pending Naval Court-martial. At the opening of the business we ventured to predict the neces sity of this concession, to further the ends of justice ; there is a humilis susurrus, that this result was not arrived at, without a good deal of acrimonious discussion, in which a bilious official distinguished himself quite as much by his caustic severity, as his professional know ledge ; his opinion did not ultimately regulate the course adopted by the majority. Rumour further adds, that the malcontent is quite as sick of his collaborateurs, as they have long been of him. A divorce by mutual consent a Vinculol Qfficii is much talked of.—lbid. It appears that there exists at the present mo ment a combination among the great coal-pro prietors in the North, for the purpose of raising the price of that necessary article. These pa triotic monopolists, who seemed so anxious not long ago that the public should be enabled to purchase coals at a reasonable price, and who gained some credit for taking the Corporation of London to task respecting the duties on that commodity, have agreed to supply the metro polis with only a limited quantity, to prevent the inhabitants of London from having any chance of enjoying the pleasure of a comfortable fire side during the ensuing winter at a moderate ex pense. It is said that all the proprietors, with one exception, have joined to carry into effect this oppressive monopoly. Such conduct comes with very ill-grace from persons of great wealth, and some of them of high rank, who have not the excuse of the distressed artisans, whose com binations for the purpose of obtaining a little addition to their wages, no person who values the good opinion of society will defend. We hope this odious coalition will be effectually put down. We refer our readers to some remarks of Mr. Tickner, in the Common Council, which will be found in another part of our Paper, on this subject, so interesting to the community at large.—Morning Herald. In another part of our Paper will be found an interesting report of the proceedings of a public meeting at Covent-garden Theatre. We had no doubt of the spirit with which such an appeal would be answered, generally, but we expected that it would have been made in such a manner as to have given precedence to the contributions of the highest classes of society, so that their example might prove a stimulus to the liberality of others. As that course was not taken, but one which necessarily left the noble patrons of the drama to perfect rather than commence the good work, so generous a subscription re flects peculiar honour upon those from whom it proceeded. The list exhibits in the most honourable light the names of many individuals connected with the stage by pro fession, as well as of others wedded to its interest by taste ; there are, however, some re maining behind whose assistance would have been more gracious, and perhaps more beneficial, if it had been spontaneous upon this occasion. The services of Mr. Robins, under all the cir cumstances, ought publicly to be distinguished. It is difficult to say whether the exertions of that gentleman reflected more credit upon his own generous and disinterested motives, or gave a more efficient aid to the cause in which they were made. There are many other indivi dual instances of liberality, noticed in our re port, and written in the more eloquent language of the subscription, which the public will know how to appreciate. We believe it may be con fidently stated as the result of this Meeting, that the " properties" of Covent-garden Theatre are saved from destruction. Mr. Kemble assured the Meeting that such arrangements had been made as would legally place them beyond the reach of the creditors of the theatre when once released from the existing claims.—Morning Post. LONDON SESSIONS, SEPT. 9. Yesterday these Sessions commenced before the LORD MAYOR and a bench of Aldermen. Daniel Dobell, the brother to the celebrated fighter, was indicted for a desperate assault on a young man named Keye, the son of a jeweller. Mr. Keye—On the 9th of January I was crossing Smithfield with my father, who was a little behind. _ _ _ _ I saw Dobell in Smithfield. One Madden was with him and very tipsy. I was seeing a man home who was drunk, and he fell. Dobell and Madden began to kick him. I interfered, and Dobell struck me in the mouth, and knocked me down and kicked me; and I called my father to assist me. We had them takes to the watch. house. The moment Dobell and Madden got in, Dobell charged me with having run against Madden, and taken his watch from his fob. I was bleeding very much. The constable said it was a serious charge, and that they must appear before the magistrate and swear to it, next day. Dobell said he could and would. I was kept in the watch-house from Saturday till Monday. On Mon day Dobell attended, but Madden did not. Dobell did not state what he had stated at the watch-house, and the constable mentioned it. I was discharged at once, without being asked for a defence. I was confined for a fortnight, and unable to work. I pre ferred my bill the week after. Madden was not to be found. Dobell—Did I strike you twice ? Witness— Yes ; and you told me afterwards you never saw such a blow struck in