The Sun. — London, England, 1835-05-05 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. If the personal question now at issue between Lord Alvanley and Mr. O'Connell were one unconnected with public affairs we should not feel at all disposed to take any part in its discussion. The question, how ever, considering the manner in which it has origi nated, is one that bears strongly upon the national manners, upon the privileges of Parliament, and the laws and usages of gentlemanly society. As such, it falls within the province of a public writer to make it the subject of observation. In the point of honour two individuals are concerned. In other matters, con nected with it the public have an interest, and ought 'to have an opinion. Among the proofs of the supe rior civilization of a country, or the reverse, the lan guage and manners of its public assemblies have always been reckoned very conclusive ; but as the Legislative Assembly of a nation either does, or ought to embody whatever is highest in education, most polished in man ners, and most refined and honourable in gentlemanly feeling, the style of language and manners prevalent in such an assembly is naturally considered by foreigners as a pretty good test of ~,,the state of civilization to which a country has attained. Thus our tourists lay hold of the coarse and vulgar epithets not unfre quently used by members of the American Congress to each other as cogent evidence of the primitive rude ness and incivility of manners which continue to defy the ameliorating progress of civilisation under that democratic form of Government. Tried by the same test, we think it must be admitted that the habits which civilisation induces have rather deteriorated than improved among us of late years ; for undoubtedly the use of coarse and illiberal language in Parliament has become more frequent than it used to be ; and rudeness of manners excites less astonishment, because it is more common than at any time since the House of Commons, having got rid of the two other branches of the Legislature, had constituted itself an absolute and pure democracy. We will not stop to inquire whether the ascendancy which the greatest mob-orator of modern times has ac quired in the House of Commons has contributed to lower its tone of language and manners. It is suffi cient that the fact is indisputable, and that every fair opportunity ought to be taken to check the approxi mation of St. Stephen's to Billingsgate. From the time that the 'Whig speech from the Throne was de scribed as " bloody and brutal," and the Members of the people's House were reported to have been de nounced to a mob as " six hundred scoundrels," we thought that frequent occasions would arise in which privilege of speech in Parliament would be strained to the utmost limits of that license which gave force and vivacity to the eloquent philippics of the Dublin Corn Exchange. Is the case of Lord Alvanley one that calls for a corrective, or is it not ? As to the language supposed to have been applied to the Noble Lord, nobody can say that it is not of the most in sulting description ; but, say the Whig Journals that advocate the cause of Mr. O'Connell, it is a breach of privilege to call the Hon. and Learned Member to account for language uttered in his place in Parlia ment. Undoubtedly, according to the Constitution, a Member of Parliament cannot be made either legally or politically responsible for the utmost freedom of speech in the House ; but that privilege does not attach to the publication of his speech, and it is of the pub lished speech that Lord Alvanley complains. Mr. Creevy was prosecuted and convicted for a speech which he delivered in Parliament, and which he after wards published. Dr. Lushington was also pro ceeded against by indictment for a speech of his pub lished in the Mirror of Parliament; but the proof of publication, on his part, failed, and he was acquitted ; but here is no question about legal responsibility. Lord Alvanley finds in the newspapers certain grossly offensive expressions, stated to have been applied to him by Mr. O'Connell. He writes to him for an explanation and receives no answer. A second letter is written, which meets with similar treatment, and he then brings the matter before the club of which they are both members, and which club, like all clubs, whose members are of a certain rank in society, pro fesses to be exclusively composed of " gentlemen," and to be always prepared to eject from their association any person who violates the laws and usages of gen tlemanly society. We pass no judgment upon Mr. O'Connell's conduct in not answering the letters ad dressed to him on this subject. He may have good reasons for his silence. He is known to have dis claimed all that responsibility which attaches to those who acknowledge the supremacy of a false code of ho nour ; but we think, for that very reason, he ought to have the greater guard upon his language, and be careful how he wounds the feelings of men to whom he refuses that sort of satisfaction which, though it be morally condemned, yet still, wherever it is acknow ledged, exercises a great control over licentiousness of language and violence of manners. But Lord Alvanley being a Member of the House of Peers, say the Whig papers, has committed a breach of privilege by taking notice of something said by a Member of the House of Commons in his place. Those apologists for Mr. O'Con nell forget that the insult arose from Mr. O'Connell's taking notice of something said by Lord Alvanley in the House of Lords—something which certainly did not jus tify the application of the grossly offensive expression " bloated buffoon l"—if, indeed, the Learned and Hon. Member used those words ; and if he did not, we wonder he did not hasten to disclaim them, as well as the no less offensive epithets said to have been ap plied at the same time, to another Member of the House of Lords, whom he is represented as having de scribed as " h a lf-idi ot —h a lf- man i ac ." W e published yesterday the requisition to the Managers of Brookes's, signed by 24 of its members, requesting, on the part of Lord Alvanley, a general meeting of the club to con sider a statement to be made to it of Mr. O'Connell's conduct to the Noble Lord, both being members of the club. The following document which appeared in The Sun of last evening, shows that the request has been refused, Lord Duncannon's name appearing at the head of the list of managers, to whom Mr.O'Connell addressed his memorable epistles fromDerrynane Abbey last year : " The Managers of Brookes's Club having had under their consideration a requisition signed by several members, request ing them to call a general meeting ' to consider a statement that will be made to it of Mr. O'Connell's conduct to Lord Alvanley, both being members of the Club,' are of opinion that it would be inconsistent with the practice, and contrary to the established rules, to take cognisance of differences of a private nature between members of the Club, and therefore decline to call a general meeting in compliance with the above requisition. ( Signed) " DUNCANNON. " ALIIRMARLE. " JOHN BYNO. " Brookes's, 3d May, 1835." EDWARD BLOUNT. EDWARD ELLICE. RONALD C. FERGUSON. On the above document we will merely observe that if the managers have nothing to do with a charge of alleged ungentlemanly conduct made by one member against another, they rightly disclaim all cognizance of the case in question. But we should have thought that the jurisdiction of the managers exercised as a Court of honour in such cases, would have the best effects in preserving the gentlemanly tone and manners of the members of their society, while it would prevent appeals to that tribunnal of false honour, which the tyranny of custom has too long supported against the laws of the land.