The Sun. — London, England, 1829-10-22 00:00:00

I \‘' OF TILE PUi3LIC JOURNALS. votes in Parliament of an extensive borough con nexion. What business, then, has Dr. Thomas Elrington with a revenue, by his own acknow ledgment, of 5,000/. per annum ? or Dr. Magee of Dublin with 8,0001. per annum ? o r the Bishop of Derry, with 15,0001. !! Such accumulations, we say, are monstrous in such hands as these. 15,000/. a year to Dr. Knox —a man wholly undistinguished in his profes sion as a clergyman, and no otherwise in private life than by being brother of Lord Northland And to save men like these from sacrificing six pence of their frightful revenues, three or four parishes are thrown into one, that the poor hack of an incumbent may have enough to exist upon —that out of three parishes two, if not all, shall he flung into the arms of the Catholic priest ; and Mr. Leslie Foster, and others of his click, be brought to their wits' ends for devices to prove that Popery is not increasing throughout Ireland. We love the Protestant Ch urc h too well to look at such things without alarm. The Church of A correspondence has been copied into the Papers, between a noble reformer of the Church in Ireland, and an anti-reformation Bishop. Be , tween such combatants, this is a ticklish conten tion ; but it proves at least one interesting fact— namely, that the anti-reforming dignitaries of the Irish Church have been alarmed. We are is?-. tremely glad to see it. Dr. Thomas Elrington, once Provost of Trinity , Col/ege, Dubli n , th e most distingui s h e d act of whose administration was the shuttinB tip of the Historical Society, and who has sine° written various political pamph lets, more indicative of a spirit which would have beer zealous in any cause, than of that discre tion which might have qualified him to judge be tween a good cause and a bad one,—Dr. El rington, we say, being now Bishop of Ferns, has, in opposition to the sentiments expressed by Lord Mountcashel, and entertained by many wise and good men who have not yet openly de clared them, touching the sort of Church Esta blishment which the country requires, taken up the cudgels for the Church of Ireland as it is,--unions, pluralities, non-residence, corrupt patronage, luxurious rectors, half-famished curates, and Bishops, with, on • his own con fession,,Afteen thousand pounds a year from their sees! Pluralists, paupers, princes, down they slip through the gullet of this translated optimist.— He swallows anti digests them, horseshoes and all, and then lets off a remonstrance as long as the rent•roll of his own Bishopric, because the Noble Earl cannot bolt the abuses of church .government wholesale with as little uneasiness of Otti stomach as bails his right reverence ; and still worse, because he displays certain spiritual cravings which Dr. Elrington thinks it would be treason to satisfy at the price of a temporal purgation. Glancing over the letters of these two friends of the church establishment, we are not much delighted to observe that the Learned 13ishop's solicitude is far more carefully directed to the carnal wants of the pastors than to the salvation of their flocks, which latter object, indeed, we regret to find, has not called forth one single sentence, or syllable, even of incidental notice from the Reverend Bishop, whose letter is, from first to last, the most worldly-minded and tradesman like production that we ever had the misfortune to hear of; except some quotations from the wanks of another prelate holding an archiepisco pal see. Dr. Elrington begins by attaching a nick-name to the assembly for church reform, at Cork, which he terms a " Lay Synod," as if it were usurping the prerogatives of the clergy. Upon this we can only say, that if the church will not rectify its own abuses, but on the other hand throw every sort of obstacle in the way of their removal, the laity, for whose welfare the church was established, and from whose means it continues to be supported, has an unquestionable right to institute inquiries, and reforms also, when proved to be necessary, through other autho rity than than that of an ecclesiastical " Synod." Bishop Elrington deprecates the proposed peti lion to Parliament, because it must " inevitably lead to the same consequences which took place in England two centuries ago,"—to wit, in the earlier part of the reign of Charles I. " A committee of religion," says this prophetic Pre late, will consequently be formed ; " and a com mittee of religion, like that in which the Com mons in 1628 censured Bishops as favourers of Popery, and as holding heretical opinions, arid tomplained that pious, laborious, and orthodox ministers were discouraged, will be the next step on the part of the Ccinnzons " -(but how if the Lords. join in ?)—" who would instantly perceive the opening which such a state of things would Afoul them to increase their power !" Verily this learned Doctor has a discriminating genius. The country is now in a :tate so precisely similar to that of 1628, that an inquiry into the church abuses by the laity of the establishment itself, must infallibly be attended with the same sub version of the church as was accomplished through the Presbyterian and Puritan interests in the time of the - Long Parliament ! At that rate, and by virtue of the learned Bishop's argu ment is/ terrorem, no matter what may be the ecclesiastical grievances complained of, to redress thent—nay, to inquire into their existence or amount, is at all times, and under any circum stances, a thing to be nbliorred by faithful and loyal Protestants. The Bishop states that the unions are in general of vicarages ill paid and destitute of churches, which were destroyed in the civil wars, and have not yet been rebuilt.