the ring. The evidence of Mr. Keye, the father of the pro secutor, and of the constable of the watch, confirmed the prosecutor's statement. The Jury at once found the prisoner Guilty. The RECORDER said that the blow showed to what class of persons the prisoner belonged, and that the Court would punish with proper severity men who used the art they had acquired in boxing upon unoffending individuals. The conduct of the prisoner was most atrocious; for, not content with having given him a most tremendous beating, he had accused him of a crime the commission of which would have affected his life. The Court then sen tenced Dobell to be confined four months in the Compter, and to find sureties for his good conduct for one year. Dobell with difficulty restrained himself; he look ed towards the bench most furiously, and left the court muttering. The RECORDER hoped that Madden would be found for the sake of the public. The Court would take care to visit him with its retributive power; it could prove itself a match for the boxers. The solicitor for the prosecution said that every thing should be done to bring the absent assailant to justice. COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL. (Concluded from our Paper of Yesterday.) OFFICE OF SECONDARY. A petition• was presented from the inhabitants of Cripplegate-without, complaining of the conduct of Mr. Crowther, in the discharge of the office of Secondary, and expressing their surprise that, after the manner in which he had acted, he should have asked for remuneration if he left the office. _ Mr. Alderman FAREBROTHER put several ques tions to the petitioners, with a view to learn whether the petition had been got up at a public meeting, and whether they knew, of their own personalknow ledge, that Mr. Crowther had asked any remunera tion if he should leave the office of Secondary. .. _ Mr. Newell, on the part of the petitioners, replied that the petition had not been adopted at any meet ing, nor did he know, of his own knowledge, whether Mr. Crowther had asked for any remune ration. He had drawn up the petition, and had made a statement to that effect from general report. Mr. GALLOWAY complained of the improper manner in which the petitioner at the bar had been cross-examined, but admitted that the petition was what was called a hole-and-corner petition. Mr. Alderman FAREBROTHER denied that he had conducted the examination of the petitioner in an improper manner. His object had only been to elicit the truth. An angry discussion ensued on this subject be tween several members of the Court, which ended in the petition being referred to the Committee upon the Secondary's-office. A similar petition was presented from the inhabi tants of Bishopsgate-without. Mr. C. PEARSON, in support of the petition, stated that it had been adopted at a wardmote re gularly convened, after the statements contained in it had been fully explained to the meeting. The facts of the case were not new to the inhabitants of 13ishopsgate-without, for they had agreed to a simi lar petition ten years since. They were not in fluenced by any personal feelings against the gentle man who at present holds the situation of Second ary, though it was rather a singular circumstance that he, filling an office of great responsibility, and receiving the emoluments of that office, was utterly unknown to almost every person residing in the city. He (Mr. Pearson) objected to Mr. Crowther receiv ing compensation, because he did not deserve it. H e came into the office of Secondary in 1808, and the con sideration for which that office was conferred on him was, that he should well and honestly behave himself therein. The late Mr. Crowther was in sured for 50001., which the Court of Common Council would have been then obliged to pay to his family, had not its benevolence been excited by a statement, that he had left his family without pro vision, though it was now known that he died worth 45,0001. In consequence of that statement, the office of Secondary was conferred on the present possessor of the oftiee, subject to the continuance of the security of 5,000/., until his death; and Mr. Crowther now asked compensation to the amount of objected to any such compen -8,150/. He strongly satiou being made, because Mr. Crowther had neg lected to attend to the duties of his office. All the business of his department had been transacted through underlings, and lie thought the Secondary ought to be made responsible for all the acts of those to whom he had intrusted the duties of his situation. A memorial was presented from Mr. Secondary Crowther, stating that the statements in the peti tions just presented were unfounded, and denying that he bad sanctioned the taking of any fees which could in a moral sense be considered as extortionate, and concluded by requesting the Court to grant leave to the memorialist to speak in support of his memorial. Mr. CROWTHER stated, in so low a voice as to be scarcely audible, that he had never sanctioned the taking of fees of higher amount than what was sanctioned by custom. On the contrary, he had in some instances lowered the rate of fees. It was true that Sher:ifs took higher fees than they were entitled to by Act of Parliament, but it should be recollected that the Act of Parliament regulating the fees of Sheriffs was passed 400 years ago, and the Court of Common Pleas had decided that the rate of fees therein mentioned was too low to form a just compensation for the ordinary risk in the fair and regular execution of bailable writs. Under these circumstances, he left it to the Court to say, whether in taking the fees which had been paid to his predecessor in office, he had acted extortionately. Mr. TICKNER moved that the Committee on the Secondary's office be instructed to inquire whether Mr. Secondary Crowther had given any pecuniary consideration for the office which he now filled.