—Morning Herald. A huge portion of barbarous absurdity has issued within these two days from the organs of the Whig- Radicals, of and concerning the endeavour of Lord Alvanley to make Mr. O'Connell amenable, in some degree, to those laws by which the intercourse of gen tlemen is regulated. We are, God knows, very far from being advocates for duel. A professed or prac tised duellist is a systematic murderer, and ought to be an outcast from civilised men. But so ought any other systematic aggressor who sports with the feelings of others, and becomes a ready practitioner of outrage, in the hope that by virtue of a screen with which he has provided himself, he may indulge every vindictive malignant, or capricious impulse at the expense of his neighbours with complete impunity. The occasion which has at present forced this irksome topic upon us, is one of many which might have arisen had other persons been as much alive as Lord Al vanley to the social duty of subjecting a self chartered offender to the same obligations which are universally acknowledged except by that offender himself. There is hardly a week of Mr. O'Connell's existence, ever since his " vow in Heaven" was pro mulgated, which has not exposed him to a most just and righteous visitation of resentment from one or more individuals whom he has savagely insulted, His vow in Heaven he has always had thelcunning to exhibit as a grand effort of forbearance towards others ; whereas the whole course of his demeanour proves it to have been no better than an ignominious artifice for his own protection. " I will make my vow," says this arch impostor, "an instrument for tormenting others, and for saving myself from retribution." Let us ask any brave man, therefore, is that a fraud which ought to be countenanced or permitted ? Is such a man, like the snake of India, to be held sacred by the superstitious multitude, because of the deadliness of its bite ? Is malice to 1- cx:iiipt all the pains of crime, because it throws over pusilla nimity the mask of conscience and religion ? If we go to the origin of this complaint brought forward by Lord Alvanley, we shall find that his Lordship has been grossly wronged by Mr. O'Connell. The allusion which the Noble Lord made to that person had no thing offensive in it—literally nothing. He merely asked whether any man could believe that Mr. O'Con nell would lend his support to the Administration without a certain equivalent ? Why, the equivalent referred to might have been, arid we are firmly per suaded that Lord Alvanley meant nothing worse, some measures with regard to Ireland which might have served the political purposes of the agitator. The whole context of Lord Alvanley's interrogaties bears us out in this construction of his Lordship's words. Is, then, a Member of Parliament to be called a bloated buffoon and a venal being, but not worth purchasing. for demanding from the King's Minister an avowal wile the ,lie did or did not concur in political sentiment, or pr deed upon a common understanding, with one who entertained projects which Lord Alvanley thought ruinous to the constitution ? There are two false colourings, spread by the O'Connell party over the proceeding of those distinguished personages who have addressed the managers of Brookes's Club to call a meeting of that Society. It is said, Ist, that the affair is a private one, with which the Club ought not to interfere ; but a transaction personal in its origin and circumstances may in its result involve considera tions affecting many other interests besides those of the parties themselves. A man may so conduct himself in a dispute with another as to betray principles and dispositions which render a social intercourse with him dangerous or disgraceful to the bulk of gentlemen. If, therefore, there exist any where a power to exclude the transgressor from a select Society, and thereby to preserve its remaining members from a contact which they feel to be injurious, degrading, as well as perilous, to themselves, it is no reason for the non-exercise of such a power that the occasion out of which sprung the question whether it shall or shall not be acted on was a personal quarrel. We have a due respect for those gentlemen whose names are before the public as constituting the managers of Brookes's Club, and are satisfied that their motives for declining the requisition presented to them have been of the purest nrture, but in their reasoning, as it is im plied by their public statement, we do not concur. A second fallacy, however, has been introduced into the discussion, the extravagance of which it is impos sible not to repudiate. This requisition is alleged to have been part of a plot for making mischief between Lord Melbourne's Government and the O'Connell fac tion ! Why, in the name of Heaven, was there ever such folly as this ? What sort of support can that be, or what is its worth, which offers itself to, or abandons a Ministry, on condition of a certain individual being bolstered up in his personal outrages upon those whom he dislikes, or punished for them in the same way as people in general are punished, by the decision of a number of independent gentlemen sitting in judgment on him, as a member not of a political party, but of a select though mixed community ? That the sins of a majority of any club in London, even of that which calls itself " Conservative," should be visited on any Minister of the King of England, is a sarcasm on his Administration the severest that ever was conceived. That would indeed be an introduction of club govern ment new as yet to England, but matter of no auspi cious experience elsewhere. If the votes of a club are henceforth to decide the fate of a Minister, there is more in the " reformed" constitution of the United Kingdom than Lord Grey at least, we are sure, has ever dreamed of. And who are the fancied plotters against the new Whig Government ; through the medium of an attempt to civilize the learned member for Dublin? Why, some of the parties to it are noblemen and gentlemen, perhaps the most zealous in the whole country for the success of Lord Melbourne's Ministry, and the most identified with the cause of Whiggism The truth is, that if Mr. O'Connell has made it a condition to his support of the Whig Administration, that the members and dependents of that Administration are to ally themselves with him, and " back him up" in his inso lence and brutishness towards individual gentlemen, no matter of what description of politics, O'Connell will be not only the supreme legislator of the empire in its politics, but the arbiter morum and dictator in what respects our manners. It appears to us, that if Lord Alvanley be well protected in this his effort to recall Mr. O'Connell to decency, his Lordship and the body of gentlemen whom he has summoned to interfere may be jointly deemed the most solid benefactors of so ciety.