The Sun. — London, England, 1823-05-02 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS. DA 1 LY Extracts f ion! the Morning Papers, May e. [MORNING CHRONICLE...I Nothing could be more paltry than the trick resorted to on Wednesday night to get up a di vision. The object of the Opposition was to follow the course pointed up by Mr. Brougham. After the declarations of all the Members of all parties against the French Government and the Allies, and more particularly after the change of tone of Mc. Peel with respect to both, it was re solved by the Opposition not to press any motion to a division, the result of which might induce foreigners, who are in general ill acquainted with , our forms, to suppose that a division really existed among us with respect to the nature of the proceedings of these Powers.---The object was not to seek any triumph over their opponents, and they did not mind ally apparent triumph over themselves ; but they didlnind the avoiding every thing which could in any way induce other countries to believe that all were not united upon the question of abhorrence of the conduct of the Allies and of France. This determination to divide haVing been taken, many of the Opposi tion quitted the House. Mr. Macdonald's ori ginal Address was negatived without a division. On the question of Mr. Wortley's Amendment being put, the larger portion of the Opposition arose, meaning not to vote, when Mr. names, the Government runner and agent for them in the House of Commons, and the Treasurer of the Ordnance, salt, the Noes have it, with the intent of forcing the Opposition to divide. The result was, that the Opposition divided for the amendment, and the few who voted against it, did so, by mistake, as the intention was to leave Mr. Holmes, Lord George Lenox, and the few who countenanced this unworthy Parliamentary manoeuvre, to vote by themselves. This trick was tried ten years ago by Mr. Swann, who was left to vote by himself, and the same thing would have happened on Wednesday night, if the hurry, noise, and confusion had not so puzzled several Members, as to prevent them from understanding the bad joke which was played off. We wish Messrs. Holmes and Co. joy of their manoeuvre, which must raise them greatly in the estimation of the country- [MORNING POST.] After the discussion in the House of Lords upon a motion in censure of the conduct of Go vernment during the late negociations, we ven tured to express an opinion, that a similar mo tion threatened in the House of Commons would be relinquished. The triumph of Ministers in the Upper House had been so conspicuous and complete, whether we regard the force of num bers or the force of argument, that we naturally .expected their political rivals to withhold from them the opportunity of another and a still more decisive victory. Fortunately, however, the fondness for crimination, the zeal for cen sure, which distinguishes this Party, prevail ed over the sagaci►y and proXtee which dictated the abstinence 'we foretold. The consequence i►as been, to place the accusing party upon this subject in a situation the most deplorable and ridiculous. After a debate of three long nights, during which it was loudly charged against Ministers that they had corn promised the honour and interests of the country —that they were incapable or insincere—that their conduct had reduced them to the alterna tive of being held either dupes or accomplices to the most foul and abominable iniquity ; after the House of Commons had been wearied by the vehement repetition of these accusations—how, after all this, must any uninitiated man have been confounded to hear one of the great Leaders of the accusing party—himself one of the loud est and warmest in crimination, at the con clusion of a speech, too, abounding in unmi tigated censure,—to hear him gravely propose that his whole party, fatigued with their own railing, no less than they had fatigued all others, should unite at that very moment in an Address ti) the Throne, conveying the most decided and unqualified approbation of the whole conduct and language of the King's Mi nisters ? Talk of consistency and principle, truly I But we need not suggest the reflections which cannot fail to arise spontaneously in the mind" of every reader. The pretence for this ex traordinary proposal was not less wonderful than the proposal itself. The apprehension that any di vision of the House upon the direct question might impair the effect of that unanimous reprobation which had been incidentally expressed of the iniquitous aggression of _France, was the presiding motive in the mind of the Member who suggested it. Marvellous simplicity ! Three nights of warm debate were to terminate in the discovery that there existed no difference of opinion ! And the moral censures upon the• conduct of France were to acquire new force by the unresisted tri umph of those who were accused,upon the ground chiefly that their reprehension of that conduct had not been sufficiently severe !