— The more shame for those who united large parishes and left churches in ruins, when,' f the good of the people, and of the Protestant religion, had been looked to, instead of the convenience or comforts of clergymen, the ruined churches would have been rebuilt, and the stipends of half-paid vicars and curates en larged, out of funds which have been scanda lously misappropriated. We are no advocates for a perfect equality of church livings, any more than Lord Mountcashel ; but there exists an enormous inequality, leaving a great number or, industrious clergy unrecompensed for their holy • labours. This inequality might, with sound wis (loin and equity, be reduced. Among other re sources for the purpose, Dr. Elrington himself has furnished one. We have never hesitated to affirm that the Irish Bishoprics are inordinately rich, unbecoming the modesty, and perilous to the conscience, of any ministers of the gospel.— Ireland is a cheap country compared with this ; an Irish Bishop can live better on his see for 2,0001. per annum than an English Bishop for 4,0001. 3,0001. a year would be an ample reve nue for an Irish resident Bishop, and 5,0001. for an Archbishop, summoned as he is but once in four years to Parliament. Such an income would be deemed an abundant reward for their professional services by men of learning and piety, though it might not tempt the cupidity of poli tical adventurers, or the vanity of fine gentlemen, or be accepted in the person of a noble pauper as an adequate return from the Minister for the Ireland, corrupt in its administration as its doe trines arc perfect, must and will be purified of its temporal dross, in spite of Dr. Thomas Elrington, who is, at the same time, far from • the worst among its members. Parliament, we have reason to suspect, will have the whole of this great interest presented to it before many months shall have gone round ; and all a good Protestant need be anxious about is, that the sub ject should be warily investigated.—Times. A fine scene will be exhibited this day at the Surrey Sessions. The question as to whether intermediate brewers shall retail beer in front of their premises, comes on ; and we think, with , out laying claim to prophetic powers, we could tell beforehand how such a question would be decided by the Great Unpaid. The great brewers have, unfortunately for the country, trusted so much to their power over Justices, as to invest large sums in the purchase of licensed houses, and the price paid for the license is, as it should be, added to the price of beer. To relieve the poor from the oppressive effects of this monopoly, Lord Goderich, one of the best hearted men alive, thought he might venture to raise up the class of intermediate brewers, who s':ould be able to carry on their operation inde pendently of Brewers and Justices. That the brewers would submit patiently to this, was not to be expe(ted. It is natural that the fight should take place in a county where it is in evi dence that brewers and distillers are in the habit of treating the Justices on licensing days, and brewers' hodmakers kindly consent to act as Justices. Every man now-a-days is engrossed by a regard for the morals of his neighbours; and what a dreadful shock must morals receive by the liberty to purchase intermediate beer in front of a house. The Justices arc guardians of morals, are they not ? If. the brewers could have only contrived to make the brewing inter. mediate beer so expensive that it could not be afforded to the consumer for less than their own, heightened by the value given by the license to a house, the scheme might have been knocked in the head at once. By contriving as they did to obtain the introduction of a clause to prevent small beer front being made by the intermediate brewers, they of course must have added greatly to the expellee of the latter ; but still it would seem that enough has not been done for the great brewers.—Morning Chronicle. The Globe observes, with reference to some observations in the Chronicle of yesterday : " The Chronicle assume, somewhat hastily, that the changes here spoken of in the relative position of the smaller or greater gentry, to the advantage of the latter, has really taken place—and if it has taken place, we do not think that it is sufficient to account for the evils which the Chronicle complains of. We very much doubt whether the Peers which our con temporary has enumerated rise in a more remark able manner above the common level of fortune than , the Earls of Arundel, Bedford, Northumberland, Oxford, Newcastle, Ormonde, and perhaps as many _ . . more, in the time of Charles the First. The union and severance of fortunes has heel' always in pro gress in this as in most other countries ; and as the money incomes of all classes have increased, those of the highest are nominally large in proportion to the rest. " But if the supposition of the Chronicle were correct, we do not see that it accounts for the state of things which the Chronicle deplores. If this dozen of individuals possess incomes so large in pro portion to the secondary gentry, it becomes more difficult for them to derive individually a share from the public plunder equivalent to their loss by the public waste. " Taking the names which the Chronicle has enu merated, do these nine of the richest Peers, iu point of fact, draw front the public purse, for themselves and their relatives, incomes much larger than their own direct and indirect contributions to the public income ? and might not, in fact, a Ministry carry on the public affairs very smoothly with these nine persons, and any nine others, in opposition to its measures? " It appears to us that we should only mislead ourselves if we sought to believe that the few rich Peers whom the Chronicle regards as the prime sources of evil have any great effect in corrupting the principles of the population. Eight of