— Times. " There is not a single Tory in office, and, by the blessing of God, there shall not be a single Tory in place either."—The above is an extract from Mr. O'Connell's last speech to his followers in Ireland-- and we have to announce to the public to-day, that, in conformity with the mandate herein issued—lst. Lord Heytesbury's appointment to India is cancelled. 2dly. Sir Howard Douglas has been recalled. 3rdly. Lord Amherst's appointment is suspended, prepara tory, we believe, to its being finally cancelled also. Now, we entreat our readers to compare these facts with the announcement made in Mr. O'Connell's Speech—" That, by the blessing of God, there shall not be a single Tory in place, either and we ask them, is it possible to believe that this man, however officially unconnected with the Go vernment, is not in point of fact the dictator of its measures—or whether Mr. O'Connell, however dis owned as a coadjutor by Lord Melbourne, is not, to all intents and purposes, a member of his Cabinet, and his collea g ue in the Government We entreat of the people of England to compare this, the first act of the new Premier, with the conduct pursued by Sir Robert Peel on similar occasions, on his accession to office, and to ask themselves the question, is any, the least, credit, to be attached to the declaration so often re peated by the organs of the Administration, that " there is no understanding whatever between Mr. O'Connell and the King's Government." We shall not now enter into a lengthened consideration of the question of Lord Heytesbury's recal. We believe we may assert, with out fear of contradiction, that there existed on all sides but one opinion as to that Nobleman's fitness for the office to which he was nominated by Sir Robert Peel. The appointment was received even by the Whigs themselves as one against which it was almost impossible to find a single objection ; and we know that it was viewed in this light by the Court of Di rectors, and for that reason was unanimously con firmed by them. Yet here is the appointment of Lord Heytesbury cancelied, on the eve of his depar ture for his Government, and after he had received the usual allowance for his out from the East India Company, without the shadow of a complaint either as to his incapacity to discharge the duties confided to him, or the pretext of any single act committed by him to disqualify him for the office for which he was selected by his Sovereign, and by the unanimous ap probation of the East India Direction. The same reasoning may be applied to the conduct of the Government in the recal of Sir Howard Douglas, and in their suspension of Lord Amherst. We shall return to the consideration of these measures of the new Ministry,—but at this moment we shall confine ourselves merely to the announcement of them, and leave the public to form, from what we have said, some idea of the liberal and enlightened policy they have to expect from Lord Melbourne and his colleagues. It will be necessary, however, we apprehend, that the sign manual should be obtained to the cancelling of Lord Heytesbury's commission, before it can be legally effected ; and we have yet the hope left, that the eyes of the Sovereign will be opened to the policy of his new advisers by this act, and that his Majesty will not suffer the public service to be impeded, and the money of his East Indian subjects squandered, in providing another outfit, either for some shelved politician, who cannot obtain a seat in Parliament, or for some favoured nominee of Mr. O'Connell, whose continued support cannot otherwise be relied on.—Morning Post. The electors of England, and not of England only, but of Scotland and Ireland, are gloriously doing their duty : tidings of victory fly to us from each part of the United Kingdom, as may be seen by the following re turns :—Lord Howick has been re-elected for the Northern division of Norsioirn ,,,, rinnd S;r John c —r-is f„r eic ) ui l,aiuburgli ; and Mr. Perrin, the Irish Attorney-General, for the city of Cashel. But two more of the English elections remain un decided, nor have we a doubt but the result will be equally gratifying to the friends of liberty and order. The re-election of Lord Morpeth and Lord John Russell is alone wanting to consummate the triumph of the Reformers : success is certain. The men of York and Devon will not be wanting in the crisis. The age before the Reform Bill was one of speculation ; the present is one of action, and the workings of that great measure afford the prospect of glorious results to the country ; but if the intrigues of faction, or the obstinate imbecility of an individual, were suffered to blight the budding fruits of the reform in our representative system, it were better we had hugged our chains, and continued the tame victims of oppression, than to have galled ourselves in a struggle for freedom, and after breaking our fetters leave the avowed enemies of our liberties still to preside over our destinies. The Tories must be now convinced that so far from a re-action having taken place, their temporary usurpation has only served "to fire the flagging zeal" of the lakewarm Reformers. In en tering the field at Dungarvon and Leith the Tories merely expose themselves to certain defeat.—Morning Advertiser. We are enabled to announce that although the os tensible object of Lord Eliot's mission to the head quarters of the contending armies in the Peninsula is to prevail on both parties to exchange their prisoners, and to acknowledge the ordinary laws of war, yet his real purpose is to declare to Don Carlos that, even should the rebellion be successful, England and France never will acknowledge that Prince as Sovereign of Spain. The Allies feel themselves solemnly pledged to the young Queen and to the Constitutional order of things in that country by the Quadruple Trealy ; and as the mission is the result of an application made to the English and French Governments under that treaty and has the entire sanction of the Cabinet of France, we have reason to hope that it may be attended with suc cess. Don Carlos has been further informed that he can entertain no hope of assistance from the mem bers of the Holy Alliance ; for even if the) were dis posed to aid his cause, they would have to conquer France before they could send a single soldier into Spain. Under these circumstanees, we are taught to believe that Don Carlos has expressed his willingness to withdraw from the contest. He is anxious to join the Princess of Beira, who is about to take up her re sidence in Italy ; and measures are in progress for enabling him to escape from the hands of Biscayans and Navarrese, who are resolved, if they can, to detain him amongst them. Should Don Carlos succeed in making his way out of the Peninsula, as we trust he will do, we may still, however, apprehend that Zu malacarreguy is determined on continuing the contest as long as he can command even a single party of Guerillas. It will, therefore, be necessary for General Valdez to bear down upon the insurgent provinces with