—Come ! come ! Sir, be for once frank and manly, and avow that you desired to evade the division only from the consciousness of weakness. Admit freely, that you perceived symptoms of the aban donment of your party by all those of its adhe rents who had preserved any remains of political character, or any pretensions to political inde pendence, and assign at once the dread of that desertion being exposed to the► worid,as the genuine motive of your conduct. Believe us, there is no further temptation to duplicity ; no man's convic tion a waits your avowal or denial of this motive. It is interesting to yourself only. And indeed the Gentleman we have imagined ourselves to ad dress, had formed no inaccurate estimate of the weakness Lo which his party was reduced. '; The wish to conceal this weakness was most natural ; but those Statesmen, who for three successive night had heard themselves reproached with the baiest and most flagrant delinquency by the ruined party, entertained a wish no less natural, that its ruin should not be shielded from exposure. They very properly insisted that the assembly which had heard the accusations against them, and had heard also their defence, should! pronounce .an opinion, and should so pro nounce it, too, that the comparative effect of one and of the Other shotild be apparent. And the triumphant result was; that the whole House, not excepting some of the most violent of the accusers themselves, rushed to the lobby, where the suffrages in favour of Ministers were to be collected ; that out of a House of almost 400 Members" no more than 20 votes were against them, of which small number even, several are to be ascribed to the circumstance that some Members were unwillingly shut in the House — the lobby being completely filled. Such was the result, glorious to Ministers—disgraceful and ruinous to their opponents, which, at any expence of consistency or principle, the Opposition would have averted. [MORNING HERALD.] After three nights' debate, the question raised on the conduct of Ministers was disposed of yes terday, at 5 o'clock in the morning. For so long and eager a discussion it was rather lamely con cluded. The Opposition showed a wish to evade putting their arguments to the test of a division, by a compromised withdrawing of the original mo tion. But M. Canning was resolved to show the lion. Gentlemen that he had profited of their lessons, by not being. so ready to concede as they supposed he had been in the late negociations. The hit was cheered, though not in the best taste, considering the subject and the occasion. The Op position, it appears, were now reduced, in the last resort, to avoid the division by a general disper sion. But the Minister was resolved to enjoy his triumph. Nome stragglers (we do not use the term in nn offensive sense) were intercepted by the shutting of the`doors, and were thus consti tuted a forced minority. There was snare want not only of magnanimity, but even of reflection, in Mr. Canning's insisting upon this public glare of triumph. What was the foundation of his sweeping majority ? Was, it the praise of having carried the country through a trying and difficult crisis of dispute with another nation, without sa crificing peace or honour? This certainly is a merit he cannot claim. We do not say that he and his col leagues have merited the censure proposed. Per haps no other Ministry could have done more ; but any Ministry could certainly-have done as much. The true foundation of his triumph is, the ddep and universal sentiment which prevails,. that the nation is not, at this moment, in a state conve niently to go to war. A prudent and reflecting Minister would not be too ready to put forward a triumph resting upon such a foundation. In the mean time the campaign in Spain goes on at a creeping pace. There are Paris advices of Tues day, but . containing nothing important. It was the talk of the drawing-rooms of Paris, that the pretended Provisional Government of Spain had been broken. Their proclamation had done mischief. This is very possibly true. They were mere puppets set up by the Duke of An gouleme, whom he could, of course, knock down at any moment. Another rumour was, that upon the arrival of the French at Madrid, hostilities would be suspended, and the negociations be re sumed with the Government at Seville. The , Duke of Angonteme was still stationary at Nit , toria, and occupied in no weightier matters than bestowing promotions in the army and the gLe ion of Honour. These are the only " opera , lions " recorded in the last Bulletins. [THE TIMES.] A division of