them, who have been long in public life, entertain opinions of very different shades, and what principles they have collectively instilled into the people it would puzzle us to say. What the ninth of them may effect the nation has not had time to see; at least, as yet, we do not perceive any sensible change in the principles of the population since the coming of age of the Duke of Buccleuch. " It requires but little acquaintance with England to discover that the strength of the existing sys tem, with all its corruptions, is to be found ins the support, not of a dozen or two of the richest fami lies, but of the great mass of the secondary gentry, whose existence the Chronicle considers so transitory and precarious. It was from this class that the great opposition in Ireland to the tolerant system which has been introduced there originated. It is because almost every man of activity and talents of this class is enlisted by his interests in favoiir of the pre sent system, that any Parliamentary reform which would create a check on the public expenditure meets with such formidable opposition. To say that the few families who are, perhaps, least of all inte rested in the support of abuses, corrupt the rest, ap pears to us to be beginning at the wrong end. The strength of the aristocracy is not that its power has been confined to a few, but that it is extended to many ; not that it is narrow, but that it is broad and comprehensive. A few examples of enormous wealth may have some corrupting effect, but this is indi rect and moral, and not direct political operation. _ " We perfectly agree with the Chronicle that the mass of the property of the country (as contradis tinguished from the property of those who have enough wealth to live idly) is not sufficiently repre sented ; and we should be glad to believe that the only opposition to a reform would be found either in the direct or indirect power of a few great families. If it were so, we should not find that, even in times when the cry of distress is loudest, reform of Parliament is almost the last subject which a very large proportion of the people will look to; and free trade, or any other bugbear, however insignificant, to which it is possible to attribute the slightest effect, is made the sole cause of the calamities of the nation." We admit that our observations, from not being sufficiently guarded, are in some sort open to the remarks of our contemporary. In singling out a small number of Noblemen, as we did, as possessed of so large a share of the property of their order, it was far from being an object to show that the individuals alluded to derived more from t'leir share of the money wrung from the people than was taken from themselves in taxes. NVe have, indeed, more than once distinctly stated of late, that that por tion of the Nobles who po3sessed overwhchning estates must lose in their share of taxes more than they can get back in places. But the power of those individuals is of course very great, and contributes materially to the controul exercised by their order over the Lower House of Parlia ment. The dozen Peers who possess kingly incomes, give stability to the state of things, which enables the boroughmongers of their order to draw to themselves the great prizes in the lottery of Church and State. The secondary class of Gentry could do little or nothing o f themselves, because the system hinges on the ownership of boroughs, and the share of that ownership possessed by the House of Lords gives them a majority in the Lower House. A Ministry might, as our contemporary observes, carry on the public affairs very smoothly with the nine persons named by us, and, perhaps, also, any nine others, in opposition to its mea sures ; but it could not carry on the public affairs with so many in opposition to its measures as possessed boroughs returning a majority of Members of the Commons' House. The great mass of the secondary gentry could do no thing then of themselves without the great land owners, because they could not command the majorities. They are, it is true, drawn into the support of the system, and it is natural that the men of talents and enterprise of the body should endeavour, in return for that support, to ob tain as great a share as possible of the loaves and fishes. The Government being really in the hands of the owners of estates of 2i millions a year, the great mass of gentry can only make their consequence available by yoking themselves to the car of the Nobility.— Were boroughmongering destroyed, the mass of property would obtain its fair weight, and the in fluence of the hmall gentry would be nothing if not exerted in behalf of the community. When our contemporary, therefore, observes that " it requires but little acquaintance with England to discover that the strength of the existing system, with all its corruptions, is to be found in the support, not of a dozen or two of the richest families, but of the great mass of the secondary gentry," he must mean that the system derives its chief oppressiveness from the circumstance of the great borough owners being in some sort obliged to bribe the secondary gentry with a large share of the money wrung Irma the com munity, This, however, is rather an effect than a cause. The cause is the system of borough mongering, which pl a ces th e G overnmen t i n th e hands - of an Oligarchy. But it would be strange, indeed, if the Boroughmongers did not gain more proportionally from this system than the se condary Squires. Let us take any estimate of the incomes of the inhabitants—for instance, that of Colquhoun in his Treatise on Indigence, as something like an approximation to the reality. He gives to the Peerage, 2,296,0001.; to Ba ronets, 1,620,000/. ; to Knights, 525,0001.; to the 'Squires of 1,5001. a year, 9,000,0001.; to Gentlemen