— Motion agreed to. Mr. HARMER wished the report of the Commit tee, in relation to the office of Coroner, to be now received, but Mr. TICKNER objected to its reception until the Committee had reported on the point which had been submitted for their consideration. A division having taken place on the subject, Mr. Harmer's motion was lost; but it was stated by the Lord Mayor that a Court would be holden on Tuesday to receive the Report. A petition was presented from Mr. Gude, stating that the petitioner, having been in the Crown-office, had had an opportunity of making himself acquainted with criminal jurisprudence; that be had performed the duties of Coroner in the King's Bench; and now offered himself for the vacant office of Coroner of the city of London.—Ordered to lie on the table. The Court, after going through various orders of the day, adjourned. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. Yesterday Sir PETER LAURIE was engaged till nearly six o'clock in a strange proceeding for a Lon don police magistrate—the execution of a commis sion issued from the Commissary Court at Edin burgh, to receive viva soce proof of the identity of a person claiming to administer to the estate of the late Alexander Laing, of Edinburgh, plumber, and return the depositions for the guidance of the Court. Mr. Hindmarsh attended as solicitor for the claim ant, and Mr. Elderton for the respondent. The commission was addressed to the Lord Mayor, or any of the Aldermen, and the Lord Mayor declining to act, Sir Peter Laurie was applied to. It had been sued out to avoid the expellee of conveying five witnesses to and from Edinburgh; the amount claimed being only 6001. It was explained that the respondent was the second wife of the deceased, and the claimant the only son of the daughter of the deceased by his first wife. If the claimant could establish his identity, he was entitled to share the deceased's property with the widow. The claimant is a labouring stone sawyer, and his father, who was a brass-founder, married the deceased's daughter while she lived as servant at a Mr. Armstrong's factory in the neigh bourhood of Shadwell. The witnesses were sworn and purged (that is, called upon to deny they are actuated by malice or interest in the evidence they are about to give) ac cording to the Scotch form. The first, Jane Williams, of St. Bartholomew's Hospital, deposed that she knew Thomas Samson and Janet Laing, the parents of the young man Thomas Samson, now pointed out to her, and heard from her husband that he was present when they were married at Marylebone church. She had some of the wedding cake. She visited Janet about an hour after she had been delivered of the claimant by Dr. Dunn, of Wapping-wall, since dead. She weaned the child for the mother, who took it to Scotland when it was 11 months old, and the mo ther dying there, the father brought it back when it was 18 months old. Witness nursed the child for a week, and had not lost sight of him since. She was positive the clajmant was the child born as she had described, on sth of August, 24 years4go. As the marriage itself was not disputed, but merely that the claimant was not the issue of the marriage, Sir P. LAURIE thought Mrs. Williams's evidence conclusive on that point, and it was needless to go farther. Mr. Hindmarsh, however, called three other wit nesses to the fact, one of whom, Ann Slater, was present at the birth, and had known the claimant from that time co the present ; and another witness was equally positive as to his identity: he had worked at the same factory with claimant's father, and had also courted Jane or Janet Laing; and when she married his rival, he (witness) partook of the fines (.ss. each) paid to regale all the work men, upon the marriage, and upon the birth of a son and heir. Mr. French, a clerk, proved that he had written a letter for claimant, and signed claimant's name, al though claimant could write. It was a letter which merely requested a party in Scotland to inquire whether the claimant's relations were then living. He wrote it at the claimant's desire. The questions put to, as well as the answers given by, the witnesses, were taken down, and each sheet of the depositions was signed by the Commis sioner, Sir Peter Laurie, and his clerk. The evi dence will be forthwith transmitted to Scotland, under the Alderman's seal. BOW-STREET. Yesterday a poor Irishwoman came before Sir R. BIRNIE and Mr. MINSHULL, and complained that the parish-officers of St.