all the forces under his command, and to take the most decisive steps for the purpose of reducing these districts to order. They are so much disposed to anarchy, that they eagerly seize upon any pretext for disturbance. Don Carlos they have hitherto used simply as an instrument for the gratification of their turbulent passions ; when he quits them they will probably proclaim Zumalacarreguy as his Vice roy, and fight it out to the last. The procla mation which Valdez has issued, very frankly offers free pardon to all those who are disposed to take advantage of it for fifteen days ; but when that period shall expire, the war is to be carried on upon the terrible principle of extermination. This is an alternative which can only be justifiable under cir cumstances similar, we are afraid, to those which now exist in the northern provinces of Spain. May they speedily have an end I We must add, that the Spa nish question is not the only one upon which the Duke of Wellington, while he was Foreign Secretary, followed up, in a perfectly honest and faithful sense, the foreign policy of his predecessors in office. With respect to the Dutch question, he expressed himself determined to abide by the views of the Whig Go vernment, although it is notorious that he had looked upon the King of Holland as an " injured man." So also with respect to Portugal, he declared that he considered that kingdom as quite settled, and that he would not suffer it to be disturbed by Don Miguel. As to the only other important subject connected with our foreign policy, that of the new rela tions founded by the secret treaty between Russia and Turkey, the Duke followed it up pre cisely as Lord Palmerston would have done, in every dispatch which he had occasion to address to Lord Ponsonby. We have thought it fairly due to the Duke of Wellington to give publicity to this state ment, which can only tend to confirm the high repu tation which he already enjoys for his strict adherence to the letter, and even the spirit, of the obligations contracted by this country with Foreign Powers. At the same time the public will plainly see, in this ad hesion of the Duke and his colleagues to the policy of Lord Palmerston, which, before their accession to power, they uniformly denounced as ruinous to the interests of the country, an irrefragable testimony in favour of the grounds upon which, in every instance, that policy proceeded. Had it been calculated, as the Duke and Lord Aberdeen had frequently declared in the House of Lords, to involve the country in war, to bring disgrace upon the very name of England, and to destroy her best commercial resources, they would hardly have ventured, we presume, to enforce Lord Palmerston's views and instructions, previously con veyed to our Ministers at all the Courts of Europe. — Morning Chronicle. The present Lord Mayor has evinced a moral intre pidity in upholding the just authority of his office, which is apparently extremely galling to the noisy de magogues who brawl and talk fustian in the Common Council ; and this day an opportunity will again offer itself, when his Lordship will not, we trust, endanger his well-merited reputation for loyalty to his Sove reign, by allowing himself to be made a party to fac tious and revolutionary measures. A motion is to be made to day in the Guildhall for an address to the King, thanking his Majesty for dismissing his late, and allowing his present Ministers to be pressed upon him. This address will be carried, because the re spectable portion of the Common Council most injudi mllo7 abscr.t Al% iuunu tiie small but gallant band that yet fight the good fight, and because the principal demagogues have issued their mandate, which their servile followers dare not question, much less oppose. The Corporation of London enjoy the privilege of being heard on the throne ; but it is absolutely necessary that the Lord Mayor and two Al dermen at the least should attend on such occasions ; an abundance of Common Councilmen may be de pended on, as they get ten shillings a-piece for " loss of time." At the last address it was our fortune to witness the miserable cavalcade. There were one or two Aldermen—whether rejoicing in the respectable , cognomen of Key, Harmer, or any other name, dwells not in our imperfect memory ; and several coachloads of Councilmen, in a very tolerable state of preservation ; still, though not fastidious, " We would not have marched through Coventry with them, that's flat." The Lord Mayor's refusal to attend prevents the King being insulted personally, and he is bound, as the King's representative, to prevent it ; and, as the head of the Corporation to protect its character. We think the Chief M if ag t i i s i t e rate right in granting the meeting. The citizens, by their representatives, have the prescriptive right of making egregious fools of themselves, and affect this important adbdurtessit sTi °Ulu r c ' a v r i i ll sign it, and f d degree the subjects' pnv ege, or i n g. hil :o lo u f r e suggested T h o ipartsyli wouldgwh slightest the Home Seer:7:y not composition approve s o e f the t i o t less find himself much coinfrw. war their doubt the perusal ' will, of it, and rvi- ...ed and edified by „ mstlp if he should then be THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 5, 1835. Home Secretary, will be doubtless too happy to single it out, from amongst the mass presented by the wealth, and talent, and respectability of the country of an entirely opposite nature, for his Majesty's spe : cial notice and approbation. The Common. Council men were not at all pleased with their reception last time, and without any very large gift of prophecy, we may predict that, to use a common phrase, their room will be considered much more desirable than their company, by all parties, at the present juncture. This is a question clepelidi,i,z, on the Lord Mayor's firmness. The granting a meeting, and ap proving of what that meeting does (which any man must who accompanies them to present the result of their deliberations) are two different things, and we would recommend this difference to his Lordship's consideration.--Morning Post. ROLLS' COURT. ALSOP V. HOPE. This was a bill filed by the administrators of an intestate, who died, leaving a small real estate of thirty-two acres of land, mortgaged for 5001., and about 501. in money. The plaintiffs were creditors of the intestate for about 601., and, upon his death, application was made to his widow for payment ; accompanied by a demand that she should take out letters of administration. This being refused, and the 501. having been paid away in rent and taxes, the plaintiffs themselves administered, and subsequently filed a bill against Mrs. Hope and her son, the heir of the small real estate of her late husband. To this bill Mrs. Hope was unable to put in appearance from poverty, and consequently attachment issued, and she was thrown into jail, where she remained thirteen weeks. At length an arrangement was made, by which Mrs. Hope was to be liberated on her giving two promissory notes for the 50/., and the money which she had expended. The plaintiffs at the same time agreed to stay all proceedings in the suit until the son should come of age, the management of whose property