of 7001. a year, 14,000,000/. Now we have only to compare the amount of public money allotted to functionaries of a class cor responding to these descriptions of nobility and gentry, to see that the share accruing to the se condary gentry must bear but a small proportion to that of the incomes from private property ; consequently, that the public money cannot pre vent the constant breaking clown of the owners of small estates, from the necessity of providing for children. At this game of beggaring the public the nobility come in for the giant's share. Those who have two, or two and a half millions, have the most of the great places in Church and State for themselves. Hence the observation of Mr. Humphreys and one or two other Conveyancers, that the idea of making a family is now generally abandoned, the leaving the estate to one son being nearly confined to the high Aristocracy.— And how could this high Aristocracy avoid set tling their estates in the same way as the secon dary class, if they did not almost universally con trive to provide for their children at the expense of the public ? Our assumptions as to the shares of property possessed by classes of the community at different times, must, of course, be very conjectural. We went chiefly on such data as are to be found in Gregory King, who, how ever, lived a little later than the period named by us. In the great point our contemporary is agreed with us, that property in the mass is no . protected.--Ibid. It requires no great intimacy with agricultural affairs to know that there is no branch of industry which calls for so large a consumption of iron as that of the farmer ; and that therefore, in pro portion as his means fall off, the iron trade must be, and is, the sufferer. Many large farms have a smithy of their own ; but, besides the common operation of the shoeing smith, carts, waggons, ploughs, harrows, drags, spades, and nearly every implement of husbandry, require, when it is able to receive it, a renewal and repair from this one source. No wonder then that, when we hear of agricultural distress, we hear, in the next breath, of decay and falling off in the iron trade ; so true is it that every branch of industry is, and ever must be, dependent upon each other. But then, say the manufacturers, « we must have cheap bread." It is in this that the fallacy of our free trade and of our Corn Laws has mainly risen and existed. Cheap bread is a very fasci nating idea ; but dearness and cheapness are mere relative terms, and the latter can, in this respect, only impose upon those who lose sight of the indissoluble connection which must ever exist in the same community between all the ar ticles which contribute to the wants, nay, even the luxuries, of life. Cheap iron, perhaps, is desirable as well as cheap bread ; but, when cheapness reaches the iron -master, he feels his trade ruined. The same with cotton and woollens; a calico shirt may be bought for a shilling, a pair of stockings for fourpence, and a coat for half its former cost. But who is the better for this ? Has cheapness of bread, of cotton, of iron, or of woollen, extended the trade in the one or the other, or added to the happi ness of the people ? Far otherwise ; when things were dear every class of the community were flourishing, contented and happy. Surely then, those who were loudest in the call for cheap bread must have found how senseless and how useless, in the result, that cry has been ; and that enlightened band of theorists, who led the van in that cry, must by this time see, unless they are wilfully blind, that in doing so they were only sacrificing at first one interest to another, which, in the end, if not arrested, must involve all in one common ruin.—Morning Herald. At the Kingston Quarter Sessions, held yes terday before BENJAmiiN BARNARD, Esq , Chairman, Licences were granted for ASTLEY'S Theatre, Vauxhall Gardens, the Surrey Theatre, and the Coburg Theatre. WORKINGTON SHIPPING INTEREST.—AS a proof of the benefit accruing to the port of Workington, by the erection of patent slips, we iwiy mention that there are now five vessels on the different Slips, and six more large vessels awaiting until those ate launched, most of which vessels would have been repaired in Liverpool or elsewhere, but for the adoption of these slips. The number of vessels repairing and fitting there is 15, and their amount of tonnage 2,464.—Carlisle Journal. THE BLACK COCK.—Black game have in creased greatly in the southern counties of Scotland and north of England within the last few years. It is a pretty general opinion, though an erroneous one, that they drive away the red grouse; the two species require very different kinds of cover, and will never interfere. It is to be re gretted that some of our extensive and wealthy northern proprietors do not attempt the introduction of the wood grouse ; extensive pine or birch forests, a n d qu i et, wou ld be all the requisites; and the birds them se l ves, or t h e i r young, could be very easily obtained, and a t a tr ifli ng ex pense.—Note to White's Not. Biat. (f Selborne. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HOUSE. THE ROBBERY IN IRONMONGER-LANE.