• Martin's-in-the-fields had refused to inter her infant child in the parish burial ground, where seven of her children had been al ready buried. The poor woman appeared in great affliction, and Sir R. Birnie immediately directed that some person connected with the parish should be sent for. Soon after Mr. Earle, clerk to the overseers, attended the Magistrate's summons. Sir R. BIRNIE asked him why the request of the poor woman had not been complied with. Mr. Earle replied, that he believed the churchwarden to whom she had applied objected to the child being buried in a particular spot, and was desirous also that a coffin should be provided for it at the expence of the parish. This she had refused to comply with, and the churchwardens had therefore declined ac ceeding to her desire. Mr. MINSHULL observed, that it was very cruel to trifle with the poor woman's feelings merely be cause she did not choose to be provided with a coffin at the parish expence. The applicant said, she had buried seven children in one spot, and all she wished was that the one which was now lying dead might be buried there also. As to the coffin, she had bought it herself, and as long as she had hands to earn a penny, no child of per's should b e p ut i nto t h e gr ound in a pa rish coffin. The poor creature wept bitterly while she spoke. Sir It. BIHNIE: told Mr. Earle to say to the churchwardens that the Magistrates would take it as a favour if they would attend to the request of the applicant, who had asked for nothing but what ought to have b een grante d i n t h e fi rs t instance. The feelings which the applicant had displayed were highly creditable to her. Mr. Earle said he would take care that the churchwarden in question should be made acquainted with the Magistrate's opinion. The poor woman expressed her thanks to the Magistrates for their humane intercession, and left the office apparently overjoyed in being permitted to bury her children all in one grave. WORSHIP-STREET. MATRIBIONY.—Yesterday George Rogers, a young man about 30 years of age, was re-examined before Mr. BROUGHTON, on a charge of bigamy, but there being no evidence against him he was dis charged. Elizabeth Attfield, the prisoner's wife's sister, was about to repeat the story she related on the last examination, which merely amounted to her assist ing to support the prisoner's wife for the last two or three years, when the husband cf the witness came forward, and thus addressed the Magistrate : Attfield—This is my wife, your Worship; she is a common prostitute. Mr. BROUGHTON—WeII, you don't seem to speak very well of her. She has told me a very plausible story. Now, I should like to hear what you have to say ; for if you tell the truth, I shall perhaps be in clined to alter my opinion of your wife. Attfield—l'll tell the truth, Sir. I was married to this woman about nine years ago. I took her out of the Magdalen, where she had been about eleven months an inmate. A short time after I married her she left me, and went to live with a compositor, and afterwards with a man named Cooke; and, indeed, since that with six or seven other men. She pawn ed and sold every article I had. Mr. BROUGHTON—WeII, if that's true I'm very much deceived in your wife. I took her to be a very decent young woman. Mrs. Attfield, with uplifted eyes, said, it's all false, your Worship; the reason I left him was be cause he made me support him by my own prostitu tion. He used to go out with me every night, and wait till I came out of houses of ill fame with gen tlemen, and receive the money I had earned; since I have left him I positively declare I have not cur ried on that course of life, but I take in needle-work, and am now making some shirts for Mr. Thomas, of Greek -street, Soho. Mr. BROUGHTON—Both stories are truly horri ble; did not your husband take you from the Mag dalen ? Mrs. Attfield—Oh, the wretch, he did. Mr. BROUGATON—Then you ought not again to have followed such a horrid course of life after coming out of there as a repentant sinner ! How old where you when you were married ? Mrs. Attfield—Only seventeen, sir. Mr. BRouGaTim--What ! and been in the Mag dalen a twelvemonth previous to that I How old were you when you were first seduced ? Mrs. Att field—l can't tell, sir. Attfield—l don't think you can. Mrs. Attfield—When I came out of the Magda len I received a guinea and two entire suits of clothes, as a reward for good conduct. The overseer of St. Andrew, Holborn, attended, the prisoner's wife having become chargeable to that parish, he said he had made inquiries, and found that the prisoner's wife was living in a court in Shoe lane, with some of the most abandoned characters. Mr. Platts, who appeared for the prisoner, said his client had lost his situation in Whitbread's brew house, which he had held for six years, through the bad conduct of his wife she used to pawn all his clothes, and was constantly drunk; surely a man ought not to support a woman of such character.— He (Mr. Platts) also understood she had been con victed of felony. Mr. BROUGHTON—I have nothing to do with her misconduct—her husband is bound to support her. I say a man dressed like the prisoner with a good coat, and a clean shirt, ought to be made to support his wife. Mr. Platte—Well Sir, if a man is bound to sup port a wife of her character because he appears here in a good coat, and a clean shirt, I would advise my client to come in his dirty working jacket next time. A drayman belonging to Whitbread's brewhouse, who was standing near the prisoner, said—Ah, sir, you maunt always take a mon by the look of his coat, because I knows as how my old smock frock cost a nation sight more than his coat.