they took upon themselves. On the son's coming of age, the plaintiff's demands not being satisfied, they proceeded against Mrs. Hope on the two promissory notes, and, suc ceeding, threw her into a gaol a second time, from which she was released by taking the benefit of the Insolvent Debtors' Act. Under these circumstances the suit origi nally commenced was proceeded with, and was now before the Court. Mr. PEMBERTON appeared for the plaintiffs. Mr. BICKERSTETH appeared for the defendants. The Learned Counsel on both sides agreed that no relief could be had on the suit as against Mrs. Hope, as the heir-at law, and his Honour reserved his judgment until he looked through the pleadings in the case COURT OF KING'S BENCH. DEWAR V. I'URDAY. Lord DENMAN read his notes of the trial. This was an action for the violation of the copyright of the song of " The Old English Gentleman," and, after the plaintiff had gone through his case, the defendant's Counsel applied for a nonsuit, on the ground that sufficient evidence had not been given of the originality of the composition. His Lordship was at first inclined to nonsuit the plaintiff on that ground ; but he said that he would reserve the point for the consideration of the Court, and that he should wish to take the opinion of the Jury on the question of fact. In consequence of this the defendant called wit nesses, and the Jury retired. They were absent for several hours, and returned into Court on the following morning, saying that they could not agree upon their verdict, and were not likely to agree. His Lordship was then under the necessity of discharging the Jury, or of acting on his first impression, and nonsuiting the plaintiff. He thought the latter was the lesser evil, and therefore he directed a nonsuit. A rule had since been obtained to set aside this nonsuit, and have anew trial. Sir W. FOLLETT showed cause against the rule, and the ATTORNEY-GENERAL was heard in support of it. Rule absolute. ROBINSON V. ROGERS. This was an action against the defendant, who had been churchwarden of the united parishes of St. Giles in the Fields, and St. George, Bloomsbury, to recover a balance due from him to the parish. The questions raised at the trial on behalf of the defendant were, first, that the action could not be maintained by the parish against a parishioner ; and, secondly, that the defendant, being a churchwarden and an officer of the parish, the proceeding against him should have been before a Magistrate, and not by action. The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Williams, when a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to a motion, on the two objections above stated. A rule having been obtained to set aside the verdict and enter a nonsuit, _ Mr. THESSIGER showed cause against the rule ; and the ATTORNEY-GENERAL in support of it. Rule absolute for a nonsuii. NUGEE V. GRANT. Mr. J. JERVIS st a t e d th a t this was an action upon a tailor's bill, and was tried a few days ago in the Bail Court before Mr. Justice Williams, when a verdict was given for the plaintiff for 501. The plaintiff was the well-known fashionable tailor, and the defendant the nephew of Sir Colquhoun Grant. The defendant had been in India, and on his return he ordered some clothes, which were charged at 781., that being the amount alleged to be incurred in six months. A bill had been given, and an action brought on the bill, and the declaration also contained the common money counts. The defendant pleaded infancy, and that plea having been proved, the claim on the bill was at an end. The question then was, whether the clothes supplied were necessaries ? One of the witnesses called for the plain tiff said that these clothes were necessaries, and the Jury, two of whom were tailors, considerately adopted this idea, and returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of 501. As the defendant had been arrested for 78/., the Learned Counsel now applied for a rule to deprive the plaintiff of his costs. The COURT thought that this was not a case for its in terference.—Rule refused. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. FARR ER V. SCHENKE AND ANOTHER. In this case, which was not concluded yesterday when we went to press, the rule was made absolute, on payment of costs. COURT OF EXCHEQUER. FINCH V. COCKER. Mr. BARSTOWE showed cause against a rule obtained by Mr. Platt, calling on the plaintiff to show cause why judg ment should not be arrested. It was an action on a bail bond ; the plaintiff was nonsuited, with liberty to move to have a verdict entered for the amount of the bond. A rule to enter a verdict for the plaintiff was obtained and made absolute ; after which the Court granted the present rule, on the grounds that the defendant had been arrested in the name of Cocker, whereas his real name was Cocken, and the bail bond was given in the latter name. The rule to arrest judgment was made absolute. CHARTERS V. BAYNTUN. This was the only case of any interest or importance brought on. Mr. Erle stated the case. It was an action brought . by the plaintiff to recover from the defendant 301. 10s., the amount of a bill of exchange. The plain tiffs, in . reality, were Messrs. Charters, Holland, and Co., coachmakers in Bond-street. The defendant was a young gentleman of rank in society, the son of a beneficed clergy man, who had a large private fortune. He hired from the plaintiffs, in 1822, a stanhope, for the use of which, for twelve months, he agreed to pay thirty guineas, and cove nanted, besides, to pay for any serious injuries it might have sustained while in his possession. He passed his pro note for. the rn-nr:-, nr.-1 lipviiv - r used the carriage for several months, he brought it back to Lile piali.tir.; much damaged. He not only neglected repairing the vehicle, but absolutely declined paying the amount of his note. The case was a clear one, and he believed there was no defence. The documents having been read, the Jury were about to return a verdict, when a gentleman said that he was the defendant, and meant to contest the action. Immediately Mr. Thessiger appeared for the defence. Evidence was then gone into to substantiate the plaintiff's case. Mr. THESSIGER stated the case for the defence. The defence was nominally made by the defendant ; but in reality it was made by his father, who had a large family to provide for, and could not therefore be answerable for the extravagance of his son. The present case must fall to the ground. The defendant, as would be proved, was not of ag e till twelve months after the date of the bill, and that as the Jury knew, was a perfect bar to the action. The father, therefore, for his own sake, and for the public good, resisted this action. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to contend that the defendant was a g idd y young man, and that the articles supplied to him were not necessaries. The conduct of the plaintiffs was inexcusable. They knew he was under age, and had no fortune. A friend had called on them especially to warn them of that important fact. The Jury retired, and returned in about twenty minutes, when the foreman said, " we find for the defendant, and w e regret that the law oblig es us t o d o so , f or th e con duct of the young man is highly disgraceful." I TWO (SUPPOSED) MURDERED INFANTS.