—Yester day a young man of respectable appearance, named John Allen, was brought before the LORD MAYOR, charged wilt having robbed Mr. Newton, an agent of the Taunton bank, of a parcel of country bank notes to the amount of 625/., a bank post-bill for 671., and 3 sovereigns, at the house No. 32, in Iron monger-lane. Mr. Newton repeated the circumstances respect ing the loss of his parcel, which have already been stated. The LORD MAYOR—Do you know any (hit g of the prisoner Allen ? Mr. Newton (who appeared to be very deaf) said he had merely seen him at the lodging-house, and known him as a lodger in the same house. Allen came into the room where he was sitting, and asked him " how he was ?" by his name. They had no refreshment together. Wit ness generally carried parcels to London from the Taunton bank, hut had no reason to suppose that the prisoner or any other person was aware of that fact. Thoroughgood, the officer, stated, that he had received instructions from Mr. Cope, the marshal, to watch the prisoner, who was a lodger in Mrs. An drews's house. He went on Thursday morning early to the neighbourhood, and saw the prisoner come out with a portmanteau, and walk to the Custom-house stairs, where he embarked on board the Kent steamer for Gravesend. Witness followed. The prisoner proceeded to Chatham, to the Sun tavern, and from thence to the Euryalus convict ship ; after which lie returned to the Sun, and slept. Next morning he returned on the top of the coach to town, and witness stuck ~close to him, having learned from the waiter at the Stu► that he had a bundle of country notes about him. Witness let fall a piece of paper, with a view to ascertain whether the prisoner had the notes he wanted; when the prisoner saw it fall he cried our," I fear I have dropped my notes; and putting his hand to his pocket, took out a bundle of country notes, and said that " all was safe." The prisoner went to a house in the Kent-road, where the witness kept up the watch in the most persevering mariner. From that honse he came into the city yesterday morning, followed by the officer, and was apprehended by him in George-yard, near Mr. Stuckey 's office. The LORD MAYOR—Did you contrive to keep out of his sight all this time ? Officer—He never saw me but once during the whole time. The LORD MAYOR—You certainly hare done your duty extremely well. John Forrester, the officer, deposed that the for mer witness bad sent for him, and that he had searched the prisoner, upon whose person he found several country bankers' notes. Here Forrester produced a bundle of notes. Mr. Nobler, upon seeing the notes, and compar ing them with the numbers specified in the list pre sented to the Lord Mayor by Mr. Jacobs, declared that forgery bad been committed in this case as well as robbery ; for that some of the numbers of the I notes had evidently been altered. The LORD MAYOR—A figure has certainly been added to each of those numbers, which otherwise agree in every respect with the list which I have examined. It must ha►e been done in order to shun detection. rprrester stated that he had found mare notes in the firisoner's portmanteau at the house in the Kent road, together with the Bank post-bill for 671. A young man, named Ferguson, who also lodged in the house in lronmonger-lane, was put to the bar in consequence of a note having been sent to him by the prisoner to meet him at the Burton ale-rooms on Thursday night. Mr. Ferguson assured the Lord Mayor that his acquaintance with the prisoner was of a very slight kind, and commenced in consequence of the declara tion of the latter that he had respectable friends in London, amongst whom was Sir James Shaw. (hi the morning the prisoner left the lodgings he brought a box to the witness, and requested him to keep it under the bed till his return - . Witness owed him 24 of borrowed money, and promised to pay Mrs. Andrews 51. which was due to her by the prisoner. Mrs. Anne Andrews, of Ironmonger-lane, de posed that she had taken possession of the box, which now lay in her bed-room, as she thought she had a right to keep it until she should receive the amount of what the prisoner owed her. Allen slept in her house on the 11th of October, the night of the rob bery, and went to bed between ten and eleven o'clock. Next day, when the officers went to search the house, Allen was up. The LORD MAYOR—Was the prisoner's bed-room near that of Mr. Newton ? Mrs. Andrews—The very next to it—one was No. 15, the other was No. 16; no other person slept on that floor. The prisoner had been recommended to her by a gentle man who resided in Lad-lane. He remained in the house until Thursday, and slept there every night. Witness, when the officer arrived, requested that nobody would leave the house until all were searched. Allen made an excuse for going out for five minutes, but did not return for an hour. The LORD MAYOR desired the prisoner to reflect before he asked any questions, and told him that his case was of so serious a nature, in consequence of the complicated charge of forgery and robbery, that legal a,sistanee would be perhaps most necessary for The prisoner was then sent back to the Compter, BONV-STREE r. Yesterday Jamcs Rather and a person named Chapman were brought before Mr. HALLS on a charge of stealing four volumes of Addison's works, in quarto, from the sale room of Mr. Evans, the book auctioneer, of Pall-mall. The work, which was splendidly bound in red morocco, had been the property of the deceased Spanish General Miranda, and had been entrusted to Mr. Evans for sale. At the first examination, Flather, who appears to be a respectable man, declared that he purchased the work from the prisoner Chapman, who had it in pawn at Mr. Bassett's, of Great Queen-street. The work, it appears, was forfeited, and sent by the pawnbroker to the sale-room of Messrs Machin and Debenham, where it was purchased by Mr. Gosling, a bookseller in Bond-street. From the information given by Flather, Chapman was taken into. custody, at Lewisham, on Monday morning last, where he was following the trade of a gold wire-drawer. It appearing that the account given by Flather was corract, the Magistrate ordered him to be removed from the bar, and he was admitted as a witness against Chapman. Mr. Evans was enabled to swear to the books, owing to a fly-leaf in the third volume, on which there was a quotation in Spanish from Addison, in the handwriting of General Miranda, to the effect, that eminent