—(A laugh.) Mr. BROUGHTON—Something new for a smock frock to be worth more than a cloth coat. He must support his wife? Rogers—Well, I'll allow her ss. per week. She shall never live in my house again. Mr. BROUGHTON—That will do. Brown, an officer, here said, that a short time ago, outside this office, he heard the witness Att field, threaten to murder his wife whenever he caught her out. Attfield did not deny it, but said it should not hap pen again. Mr. BROUGHTON—If a woman is ever so had, sir, her life is not to be threatened—you must find bail. Attfield not having bail present, was locked up ; the rest of the party left the office. PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE. PARIS, SEPT. 6.—Little by little the causes which produced the ministerial revolution we have lately experienced are developed. I can name one which exercised very great influence on the determination of the King. Austria was much dissatisfied with the conduct of our Govern ment. She at first tried to change its course by persuasive means. Not being able to succeed in this, she had recourse to more eff►cacious means—fear. A letter, which the counter police seized very apropos, announced that since Charles X. did not think proper to take measures to stop the progress of revolutionists, Austria would raise the son of Napoleon to the throne of France, and that then she would pos sess sufficient influence in France to ensure the triumph of monarchical principles. This letter having been communicated to Charles X., oc casioned him serious reflections. His fears be came more urgent when it was announced at Court that a Buonapartean conspiracy was hatch ing on the frontiers of Switzerland. Finally, our courageous Monarch learned, on an autho rity which did not admit of doubt, that Maria Louisa (the mother of the young Pretender) was at Geneva; and this news threw him into a mortal fright. This intrigue, which Austria caused to be conducted with much adroitness, was supported by the courtiers and the church men. In the last session the Chamber of De puties called for reductions, and the Minister of War promised to make them.. But those reduc tions must fall on the courtiers : it was neces sary, therefore, that the Ministry should be overthrown, in order that the sinecures might not be abolished. One of the first measures of the new Minister of 'War was to grant an immense number of fur loughs. A person acquainted with subjects of this kind assures me, that the number of defini tive furloughs granted amounts to 40,000, and the number of yearly fUrloughs to 60,000. — The object of this measure is to obtain funds, for the soldiers who are on furlough receive no pay. If, during the course of a year, 100,000 men are on furlough, the Minister will save a sum of about a hundred millions. Part of this sum will be employed in discharging the debts of the King, for the civil list is much embar rassed, and another part will be employed in fa vour of the Court. A third, it is said, is des tined to the forming of a majority in the Cham bers. The Ministerial journals exhibit, with re ference to the latter object, either a want of tact, or uncommon impudence, for they have an nounced that the Ministry will have the support of deputies who will vote in one way, and who will in private think in another. The Mini": terial journals announce that this plant will eV succeed, because the individuals opposer); to till Ministry will display the balls by whictr chef declare their votes. Last year the left side' c perienced some defection, and it was propoo to have recourse to the measure alluded to by till session s roepspoortseitdiotno inh journals. te I b a v a ppro Ministry should last till then. It is customary for a retired Micister to de' mand from the King the entree to his Cabinet' and this demand is never refused. Conforrnabll a ch e in nc t; dsoubiton it wifill b b t 1 1 to this custom, M. Vatismenil, late Minister 0 1 Public Instruction, solicited an audience. Thy King, on seeing him approach, addressed him it these terms—" Ah I are you here, Monsieur You ought to be satisfied ; the liberal journab load you with praises."—" Sire, I cannot pre vent them from speaking of me as they thin' proper. lam not indifferent to the expression of public opinion, but I assure your Majesty that I am quite a stranger to what the journols say of me."—" You have not done what jou led us to hope from you, and your conduct as ° Minister has belied your previous behaviour' You have deceived our confidence. However, I ought to tell you that you never possessed mine , To complete you,nothingis wanting but that yoa should be elected by Liberals." " Sire, I hope the occasion may yet present itself of giving yo 4 proofs of my devotion ; and I flatter myself I shall convince you that I have not been toy worthy of your confidence. I came, Sire, t° request the entree to your .Cabinet, but after , the opinion your Majesty entertains of me, it i 9 an honour which I must no longer permit or self to solicit."