---.The ^ ` , vo fine infants, quite dead, and sewed up in a pil bodies ot ' with eathers, were' discovered yesterday low, partly "lose to the wall in front of the es morning on the paveine4 - "ash of St. Paul's, Covent were tablishment which belongs to the pt 4,,. he infants garden. There seems n 6 doul4t bui thaw , smothered. An inquest myth° bodiei w ill he helu, POLICE INTELLIGENCE. 1 MANSION-HO USE. A lad named James Farrell caused a gentleman, who had been driving through the City in a gig, to be apprehended for an assault committed with a horsewhip. The complainant, who is what is called a flying messen ger about the inns in the City, stated that he had been sent on a message, and as he was in the habit of beating tho Omnibusses, and other vehicles in speed, he thought he might as well out-run the defendant's gig. He accordingly ran before the horse ; but the defendant, without any other cause than that he had been out-stripped, leaped down from the seat and lashed him most unmercifully. The LORD MAYOR—Are you sure you are telling the whole truth ? Prosecutor—Yes, my Lord. I did no thing in the world but just run before his horse. A witness stated that he saw the lashing, which made the lad caper about in a very remarkable manner. He saw no provocation given, and thought it quite an unneces sary affair. _ _ The LORD MAYOR—Perhaps you saw the lad capering about before he got the lashing ? Witness—No, I saw nothing of that. The defendant said that the Lord Mayor had put a ques tion to the complainant which, if answered truly, would have fully explained the matter. The fact was, the com plainant took it into his head to cut capers and antics be fore the horse, which was a very spirited young animal,, while he (defendant) was driving through Whitechapel. The horse several times reared, and the crowd were appre hensive of great danger, and called out to the boy to drop his clownish tricks. The remonstrance was disregarded, and all the way to Gracechurch-street did the flying mes senger lead the way flinging his legs and arms about in the genuine Grimaldi style. The more crowded the street be came, the more dangerous, of course, this sort of exhibi tion promised to be. To put a complete check to it the horsewhip was certainly used, and away danced the com plainant, cryinc , out murder. The sympathies of the crowd happened to be divided on the occasion, some thinking that the punishment was too harsh, and others thinking that a little more would have done no mischief. The defendant assured the Lord Mayor that the sole motive for using the whip was the preventing of mischief. A gentleman who observed what passed, declared that the conduct of the boy was calculated to frighten the animal and that the defendant was in considerable danger. Although the complainant leaped very high before he got the lash, he certainly cut a higher caper upon being touched about the legs. The LORD MAYOR said the complainant deserved much more than he got, and it was to be hoped if he ever cut his, capers again under such circumstances, a horsewhip would he more liberally used upon him. Robert Trevitt, the driver of an omnibus, was summoned for having driven his vehicle furiously along the streets. Mr. Wood, a gentleman who resides at the west end of the town, stated that he came to the City in the defendant's omnibus. As they came along the driver whipped on his horses, and the vehicle swung from side to side ; and if it had come in contact with anything, must have been over turned. The passengers were in danger in several parts of the town, particularly at the foot of Holborn-hill and in Cheapside. It was useless to appeal to the conductor. That person, upon being requested to speak to the coach man, said, " My dear fellow, you know nothing at all about it. The driver knows what he's about well enough." Another gentleman confirmed this statement, and The LORD MAYOR fined the driver 11., and declared that he should double the penalty upon the next occasion. GUILDHALL. Yesterday a labouring man, named George Williams, was brought up in the custody of Brand, the Marshalman, charged with unlawfully appropriating to his own use a 201. note, which had been accidentally dropped in the street. Brand stated the nature of the case. On Thursday se'nnight the son of a gentleman, named Haslope, lost a 201. note in the street. This, it appeared, was picked up by the prisoner's wife, and the prisoner exchanged it at a Mr. Harris's, at Sparrow-corner. Here he received a 101. note, which had also been traced to the prisoner. He was, therefore, apprehended ; and Mr. Haslope, having re covered 151. in cash, and obtained the clothes purchased with the rest of the money, was willing, if the Magistrate thought fit to look over the prisoner's misconduct. Mr. Alderman ANSLEY asked Brand if he was sure the lad lost the note, and that it was not stolen from him ? Brand replied he knew it was lost. Mr. Alderman ANSLEY told the prisoner he was indebted to Mr. Haslope for forbearing to prosecute him. For the sake of his character, he ought not to have thought of appropriating the note to his own use, without endeavour ing to find the owner by advertising it. He should now discharge him. Q UEEN-SQUARE. Jamei Wemys, a middle-aged man, of very respectable appearance, was yesterday brought before Mr. Hoskins, charged with bigamy. Elenora Atcherly, a very interesting looking woman, stated that she was married to the prisoner at St. Bride's Church, Fleet-street, on the 27th of November, 1832. He married her in the name of John Wallace, and they had lived together ever since, in Brook-street, Lambeth. She had since ascertained that he had been previously married, and that his wife was still living ; and in consequence of his ill-usage towards her, she gave information of the fact to a police constable. Thomas Stroud, of the L division, No. 174, produced the certificates of both marriages ; and it appeared that he was married to a woman of the name of Mary Williams, on the 2d of January, 1826, at Newington. On taking the prisoner into custody he did not deny having two wives ; but looking sternly at Atcherly, asked her whether she meant it, and she replied that she did, for his ill treatment to her. The prisoner remained perfectly silent, and Mr. Hos- Kim ordered him to be remanded, so that the first wife might have an opportunity of appearing against him. William Barker and Charles Chappell, two young men, the former describing himself as a fishmonger, the latter a butcher, were brought up in custody, charged with a rob bery under very audacious circumstances. Mr. Humphries attended professionally to defend the prisoners. Mr. Alexander Shaw, broker and appraiser, of No. 1, Little Tothill-street, about twelve o'clock on Monday night last, went into the Cooper's Arms, Strutton-ground, for re freshment ; the two prisoners and several other persons were opposite the bar. Witness knew Chappell previously, and offered to toss him for some spirits, but the landlord objecting to this, he called for some drink, and changed half a sovereign. The prisoner Chappell drank with him. Sub sequently an altercation took place between witness and the two prisoners, and Chappell