men should be above the comments of the critic. The prisoner Chapman having declined to account For his possession of the books, was fully committed For trial on the charge of stealing them, and the wit ,e;ses were hound over to prosecute. M A ELBORO U GI-STREET. Yesterday Martha Geary, who was committed for trial from this office some days ago on a charge of stealing a large quantity of house-linen and other property, from the Atheneum Club, in Wa. tedoo-place, where she had been employed in the capacity of housekeeper for upwards of four years, %vas again brought before Mr. DYER, the sitting Magistrate, to undergo a fresh examination on a charge of having committed similar depredations in the family of General Stapylton, where she resided as housekeeper before she went to the Atheneum Club. After an investigation, the prisoner was fuily con mitted for trial upon this charge also, and General Stapylton was bound over to prosecute. Mr. RoE, the Magistrate, was yesterday again occupied for several hours in a private investigation of the cases of the nine prisoners in custody upon the charge of being concerned in the daring burglary and extensive robbery, a few nights since, at the house of Mr. Burgl.ar..: , tailor, in Clifford street ; but as the examinations of the different wit nesses, who are extremely numerous, were altoge ther private, it would not be proper in this stage of the proceedings to give them publicity. We may, however, mention, that a tenth person was yesterday added to the number already in custody in the per son of the backney•coachman who carried off the " swag" (booty) from Mr. Burghardt's house. The officers of this office have been incessant for the Jast three days and nights in their pursuit of this man, and, after having traced him in various winding di rections, they apprehended him early yesterday morning, driving, not the coach in which he con veyed away the spoil, but the hackney chariot, No. 949, and they brought himself and his vehicle at once to the office, when he underwent a short pri •vate examination, and was then placed in his own chariot, with Clements and Ballard the officers, one on each side of him, and Schofield, another officer, .on the box, who drove off in very good style to the House of Correction, to lodge the prisoner for re examination on a future (lay. This prisoner is a very remarkable figure, being about four feet in height, and of about an equal breadth, and perhaps this is the first time that he enjoyed the luxury of riding in his own vehicle. The other prisoners, when their examinations con cluded, about five o'clock, were removed per van to another prison for future examination also. WORSHIP-STREET. IMr. William Clarke, whom a person named Spencer bad apprehended and brought to the office on Tuesday evening, on a charge of being the Thomas Clarke, alias Bugsby, accused of robbing the St. Neot% Bank, and for whose apprehension a reward of 2001. had been offered, was yesterday brought before Mr. BENETT, the sitting Magistrate, for further examination. The accused was attended by Mr. Overton of Shoreditch, and Mr. Harmer, his friends, and pro fessional advisers ; and Mr. Gates, the solicitor to the Association of Bankers, was also present at the inquiry. Spencer, the accuser, is foreman to Mr. Davis, a shoemaker, in High-street, Shoreditch, and is stated to have been for several years acquainted with Mr. Clarke, who is possessed of very considerable pro perty in that neighbourhood. The accuser was asked by the Magistrate if be still persisted in charging the prisoner Thomas Clarke, and he declared that his o pi n i on rema i ne d unshaken, and he had never known him by any other name during five years that he had known him. Mr. Harmer, after having questioned the witness, declared that this was the most foul and shameful transaction that be had ever met with, and was a malicious trick, on the part of Spencer, to injure and ruin, if he could, the accused, with whom he had had some dispute. He had himself known Mr. Clarke for many years as a public man, and a thou , sand persons could be brought forward, if it were necessary, to prove that he had always been known, as William Clarke. Mr. Gates \vas satisfied that he was not the per son for whom the reward had been offered, and the individual described was so very different a person that it was impossible the accuser could have believ ed the Mr. Clarke now present to be the person so advertised. A copy of the placard describing " Thomas Clarke," the bank robber, was produced. The description had no resemblance to the prisoner. The only circumstance that could at all apply to the accused was the single one of his residence being in Brooksby-street, Islington, the advertised resi deuce of 'norms Clarke. The Magistrate said, that under the circum stances in which Mr. Clarke was brought before him, and so positively spoken to by Spencer, it had be come a duty to detain him in custody until the mat ter was cleared up. That was necessary even for the sake of his own character, and any evidence he then had to produce for that purpose should be heard. Mr. Harmer then proceeded to call several tvit nessses, who had known Mr. Clarke intimately for many years, all of whom spoke highly of him, and said they had never heard of him by any other name than William Clarke. Forrester, one of the City officers, had previously stated that the defendant was not the Thomas Clarke for whom the reward was offered, and to prove the said fact, Joshua Hudson, the pugilist, was now called, and stated that he knew the Thomas Clarke referred to, who was not at all like the Mr. Clarke present. Mr. Clarke complained bitterly of the treatment he had experienced. Mr. BENETT—It was my duty to detain you under the circumstances, and if it were to occur again I should be