the House upon a vital question, in which division Ministers and Opposition voted on the same side, is so remarkable an incident that it deserves some notice. When the Oppo sition perceived that. every Member of Admi nistration spoke with, the same abhorrence as themselves of the conduct of the Bourbons in the aggression upon Spain, the object of the original motion no longer existed ; and those who made and supported it, proposed to with draw it. " But, no," said Ministers and Mr. Canning, " you shall not withdraw it till we have taken and well banged this fine " motion of yours." " Very well," quoth the Opposition, " take it, and bang it as long as you 44 please. It has effected its purpose in making " you decry, as strong'y as we have done, the " infamous proceedings of the Bourbons, and we " want nothing farther from it." To it, there fore, Ministers went, " tooth and nail," as the homely phrase is, and negatived—what was not affirmatived by any one—the spent motion. This conduct of Ministers resembled the blind rage of the Pantaloon and clown in the pantomime, who beat the man's jacket after the body is withdrawn, and quietly standing by them to join in their next enterprise. The next en terprise in the present case was the pursuit of the Amendment—the Amendment of Mr. Stuart Wortley, a Gentleman who spoke with as much seyerity as Mr. Brougham of the Bourbon proceedings, and in the support of whose amendment, therefore,. Opposition joined as cordially as Ministers. The House was thought Unanimous for the amendment, when Mr. Holmes, a Government Member, called out against it, and so produced the unexpected and needless divi sion, himself actually voting against both Ministers and Opposition, in condemnation of the amend ment. By the way, we suspect Mr. Holmes is of the sister country ! IVe recollect though, Mr. Swan, an English gentleman, and a man of the law, too, performing exactly the same feat in the time of Mr. Perceval, but with so much more success than Mr. Holmes, the lobby being large enough, in that instance, to contain all the Members for the affirmative, that he (Mr. Swan) had the pride of standing alone—an honour that would probably have attended the unit of oppo sition on 'Wednesday night, had the lobby afforded continent enough for his advesaries.— There are many points in the debate upon which we might comment did our time and room allow of farther remarks upon a question already so amply discussed. One or two observations we shall ha zard, which we think of a very decisive nature. Mr. Canning asserted that our celebrated prema ture declaration of neutrality (" come what, come " might," &c.) had broken asunder the corporate capacity of the Sovereigns at Vienna. The direct contrary of this is so clearly the fact, that in the very first sentence of each of their three notes recalling their Ambassadors from . Spain, the se veral Sovereigns of Russia, Prussia, and Austria, assume the proceedings at Verona as the ground of the unfriendly measure ; they act in unifor mity, and they derive their motive of action from a common source. " The Sovereigns assembled " at Verona were led frbm the first moment of " their assembling to direct their attention to an " ancient Monarchy," says Nesselrode. " The " situation in which the Spanish Monarchy finds " itself, was an object of too paramount import " ance not to have seriously occupied the atten tion of the Cabinets assembled at Verona."— Metternich. ." Among the objects which fix the " attention and demand the solicitude of the So " vereigns and Cabinets assembled at Verona." —Bernstorff. These notes are dated all nearly at the same time, in November, or December. — Our declaration of neutrality was made on the 27th of September. We leave it to the world and to posterity, to judge whether that declara tion broke the concert of the Sovereigns INEW TIMES.] Parturient Mantes, nascitur ridiculus Mus. This ancient prophecy appears to have found its entire and absolute accomplishment about Five, A.M., May 1, 1823. If Queen Hecuba had been alive, she would have once more a laughed till her eyes ran o'er" at the droll result of three nights' Debate. We speak of course from the information of The Morning Chronicle, which tells us, that the business ended with 46 the appearance of a Division, where, in fact, there was none." 46 0 ! 'tis the sport," says Hamlet, 4 6 to have the engineer hois'd with his own petard !" The , whole Opposition—" Pioneers and all," marched on to the assault, confi dent and rejoicing in the certain effect of the 44 Bumble Address," which IVil3 to wrest the seals from the imbecile hands of Mr. Canning, to shake his associates from their seats, and to shew by its result a disjointed Cabinet, in whom the House of Commons could not, put their confi dence. Such was the project, and how has it been effected ? Turn we once more to the official Journal of the party—" For the amend ment, 3728—Against it, 20."