seized him round the neck, and struck him several times. The other prisoner Barker also assaulted him. During this attack the prisoners rifled his pockets of all they contained, amounting to two sovereigns and three half sovereigns. On discovery of his loss he ac cused the prisoners of the robbery, when Barter absconded from the house, after which the prisoner Chappell consented to be searched, but no officer was present. Witness gave information of the robbery to the police, and the prisoners were apprehended on Saturday, over the water. Mr. HOSKINS, the presiding magistrate, questioned the prosecutor as to whether he was sober at the time he went to the Coopers' Arms, and if he was sure the money was in his possession at the time he first entered the company of the prisoners. Shaw had been drinking, but not to an extent so as to prevent him from knowing what he was doing. He could speak positively as to having in his possession two sove reigns and three half sovereigns when he entered the house. One of the half sovereigns he received change for from Mrs. Evans, the landlady of the - house. Mr. Humphries—What is the reason, Mr. Shaw, that at the time you found you had lost your money, and accused the prisoners of the robbery, you did not immediately give them in charge ? Prosecutor--We were all put out of the house, and when I reached the street I did mention under what circumstances I had lost my money, to a policeman ; but he refused to take the charge, and said he would not allow me to make a disturbance in the street. I after wards gave information of the robbery at the police station. Mr. Evans, the landlord of the Coopers' Arms, spoke to the quarrel and scuffle that took place between the prose cutor and the prisoner, and the former accusing the two men of robbing him of 3/. 10s. A man named Sutton, residing in Tuften-street, West minster, on Monday last, was put 'in possession of Chap pell's house, they having been distrained for rent. I n th e evening the prisoner Barker came in, and soon afterwards Chappell, the former offered to discharge the execution, and witness saw him (Barker) produce some gold and sil ver. An altercation took place the same evening between the prisoners respecting the division of some money. Dawson and Hall, officers of this establishment, appre hended the prisoners on Saturday at the Gibraltar, in Pro spect-place, St. George's-fields. Barker endeavoured to escape by running away. The Magistrate expressed his belief that the prisoners were guilty of the robbery, observing at the same time the evidence was not very strong ; but if the prosecutor wished to proceed, he (the Magistrate) would commit them for trial. Mr. Shaw expressing his desire to prosecute the pri soners, they were accordingly fully committed to Newgate. WORSHIP-STREET. Last night, at nine o'clock, George Smith and Anne Smith, his wife, were brought up for re-examination before Mr. BROUGHTON, for the purpose of taking the evidence of Mr. W. R. Rolls, landlord of the Goat public-house in Golden-lane, by whom it was stated by Mrs. Roberts the 101. note presented by George Smith was changed. Eagles, in whose custody the prisoners were plated by the prosecutor, stated that he had been to Mr. Rolls, who excused his attendance on account .of his business. Mrs. Roberts, in addition to her former evidence, said that that morning she wanted to borrow a box ; whe n Anne Smith offered her a small tin box, on opening which witness discovered what she thought a 201. note , which was immediately snatched out of her hand by the prisoner. On Anne Smith being again asked what she had to saY , she stated again that she was innocent, and that it was a conspiracy on the part of Mully and Giblin against her. Mr. BROUGHTON said, that he should require the disin terment of the deceased, Mr. Henry Roberts. He then gave directions to Eagles to communicate the circui': stances to Mr. Stirling, the Coroner ; and to Mr. Hab' the Vestry Clerk of St. Luke's, to tell them that 1!° medical man or nurse attended the deceased ; and that, in his opinion, it would not be satisfactory unless an invest gation of that sort should take place. It has been PNv e t , in evidence that his keys were taken from him the before he died, and that before the prisoners had their breakfast the boxes were broken open. A di- The prisoners were then remanded till Saturday , an rections given to summon Rolls, the landlord of the Goat and the Clerk of the Bank of England, who received ~,th° one hundred pound note. Mully was again bailed by Dlr. Roberts. The prisoners were removed at ten o'clock. UNION-HALL. brough t Yesterday, Ellen Snook, a young woman, was up, charged, on her own confession, with the murder of lic illegitimate child. • the The prisoner had been living for a few w eeks 3 service of a butcher, at Stockwell, and on Thursday in t , . man called to make some inquiries respecting her, a nd a s ; his departure she betrayed great anxiety of mind' te r, journeyman spoke to a butcher in the employ of her to to whom she made a voluntary conf ess i on t o the effect; ate while living at Lancing, in Sussex, she had an ilieg it° , it child, which, she said, she had destroyed, by throwiniode, into a copper full of water, and that when she b au ro e prived it of life by that means, she then buried the corpse without the knowledge of any person. She added thal, o n beavi 3 05 circumstance of destroying the child weighed so her conscience, that she was rendered incapable ef b h o a r s ' e l bs , rest day or night, until she had told the secret, ana tu— the unburthened her mind. Subs e que n tly t o having made stei s above statement, the pris o n er a b scon d e d f ro m her the service at Stockwell, and was taken into custody road to town, but when brought up t o thi s office on .r ea ri er e last, she refused to answer a n y q ues ti ons , and was , r ole fore, remanded to yesterday, until some inquiries wer e har into the truth or falsehood of the statement she had v° tarily made with respect to the murder of her c hild, a r e , Inspector Walters produced a lett er w hich he 11 , 3 +4 of) ceived from Lancing, in reply to o n e th a t h e bed vgr i6- oc ee• the subject of the self-accusation made by the P. ', , in The letter described that the p r i soner had been hv i l s ro service at that place, but that nothing w hatever was Pi l o ce by the family with w hom s he h a d li ve d th a t such an t hat was committed by her while in that neighbourhoo d- 'OO 3 she had been a giddy, thoughtless girl, and had given a deal of trouble to her family, who lived at Woolveie ll 'dor The prisoner's father and mother a tt en ded at the es a w l bes tion, the latter of whom stated that some months agi le ob' her daughter had come home from her situation , s cas l o o served that she bad grown stouter ; and on that ee Ater expressed a hope that she was not enciente. Her dig aeve r denied that such was the case, and she (the mother) o , 3 rdi heard that she had been in that condition. She lift er p , ber went to another situation, and her f am ily had not se ' for some time past. t s be The prisoner now denied the truth of the stater ne b e en had voluntarily made, and it came out that she b ad las t ' committed. from this office in the month of Deeern e tber to gaol, on a charge of vagrancy. When asked 0 her she would disclose the name of the man who at Stockwell, prior to her having made the confession After ing herself of murder, she remained perfectly silen t % S t " some time, however, she said that she was a pa tient ' t t he tba Thomas's Hospital nearly about the same period crime was committed according to her former accou n t' le° latter fact having been elicited, and also that sh e attended during her illness by Dr. Roots the 1 4 ,,scpeir d gave directions that inquiries should be made tg ° : s hoe cal gentleman on the subject, and that the prisone r be remanded for that purpose. MELANCHOLY ACCIDENT.