obliged to adopt the same course. Let me now advise you to be patient. Mr. Clarke--If you were placed in the same cruel situation, Sir, you could not but feel as I do. I have been locked up in prison, and refused even a drop of water while I was there. You know that last night bail to the amount of twice 10,0001. was offered for me. Mr. BEN ETT—I am aware of that, but I could not take bail. I was obliged to keep you in custody, but I left the choice of your place of confinement to yourself, and sent you there in ►he care of our chief officer. It was my order, too, that you should have every accommodation consistent with your safe custody. Mr. Clarke—You did so, Sir, and I feel much obliged to you for it. But instead of being so ac commodated, I was refused even a drop of spring water when I asked for it at the New Prison. Mr. Clarke was discharged out of custody, and retired with his friends, with the intention, as he threatened, of indicting the person Spencer who had taken him into custody. UNION-HALL. Yesterday a Mrs. Drew was brought before the sitting Magistrate, Mr. CHAMBERS, on a charge of felony alleged against her by a female named Morris, who was recently robbed of various articles of clothing, and who, with the view of discovering the thief, had consulted a " cunning woman " on the subject, which led to the apprehension of the accused. Mrs. Morris, who is a native of Wales, stated, that during her absence from home a few days ago, her apartments were robbed of clothes, and amongst the various articles missing were a pair of her hus band's breeches. On the discovery, she afterwards obtained information from a woman named Jackson, that the prisoner was the thief, and accordingly she had her apprehended. Mr. CHAMBERS, who had an intimation of the grounds upon which the accused was taken into custody, commenced questioning the complainant very closely on the subject. " Have you not," in quired the Magistrate, " consulted a fortune-teller about the robbery ?"—Complainant, who was much abashed, replied that a woman named Jackson, liv ing in Kent -street, had assured her that Mrs. Drew was the thief. Mr. CHAMBERS—Did she give you this informs• tion for nothing ? Complainant—She wanted me to give her some money first, but I declined doing so until my property was found. Mr. CHAMBERS—Now will you swear that you did not cross her hand with silver before she told you that Mrs. Drew was the thief?--The complainant, who was ignorant or pretended to be so of the mean ing of the word•=, " cross her hand with silver," in quired what they meant. Mr. CHAmnEns—Come then I shall speak them more intelligibly. Diernt Mrs. Jackson ask you to slip a shilling into her hand before she revealed the secret to you ? Complainant—l gave her a drop of drink, and I believe a sixpence, for her kindness in letting me know who the thief was. Mr. CHAMBERS—How came you to imagine that this Mrs. Jackson knew more about the robbery than you did yourself ? Complainant—She has the reputation of being a person who has found out many robberies, and the parties by whom they were committed. Mr. CHAMBERS—How does she acquire theknow ledge you speak of ? On pointing out the thief to you, did she perform the old trick of the bible and key, or consult the lines of your hands, the cards, the tea-cup, or the planets ? Complainant—Your worship, you have quite puzzled me; for I knOW 4 . 0 only two ways of finding out thie'ves, and thtit 0 1 . by the cards a nd by th e pl ane t s ; t h e last,. !' 11 ; told, is by much the surest way.—(A laugh.) Mr. o,lA:um:Rs—Then the only evidence :113 have against accused relative to the charge ie tod e o v t what Mrs. Jackson told you ? is all, and I still believe the account to be trap' . 1 the prisoner was once a lodger of mine. htl Mr. CHAMBERS inquir e d mos t anx i ous ly wbe. t .„ o Mrs. Jackson was in th e office, for he was of 00 117 0 , that a month at the tr ea d- m ill wou ld b e o f vat 61 . vice to her. It was ascertained, however, that she had l° been seen since th e ti me s h e consu l te d t h e Phu', about the robbery in question. Mr. CHAMBERS discharged the accused, and 1 1 pressed a determin a ti on to p un i,h persons broS before him who attempted to extort money 1 7 4 ignorant people by p re t en di ng to te ll f uture 0 611 or the parties by whom they were robbed. MYSTERIOUS DEATH OF MRS. PHILLI Yesterday Mr. Cox, a solicitor, residing in!: Poultry, came before Mr. HALLS, at Bovr accompanied by Mr. Kerr (one of the executor ,the will of the late Mrs. Phillips), and two PS gentlemen; and Mr. Cox having announced hiteri, as a solicitor, said that he appeared on behalf of executors to the will of the lady whom he useL: and whose death having taken place under cirlp stances of great mystery, occas i one d considettd excitement in the neighbourhood in which she 7, resided. The Magist ra t e wou ld reco ll ect thst L l d i subject had been brought before him and Sir Ric . . j a a Birnie about three weeks ago, when a formitow array, not only of witnesses but advocated:trio geared. Mr. Kerr, one of the executors to the of Mrs. Phillips, was now pr esent , an d h e, in ca, te." mon with the other executors, f e lt t h e deepest 0., rest in the case, and they were most anxious that . ; inquiry should take place as to the imm e di a t e ce:d of the unfortunate lady's death, as th e y f e l t convieTo that the inquiry which had t a k en pl ace b e f o re i a Coroner did not go to prove the direct cause of itl y' l decease, or rather the agenc y by w hi c h t h e e g j was occasioned. Finding that the affair remser t , so long a time without being again agitated, l tp , withstanding that t wo mo d es o f i nqu i ry w ere jA gested by the Ben c h, h e (M r . C ox ) addreeno letter, which he should take the liberty to reeatof Mr. Ashurst, the