—" And why not, Sir ? Yoo could come : this is a place where everyhorl/ comes. But no, upon consideration, do not re turn till you shall be cleansed from the praises which you have received from the liberal jour' nals." Thereupon the ex-Minister departed , and it is not said that he has the least intention to cleanse himself from the praises which the berals have bestowed upon him. All the Kings observations were uttered in any angry tone, and during this short conversation the ex-Minister was very much embarrassed, as he was far fro o expecting such a reception. When the Me' tignac Ministry was formed, I informed you thss the Court would not accept M. Vatismenil, 0° account of the bad intentions which were attri; buted t o hi m , an d th a t if h e con d ucte d himself well, it would be disappointed in its expects' tions. The manner in which he has been dir missed proves that the conduct which he put' , sued was different from that which was e xp e cted from him. Our Ministers are not unanimous ; they oi l have the same object in view, but differ as to the means of effecting it. Some wish to have re course to force, others to stratagem, and others to corruption. At first they entertained the ides of postponing the meeting of the Chamber° ' indefinitely. They procured a report from solve architects, which stated that the building i° which the Chambers hold their sittings was not safe. The commercial interest of Paris, which perceived Ministers' intention, removed the difficulty by placing at the disposal of the Go' vernment the palace of the Change. The re° o lu tion of not paying th e t axes , un l ess th ey should be legally voted, besides, appeared so generate} that it caused the abandonment of the ides a' doing without the Chambers. Now Minister s are deliberating on the means of forming a or_ jority in both Chambers, for they possess it 1 neither. On the d a y b e f ore yester d ay t h e y ha d a very long and animated conference on this sob' ject. They calculated that by uniting all their means—fear, corruption, and persuasion--th t er can obtain a majority o f fi ve or s i x votes i n LI Chamber of Deputies. I b e li eve th a t th e y mu' exaggerate their influence. A report of the retirement of M. de la Boor donnaye was circulated some days ago on Change' and caused a small rise in the funds. It vo° supposed to be a stock-jobbing manoeuvre; bos it might reasonably be attributed to the fear w'it'h which this Minister inspires most of his col' leagues. The members of the Ministry who O i l on corruption and fraud rather than violenti imagin e th a t th e y cou ld cont i nue at the hesta„ of affairs, if M. de l a B our d onna y e wou ld retl'," . Some have already ma d e overtures on this sub' ject to the liberal deputies; but th e y h ave bee; received with such contempt as must colitis" - them that no arrangement is practic a bl e in th° , 1 quarter. B e sid es , B ourmon t i s no t l ess h a te fo than Bourdonnaye, and he is so well suppor t % by the Court that he will not retire to plO s a his colleagues. Some courtiers dared to bazar, some reflections on the odious nature o f this l e pointment to France and the army. Th e nu7 l of Angouleme, to whom the m a tt er was reports severely reprimanded the courtiers who bs allowed themselves to blame the King's choic . e . i He declared his satisfaction at the selection the new Ministry, and particularly with the sr pointment of M. de la Bourdonnaye. • h The journals have acquainted you w ith M • (16 Chateaubriand's resignation, and with the ICiag . , refusal to grant him an audience to. explain motives of his conduct. They have likewisil n . : formed you of the judgment whi c h Minisee', , have caused to be pronounced on M. Bertio.""' These proceedings against men who have re ° ; dered the restored family immense benefit, must little by little alienate from the Bourbons the to lc who were most sincerely attached to them. • this unfortunate family had its most mortal ea ° , mies for councillors, it could not act othern, than it does. In the eyes of all men not blinar. by the spirit of party, it is hastening to its A l 7l with inconceivable rapidity. No one can to how all will end, but it appears evident to all m ' world that we are advancing to a crisis. ll The ex-Empress Maria Louisa is sti Geneva. M. de Metternich retains her to OK the King in check. BIRTHS. On the 9th inst. in Meeklenburgh-square, the lady O f Mackenzie, Esq. of a daughter. t► On the 6th inst. in Dorset-square, the lady of J. - Esq. of a son. On the 9th inst. at Clapham, Mrs. F. Hewitt, o f II (laughter. MARRIED. E 14. On the 9th inst. at St. James's, Piccadilly, Mr. i t be Rowe, to Sophia, fifth daughter of Mr. E. Roberts, ° Grange, Bermondsey. iceo On the 9th inst. at Elmley-Lovett, Mr. J. risr youngest son of the late J. Clarke, 8.111., Oxon, t ° ,econd daughter of F. Hanle, E sq . o f S nea d' s - great 111°r' cestershire. DIED. On the 9th inst. Mrs. Ainslie, of Upper Norton-street On the Sth inst. Joshua Reeve, Esq. of Chatham-pldd"• Blackfriars. The Rey. John Roope, of Adam-street, Adelphip at tfr advanced age of BC ! PAIKTEn and PUBLISNED by MURDO YOUNG, at -0 Oirrai, 112, STRAND, LOISOOM