--011 ThUrSbY as the British Heroine was leaving Newry for Qu,eb, e h e ' s tre d ‘ in the act of weighing anchor, a block gave way, wait colt' a fine young man, only 20 years of age, Thomas IlY"" 0;1; 1 ' tenay, of Warrenint, on the temple ; he survived th e called occe only one hour.—Belfast News Letter. a at An accident of a very singular kind occu r !„ e , o f Humehall on Saturday. A girl, who was upon the OP' straw sack, was sliding down, when -the end of a L °l. l - t b l' e i that was standing against the stack entered her erre 7",, ° a t ", elbow, and by her weight and velocity was forced 4 , ,, Lf) ,,'"vei r '' arm below the skin till it came out at the wrist. ed,e7, were laid bare with as great precision as if they ha u a ti scil' c " gone the operation of dissection. The part of the w°, ° iao ete t ' was in the arm is more than an i nc h a n d a q u a rter in " and has a very thick blunt end...-Berwich Advertise r ' hi' 3I C The following account of the discovery of th e 0 01 tect of the Cathedral of Notre Dame, at Rhenns,,,aPP o i, a letter addressed by M. Nadiegts Laborde to the le effete, will be found interesting to the antiquary and Mall ,c" Bbet —" The architect of the Cathedral of Notre Dame u o kooc f :; and the precise date of its foundation, were equally u r f ocr ii While examining the building, I discovered at the e i n",," v er' 4 ° the nave a large tombstone, on which is represente'',„ fig,,,`"j whose head is covered by a little cotton cap, an d r i g ht wrapped in the short cloak of a shepherd. In his 1 .1 0 . , t , 5 9 , he holds a rule, and his left arm, bent across his br e ; aIT; tains the model of a Gothic chapel. His feet rest uP d ° s i". stalk, and round him are written the following ~w° r, r 1 1 character of the 13th century:—" Here lies Do s 'i the i 0 the shepherd, who began this church in the Year Tc,),, died le carnation 1219, on the Tuesday of Easter, and ,1 the year 1271, the Saturday after Easter. For v' o rt , v,i% pray for me and Him." After a ll, th e ma gnificen t I ra for Rheims, which has been the admirati o n of the vr r f Cba success , ive centuries, was designed by a shephe pagne., BIRTHS. of Or On the Ist inst., Mrs. William Goode, of Ely-plac e, o ff On the 2d inst., the lady of Wm. John Whyte, EstO square, and Lincoln's Inn-fields, of a daughter. Wise' On the 16th ult., at Florence, the lady of Matthe w c oal of Leamington Priors, of a son. (If On the 29th ult., at Clifton, near Bristol, the la d y 010011 Whish, of a dauOiter. On the 2d inst., at Weymouth, the lady of Lieu' e r Todd, of a daughter. On the 3d inst., at Norwood, Surrey, the lady of . 4 o ham Bernard, Es. a son. On the 4th inst. q ~ in Pall-mall, the Hon. Mrs. Fr anci° 8 0 ' of a son. Lake, On the 2d inst., at Ramsgate, the lady of Sir Jellies °' of a son. of $ 00 , On the 3d inst., at Brighton, Mrs. Frederick Wrightg. per On the 3d inst., at Camberwell-grove, the lady of X re Esq., of a daughter. late Co On the Ist inst., at Cheltenham, the lady of the e • Maquay, of a son and heir. of 0 0 f 5O On the 3d inst., Mrs. Josiah Wilson, Stamford- 111 , 1 t."; 154 ° On the 3d inst., at Barnes Common, Surrey, Henry Willock, of a daughter. "' MARRIED. , fo ha cottot On the 28th ult., at B e l v id ere , Thomas Orneb.,ote'obert Esq., of Belfast, to Chri s ti ne , e ld es t d a ughter 01 "" ifits cii iil e Esq., of Belvidere, Aberdhire. On the 30th ult., at St. eens Olave's, Hart-street, Charle; Deer Allen, of Old Brentford, to Emily, second daught er , el ef' Lewis, Esq., of Crutched-f r i a r s . arc l 0 0 Pt icho o On the 23d ult., at Wanstead Church, Mr. --,_ late - hatter, Bow, to Sarah Ann, only daughter of th e l q ° fle° r ' Langley, Esq., East India-road. C. , t . ovp On the 2d i ns t., at St. Margaret's, Westminster, No w )I. i Esq., eldest son of Sir C. Monck, Bart., of BelsaYi part" er e land, to Laura, secon d d aug ht er o f Si r M. W. Rid! e t'„ Tar ti o f 't i On the 2d inst., at St rea th am , Surrey, Henry J ° 5 q.,,,,, ,, ,, ° Percy-street, eldest so n o f H enr y Holden Turner, - - 1, 5 , r , John's Wood, to Harriet Coat s , daughter of John 133° l" Ocis 11' Balham. br , On the 30th ult., at the Collegiate Church, I'llan' Lou este isavclad youngest son of Richard Hilton, Esq., of Darwen, to ter of Thomas Cartwright, Esq., of Heaton Norris. f tile DIED. wid ow °pg. , On the 16th ult., at Lancing, aged 73, Charlotte; woof , late Charles Whinfield, Esq., and daughter of Joshu J . .., o .l;er formerly of Edgware. late Joh n j e i t ieo On the 3d inst., Mrs. Parke, widow of die Esq., of Dean-street, Soho. Jo be, On the 2d inst , at the Vicarage, in his 19th Yea r ' 0' D ro , er son of the Rev. John Kirby. , Jata es lea " eo On the 30th ult., at Lymington, in his 68th yer , d pa) ..,, i tt ' Agent to ..t Ins h , , oEfs theq., Collector of a o s f t C l u ia s n to t m s sLoactalth3aitaiptliaac,e Captain the Co7oo, for the Affairs of Lloyd's, Secretary of the Provid e : no roll o c:,. member oft he Corporation, and Town Clerk of t,,„„es, ~0 0r liaf.,1 On the inst., aired 22 months, IVadaline AW, t, 1'5;_.,,,1r daughter of T. Tringriam Smith, Esq., On the 30th ult., at Buckingham, in his 3 5tia Y f fell Bartlett, Esq., banker. the 134 O 13' On the 2d inst., at Hedley House, Surrey, Din s ' Calvert Ladbroke, Esq., aged 64. TO , i r oh ) 0 0, On the 21st inst., at Brown Heath, in he r po Chance, relict of Mr. W. Chance, of Cummins. Tam es , 'ral ' „fr On the 27th ult., at Ilfracombe, Rear-Admi a the .., 4.4 in his 85th year. s erVe o r' In his 80th year, Mr. Samuel Snook, who has _ for , f Col ton, e yle9" of Bailiff to the Feoffees and twenty men o of Boltorizst,re.7cart .Dct ,$ ~,„o e S, of forty years. Alfred " n pf , On the Ist inst., at Huntingdon, aged 13, son of David Veasey, jun., Esq., of that place . : Dorothy jess" fp On the Ist inst., at Waltham Abbey, 3-Ir r • v d year. ea r, P ) ~ relict of Joseph Shiercliffe Jessopp, Esc'' , in li ri his 3th jha ncer) i d gill, of 8 At his father's house, Stockwell-comm on, h i esl. 'l 4 X Richard Hill, jun., solicitor, son of Mr.Richar. lane, solicitor. his 77t h, Rev. Andrew Sharp, 43 years the incumbent oi i" of T ° On the 30th ult., at Clare Hall, Herts, in ,-rtarnberg Tot thurnberland. . s t oles , On the 3d inst., Elizabeth, wife of M r. Jaw." < y ton-place, late of Long-acre, aged 60- ___-- o Of co ro ovs ' 11l B - 0 London : Printed and Published by U 79 Stran d ' ill t he 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, N A o l , 112, of Middlesex. CAp i Willi Si? % t t , lo Vi,ell:l l'i ..„,i, 111