solicitor, who appeared on he_ d , of the parish officers of Finchley, an d M r . Se' the surgeon. Mr. Cox here read a letter, of which the follovs is a copy:— " 24, Poultry, Oct. 1 5 '0 . " Szn,—After what passed before the Magistrate l i d Bow-street, on the 29th u l t ., t h e executors o f the Mrs. Phillips fully expected th at t h e i nqu i ry i nst i tu te' s ,' you, in the name of the parish-officers of FinchleYt ol ere this have been commenced in one of the modes ro out by Sir R. Birnie and Mr. Halls. As, howeserL f does not appear that the parish-officers have renewed tbl application either through Mr. Adolphus or otherwills am directed by the executors to request you will accen t me whether it is the intention of the parish-officers ar i d to bring the matt er f orwar d, e i t h er i n t h e s h ape o f a d . charge against any person or persons, or by tenttiring.,: f ftrmations of witnesses ready to be sworn to facts or ctunstances having a tentttncy to prove by whom th e o f !egeti addition to the medicine taken by the deceased made or administered to her. " I beg the favour of a reply as soon as you can ei° niently furnish it. "I am, Sir, your obedient servant, " THOS. B. CC/2c ' " That letter," continued Mr. Cox, " was warded to Mr. Ashurst on the 15th instant, WI; cehing no reply, I wrote again after the lapse few days, and received the following answer • "134, Newgate-greet, Oct. 2 6 00 ,1 " Sia,—l am unabl e t o rep l y to t h e i nqu i ry coats' • in your letter of the 15th inst.—Your's obediently, W. H. ASHURST: t e Now, it certainly did a pp ear to hi m (M r. Cos) Blithe be wanting in respect b ot h to Si r Ri c h ar d 101 9 and the Ma g i s t ra t e w h om h e a dd ressed, no t e bring the matter in a proper train of i nqu i r y e t the modes which they sug ges t e d m i g h t b e a d o pt Not only the friends and connexions of the decesv:, lady, but public j us ti ce it se lf, oug h t to b e sat i s fi e d', to the real manner of her death, as it was clear e ,. all hands th a t it was not e ff ecte d b y h er own a gent ! He believed that the parish officers were as defil e , as ever to prosecute the inquiry, but still their 00 sire would not go to the requisite extent, becec o , of the expense whi c h m i g h t atten d a prosecalio Now in order to clear up the mystery in w hich transaction was inv o l ve d, an d to set part i es rig, before the publi c , h e p ut i t to t h e M ag i strate to 6 s l ; whether it was n o t th e d uty o f t h e par i s h offic e . r , regardless of exp ense , to cause an i nqu i ry to be 0' stituted. Mr. HALLS thought that if the parish officers ir e in possession of evidence sufficiently strong to ni l if a presumption of guilt, it would certainly be th e , duty to follow up the ptoceeding by makillg A , charge; but in doing so, they would of course nothing rashly, but be guided by their own discretio bl y Mr. Cox—l wish to ask this question—lf f, parish officers, being on the spot where the transilt Lion has occurred, think it right to make a chid e ' and suppo s i ng t h ey s h ou ld b e b oun d over to pt?i fi g cute, are the 'expenses of that prosecution ( 0 upon them, or upon the county ? ad Mr. HALLS—That I s h ou ld t hi n k wou ld de.P e. ' upon circumstances. Mr. Cox—Exactly so. I wish to convince s b parish officers that they would not be saddled all expenses. - to ` r' Mr. HALLS had som e vague id ea t h at a n ° w it view had lately tak en pl ace b etween M r . Adolr of and Sir R. Biroie upon this very case; but_he,, not aware as to the nature of that interview. d ust Mr. Cox—ln ju s ti ce to t h e par i s h officers, I %' observe that they are extremely willing to pr°‘;,, e n but a bill of expellees with which they have "to already furnished, has, I believe, induced the`" lit bold back, on account of the expencei they P l e be put to. The executors felt that when the o h was brought to Bow -street, it would have met %Jo! the fullest investigation. They would have•put no t matter in a train of inquiry themselves had it been taken up by the parish-officers. kr. Philp; the husband of the de cease d, appeared at first VI I • ing that the inquiry s h ou ld take place, and af t e r wards threw every obstacle in the way. ll p w e b t Ar i e c i n ii t . inquiry, nt by s h ei a irt t hß i e t r. is oßf the ~rsld myself. tilhottApvLerLsocb—eeeedAniiiiisultghca n suggested Mr. Cox—l think, after what has passed teas, with respect to the defraying of the expences by t county, the parish-officers will feel no further be tation as to the course they ought to take. .A . Mr. Cox and th e ot h er gent l emen t h en retire"_„.,. BIRTHS. On the 21st inst. in Upper Gower-street, the lady Of M. Waters, Esq. of a daughter. o re, On the 15th in-t. 31rs. J. Evans, of Arbour-sq Commercial-road, of a daughter. MARRIED. of On the 21st inst. at Aldenham, A. Monro, c i;kro , Bushey, Herts, to Lucy, sixth daughter of the lat e Agnew, Esq. of Russell-square. On the 20th inst. at Rochester, Frances Elizabe th cond daughter of C. Thompson, Esq. to Arthur, yo u ;0 61 son of the late W. Wightman, Esq. of Old BromPte ° ' of of the 49th Regi m e n t. e On the 20th inst. at H a mp s t ea d, D. Torrance, th e lat Rugby, Warwickshire, to Mary, only daughter of t i J. Macintosh, Esq. of London. DIED. LO' (1" On the 15th inst. at hi s brother-in-law's, Kentish-I t ow George Dawe, Esq., R.A., Member of the linPell:bolo , " Royal Academies of Ai ts, at St. Petersburgh, St°,t,ty, the Florence, &e. First Painter to his Imperial Ikla.1";ril l , Emperor of all tlx Russian, &c. Sze; Mr. Dasce bel t , o f te d in England about six weeks ago in an in state - o ius• from a (lis!.ase of the lungs, which eventually term his existence. „ u , i culq tit PRINTED AND PUBLISEIED BY MURDO s , THE SUN Orncz, 112, STRAND, LONDON'