—" Almost the whole Opposition voted with Ministers! ! !" True it is that The Chronicle suggests a curious solution of this odd phenomenon. Mr. Macdonald, it seems, (kind Gentleman !) had no evil de signs against the British Administration—he merely wanted a unanimous vote against France! Now, really, this reminds us of the large bugs, which a certain traveller once described, and which turned out to be humbugs. Does not The Chronicle know—if he does not we can inform him—that bets were laid on a change of Ministry to be effected by this very motion, and that the Foreign Secretary was signifi. cantly told to beware the Ides of March ? Unfor tunately Mrs. Canning was not forewarned in a dream to dissuade her illustrious husbad from going to the Senate. lie therefore went thither, and in a speech, such us has been seldom heard, even from his lips, flashed entire conviction on the minds of his adversaries. Those who went to scoff remained to praise—i-and now that the dart, warded off by the shield of truth, has fallen harmless at his feet, they, from whose hands it came, are eager to disown it, as a - 'Alum inthelle sin tctu. —We cannot dismiss this ludicrous subject without one serious remark on the manly and honourable manner in which Mr. Canning came forward to render justice to the personal charac ter of M: de Chateaubriand, who justly ranks ns high for talents, integrity and honour, in France, as the Right Honourable Gentleman himself does i n E ng l a nd. Whatever difference may at any time arise between the two countries, on ques tions of national policy, we trust that our States men will never degrade themselves by a con temptible endeavour to depreciate the reputation of jhe eminent foreigners to whom they may be opposed. [BRITISH PRESS.] We shall most anxiously, on their production, attend to the papers moved for by Mr. Hume re specting the collection of the revenue', viz. copies of all correspondence' between the Board of Taxes, the Treasury, and George White, relative to frauds in the collection of the taxes; and also for the copies of the correspondence respecting the dismissal of that person.—We regard this as of great importance, and we would draw the attention of the public clearly and closely to the whole transaction, when it comes before them. The instant any individual comes forward to de nounce the malversation of any person high in office, that instant the whole force of the Trea sury is ready to crush him. He becomes 'a marked man, and no means are left untried to complete his ruin. If we did not know that it is the effect of high polical station to extirpate the best and most benevolent principles which na ture has implanted within us, we should feel surprised that the present Chancellor of the Ex chequer, so early in his reign, should demur to the production of any paper which went to ques tion the propriety of that dismissal, on the ground that it would cause an improper and unnecessary interference with the duties of that department that had discharged Mr.Whi•te. Mr. Robinson is a man of sound judgment and liberal feeling, arid we shall he slay whenever we find him inclined, as in the present instance, to prostitute the one or pervert the other. This case is, upon the face of it, a case of gross oppression, and in whatever public department of the revenue► such an instance is furnished, the head of that department should be brought to account. If the greatest frauds are to be committed on the public re venue by the collectors of taxes, and. that no man should dare to denounce the delinquent, but at the peril of being himself distnissed from office, in that ease let the Treasury and the Tax Board speak, out. Every honest and faith ful servant of the public will then know what he has to trust to. Better were it at once boldly to avow the principle, than to act up on it without avowal, and then resort to frovolous and foolish pretexts to justify it. If the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had pointed out any re cognized court of appeal, or any regular mode of redress to which the injured party might resort, his assertion that the interference of the House would' be mischievous, might have been intelli gible. But to talk of its being mischievous triat the House, in such a case, should contribute to the furtherance of justice, is to affirm, in other words, that the tax-office and other departments may act in defiance of it. But wisdom rarely conies too late to be useful. The whole corres pondence will shortly be produced., LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, MAY 1. IN THE MATTER OF LORD PORTSMOUTH. The ATTORNEY.GENERAL said there was a petition in his Lordship's paper in this matter, which was merely to con firm the Master's Report as to the settlement proposed for Lord Portsmouth. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had read that petition, and mast desire to see Mr. Courtenay (the Master) again upon the subject. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, there was no opposition offered to this petition ; it only prayed that the report might be confirmed. Mr. HEALD stated that there was also a petition presented by Lady Portsmouth. He did not know whether his Lorti ship had seen it or not. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had seen it; but wish ed to know what he could do with it ? He could make no order upon it. He perceived the deeds. which had been exe cuted by Lord Portsmouth were mentioned in that peti tion. He (the Lord Chancellor) could not carry those deeds into execution. _ _ hEALD said he could not, certainly. The LORD CHANCELLOR could not make any order for the advance of the money until there was laid before him what maintenance was to be allowed for Lord Portsmouth, regard being had to his circumstances and family. Mr. HEALD understood that Lady Portsmouth was without the means of subsistence. _ The LORD CHANCELLOR.—If the parties thought proper to act without such order, he (the Lord Chancellor) did not say that would not be proper on their part ; but he could make no order. _ Mr. HEALD thought that his Lordship had the controul and disposition of the lunatic's estate. The LORD CHANCELLOR certainly had the controul and dis position of the lunatic's estate, but he must net so dispose of it as to disturb the settlement which had been made; they must act out of Court ; because the report had been made, or ought to have been made, to state what was proper to be lowed for the maintenance and establishment of Lord. Portsmouth, hav ing regard to all the circumstances of his situation. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought it right to state to the Court, that Lady Portsmouth had not been left without money; for some money had been advanced to her. Mr. HEALD had understood that there had not, but itap peared that he had been mistaken ; for he was now told that advances had been made to her ? of which he was not aware until this moment. He had been informed that she was without any means of subsistence at all. _ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was to understand, then, from his Lordship that the petition was to stand over. The LORD CHANCELLOR would state very fairly what his doubt was. He was not satisfied that there was enough of per sonal constant attendance provided, by this report, for Lord Portsmouth. Mr. SHAD*ELL said, that Mr. Coombe had the care of Lord Portsmouth at present, and would continue it until his Lord ship made an order. The LORD CHANCELLOR would see Master Courtney upon the not r k e n p o o w r t thm a t s a f a r p a a r s t y i t w w e h n o t, wa i s t r m e p i r g es h t e n b t e e d r to g It b t e ; al but w a ;h s e r . e d s i i d . dent in London would be the most proper person to be commit tee; he did not mean that he should reside in any other place ; but, such being the place of his residence, he did not think the personal attendance on Lord Portsmouth was sufficiently pro vided for by the appointing of one committee so circumstanced, although he was a very respectable clergyman. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that any suggestion of his Lordship would be attended to. The LOUD CHANCEL/. on said, it was not necessary for hint to state the reasons why he thought so. He would see Master Courtenay upon the subject before he came into Court on Saturday. • VAN CARR. This was the petition of the plaintiff, Mrs. Van, praying that the defendant, an eminent solicitor, should be committed to the custody of the warden of the Fleet prison for a contempt of Court, in having commenced un action against the plaintiff, for the recovery of the amount of a bill of costs, in violation of a►► order of the Court directing it to be taxed. On the part of the defendant it was urged that the order was considered as referring only to bills of cost which had not been taxed before, and that it therefore did not include that bill for which the proceedings complained of were instituted, as it had been taxed already. The LORD CLIANCELtOR deferred pronouncing his decision until Saturday ; hut intimated that a petition praying for the defendant's commitment in the first instance was a measure more rigorous than the circumstances of the case required. COLOMBIAN BONDS. The Loan CHANCELLOR came ;inioCourt athalf-past nine o'clock this morning (which was half an hour before his Lord ship's usual time of sitting), when we understood that the bill praying for an injunction in the case relating to the Colombian bonds was dismissed. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, MAY I. _LORD GAMBIER V. LEAKS AND °TREAS. The plaintiff is one of the executors of the late Lord Barham, and thedefendants are the trustees and creditors, holding in cumbrances upon the estate of Sir Gerard Noel. It appeared, that about 1811 a sum of 41i,8901. had been advanced by the late Lord Barham to Sir G. Noel, which sum was secured upon the estates. In 1813, Lord Barham advanced a further sum of 8,000 t., secured in the same manner upon the estate. On the iith of March, 1813, a trust-deed was executed by Sir G. Noel on one part, and Lord Barham and others, on the other, reciting that Sir G. Noel had granted five annuities of 700!. a-year,pay. able out of the estate. It also set forth the various sums ad v;nced by Lord Barham. The VICE-CHANCELLOR asked whether the mortgage of Lord Barham was in fee, or for years ? Mr. iLutw replied, that it was a mortgage in fee. Ile un derstood that it was now contended on the other side that by the deed in question of the 9th of March, 1813, Lord Barham had abandoned a portion of his mortgage. Ile then read to the Court that portion of the deed which, it was said, bore this con struction. . . The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought there was no pretence whatever for such an argument. Mr. HART said that the trustees had, In the execution of their office, proceeded to the sale of the estate comprised in the deed and mortgage. Mr. WETHERELL, on the other side, expressed himself sa tisfied with the decision of the Court upon the point. There were, he observed, several balances due to Lady Noel. That lady was now dead, and the property now came to her husband. The only question was, whether a new bill ought not to be filed to make him a party to the cause. The VICE-CHANCELLOR directed an account to be taken of the monies due and paid to the different parties. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAY 1. THE KING versun THU CORONER OF SALOP. Mr. PEARSON moved for a rule, calling on the Coroner for the County of Salop, whose name he forbore to mention, to show cause why a criminal information should not be filed against him. The circumstances under which he moved were peculiar; and the charge nearly affected the due administration of criminal justice. It related to the suppressing and rejecting evidence in the inquest holden on the body of Mrs. Newton, who died from violence inflicted by her husband. The COURT inquired whether the Learned Counsel could show enough to induce a belief that the Coroner was actuated ' by a corrupt motive ; otherwise they could not interfere. Mr. Pt:Alt.3ot; replied, that he believed he should succeed in convincing them that such motive existed. At the Inquest held before the Coroner, a verdict-was returned that the deceased ".died by bleeding." In consequence of reports which were Circulated, affecting the husband, he was apprehended, and, on the evidence adduced before the Magistrates, committed tin trial. At the last Assizes for Shropshire, he was tried before Mr. Justice Best, when be was found guilty of murder, and afterwards executed. It was now charged, that the Coroner had improperly refuied to admit evidence which was of the highest moment to the solemn investigation over which he was called to preside. Ile was informed that a person named Ed- wards could prove that a dispute had taken place between New ton and his wife on the day of her death, and that he then ex. pressed his intention of beating her; and this evidence he re- fused to receive. Ile himself talked with the witnesses, and endeavoured to persuade them that the death arose from acci. dental causes. When the Jury were assembled, he told them that as it was a very slight case, part of them might go home, and though they went to see the body, lie endeavoured to pre vent a minute examination of its members. The medical men who saw it found marks of violence on the limbs, and the ture of vessels which could not have arisen from any natural cause. Although the Coroner was assured that Edwards could prove the threatening language, he refused to hear him ; and the result was a verdict which was subsequently shown to be highly improper, and which might have prevented investigation into an atrocious crime. The Court granted a rule to show'cautle. SOCIETY FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF VICE..-THE RING V. # RENBOW. Mr. GURNEY moved for the judgment of the Court on this l i defendant, who was found guilty at the last Sittings fo r 31W. •. 1 hffieddefendant‘vit,published byexpressingappe ared several hi 3 o n respectable floor r fur o dlesex, on an indictment preferred by the Society for the Sup pressionof the' booksellers;the of Vice, for the publication of impure works and p :n i e c t 4 .m ure a s. he had been convicted ; stating, that the work (Faublas) had oCourt,frenc offence and put d p w u ht t ra in t hhad e a wife and five children entirely dependent on him for subsistence. Mr. GURNEY, in aggravation, put in an affidavit, alleging that the defendant continued to sell the work, notwithstanding the prosecution to which he had been subjected. Mr. COOPER addressed the Court in mitigation of punish. ment. He trusted they would not increase the punishment of his client in consequence of any publication but that for which he was indicted, as for each act he was liable to a distinct pro. ceeding. He trusted that they would evince such moderation in their sentence as would show to theunreflecting mind that all crimes were not equal. While he could not contend that th e e defendant must pass unpunished, he might suggest that th offence was one requiring . nice discrimination to appreciate, and respecting which the wise and good might differ. It could scarcely be asserted that such a publication was calculated to produce,great evil to society, when works far more indelicate and inflammatory had passed without censure for ages. In the 4 ' Clouds" of Aritophanes, lan,, ,, uage was used far c oarser than any which tumid be pointed out in the work now so heavily censured. The poems of Ovid, the comedies of Terence, which were not only read, but acted by youth in our great schools, contained descriptions far more highly coloured, and more ex. quisitely contrived to fascinate, than any one i n this compel'', tiyely vapid production. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.—We do not take our idea of morality from Athena or Rome. Mr. COOPER said, that our most classical poets would also fall under the same censure. Pope log 's Proue to the Wife of Bath's Tale was more loose in principle, and more luxurious in league than any passage of the work now indicted. The noble wor ks of Dryden were chequered with still grosser indicted. . rities. Swift was more broad and unsparing, Pope more dex trous and seductive, than the warmest chapters of the work in uestion. The elegant and graceful Virgil, in the desc ri p tion q of the blandishments employed by Venus to induce Vulcan to make armour for eEneas, had, in the judgment of Montaigintcc, in far surpassed the most luscious description of Ovid, a sat tire style ; yet this poet was placed, whole. and entire, in tn t e hands of the British youths. The pictures -which werevear; tached were really hannless, compared with those which e _ t . _ splendid printshop contained, and exhibited far lesseoJ.on,e. naked figure than every exhibition of sculpture. lint th r a ,,lt. tans succeeded in their efforts, the drama' would not now e !s! . : our paintings would be wretched daubs without life or s pirit, and our sculpture confined to the appropriate embellishillettcls re. a tombstone. There was no companson between the ottu a ll ~ T, the defendant and that of those who had endeavoured to ho 7e , our religion, and destroy the sources of our comfort amp . U.: and he trusted the. Court would mark their sense of this 015 tinction in their judgment. ; 1 the other The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, after consulting.w.t.t alt the Judges, suggested, that if the defendant would give "I' ._ _id, copies of the work, he might induce the Court to pos a m id- copies sentence. - 11 - give up Mr. COOPER said, the defendant would most rem i t w r far . all the copies in his. possezion ; but lie could not ens e those which he had already sold to others. sale Intntel- Mr. ADOLPHUS observed, that the work was an shops in various parts of London. ' . Poffenders like the Mr. GURNEY begged to observe, that i. men _ , , h , defendant were permitted to retire with a lenient s o e st , c_e_4 evil would not be diminished, but increased in ani Wan" manner.over for a week , It was arranged that the case should stand __ do .000 in order that die defendant might try what he could fo r in the suppression of the work. THE LINO V. CHARLES TRUST. [Further Particulars.] ', i t 1 anent of th e Mr. SOLICITOR-UENERAL moved for t he ,ti b an infor,,,s.. Court on this defendant, who was found g uilty gi n a 7 lll for Lon don tiled by sib n Gener6l at the 'tattle Christian 'ten don, of publishing a blawhemous libel on f t Nature , it a p. . loon, contained in " Palmer's PrinCiPle:d°officiated assn opuisn peared on the trial, that the defendant 11 _ e _ set andGiitsp,tr: m a shop situated at the corner of argil" Nt-siic Iwas insclibetl,wl";`,, street, and over which the name " Car . c officer bY means o f ..r the work in question was sold to a police eal the itemal venqa machine, constructed with a design to coll.c. At the trial, tili of the publications regarded ifs (tango:: 11 l ° soother person who defendant, attended by his brother ari.i.sakiad, conduc,ted his in on the character usually seen in Court on the trials of ttl ect g i own case, and read a paper violently tett of the witnesses. t i ng th at be ' behalf, sta An affidavit was now put Counsel,on his evented fro)) who was pr defenc e expected to be defended by tits moment the to appearing by indisposition, and that at e Sentiment o f which he was anxiloar was put into his hands, every --1 the Christian religion, a, to disclaim, he had never impugni- - 7.: m elt 1 j he ha d li t d c f I had read the work for which he was 01--- r t e a into the '''' ,3 munication with Mr. Carlile i but had, ente s . as an ind.iiiitl the request of his brother, and quitted t i ns t 9° ' ' fr ont this 0,?, 'tient was found against him. He " 84 cus tody, and ‘0 , 21,, with his parents until he was taken into nected witu xious to obtain his livelihood by mettns unconnected of yank in which he had been unfortunately en l e l e „, ;tin tiort.,, . Court r" "" rj e ntito Mr. PRENDERGAST addressed the ant had not 1 1 punishment. He urged that the defend .1_ 'Sivery 11! himself with the principles of the work some' hat 1 e w ee perien c ` more , fo n a and had probably been Influenced by Ito societi tai Person ,and that more benefit would. mightrestit render the,,, lenient sentence, than from one which wcr of those um &Want wreckless, and throw him into the po otto t whom the Court would desire to save him. 1 t h a t the _ , The SOLICITOR.GENERAL, in reply, 'err, w , los , to cu e ' , adopted by those who resolved on defying the _ , /s„, 0 , 0 ., J ODI ploy men who ceased to aid them as soon EIS "WI lily °f cuted, and then to supply their place by, Alters; the fi bers die d to P-,, oi„ Mr. Justice BAYLEY, after commenting ot tie fined the English law in respect of opinions, p10*2 0 e!, 1 , 1 be tioeu f ,, t hig sentence of the Court—that the defendant sii "., - socu rity y ew; Imprisoned for six months in Newgate, and &a two st ir 1001. and ' , . good behaviour for five years, himself in tri g 0 in lii!. each. ~..55is•rw bur 1 fir In i'" „,., ; The COURT were occupied till a late .10.-- . . e , o fficw- • tench on persons convicted of assaults on revettiLr co l. there was no matter of public interest in any of u''' • ---4--- , MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. • ADJOURNMENT DAY. „ or. PALMER'S PRINCIPLES OF NATIIIIE,-1° 1 Wl' The defendant refA nc we WasJocosnEvricHtediVoAfTpsuobNa.4lingtosbp.nug the si of and concerning the Holy Scriptures, and into hatred and contempt. lie 1 13 t t ,E,Liv't- - ~,ei. The defendant , after verdict, swore to an aoi. - i i s o jai" 0 In r!l acted as the shopman of Carlile ; he hat: lig ioul n whatever in the business ; and should he be go t " 0 16 • money orprope rt y The C it with. UAIRMAN then proc , ed.tl to pass sentenc e Ilre4 41'1 defendant, which was c " That he - should besilartitoellu oft.t:lt. in the House of 'orrection, p.ntl at the c P" 1 .401 " I _time . to tind sureties for his good behaviour for " a ' 0 1 self in 100/. and two in 50/. each." c usto 4 r . The defendant exclaimed as he left the Court i n - _,,..- glory in It." -"-.- ----------- pq , :BIRTHS. Gates , o f •On the 30th ult•, at Brixton, the lady of Thonl3s of a daughter. On'Tuesday, the 29th ult I of Capt.'''. l '' 8111°11 the 11. C. S. Hythe, Of a son! le wife 1 e ..---. t , lil•A'' Yestertlay, at Chelsea,llblyAthßertßieEvD. T • homas Slojeibore„fil'enl ..Rector of Bla mes , Emily, eldest daughter of ~ i V' Sir John Can XC B L ' ' 1 Sclite ber' 0 0/6 flinchelsea Lodge, ilan • ts; ” t° "sr es Liett . tcn. lll) :loo, t e e t t . On the on --e --th ult., at Sam ford Arundel, Rivers Luke, of the Royal PArtillery, to Mari A rl ,7,so er 'of of Lovell Todd, Esq., of Weres Cot, in the e°uPtl ' t Siti:lef. esterday, at 11Iarylebone John Owen Berbe r ' f t he r i p, Dolforgan, Aiontgomeryshire 'to Harriet, dang l/ter ° ill t' ll' . C. Johnson , of Soutlistoke, B(;nlerset, and Prebentlyst. joire, _ yesterday, the Rev. Robert Itoberts. D.o.lolnipterloie uodege , Cambridge, Rector of Barnwell, N ell a-s 1 % 0 to Sarah Anne, eldest daut , htet of the late Clntr'' Wheelwright, Esq., of London. , Ob eid ED. On et., be, land -place, the 29th ult ra ., at his house in Ort?ti',7l/6. .., -place, Lieut.-General Pere Warner HusseY , 0 ' 006 10 t 0 On the Ist inst.. at Pentonville, aged 44, A 43r of the lam John CUIIIIIIIIIg Esq. ' I, 03 A rP On the 30th ult. at 1'; tlingl o -lodge, 185-e tot. wife of the Rev. W. C. Brand a ged 21. , a ker, S ev On the 30th ult., Mr. Samu el St' nith, cOav" — ti l4 ' street. ________- . the _ Printed and Published for the Paora trf":l44;aoq trllice, No. 112, Strand, by J. B. CO